We ready to go?
I would say wait another minute.
Okay, Chair, we have 33 attendees and you're good to go.
Good morning everyone and welcome back.
My name is Bill Bergman and I will be chairing this morning's EBA hearings.
With me is Carol Tenere, our vice chair.
Carol?
Ismael Shaheed, our board secretary.
Carol, Ms. Tenere, you are muted.
I apologize. Present.
Sure. Ismael Shaheed, our board secretary.
Thomas Holliman, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And James Snell, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also with us is our board administrator, Tanya Sunkit, and our board attorney, Sharon Saleta.
Before we begin, I want you to take a look at our virtual format.
One, be advised these proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
A video will be available by contacting the Board Administrator Tanya Sunkett at tanyasunkett at phil.gov.
Two, for the benefit of our court sonographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before they start.
Three, if you're participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star nine to raise your hand and star six to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and the address of the property in question.
That phone number again is 267-270-5548.
And lastly, please be advised the question and answer box is not for testimony or comments.
Any comments should be directed to Tanya Sunkett, our board administrator.
So we're going to start with the continuities.
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair.
This is Tanya, the board administrator.
If I could just interject a thought.
Today we have with us the attorney for the record is Ms. Rebecca Cole.
Just so all involved will know, Ms. Cole will be acting in place of Ms. Saleta today.
Thank you very kindly.
Oh, great.
Great.
Thank you.
So let's look at continuities first.
we have a request for a continuance
from number 12
hold on a minute
number 12 if the
appellant's here could they please identify
themselves
this request for continuance has come from
the councilwoman
got the A's office
okay that case will be continued and it'll be marked must be tried we also have
two withdrawals mi 3021 003488 2423 north 56th street withdrawal withdrawal by
request of attorney. Number seven, MI 2021 00374 3204 Their Avenue, withdrawal by attorney. So
both will be withdrawn. And we're going to start with an add-on. MI. Chair, we do have a
Um, hand raised with a call-in user.
Call-in user.
Hi, uh, Tiffany Green, concerns to the point green.
Okay, could it, could I?
Wait, one minute, hold up one minute.
Do you swear for them to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Okay, go ahead.
I'm sorry, could we get your spelling, name, spelling on the record, please?
Sure. T-I-F-F-A-N-Y-G-R-E-E-N.
T-I-S-S-A-N-Y
Thank you. You can continue.
Okay. We sent in a withdrawal for our case, 1420 Point Breeze Avenue.
Ms. Green, is that for this morning or later on?
It is.
Oh, no.
so number four you okay
is your attorney here
um i don't i'm supposed to call him i don't know if he's there that's why i wanted to check and
make sure i was uh i thought he was going to handle this but i'm just i didn't hear you
here's what i'm going to do is i'm going to call that case first
and we'll see who's here on the case when i call it okay
Ms. Green?
Ms. Green, you've got to unmute yourself.
We're withdrawing the case, so we're not going to move forward, are we?
No, I'm just going to call the case, make sure all the attorneys know what's going on with it.
That's all.
you'll hear me call okay no problem okay all right are there any other requests for
continuances chair we have a franz pierre with his hand up sure you can unmute yourself and wait
for the chair are you on sir good morning okay could you state your name and spell for the court
reporter yes uh that's france pierre remember johnson okay could you spell it for
yep f could you do that one more time please
yep that's f-r-a-n-e last name pierre p-i-e-r-r-e right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth absolutely can you hear me better now i hear you better now
Yes. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and fellow board members. I just wanted to verify, did you say that 3024 Vare Avenue was withdrawn?
Okay. Wonderful. Thank you.
Any other requests for contingencies?
i see no other heads at this time chair okay so we have one add-on case
mi 2021 003843 2000 block of wallace street
this is a vote only i vote yes with provisos yes with provisos
Thomas Tolliman, yes, with provisos. James Snell, yes, with provisos.
So if I could, Chair, this is Tanya. I'm sorry to interrupt. Would it be approved if Rebecca Cole
state the provisos on the record for all to understand? Absolutely, that's fine.
Can you hear me? This is Rebecca Cole. Yes, Rebecca. Thank you. The provisos in this case are
one, no commercial uses, and two, revised plans, two pages.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay, we're going to go to our regular list, and we're going to start with number four.
MI 2021-001578-1420, Point Breeze Avenue.
Russell Manning, Turney, and Leonard Reuter.
Mr. Reuter is coming back in as a panelist now, Phil.
Mr. Reuter, you there?
good morning members of the board uh leonard freuder uh senior attorney for the city of
uh senior attorney for the city of philadelphia you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole
philadelphia you swear for him to tell the truth
truth nothing but the truth i do okay um we um if i might mr chairman uh we received pardon me
uh two messages yesterday one from uh russell manning uh indicating that his firm is no longer
uh representing the uh point breeze community group and also we received another uh message
from uh ms green who you'd heard from earlier uh also stating that the appeal was being withdrawn
and that email from mr manning went uh both to myself as well as uh sharon saletta
okay and that was yesterday so um yeah we we i don't think there's any i don't think there's
any dispute at this time that that appeal has been withdrawn case withdrawn thank you sir
thank you and that concludes my business made uh for this morning may be excused
yes you can sir thank you thank you all right all right number one
MI 2021-003389-1124 South 10th Street.
Van Anastasia, RCO, Letter of Opposition.
Councilman Squilla opposed.
he's coming in now as a panel great
good morning mr chairman members of the morning state your name and spell for our court reporter
please yes sir verne anastasio it's v-e-r-n last name a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o 1315 walnut street
suite 1006 philadelphia 19107 okay do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing about the truth i do sir proceed um mr anastasio do you also agree to waive the reading
of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do okay um it appears in my notes that you have
submitted everything required in the exhibit packet that's correct okay you may proceed
thank you i want to note that the um passion square civic association letter of opposition
is actually counter to the near neighbor's vote that was um in support of the um actual
presentation and i'm going to go through it with you so that you can see why that is just
just bear with me for just a second i'm looking for
my files are not coming up i apologize
let's see here
can't seem to pull up my packet and i'm not quite sure why i apologize okay
I only have one document open.
There it is.
