that Mr. Bonney represents, one of them with a separate RCO in the neighborhood, and two of them
with a development corporation. And, you know, at this time, you know, we will proceed and work
in good faith with the community on the 22nd
to see if we can, you know,
resolve any of the outstanding issues that are around.
But the final contingency of that agreement
to consider and a continuance for today
was the provision from,
was the provision from there's been some miscommunication from both sides, then
there's been some miscommunication from both sides
and there was an agreement.
there was an agreement that the RCO would present us with an itemized list in priority fashion of
what they wanted answered. And, you know, there's an understanding from the RCO that
its concerns were not being met, although we continued to have meetings. So based on that,
we agreed that if they provided us that, we would answer, you know, whatever questions and concerns
they had very specifically, number one, number two, number three. At this point in time, just a
couple days ago, they stated that they are refusing to provide that list. So at this time, the
concerns presented to us have nothing to do with the refusal. There's a single refusal remaining
for this project. It's a steep slope issue. And there's no question that none of the questions
or concerns raised over the last year have been related to steep slope and we would respectfully
request that we be able to proceed in line with our contractual agreement with PHA and at least
be able to present our case today. Mr. Bonney. Thank you. So first of all, I was just retained
this morning. Well, I've had a few days to talk to the client before this morning as I was
evaluating the case and whether I wanted to take it or not I was just retained this morning and I
do not have you know sufficient understanding of the case and the issues and the meeting on
later this month that Mr. Whelan alluded to is necessary because the first meeting with the RCO
though, we believe that the letter notification was not sufficient, that it did not reach
everybody within 250 feet. And we have a witness and an exhibit who can testify to that if
necessary. So we really would dispute that the RCO process has concluded. We also believe that
the property has not been posted adequately for purposes of today's hearing. My understanding is
the client that the RCO emailed Ms. Sunkit and Ms. Suleta maybe yesterday I don't know if they
got that or asking that an inspector be sent out to confirm the lack of posting but we do have
a number of photos all along the frontages of this property and it's pretty clear that the
posting is woefully insufficient so I think on that basis of loan the case has to be
I don't really, you know, I think the case has to be postponed due to lack of posting.
My understanding is that while the applicant has provided the exhibits five days in advance,
that it has not provided the witness list five days in advance, which I think is another,
you know, violation of the rules and warrants continuance.
um and you know i i could go on and on and i i will if i need to but i i really feel that this
is you know for all those reasons some of which are i think pretty mandatory according to the
rules that you know public notice and witness list you know okay you know i just think that
this case should be postponed um i i'd like to you know i can get into more detail about some
these things and I'd like to show the exhibits the photographs of the lack of posting because
I think that alone should should resolve this issue. Well let's let's hear from Mr. Cohen.
I don't want to get into all the details because then we're hearing the case and
we haven't the board hasn't made a decision yet on yeah no he's referring to the posting yeah I
do have one question though for you uh you've been retained by is it the coordinating RCO?
Yes, it's the East Falls Community Council. Thank you.
Mr. Cohen, please identify yourself and I'll swear you in.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Josh Cohen on behalf of Councilmember Curtis Jones Jr.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, our office, Councilman Jones, is requesting a continuance
for this hearing, not only for the reasons that the East Falls Community Council's attorneys
have just outlaid, but because we believe that the East Falls Community Council
is not prepared to move forward with the case today. I know I've been in touch with both the
East Falls Community Council, the attorney for the applicant, as well as PHA. We did meet
the attorney for the applicant, as well as PHA.
We did meet two weeks ago.
We had a pretty robust meeting.
Everybody agreed to the community meeting.
We were hopeful that this case could happen after that community meeting.
I don't believe it's fair that the applicant should be able to put on their testimony today
and not the East Falls Community Council
or any other neighbor or interested party
who wish to testify.
So I think one of the concerns was that
if this case was continued,
the next available continued date
wouldn't be till November.
So we're hoping maybe we can get an expedited
continued date for after that community meeting
and maybe July or August.
And then the applicant and PHA
would still be in agreement
with their uh there would be no uh uh issue with their uh sale of agreement
yeah i i i know we had a uh off line conversation about uh potentially uh or the request to have a
more uh hearing scheduled more closely to this date than november uh i don't think that is doable
and I don't want to put the onus
on Ms. Sunkit
but since there is going to be
a proposal
to have a meeting on June
would you
suggest
and I know we said we're getting
away from resumption hearing but maybe
to do a resumption hearing
Chairman this is Sean Whalen again
we would be willing
to do a resumption hearing and present our full case and allow all the so there are two letters
of support also to allow the support and you know whatever position efcc and the councilman's office
take uh following the june 22nd meeting um to the extent that we could present all of that at once
that would be fine if we could do that we would certainly agree to that at any point in time in
july um but as i think you can understand we can't agree to a to accept a november date and just as
far as um you know mr bonnie raised some very serious issues um i think frankly they're a little
incredible here and i i understand why let's not let's not debate that at the moment right i'm
trying to see if we can figure out a way in which we could uh do our best to accommodate all parties
here. Hi, Chair. This is Tanya. Yes. I could put this on August 17th at 930 if we would wish to
continue it or do a resumption. It's your call. When does that date again? August? It would be
Tuesday, August 17th at 930 a.m. All right. It's not July, but it's not November. So I think we
can agree, the board would agree that we can resume this case on August the 17th at 9 30 a.m.
