parking so it'll free up uh on-street parking in the area so that uh pretty much concludes
our presentation we'd be happy to to take any questions and thank you thank you any questions
from the board no no anyone else wish to testify in this matter if so please raise your hand
i have no hands at this time chair thank you and planning commission good morning mr chairman and
members of the board okay you're going to do it again yes david effecto f-e-c-t-e-a-u for the
planning commission you're swearing firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth yes sir i do mr chairman this property is indicated for multi-family residential use
on the city's comprehensive plan this is an existing philadelphia housing authority development
we do not believe this proposal will have negative impacts on the surrounding area
Accordingly, we support granting this variance.
Thank you.
Callum, let's see.
MI-2020-000763.
1300-50 North 10th Street.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you, everyone.
Thank you very much.
Appreciate it.
Take care.
Calendar number 39275, 1406 Willington Street,
and calendar number 39274, 1408 Willington Street.
Attorney is Meredith.
Meredith you've been promoted to panelists you can share your screen and unmute yourself to
testify but if you could wait to be sworn in good morning Meredith uh do you affirm and
swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do yes good morning
everybody for the record please my name is Meredith Ferliger with Delworth Paxson
uh address is 1500 market street suite 3500 e or please spell your name for the stenographer
m-e-r-e-d-i-t-h last name ferlger f-e-r-l-e-g-e-r thank you
um i don't believe i was asked if i stipulate to the accuracy of the referral because i do not
sorry about that okay no problem um i i do not stipulate to the accuracy of either of these
referrals uh they both say that the request is for a rooming house or a single room residence
the referral should have been issued for group living i will go into that just in a little bit
of detail in the presentation because i want to make sure the board actually understands what we
are requesting so I'll get to that let me share my screen all right so again my name is Meredith
Ferliger of the law firm Dolworth Paxson I am here with a request for two special exceptions
for student residences that are at the edge of Temple's campus. Properties are
Properties are located at 1406 and 1408 Willington Street and are both zoned RM1.
located at 1406 and 1408 Willington Street.
The owner of 1406 Willington Street is Guesk Properties, and I do believe we have a representative
on the call today from Guesk Properties.
I'll call them out a little bit later.
The owner of 1408 Willington is Temple Properties, and that is represented here today by Ricky
Biddle.
Ricky's company, MK Management, manages both of these properties.
Ricky, if you can at this time hit the raise hand button so we can get you sworn in and introduce yourself.
hi uh this is ricky biddle r-i-c-k-e-y-b-i-d-d-l-e with mk management
mr biddle do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do thank you ricky if you can just give the board a two sentence kind of understanding
of uh mk management and and its role um the scale of the properties that you manage in the temple
area sure we uh we manage primarily uh temple student housing and we manage uh just over 300
units uh in and around the temple area um not far from the two subject properties here
Thank you. So to give the board some brief background on these two particular structures,
they were both built within the last five years and were approved as duplex dwellings.
Permit history you have is at tabs 12a and 12b of your exhibit packet that starts on page 62 of the
of the PDF. Now, as the board knows, having seen many of these cases in the past, the zoning code
would only permit six occupants in each of the two units, where the request today is to allow
group living to accommodate the additional three occupants. So in total, there would be nine
residents in each structure instead of six. In each structure, unit A has four residents and unit B
has five residents. For reference, you do have floor plans of each structure in your packets
at Exhibit 5A and 5B, which begins on page 32 of the PDF.
The structures are each just under 2,500 square feet, and they have nine bedrooms and six
bathrooms. Each living unit has a kitchen and a laundry facility, and the structures are,
of course fully sprinklered, having been built just within the last five years. Now with respect
to the applications, we received one referral for each for the proposed group living use. Now the
examiner wrote these referrals for rooming house or single room residences. So if the board will
refer to Exhibit 11, which begins on page 56. I'll bring it up on the screen.
You'll see that Section 14601 of the Code provides a definition of a single room residence.
This is defined as a building containing rooms rented as living quarters without private
bathrooms, such as dormitories or rooming houses. Alternatively, a group living use
provides communal kitchen and dining facilities, such as fraternities or group homes. Now, Ricky,
are these rooms rented independently to your tenants?