Can you see that now?
We can.
Thank you.
Great.
So this is 1024 South 10th Street.
My client purchased this property relatively recently.
and when he purchased it he purchased it as a three-family dwelling and this was already
outfitted as a three-family dwelling let me show you the plans
there's mechanicals in the basement there's a one apartment on the first floor
one apartment on the second floor one apartment on the third floor
um already had three electric meters three full kitchens and i'm going to bring it down to
and i'm going to bring you down to let me show you
uh give you some context to the property i think that might be helpful here's our property right
here it is the longest in a row of residential properties here's a church um there are multi
families here to the south there are multi families here to the north across this uh parking
lot there's over 60 units here in this one building alone and here is the property 1124
again the longest in the row here's the gas station here this is a north and south
street the numbered streets in this particular neighborhood as well as some of the adjoining
neighborhoods typically handle the multi-family dwellings so this is not inconsistent with the
other multi-families in the immediate area. Again, my client purchased this property as a
three-family dwelling. And in order for them to revamp it, gut it, and turn it back into a single
family home would just be an incredible burden. And he would never get back what he put into the
property um so with that uh we did meet with the community um and here's the letter that went out
here's passion square um saying that you know the community that the nearest neighbors
voted five to one in non-opposition uh these are the folks who live in the immediate area
uh the zoning committee voted in opposition but the zoning committee none of those members lived
anywhere near this particular property. I shouldn't say anywhere near, but they're not impacted
neighbors. The impacted neighbors support this proposal. Right next door, there's a single
family home, by the way, that's been for sale for some time, $800,000. That's another reason why
the immediate neighbors support the granting of this variance. They see their community as turning
into a bunch of new homes that are eight hundred thousand dollars pricing them out all the more
reason to support an already existing we're not doing anything new we're not building anything
simply want to be able to get to legalize the pre-existing three-family dwelling
and then get the certificate of occupancy making sure that all the building code requirements are
bed. And with that, I'd like to bring Mr. Kang Mi Zhu to the panel. Less than 50, you know, 100 feet
away, there's a gas station, like I said. Again, multi-families to the north, multi-families to
the south, and a very large multi-family right across the street. Mr. Zhu, could you raise your
hand, please. Chair, I see no one with that name at this time. Kong, K-O-N-G-M-I-Zhu, Z-H-U.
Or Yanmi, Y-A-N-M-E-I-Zhu, Z-H-U. Ms. Zhu?
i see someone with their hand up and the name says winnie i don't know if that's what you're
looking for that's that's they have that that's fine too okay thank you the person with the name
winnie you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair good morning
good morning could you could you state your name could you state your name and spell for
the court reporter we need w-i-n-n-i-e last name w w do you swear for him to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth yes ms wu did you hear my presentation to the board this
morning yes is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge yes and do you adopt it as your
own testimony yes thank you mr chairman i'm going to be open for questions again i want to remind
the board that immediate neighbors five to one voted to support this pre-existing triplex to
turn this back into a single family now would be a catastrophic financial hardship for my client
this is not inconsistent with other multi-families on the block
commercial nature of the block as well with a laundromat a gas station a sport
a bar and a church on the same as well yeah questions from the
a bar, and a church on the same block as well.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Other testimony from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good morning, Chair Bergman.
and Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Morning, Ian.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Proceed.
Thank you.
Members of the board, good morning.
The comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change to RM1 at this location.
That's a multifamily zoning district recommended in the comprehensive plan.
The proposed use conforms to the recommended zoning district
and is therefore consistent with the comprehensive plan.
and the City Planning Commission recommends
that the Board grant the variance.
Thank you.
MI 2021-003389-1124 South 10th Street, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, yes.
Thomas Holloman, yes.
James Snell, yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, yes.
Thank you all.
Thank you.
MI-2021-003344, 1217 Standwood Street.
RCO, Fox Chase Home Association, a letter of support.
Pro se owners, Douglas and Margaret Beyer.
Mr. and Mrs. Beyer, either one.
Sarah, Mr. Byer is coming back in as a panelist now.
Thank you.
Mr. Byer?
Sarah, you need to unmute yourself.
hello good morning mr byer could you state your name and spell for the court reporter yes
yeah good morning board my name is douglas byer b-y uh first name is douglas d-o-u-g-l-a-s last
name's Byer, B-Y-E-R.
Do you swear for him to tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Okay, our Deputy Chair has a few
questions for you.
So I'm deputized now. I like that.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy
strike that? It appears
on my notes
that you have submitted the required
documents.
Yes, I have.
okay you may proceed you do have a letter of support from the fox chase homeowners association
yes okay you may proceed tell us what you want to do mr byers yeah um i want to have a um
a walkway out of the side door as opposed to building a door in the back
or having a door installed in the back, which would be very costly.
There's already a door there.
It would come out about three feet approximately.
You can see it by the plans.
I don't have the plans with me, but I've submitted them.
It's just an access to the deck that will be behind the house.
That's pretty much it.
You're building a deck behind the house?
Yeah, we want a deck built behind the house, and we want to come out the side door, an existing side door, and come out to the deck from the side of the house, as opposed to coming out to a door in the rear wall, which is really not, you know, ecologically safe or whatever you want to call it.
So just out of curiosity, why don't you give us a little sense of what it looks like?
I mean, how big is the deck, you know, things of that nature?
It's going to be approximately 15 by 15.
I'm not sure it's in the plans.
I don't have the plans with me.
I don't have any of my paperwork.
I've had to run out for a funeral.
But it's approximately 15 by 20 maybe.
I'm sorry, Chair. This is Tanya. We don't have anything to present to the attendees?
I'm sorry, Chair.
This is Tanya. We don't have anything to present to the attorney.
No. No, we don't. It's really difficult.
I've never done this before, so I'm sorry.
I know. I know. I know. So here's what I think we're going to do is we're going to continue your case, right?
