Questions from our attorney, Hilary Emerson.
um miss pritzker just to verify the the revised plans that you were showing those are the ones
that were reviewed as part of the amended refusal right there are not any additional changes
i don't believe there are any additional changes um just go up to the refusal
yeah it was just to remove the setback in the front that we had do a covered porch so that
minimizes um the dimensional refusal for occupied area makes it less so i don't think that should
cause any issues and then it's the only other one was three family which we're still proposing
three family got it thank you very much yeah questions from the virtual audience
i see no hand here mission madison matera planning commission staff this property was
remapped in 2017 from rm1 residential multifamily to rsa5 residential single family the change
aligned with the district plan the appellant has shown that there are unique physical conditions
or circumstances of this property that would prevent conformance with the code the proposal
for multifamily is in character with the block the planning commission recommends the board
grant the requested variance for occupied area and multifamily mi 2025 000 476 1625 north
marshal street i vote yes with proviso per amended refusal dated september 19th 2025
cheryl gaston my vote is yes with proviso tanetta graham my vote is yes with proviso
ryan mcadams my vote is yes with proviso and win my vote is yes with proviso thank you council
Number six, MI-2025-003-643-2004, Cecil B. Moore Avenue.
Augusta O'Neill is the attorney.
And she's coming in as a parent.
can everyone hear me yeah we can okay perfect thank you counsel could you please state your
name and spell for the stenographer sure my name is augusta o'neill that's spelled a-u-g-u-s-t-a
my last name is o apostrophe n e i l l do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth i do counsel this is a resumptive hearing um my understanding you will
give us an update relative to the corrective refusal and a community meeting there'll also
be questions from the board public testimony will also be limited to what you testified today and
not previously, and the Planning Commission will make a recommendation.
Would you please start?
And if you can, just give us a little update as to how you got here, okay?
Thank you so much.
So since we've last met, the last time that there was a hearing on this application was
back in September, September 10th, I believe.
So it's been over three months.
I'd be happy to run through any renderings that the board would like to see if you would
like a refresher.
But this is an application that's being made in conjunction with the Philadelphia Housing Authority.
My client is Frenkel Enterprises.
My client is Frankel Enterprises. They're going to be developing this property, which is currently a vacant lot.
They're going to be developing this property, which is currently a vacant lot.
They're going to be developing it to make it into a senior housing facility with 63 affordable units.
So when we were last in front of the board, we presented the case.
But we asked the board to do a hear and hold because the RCO didn't provide a letter at that time.
there were still some questions related to the operation of facility that the neighbors wanted
answers to before they wanted before they were comfortable providing a letter since that time
we have received a letter of support which was provided at exhibit two of my updated exhibit
package which was sent in on friday afternoon i did want to bring the board's attention to the
fact that in the letter of support issued by the brewery town shardswood community civic association
they did note that they considered the project team's responsiveness and willingness to address
resident concerns to be significant factors in reaching their outcome of support. This project
is viewed as an important opportunity to provide affordable senior housing along this corridor
in aligns with neighborhood priorities. Again, that was provided... I'm sorry,
did that not even show up on my screen? No, you're just talking. Okay, all right,
i apologize um if you'd like me to share my screen and why don't you share your screen
you can give us an idea thank you all right here we go
okay so this was a letter of support again from the brewery town shardswood community civic
association my clients met with them in august um and at that first august meeting there were
questions that came up related to whether there was going to be a security guard at the facility
and some other operational related questions. And so my clients met with the Civic Association
after that September 10th ZBA hearing. And following that second meeting, the RCO did
provide a letter of support. There were 11 in support, two opposed and two abstained. But the
final community position I just wanted to note for the board, the RCO wrote that they considered
the project team's responsiveness and willingness to address resident concerns to be significant
factors in reaching their outcome of support. This project is viewed as an important opportunity
to provide affordable senior housing along this corridor and aligns with neighborhood
priorities. Again, because it is an application in conjecture with the PHA, this is going
to be providing a lot of much needed affordable units for seniors. In my own research, it
looks like there's at least three years of a waiting period for anyone that's applying
to be in PHA housing. So this is going to be specifically for seniors. And one of the questions
that came up at the last hearing was related to one of our refusals, which was for, let me see,
I'm just going to pull up the refusal. One of the refusals that we had received was for the lack of
a loading spot within the building. So we had asked for initially a variance to provide zero
loading spaces within the building. And several of the board members expressed concern that
because this is a facility for seniors, and there's going to be a need to, you know, bus
seniors to appointments or have deliveries made, there were concerns that, you know, without that
dedicated loading spot um it could impact the operation the facility so we did go back and we
have now added a loading zone within the building so towards the east of the building there's this
proposed loading zone um on the plans the retail areas to this side but the proposed loading zone
is uh right here again towards the east side of the building on cecil b more avenue so that those
Those are the two changes that have been, or I'm sorry, those are the two updates to
this application since we were last in front of the board three months ago.
With me this morning, our project engineer, as well as my clients, Zach and Max Frankel.