No, we rent both units as a unit, not as individual rooms.
Okay. Now, I did dispute the characterization with the zoning examiner for several weeks,
But because both of these categories would require a special exception, the distinction is not critical.
However, I just want the board to understand that the proposed group living use is identical to the many other cases that I have brought before this board previously, which were all issued as group living, not as single room residents.
As is required by Section 3037E.1 through .3 of the Zoning Code, the proposed group living use
does meet the definition of a use permitted by special exception in the RM1 Zoning District.
Furthermore, the proposed use will not cause specific detrimental impacts to the neighborhood
beyond that which might normally be expected from the proposed use. The proposed use has
The proposed use has not and will not cause congestion in the public streets.
not and will not cause congestion in the public streets.
The properties are both located at the edge of Temple's campus just south of the Leopold Center
and are located within walking distance of several public transit spots.
The existing occupants generally travel primarily via foot or via bicycle.
Continuation of these uses has not and will not cause overcrowding.
As mentioned, these buildings are each about 2,500 square feet and have one bedroom per proposed
residence, so a total of nine bedrooms, and six bathrooms. Each of the bedrooms varies between
104 square feet to about 158 square feet. As you'll see in your packet at tab 12C,
which is starting on page 65. This block of Willington Street is made up of many other
similar uses such as two, three, and four family dwellings. In fact, directly across the street
at 1400 North 16th Street is a 48 unit apartment complex. So this is a uniquely dense area even
compared to some of the other cases that I've brought before the board in the past.
Furthermore, both of these lots have a history of high-density uses.
Exhibit 12A shows that 1406 Willington was historically a four-family dwelling,
which may have accommodated up to 12 occupants.
Exhibit 12B shows that 1408 Willington was historically a three-unit,
which would have permitted the nine occupants requested today.
Furthermore, given the lot sizes of these two properties, three units would actually
be permitted on each. If the board refers to exhibit 11, which begins at page 53, I've
brought it up on the screen, you'll see the breakdown. So the requested number of occupants
here is actually permitted based on the lot sizes. We're only here because the nine occupants
are in two living units instead of three. So we do assert that the proposed and existing density
is well in line with the history of the lots, the permissible number of units under the zoning code,
and the character of the neighborhood, and will therefore not cause any overcrowding.
These uses will not impair light and air to adjacent properties as no physical changes are
proposed. The structures are three-story attached buildings that are uniform to the surrounding
properties. The uses will not burden any public facilities as the uses are existing and the
facilities are capable of supporting continued use. The uses will not impair adjacent properties
which all have similar or much higher densities than that proposed. The proposed use will not
endanger public health or safety nor is it inconsistent with the comprehensive plan.
This area is zoned RM1 and is specifically contemplated for multifamily residential use,
particularly the nine occupants that are requested.
The proposed use is in keeping with the impacts that are normally expected from the proposed
use and is specifically contemplated as an allowed use in the RM1 zoning district.
Now Ricky, can you just briefly give the board an understanding of both the sanitation
measures that are employed for these two structures, as well as just generally your
company-wide sanitation. And you are muted, so you'll have to go ahead. Sure. Thanks, Meredith.
We design these two particular buildings have trash corrals under the front stoop that allow for
trash bags or trash cans to be placed under them. And any buildings that we take on or design,
we design with specific trash areas to be stored off street we additionally have a we have a full
time employee with a street sweeper that goes up and down our streets to clean the fronts of any
blocks that we manage including under the trash corrals and in and around the front of the property
thank you um excuse me this is sharon seleta i had one question it's ferlinger if the board
should approve this do you believe there should be language clarifying that it is a group living
facility i i believe so uh group living would be a more would be a more general category so i think
it would be wise if the board is so inclined to approve these um that it that it should be
understood that it's the the more broad category and not the specific
single room residence so something stating perhaps proviso
So something stating perhaps proviso uses properly categorized as group living, would that?
uses properly categorized as
That would be fine. Thank you. Now before I conclude, I need to address an issue the board
is likely to raise. Each of these structures does have bedrooms in the cellar level. However,
for several reasons, I'm going to implore the board not to issue its common proviso.
let me explain first of all if the board refers to me yeah did you bring up a floor plan yeah sure
all right so for this is 1406 willington um i will i'll highlight what i'm about to explain
for you, and then I'll go to 1408. So first of all, if the board refers to Exhibit 12A,
you'll see zoning history for the properties. When the structures were originally built,
the zoning application specifically did list these bedrooms in the cellar level.