And then the next time, maybe you could be at a location, you could put up on the screen the plans and things like that, and I think it'll make it much easier for us to do it.
understand it's just impossible to understand what it looks like and things like that and i'm
not i know you never did it before i know you have a funeral so what we're going to do is you'll hear
from us we'll continue your case and when we continue it's going to be must be tried and i
would recommend that you sit at a computer or someplace and just show us what the deck looks
like when you're when you do it okay okay hi this is tanya again mr buyer um we're scheduling
currently for June so if you wish to reach out to me I can schedule you quite readily because of
just a little bit of a glitch and then we can have you come back very soon okay okay yeah you can
you can schedule it as soon as possible so that's fine well that's not how it works so that's why
yeah but make sure you reach out there Mr. Beyer make sure you read out to reach out to Tanya okay
Tanya okay what's her last name tanya.sunkit at phillit.gov you can just email the RCO box
and we will assist you in that way. Okay? Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Sorry for your
loss. MI 2021 003344 1217 Stanford Street is continued. MI 2021 003350 1344 South Opal Street,
Roger Perry
RCO Point Breeze
Development Association
Petition of Support by Near Neighbors
Mr. Perry
Mr. Perry's coming back in now
as a panelist here
Okay. Mr. Perry, do me a favor, state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Roger Perry. I'm an attorney for the owners,
R-O-G-E-R, last name P-E-R-R-Y. Address is 734 South 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Mr. Parry, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
It appears in the notes I'm looking at that you've submitted everything that's required.
You have a letter of no support from the RCO Point Frees Community Development Coalition and a petition of support signed by the near neighbors.
So you may proceed.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Welcome, members of the board.
This is an application for a single family home by the family desiring to build a family home for four adults, all immediate family members.
In conjunction with that, the refusal was issued for a one-car garage in an RSA 5 district.
The only refusal is that garage.
Dealing initially with the letter from the Neighborhood Association, we note that although 41 people attended the meeting and there were five in support, there were only five in opposition to the garage.
I'm going to put up the documents now. Oh, I lost. Where am I? Okay, you should be able
to see those now, I hope. Yeah, Mr. Chairman, can you see those?
we can yep okay so here's the list uh there's also an additional uh tax certification uh the
refusal as you know is for the one car parking uh application for appeal if we come down to the uh
plans it'll give you an idea of what the family intends to do with this current vacant lot
So here is the initial drawing. This is a single family home. First floor would only be a garage and utility use, and then three floors.
First floor would only be a garage and utility use, and then three floors with three bedrooms, approximately 540 square feet per floor.
Right now, the intent is that the family building the home will have their parents who are 78 and 80 years old living with them.
And that's one of the prime reasons that they're requesting off-street parking for safety and easy access.
We've also submitted plans we can come back to in terms of the construction, but we have submitted photos.
This is the posting of the vacant lot.
And on this particular street, this is the block here.
You'll see that there are both single garages and off-street parking, and there are also homes on the block with similar garages and curb cuts and so forth.
We don't feel that this variance would be any violation of the public's health, safety, or welfare.
In fact, it will help the developers.
This was the letter where there were five support and five oppositions.
And my client went out and met with the near neighbors with the refusal and got approximately 16 signatures in support of the property.
Tax clearance certificate was submitted to the board.
We feel that with the nature of the block having existing off-street parking, that this would be consistent with the block and also a benefit to the neighborhood to get this property, which is one of the cutouts on the block, developed as a nice single-family home, as indicated here on the plans.
and there may be uh uh are the lambs here or Mr. Lowe or somebody listening
if you are can you raise your hand
okay if the lambs are there
you know they were calling in i know um i can take questions from the board
and we can try to get the owner to to sign back in for us
questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman hello mr chairman
has anyone called in
Mr. and Ms. Lamb, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
They're available to be sworn in, chair.
Could you state your name, please, for the court reporter and spell it?
Any, take any.
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Lambs, please speak to the Chair's question.
Hello?
Yeah, could you state your name and spell it for our court reporter?
Can I do?
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Hello?
Hello?
Yes, could you state your name?
Yes, can you Lambs?
There's the address for 1344.
Do me a favor, state your name and then spell it for the court reporter.
Yes, Lang Heng Yu, last name L-A-M-K-A-M-Y-U.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, all truth.
Mr. Perry?
Yeah, I've made a presentation to the board as we reviewed for the single-family home with off-street parking supported by your near neighbors for a single-family home.
Can you adopt what I presentation as true and correct to the board?
Yes, 100% correct.
I went out to sign the signature on the neighbor cross street and diagonally all the people support us for the garage.
Also, already when I purchased this land, it's already cut cut for this property as well.
That's why we bought a couple years ago now for my retirement to stay there and my parents to be there.
we needed a car garage for the uh the the old senior as i'm getting older as well for retirement
old senior as I'm getting older as well for retirement as neighbor thank you everybody for
this neighbor
thank you thank you thank you Mr. Lam all right any other questions from the board
no Mr. Chairman okay questions from the virtual audience
Chair we have Pietra Gamble Ms. Gamble you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair
could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
sure petra gamble p-i-e-t-r-a last name g-a-m-b-l-e right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the
truth and nothing but the truth yes okay proceed um good morning i am a member of point breeze
community development coalition and i just want to go on record stating that we are um not in
favor of this property the neighbors were concerned about the people parking on the street and using
the garage as storage that was their main concern so i just wanted to go on record saying that we
are not in support of this project thank you thank you for calling in do you have any questions mr
yeah uh miss gamble the the primary opposition was that they they thought that the garage itself
would actually be a storage space and not a one-car garage?
Okay, did they have any reason to believe that
other than some prior experience with other neighbors?
That was their main reason, the prior experience with the neighbors,
and they said that there were other houses on the block
that do the same thing.
Okay, thank you very much.
You're welcome.
Thank you, thank you for calling.
You're welcome.
Anybody else in the virtual audience?
Chair, we have someone under call-in user. Call-in user. You can unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Good morning. Could you state your name and spell for our court reporter?
Call-in user 2. If you're there, please unmute yourself.
Okay, I'm sorry, I'm going to pass on the testimony and go in agreement with Point Breeze
Tiffany Green from Concerned Citizens of Point Breeze.