Chair, excuse me, this is Sharon. If Ms. Sunkett is willing to put this on as either a resumption
or a continuance, and since the RCO would prefer that it be heard together, maybe a continuance
instead, if that would be acceptable to the board. Either way, it works, correct, Tanya?
August 17th?
Yes, Chair.
Yes, Chair.
All right. MI 2021-000336 4401 Ridge Avenue is continued to August 17th at 9.30 a.m.
Thank you all.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Chairman.
All right.
Anyone else have any concern about continuance cases that have been read into the record?
If not, I will ask at this time, is there anyone who would like to request a continuance or withdrawal?
Please raise your hand.
Only if you are asking for a continuance or withdrawal.
Chair, I have Ronald Patterson with his hand up.
Mr. Patterson, you can unmute yourself and speak now.
Patterson, are you here about 708 Sansom?
I am, Mr. Chairman.
You have it down.
You may not have heard, but you already continued that.
No, I did.
I wanted to clarify my request.
Okay, now put your name and I'll swear you in there.
Ronald Patterson, Claire Harrison, 1835 Market Street, Philadelphia, EPA, 19103.
You swear if I'm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Please proceed.
So this application regards the Jewelers Road Project.
Correct.
And the refusal pertained to an ADA van accessible space that we were approved for on site that
that we were approved for on site that we wish to remove and that was the subject of the variance.
we wished to remove.
And that was the subject of the van.
After meeting with Wash West Civic Association and understanding the implications of it in terms
of the building code and accessibility issues we came up with we believe an alternative which was
to provide the parking space which is very hard to do because of the van height at an off-site
location which we're allowed to do up to a thousand feet but this one's about 1200 so
So it would eliminate the ADA refusal, but cause a refusal for greater than 1,000 feet.
So we were hoping that we could get leave to ask Al and I to revise the refusal and come back on this appeal when it was rescheduled.
Do you have any comments about that, Sharon?
No, you would just submit the letter to Ms. Sunkett detailing the change and asking her to
give you an authorization letter to submit an amended application. Okay, I believe it's included
in my letter, but I'll send it. Okay, perfect. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone
else requesting a continuance or withdrawal on the two o'clock list, please raise your hand.
here we have someone from the strawberry mansion community organization with their hand up
thank you whoever that person is please can you hear me yes please identify yourself
hello first and last name spell your last name i'll swear you in my name is bonita cummings
Director, Strawberry Mansion Community Concern. My last name is spelled C-U-M-M-I-N-G-S.
We're going to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
What case are you testifying on?
2535 West Lehigh. There's not clarity as to whether or not this location really is even
on this calendar. We were told today there was a hearing, but on the appeals calendar,
we were not able to find this. Correct me if I'm wrong. It's not on our list today. Correct,
Tanya? Yes. It's because it's a resumption hearing. It's number one on the add-ons.
Resumption meaning from something that started, which we never had a hearing on this at all. So
I'm not sure how resumption is being used. Sorry, I missed that. What street is this?
36.01? 2535 West Lehigh Avenue. Perhaps we could call Mr.
Nockamson. I have that it was originally heard on April 28th.
Am I missing something Sharon? I don't see it on the add-on. It's the two o'clock add-on number one.
good afternoon members of the board my name is alan knockamson pc
yeah you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do now i'm pleased by your last name for the record i'll do both first name alan a l a n
Last name, Nockamson, and it's Anansi, O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
And I apologize, I had the wrong sheet in front of me, so please proceed.
As Ms. Saletta stated, we did have a hearing previously on this matter, and we agreed to have a resumption hearing because the community meeting did not take place at the time of the original hearing, and we did have the community meeting.
and we're prepared to proceed forward.
Okay, we will hear that case.
Just let me get through the withdrawal request
and then we'll come back to you.
All right, thank you.
Anyone requesting a continuance or withdrawal?
Chair, we have a call-in user.
Call-in user, you can unmute yourself and speak now.
Will the call-in user please identify yourself?
Anyone else?
Yvette?
Hello?
Hello?
technical hello can you hear me okay yes we can you please give us your name and i'll swear you
in okay this is adrian fernandez swamp little neighborhood process association rco
We're going to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
we're a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
Yes, I do.
You're here regarding what case?
2535 West Lehigh Avenue.
We're going to go forward with that case.
I said we're going to call that as soon as we're done with the continuance list.
I just, I did want to state also that the property was never posted.
We'll get into that.
With all due respect, Agent, we'll get into that when we call the case up.