So they were not only approved through zoning, but then of course they went through the building
permit process and were specifically approved with these bedrooms. So if you'll see, there is
the front bedroom and here's the egress for that. There is bedroom here that has an egress here
and then there is the bedroom here that actually has a sliding glass door that provides access
into the rear. Same thing for 1408 which is just reversed. So front bedroom here
with egress there, middle bedroom here with egress into the rear, and again the
rear bedroom with the sliding glass door. So of course each of these bedrooms has
light air and proper means of egress and does comply in full with the building
code having just been built within the last couple years. Now, most importantly, and this is
going to be somewhat unorthodox, if the board refers to exhibits 8A and 8B, which start at
page 40 in the PDF, and I'll bring them up, you'll see the results of two prior cases this board has
heard within the last year year and a half for 8a this was 1838 north 16th street now the board
denied this one specifically because of the bedrooms in the basement this was actually one that
was a walkout basement and the board did deny that one on appeal the court reversed it
and you'll see the court decision there that was just issued uh december of 2019.
Now, even more telling to this issue is the next one, which is 1700 West Norris Street
at Exhibit 8B.
Now, in that case, the board granted the special exception.
However, the board did issue the proviso for no bedrooms in the basement.
I specifically appealed that proviso in that case, and the court reversed it.
I would, of course, be happy to share with the board the legal reasoning for the court's reversal of the proviso, which would, of course, apply equally in the cases that you're hearing today.
But generally speaking, it did turn on the board's authority under the zoning code.
But more importantly to these cases, it centered on the uniqueness of a request for a special exception.
and the fact that when we're asking for a special exception, that request would apply to the
structure as a whole and wouldn't be broken down individually for different parts of the structure.
So we are imploring the board today to grant the request for a special exception without proviso,
both due to L&I's explicit approval of these structures as they exist today, as well as the
court precedent that this counsel has established and presented to the board.
We're imploring you not to make these two owners go through the
time and expense of an appeal given the likely result that the
court has seen here today. So we do therefore assert that we've met the
requirements of Section 3037E.1 through .3 of the Code concerning
entitlement to a special exception and we therefore asked the board grant our application.
With respect to the community, it feels like a lifetime ago but we did meet with Matt Polistic
along with representatives from several other area groups including community land trust.
along with representatives from several other area groups, including Community Land Trust, back in February.
Matt did issue a letter of support, which you can find at tab 14, which begins on page 84.
They did also issue a letter.
Ricky, if you can unmute.
ricky have you heard all of my testimony here today before the board i have and would you agree
that that testimony is true and accurate and would you adopt that testimony as if it were your own
i do and i would and could my representative i don't know given the time who is on the call
right now could my representative from guest properties uh raise your hit the raise hand
button and identify yourself? You can unmute yourself and speak. Yes, this is Gua Nui Xu
from Gas Property LLC. Please, sir, please identify yourself for the record. Spell your
name. First name G-U-A-N-H-O-N-G. Last name X-U. Do you swear and firm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do please proceed mr you have you heard all
of my testimony here today before the board yes i do and would you agree that my testimony was
true and accurate and would you adopt it as if it were your own yes thank you and with that we do
ask that you grant our application we're happy to answer any questions questions from the board no
no no no no anyone else who wishes to testify in this matter if so please raise your hand now
no hands chair planning commission mr chairman and members of the board these properties are
indicated for multi-family residential use in the city's comprehensive plan the applications
match the pattern of existing development on the block accordingly we have no objection to granting
these special exceptions thank you before i call for the vote sharon did you want to give us some
language regarding the group living um yes if you approve it it should you should include a proviso
stating um uses properly categorized as group living
calendar numbers 39275 and 39274 1406 willington and 1408 willington street my vote is
yes on both with the proviso uses to be categorized as group living my vote is yes