Okay, you were sworn in earlier, Tiffany.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
all right planning commission
thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rsa 5
zoning which prohibits this type of parking access from the street the applicant's hardship
claim is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or conditions of the
property and the variance would remove at least one on-street parking space and degrade pedestrian
safety and comfort. The age or the ability of the occupants while certainly relevant to
the applicant's personal life are not relevant to the provisions of the zoning code and the
grant of the variance would be a permanent change to the physical condition of the property
regardless of the occupants and I just want to also note that adjacent non-conforming
off-street parking curb cuts are not grounds for hardship the city planning commission recommends
that the board deny the variance MI 2021 003350 1344 South Opal Street I vote no my vote is no
Carol Tenere Thomas Holloman my vote is no James Snell my vote is no Ishmael Shahid my vote is no
Okay, thank you, the board.
Thank you.
MI 2021 003388 1519 West Venango Street.
RCO Nicetown Tioga Improvement, letter of support.
Mr. Anastasio is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Good morning again, Mr. Chair.
Vern, just state your name for the court reporter.
You've already been sworn.
It's Verne Anastasio, V-E-R-N-A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O.
It's Vern Anastasio, V-E-R-N-A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Mr. Anastasio, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Okay, it appears that in the notes, you have submitted everything required, so you may proceed.
Thank you.
This is 1519 West Venango Street.
It's for the construction of a two-family dwelling.
And we're here because it's zoned RSA 5.
I want to take you through the plans first.
There's a corner property.
So we'll have two separate entrances, one fronting and one on the side.
We have a proposed basement area with utility room, sort of like a family room and a bedroom within a well.
And then the first floor being another two bedrooms and a full kitchen and living room.
um here's the corner property like i said and it's uh on a block full of multi-family
uh development here's the proposed second floor would be the living room large sort of uh open
area with a eat-in kitchen a bedroom and then two other bedrooms on the very top third floor
there's several multi-family homes on this particular block including adjacent properties
and across the street we have apartment towers as well
this is the letter that was mailed out to all
immediate neighbors and we met with the registered community organization
we met on november 16th at 6 p.m and we invited everyone today to january 12th meeting hearing i'm
sorry also think it's important uh that you see the history of the property uh this property has
never been a single family home in fact it was a four-family and a business in the 50s and 60s
uh and it was and it remained that a multi-family dwelling
until the property was demolished here again it was a four four family dwelling without the
business so that was the last known use of the property and then when it was demolished
it sat fallow for for quite some time again four family four family a long history of four family
dwelling we did in fact meet with the community as i told you and we have a letter of support
with one proviso for a local management company which my client agreed to there's 125 pieces of
individual mail that went out on the first uh mailing and the second mailing another 125 pieces
we did meet with the community twice uh we have the tax certification uh and because it's a corner
property because it is surrounded by other multi-families because of the long history of
multi-family use in this particular on this particular lot uh we do believe the two-family
dwelling uh is the most appropriate use and we respectfully request that my client be granted
the relief we believe building a single family brand new construction on this block uh it would
be an anomaly it would you know be it would be a white elephant uh there there is no such thing
there is no such uh product on this block or any other block anywhere near this lot and it would
incredibly difficult to market and sell. And with that, I'm going to ask my client
Zongmi Zhu to raise his hand. Z-O-N-G-I-M-I.
Mr. Liu, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, good morning chair, members of the board. My name is...
Hi, could you state your name and spell it for our court reporter?
Absolutely. Lijon Liu, last name is Liu, L-I-U, first name Lijon, L-I-J-I-O-N.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you, sir.
Lijon, did you hear my presentation to the board today?
yes is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge yes and do you adopt it as your own
Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And do you...
testimony yes were you present at both community uh meetings uh whereupon they expressed support
for the project yes thank you no further uh material mr chair we're open for questions
questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman
questions from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty
for the philadelphia city planning commission uh members of the board the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the existing RSA-5 zoning. While we agree that there are several
adjacent non-conforming structures on this block with multifamily uses, we simply can't
support the hardship claim here because there's no evidence of unique physical circumstances
or conditions of the property since it's a normally sized corner lot that's been cleared
of all structures. So we have to recommend that the board deny the variance.
mr chair i respect the planning commission's position uh i just want to point out that market
conditions uh dictate uh that we seek some sort of relief the near neighbors um believe that's
the right way to go they don't want an empty single family home sitting there uh and the
actual reality of all the other properties being multi-family actually is is de facto evidence
that a single-family home built from the ground up would be a white elephant in this community.
Okay, thank you. Our counsel, is that an enforceable proviso, a management firm?
This is Rebecca Cole. Vern, can you please repeat that proviso that you
indicated and what kind of agreement it is? My client just agreed to hire a local management
company, you know, from the community to manage the property.
Chair, I'm unsure if that's enforceable, but it sounds good.
Okay, okay.
MI 2021-00-
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry, Chair.
This is Tanya.
No, it would not be enforceable by license and inspections.
M.I. 2021-003388, 1519 West Benango Street, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Thank you. Thank you. Hey Vern, could you stay on please?
yes sir mi 2021 003519 3632 north 16th street rco nicetown tioga improvement letter of support
verne state your name please again for the record sure it's verne anastasio v-e-r-n
A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O.
Our Vice Chair has a few questions.
Yes, sir.
Good morning. Do you agree to wait through any of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Based on these notes, it appears that the required documents have all been submitted, so you may proceed.
Thank you.
3632 North 16th Street is an existing structure.
It's been abandoned and run down for quite some time.
It is on a block that is severely depopulated. And those properties that are populated,
many of them are, in fact, multifamily dwellings. As you can see from this aerial view,
we've got a dozen empty lots on North 16th Street right across the street. We've got
several more at the end of the block. And in between these lots, we have some boarded up
homes so as a result my this property has laid uh pretty much neglected for quite some time for many
years uh again there are lots of multi-families on the block here's one right as a triplex down
the street uh most of the properties though are duplexes we have met with the community of nice
town tioga there is a letter that went out we met with them twice once in november and once in
December let me show you some plans I think that might be helpful before we do
anything else so again like I said this is a this is part of a twin
so again like i said this is uh this is part of a twin uh much of the block is either vacant or
multi-family uh we have uh unit one which is a rather straightforward one two-bedroom apartment
with a common entry and then unit two
another two-bedroom unit on the second floor and the third floor plan with additional
um space and let's see here
the property is pretty much falling apart my client purchased this and would in fact like
to put in the two-family dwelling.