I believe that Mr. Frankel, Mr. Zachary Frankel was sworn in and adopted my testimony last
time, but I'd be happy to have him adopt my testimony this morning as well, if the board
would like.
uh your testimony adopted okay sure thank you and what was your client name again
his name is zachary frankel that it's uh frankel enterprises
they're gonna be and he has been promoted chair thank you
mr frankel could you state your name and spell it for the photographer hi good morning all my
name is Zachary Frankel that's Z-A-C-H-A-R-Y last name F-R-A-N-K-E-L do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do counsel please proceed
council please proceed morning mr frankel morning you have a chance to hear my testimony this
morning Mr. Frankel morning
morning i did was everything that i relate to the board true and accurate it was uh is there anything
that you would like to add uh not at this time thank you okay and would you like to adopt my
testimonies if it were your own i do i would thank you so much um and members of the board
if there are any questions about the update questions from the board
questions from our attorney hillary emerson um good morning ms o'neil just a quick clarification
um so originally we were just going to correct the refusal because the lot adjustment wasn't listed
um but i believe the refusal was then amended so that the revised plans that you've submitted
those were reviewed by l and i and incorporated into this refusal is that correct that's correct
okay i just wanted to verify that that if the board does grant we don't need to adopt a rise
plans because those have been reviewed and accepted by l and i so yeah the plan showing that um
updated park i'm sorry loading zone is has been reviewed by l and i okay thank you so much thank
you what question was from the virtual audience i see no hands at this time any commission
Madison Matera planning commission staff at the time of the district plan the zoning of this
property was RM1 residential multifamily and CMX2 commercial mixed use the district plan
recommended no change in 2017 the property was remapped to RM1 and in 2021 it was remapped to
ICMX industrial commercial mixed use per PHA's request the planning commission recommended
against this change.
The proposal completed its Civic Design Review in September 2025.
Civic Design Review Committee's advisory recommendations are not an expression of the
City Planning Commission's recommendation or opinion regarding zoning variances, special
exceptions or other discretionary approvals associated with this proposal.
The proposal supports the plan's recommendation 1.2.2 to support housing for the aging population
and 1.2.3 to promote affordable housing.
The Planning Commission recommends the board grant the request of variances for multifamily parking ratio and off-street loading.
Thank you.
MI 2025-003-643-2004, Cecil B. Moore Avenue, I vote yes with proviso per amended refusal dated October 30, 2025, and revised plans, one page.
Mr. Chair, we don't need you to revise plans.
That was what I clarified.
Yeah, the refusal encompassed the revised amended refusal.
That's amended refusal.
Thank you.
Her remender refusal dated October 30th, 2025.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ryan McAdams, my vote is yes with proviso.
I win, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you so much.
Thank you very much.
Number three, MI 2024-006-699-2021 Stanton Avenue, Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
This is a resumptive hearing.
morning mr chair morning council could you please state your name for the record
yes sir it's verne anastasio a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o on behalf of mr james ingram do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do all right so council this is
a result of hearing um see here yes sir um if you would um could you give us an update
relative to your amended refusal
and also the community meeting.
Yep, I have.
Board and Council will have questions
and then public testimony
and then we'll have an update from planning.
So if you would please start, Council.
And if you want,
you could give us a little update out
that you got here.
Yeah, we just wanted to make sure
that the refusal was accurate,
accurately reflected,
you know, what's there at the property.
First floor business professional use
and the three-family dwelling above.
And with that...
We're going to hold the vote on this.
Am I correct, Hillary?
We need Michael for this.
On our side of the house,
we're just going to wait for Michael Johns
wait for michael johns to vote on this and he'll review the testimony okay i see because he was
to vote on this,
and he'll review the testimony, okay?
I see, because he was here at the...
here for that reason because he was president at the first hearing i understand okay uh you should
be in receipt of two letters of support one from a concerned community and one from the 10th ward
10th ward i just forwarded over to miss emerson yes we have received both of those thank you
wonderful uh and the application is for uh the business and professional on the first floor with
the three-family dwelling, all within the existing structure. We've already put on testimony of the
very unusual size and shape of the property. If there ever were a unique condition that rendered
this property impossible as a single-family home, this would be it. And we just wanted to
have clarity on the refusal, which we now submitted, and you also asked for the RCO positions,
and now you have both of those. I'm moving a 122-page exhibit packet back into evidence,
along with the letter from Concerned Community and the letter from the 10th Ward, both in non-opposition.
And here's the property, as you can see. That's what we're dealing with there. There were cert. That's all I have. I think that's why we're back for the refusal and for the RCO positions.
Okay. Any questions from the board?
Did we do anything about all that wiring that was in the basement of the property?
We're going to clean it up. Yeah, that's the plan. The plan is to clean. Obviously,
we have to go through a whole CO process that's going to be required. When we do that,
we're going to have electrical inspectors. We may have plumbing inspectors. We're going to have
So, you know, we're going to do whatever it is necessary so that he can, you know, fully occupy it.
He's going to have the office on the first floor.
He'll be responsible for that basement.
And that's that's our plan.
In addition to exterior lighting and some trash towards the back of the property, he wants to put a trash corral in.
There's very little open space there, as you can see.
And there won't be any household living in a basement.
No, no, ma'am.
Thank you.
Questions from our attorney?
Not a question.
I just wanted to comment that the letter of support from the 10th Democratic Award did have some provisos, but I don't believe that any of them are enforceable by the board.
Just want to note that.
Thank you very much.
Questions from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commissioner.
Madison Matera, Planning Commission staff. The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing residential single family RSA 5. The property has a history of commercial use. The proposal for residential is more aligned with the residential zoning. However, three family is not the least minimum and the conversion was created without the benefit of permits. Planning Commission recommends the board grant the request of variance for multiple principal uses and for multi multifamily with proviso and max two units.
Thank you very much.