There's the rear yard.
There's the block itself.
Again, many of them,
multi-family dwellings,
two and three families.
There's a wall.
Did you say two or three?
Which one is it?
At one point you said two,
then you said three.
I'm sorry,
the application is for a three-family dwelling.
I didn't mean two.
Yeah, it's one per floor.
Right.
First, second, and third floor, as the plans suggest.
My apologies if I sit too.
And it's, again, we met with the community group.
They are in full support.
And, again, we met with them twice.
123 pieces of individual mail went out the first time.
And, again, in December, given the condition of the block,
condition of the other homes on the block or the multi-family nature of whatever homes do exist on
the block uh we do believe a single family home here would be difficult to to market and and and
fill the near immediate neighbors agree and as a result we respectfully request granting of the
variance uh in with support of the rco of course with that i'd like my client ms blair b-l-a-i-r
Atiyah, to raise her hand to be recognized.
Ms. Blair, if you're in the audience, can you please raise your hand?
Chair, no hands have come up at this time.
So, Vern, you're an officer of the court, and we can stipulate that she would adopt my presentation as her own testimony.
Please, thank you.
Right.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Vern, I have a question.
You said it's a twin.
What's the attached property?
It's a single-family home, and that adjacent neighbor was at the meeting.
Pardon me?
that adjacent neighbor was at the meeting okay all right questions from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair questions from the planning commission
uh thank you members of the board ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RSA 3 zoning at this site. Again,
just noting that the applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique
physical circumstances or conditions of the property, which is a basic requirement to
establish unnecessary hardship. I would note for the board that economic conditions or return on
investment do not establish hardship for use variances. City Planning Commission recommends
that the board deny the variance.
And I respect the Planning Commission's position.
Again, the depopulation here speaks for itself.
And the brand new single-family home
could not be supported.
And as a result, that's why the near neighbors
would like to see this property brought back to new life.
MI 2021-003519-3632 North 16th Street.
I vote yes.
Harold Tenere my vote is yes. Thomas Holloman my vote is yes. James Snell my vote is yes.
Ismail Shaheed my vote is yes. Thank you. All right Vern please stay on a minute.
Yes sir. MI 2021 003 385 4321 Tyson. No RCO letter received at this point.
Tyson, no RCO letter received at this point.
You've already been sworn in.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Thank you.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Do you know if the required documents have been submitted?
I submitted everything but for the RCO letter.
I would like to be able to have the RCO weigh in on this.
So at the board's discretion, I'm offering either to either continue the matter so that we can continue to talk to the RCO and get their input or present our case and have a resumption hearing where only the RCO letter would be read into the record prior to the board's vote.
I would leave that up to the board at your discretion.
Why don't we do that?
Why don't we do that?
the latter yep thank you
may i proceed yeah sure thank you this is an application at 4321 tyson
for using a two-family dwelling in an existing structure um i will pull out here and show you
what we're proposing
here's the property itself and it has a detached garage in the rear
the basement would be for utilities only the first floor would be one
large apartment and the second floor would be an apartment as well
and i'm going to show share some photos
property's been vacant for a few years now
and my client purchased it and would like to make it a duplex the property is large enough
and there are other multi-family dwellings on the block
we did meet with the RCO there's the letter that went out to Taconi Civic Association and all its
immediate neighbors we met with them and also invited everyone to today's hearing
there's proof of mailing 80 individual part of pieces of mail went out to different households
we have tax clearance certification again we do not have a position letter yet from the rco
but uh we would respectfully request the relief because this is a particular block on the 4300
block of Tyson, has several multifamily homes. This property does need to be rehabbed. And my
client believes it's best and highest use would be a two-family dwelling at approachable price
points, one on the entire first floor and one unit on the entire second floor. And with that,
I'm going to have my client raise his hand, Zong, G-Z-O-N-G-I, me, M-I, Zhu, Z-H-U.
Mr. Zhu, are you up present? Please raise your hand.
Chair, I don't see anyone with that name with their hand up at this time.
He was present, Mr. Chairman.
Hold on a moment.
Mr. Zhu, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair's instructions.
state your name and spell for the courtroom word please uh okay uh k-o-n-g-m-i-c-s-u
do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth
thank you mr zoo did you hear my presentation to the board today
yes is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge
yes and do you adopt it as your own testimony yes thank you mr chair i have nothing else if
there's any questions questions from the board no mr chairman no mr no mr chairman oh mr chairman
okay questions from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair playing planning commission
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Again, a comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA 3 zoning. The applicant's hardship
claim has not been supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or conditions
of the property. City Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the variance.
Tanya will resume this for a resumptive hearing, waiting on the RCO.
Tanya will resume this for a presumptive hearing, waiting on the RCO. Thank you.
Thank you.
Do we have anything in place for a date, Mr. Anastasio?
I ask for maybe another 30 days.
I'll try to get them to produce their letter.
Would that be okay?
So this is January.
We'll do February.
the third week in february does that work for you let me get the date or record yes it does
i'm only here i mean that's only the place i'd be okay so okay i just didn't want to make sure
we don't have a conflict with you but i can do
tanya we have the 15th and the 16th that week thank you um madam vice chair
We can do the 15th at 9.30, Mr. Anastasio.
Thank you, Ms. Sanket.
Okay, thank you all.
MI 2021-003351, 527-37 West Rod Avenue.
Paul Turner is the attorney.
A letter from South Kensington Partners with revised plans.
Mr. Toner is coming back in now as a panelist chair.
Mr. Toner.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Could you state your name and spell for the court report, please?
Absolutely. Paul Toner, T-O-N-E-R. I'm the attorney for the applicant, 527 West Gerard, LLC.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
The vice chair has a few questions.
Good morning. Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
We do, yes.
have you emailed all of the required documents in with the exhibit packet
we have yes okay you may proceed thank you very much mr
mr chairman um what i've now shared on the screen is the proposed rendering for my clients
uh repurposing a preservation of an historic structure at six and gerrard this property
does not look like anything close to what's in the rendering right now.
In its current condition, the property has sat in a state of disrepair for a number of decades.
As you will see, and as is revealed through the zoning archives,
this property has seen a number of uses over the years,
including plumbing supply, batting cages, check cashing uses, dance halls, bingo parlors,
a whole array of uses that really led to the ultimate disrepair of this property.
So what my client is proposing to do is to take the existing structure,
maintain all the historic components of the existing structure,
including the cornice, the windows, and the overall outline of the building itself,
and build an addition to the rear of the property
that has already been reviewed and approved by the Historic Commission.
so we have received a total of three refusals um that are at issue before the board today
and each one of these refusals uh relates to the new addition that's going to be
constructed constructed in the rear of the property those refusals are minimum rear yard
death which right now there is a hundred percent lot coverage on this building and because we're
proposing a new addition under the zoning code we would have to comply with the existing code
provisions for a new addition, but it is important for the board to know the existing features of
this building have 100% lot coverage. The number of dwelling units. By code, we're in the CMX2
zoning district, which allows by right 21. Our refusal is for 41. After meeting with the
community, we have been able to reduce the number of units from 41 to 38, which we're going to
discuss a little bit as we go through the exhibits and testimony here today. And finally, the third
refusal is for height. In the CMX2 zoning district, the maximum height is 38 feet. What the refusal
was issued for was 82. 82 includes the stair towers, which under 14701-6 should not have been
included within the maximum height refusal the actual max the actual height of this building
the actual max the actual height of this building is 73 as was originally submitted to lni again
is 73 as was originally
after extensive neighborhood input and consultation we have reduced the height of
the new addition structure from 73 down to 66. this property has um it has a long history itself
in terms of this specific proposal proposal it also has a long history and as the board's aware
is aware, the South Kensington neighbors have issued a letter of support, actually a very
strong letter of support. And we believe the letter of support reflects the amount of concessions,
discussions, and understandings that my client has agreed to with the neighbors,
all in an effort to preserve the historic structure. With us on the Zoom today is two
representatives of my clients, Matt Samola and Alan Delphiner, as well as a project architect,
Judy Robinson of Continuum Architects. And within our zoning packet, we have both revised
zoning plans, revised floor plans and schematics, as well as relevance documents from the zoning
archive, our original zoning plans for comparison purposes. We have our RCO 14303 notice packages
for both our first RCO meeting, which took place in October of 2022, as well as the second RCO
meeting, which took place in January, two days ago of 2022. Those RCO proof of service are
included as 15 and 16 in our zoning packet. We also have a proviso form that indicates the
changes being made. Going back to what's being presented today.
The existing structure, while the outline remains of its historic character, it's fallen into
disrepair. The proposal after going through the historical commission has a number of significant
changes. First of all, the windows, which are not currently in an intact condition, are all being
restored. The historic commission have requested that we remove all the paint from the window
archways right here which are going to be done in the new in our proposal. The transoms along
with the intricate window work are also all being restored. And then in the center of the property
is a Celestri that right now is,
I'll give you a current view of Celestri.
Right here has been built over and essentially destroyed.
My client's proposing to bring back that Celestri to life
and restore it to its original condition.
In terms of the historic commission,
This property has received full review and approval as of July 13, 2021, based upon the plans before the board today.
But it's actually the second time in the past two years that this proposal has been before the Historic Commission.
The legal owner, Mr. Berger, made an application contemporaneous with the nomination of this property for placement on the Registry of Historic Places.
As included in Exhibit 5, Keeping Society nominated this property in 2019.
Oscar Beisler was the nominee himself and appeared before the Historic Commission.
After extensive review, the Historical Commission granted approval in February of 2020, which is included within Exhibit 5.
The nomination itself includes some additional pictures of the historic property, as well as some aerials to help show exactly what we're doing.
So right here where my cursor is, this is the section of the property that's going to be demolished.
The rear of the property is not visible currently from either 6th Street, which is to the left here, and Girard Street, which is to the bottom of my cursor here.
And when the Planning Commission granted their approval in August of 2020, their conceptual
approval, this is what was before them.
The prior owner had proposed four different scenarios, and the Historical Commission had
and the historical commission had approved the first two which included as you can see in scenario
approved the first two, which included
two six eight or ten story the historic commission ultimately stipulated they wanted a six-story
building and as the board is before the board today is my client's proposal which is less than
what the historic commission approved conceptually back in 2020. this is a rendering of what the
Historical Commission had conceptually approved. And this is the eight-story addition that they
thought would be appropriate for the property. Although this is eight stories, but the six-story
is right here, which the Historical Commission thought would be appropriate for the property.
Exhibit 6 includes our zoning plans along with elevations. I just want to walk through those
plans real quick and our architect is also here who can answer any questions but just to highlight
some of the more important areas um first of all on the right here you see an outline dotted outline
this property in addition to repurposing and preserving all the historic elements is going
to include a pretty vast solar array to have a green element to the property it's going to be
situated all in along the front of the building facing gerrard avenue and there's going to be a
second solar array on the new addition, and this is tucked away in the back left-hand
corner. The proposal is going to have an open courtyard area in the center, and this is
actually going to allow for an increase in open area. As I mentioned before, right now
in its existing condition, there's 100% lot of coverage.
My client's proposal includes opening up the center portion
to allow air and light to all the units in the front here
and to create a courtyard environment.
And in the second page of Exhibit 6, the elevations,
you can see how the open courtyard is going to be situated
in the back of the existing structures.
And then again, on the drawer elevation, which is the third page of Exhibit 6, you can see the
railing areas, the planter boxes, all that will be included within the open courtyard.
I also want to direct your attention to the height of the building.
The existing structures are all 42 feet in height. My client's new addition on the back
is proposed at 66 feet in height, with the top of the stair towers at an additional 9 feet.
But per the code, the height is 66 feet.
Moving to Exhibit 7, which are the floor plans, as well as the schematic section.
Beginning with the upper left-hand corner floor plan, which includes the first floor plan,
there is going to be a large storage area for bicycles, including e-bike for charging
stations. Originally, we had proposed 14 bicycle parking areas. This includes 20 now. There
is a dedicated trash storage area right to the north, or I guess this would be the east
of the bike parking area and that is going to be for all the new units it's going to be accessible
through the open courtyard onto gerard there'll be a private private trash collection service
the units themselves before the board today is a proposal of 38 total units
those units are all going to be a similar size the majority will be in similar size
and that's ranging from 486 square feet to 871 square feet. So all these units are going to be
of a good healthy dimension. They're all going to be situated as a mezzanine style, loft style
apartment unit that is intended to go with the garden flow of the property open area concept.
Moving to the second floor floor plan, again, the center will all be open below.
There's a proposal for five units measuring between 486 and 496 square feet that will
be constructed within the new addition.
And then on the second floor, the existing structure will be a series of other residential
units measuring from 939 square feet. And then another
measuring from 939 square feet and then another inclusion of
eight additional units, I'm sorry, 11 additional units ranging from 515 to 494.
And then the third floor plan
includes again the open courtyard there's going to be no addition to the front historic structure
at the third floor level with the addition of these five units at the new addition
and then finally
the fourth floor this is where the prior proposal had five units measuring approximately 500 square
feet at the request of the neighborhood we consolidate those five units into two these
are measuring 871 square feet and these are these are both going to be two bedroom units
in addition to reducing the number of units and reducing the height
the neighborhood asked for us to increase the number of two bedroom units which we were
happy to do with this change to the plan. Moving to the second sheet in Exhibit 17.
Here we have just depictions that show the visibility of the new addition. And as you can
see from the perspective of someone standing on 6th Street, the new addition won't be visible at
From the perspective of someone across the street, there will be the top area, the addition
of approximately 20 feet will be visible.
And on the roof deck, the original proposal was to have an open roof deck area that one
the changes requested of the neighbors was that we reduced the availability of roof deck to just
a certain number of units. So a change was made to reduce the accessibility roof deck to just
the fourth floor units, those two fourth floor units. And we've also added some greenery that's
going to help soften the impact of the new addition on the Randolph Street neighbors,
which would be the neighbors whose backyards are abutting to this property and those properties
are right to the immediate east of this proposal. So to see how this proposal interacts with
the neighbors to the east I want to go back to the rendering.
so randolph street and actually let me go to exhibit 13 for some of the aerials
so randolph street is right where my cursor is here it's right to the west so the existing
structure of my client's property is right here where my cursor is and the rear yards of the
Randolph Street properties, a butt to my client's property.
And these original neighbors at the first hearing
did voice some concerns about the impact
of our proposal on their rear yards,
which as we went back, reduced the height,
and update our renderings,
we think we're able to come to a good, happy medium
that addressed the vast majority of concerns.
So for an individual walking down Randolph Street
and in the bottom left-hand corner of exhibit two,
where my cursor is right now, is a depiction of Randolph Street. The new addition is going to be
virtually unnoticeable to any individual walking down Randolph Street. Just the very tip of the
roof here with the green elements will be visible. And again, this is the upper left-hand corner is
a rendering on 6th Street showing that what is visible from 6th Street is only the top of the
roof tower. Now the structure has been reduced. And this is from a little further north on
6th Street, where you can see the access stair tower here, which will be visible. And then
from the rear yards of the Randolph Street property, they asked that we include as much
softening as possible. Originally, the proposal had been just for a solid surface wall. What
has been done is a number of things first of all we've added glass blocks to mimic windows here
these glass blocks are all fire rated they're not going to be something that can be open so they're
going to maintain the zoning code compliance without having windows on properties that are
windows on properties that are budding to additional properties, but they're going to
budding to additional properties.
create the appearance of windows. And it creates the appearance of just some more texture to the
property. And when we combine that with the green elements that we've installed to the roof areas
that will grow down along the corrugated metal exterior facade, it's all going to help to soften
the impact on the Randall Street properties. One of the questions the neighbors had at the meeting
on Monday night was how these green elements would be maintained. My client's going to hold
and maintain ownership of this property. These green elements are all accessible from the roof
deck. So my client and their maintenance crew will have full ability to keep and maintain the roof
deck and as well as the green elements of this property. And an additional effort to help just
soften the wall itself the corrugated metal exterior is going to be differentiated in color
just to to change the patterns as we move up this was also something that was well received by the
neighbors when we made our presentation on monday and it's a change that my clients were certainly
happy to make. Moving to Exhibit 10, the document history of these properties is fairly extensive
and we've included the prior approvals for the plumbing and the private clubs, the retail
furniture sales, the check cashing, the dance hall, the hot dog concession, and the plumbing
supply, all included within Exhibit 10. The intent in putting a proposal together that would gain
broad community support was really return this property to its grandeur, get rid of the undesirable
uses that have been existing for a number of years, and create a large commercial space that
have a good quality tenant along with some garden style loft style apartments that would be comfortable
living and also would be complementary to the historic structure itself the historical commission
and approving this certainly was grateful that we were able to take what is a very distinctive
property at the corner of six and gerrard street and return it to a historically appropriate
condition and we believe when you review the letter from the south kensington community
you're going to see that the fairly broad support and that would be of the total number of
individuals who came to the meeting 36 of 44 expressed for full support the community expresses
full support and we believe that's the right position to take for this property
so with that we do have our architect judy robinson available and i also before the end
presentation would like to have my clients adopt my testimony, but we're
available to answer any questions that the community or that the zoning board may have
on this project. So I think you've done a good job at explaining
the structure, and I don't think we need the architect. Why don't you adopt your
testimony with the owner? Is Mr. Samola available? If you could raise your hand.
Yeah, my hand's raised. Can you hear me? Yes.
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please? Sure.
Matthew Samola, M-A-T-T-H-E-W, Samola, S-E-M-O-L-A.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Good. Counsel?
Mr. Samola, you're a principal with 527 West Girard, LLC, correct?
Correct.
And have you been before the board during the entirety of my presentation this morning?
Yes, I have.
Did you hear my factual presentation to the board, my explanation of the plans and the various documents
included within our zoning packet yes and do you adopt my testimony as your own yes and do you agree
with all the statements i made to the board today yes all right thank you mr small questions from
the questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman
questions from the virtual audience.
Chair, we have Oscar Bersert.
Mr. Bersert, you can mute yourself and wait for the chair.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for our court reporter?
Oscar Bersert, O-S-C-A-R, last name Bersert,
b as in boy e-i-s-e-r-t um i'm an architectural historian and um uh with the women okay do you
swear for them to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes okay proceed sir
I was just calling in to state my support for this project. It's an incredible balance of preservation and new development. The owner, the property owner, is taking a building that while rather, you know, had not been maintained really well over the years and sort of had seen, you know, maybe its worst, you know, treatment and taking it and turning it into the landmark that it should be as a former market house.
i was just uh calling in to state my support for this project it's an
Thank you so much.
Thank you for calling in, sir.
Any other comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have a Jessica Rodriguez.
Ms. Rodriguez, unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, I'm unmuted.
Just let me know when I can speak.
Yes, could you state your name and spell for the court's reporter?
Hi, my name is Jessica.
Oh, so Jessica, J-E-S-S-I-C-A.
and last name rodriguez r-o-d-r-i-g-u-e-z um do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth yes proceed thank you i'm the democratic committee person for
board 18 division 9 which represents this area there are several neighbors um we're opposed to
this there's several neighbors neighbors who are opposed to this who are near neighbors there are
concerns about the impact of parking and also the visibility of light onto the randolph street
neighbors um while we do appreciate the developers efforts to to actually um restore this this
marketplace this community has used this building for you know up until recently as a check cash in
place and and we would just like the community that exists to be included with especially with
the impact of parking and um visibility of light to neighbor to near neighbor's yards we have
several folks who have retained attorneys so we'll see what happens if you vote to proceed with this
so i just wanted to to comment on that thank you all right thank you very much for calling in
Any other comments from the virtual audience?
If I could just respond to Ms. Rodriguez's comments quickly.
In terms of parking, this certainly was something that one individual raised at the hearing on Monday evening.
And there are two important things to keep in mind.
This is an historic structure.
The entirety of the exterior is historically designated.
Any sort of parking would require us to destroy the exterior, at least in a limited way for parking, which is something that the Historical Commission would not support.
And it's something that would certainly endanger the historic fabric of this building itself.
Second, this property is located literally on the Girard Street trolley line.
This is a perfect example of a transit-oriented development with immediate access to public transportation that will take all the residents right into Center City.
So in addition to being right on a public transportation line intended for use by these residences, the extent of bike parking was included, including e-bike facilities to allow for non-car transportation uses at this property.
All these issues were at issue before the RCO, and I think the fact that they're supporting us today speaks volumes.
Thank you. Any other comments or statements from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have a Brett Cohen. Mr. Cohen, you unmute yourself on the way for the chair.
Thank you for recognizing me.
Could you do me a favor? Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Yes, my name is Brett Cohen, B-R-E-T-T-C-O-H-E-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thank you.
Well, I just wanted to start.
In my opinion, there are a number of omissions and errors in what we heard from the attorney.
For example, he described this as a transit-oriented development because of the trolley.
This is absolutely not transit-oriented.
The trolley runs barely every 20 minutes.
He might be thinking of the L or the Broad Street Line.
And being within approximately two blocks of that. But this is nothing remotely close to being a transit oriented development. So just just so quickly. But in terms of my prepared question, you know, the some of the claims made about parking are not true.
parking certainly could be added to a project like this either this project or similar to this
we've seen similar ones in the neighborhood that involve lot consolidation to allow you know
We've seen similar ones in the neighborhood that involve lot consolidation to allow, you know, the purchase and consolidation of groaning properties.
In the example here, there's the rear of the project, which they're using to add additional units.
And units are the key thing here.
They are adding 40 units approximately.
I believe they said 38 or 37, but it's approximately 40 units.
Some of them will be two bedroom.
Currently, you can see there in depicted, there's parking for maybe eight or 10 or 12 spots.
They're also proposing a commercial use for the first floor.
So those 12 spots have to service that first floor, as well as the 40 residents, some of which are two bedrooms.
We know in our neighborhood about 50% of people have cars.
So, you know, there's going to be 30 to 40 cars additional if we just go by existing numbers.
So I just want to, you know, I appreciate the attention in terms of the historic aspect.
But, you know, the notion that this is all or nothing, that this is the only way this project could be done and that there could never be any parking, I think is simply not accurate.
Right. But the last point I wanted to make, and perhaps the most important point, is that this project falls on an RCO boundary.
So I live at Fifth and Girard. I'm a near neighbor. I'm basically at Fifth and Girard, a few houses down, but at Fifth and Girard.
And the RCO, of course, we heard from the South Kensington RCO, but really they only represent 50 percent of the neighbors.
The neighbors to the south in Northern Liberties may not have heard about this project.
When I posted about this earlier this morning at about 8.30 or 9 o'clock, we already had 10 comments from Northern Liberties neighbors.
The majority of them opposed to the project.
So what I would ask, and this is a key area where the zoning board of adjustment is so important and you have such an important role to play.
um you know you're here to help facilitate and coordinate cases where projects are falling along
boundaries therefore i would ask for a continuance um if i have the standing to do so or
certainly um if you have the power to do that but i would ask that there be a continuance
to allow the uh southern neighbors who a majority that i've spoken to are opposed and perhaps
strongly opposed to organize. I suspect that our political representatives would be sympathetic
and we would want to have the time to engage them. I did not receive a letter personally. I don't
know if I was supposed to, but I did not receive a letter about this project. I know sometimes the
mail is not so good, but especially for those of us to the South, we are not hearing direct
communication because many of us may not be on the South Kensington community partners mailing
list their email list so this you know essentially this may be news to everyone and then it might be
too late for us to weigh in so I know the zoning board of adjustment values community input and to
allow the community input for the half of the people impacted by this project just south of
Drard Avenue, I would humbly ask to allow for a continuance so that we can allow our neighbors
to organize and to weigh in properly. Thank you. Mr. Cohen, thank you. Thank you very much for
your comment, but we're going to continue with the case. Thank you very much. Is there any other
comments or statements from the virtual audience? Chair, we have Amanda Rosario. Ms. Rosario,
you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Yes. Can you hear me?
Yes. Could you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Yes, sir. My name is Amanda Rosario, A-M-A-N-D-A, last name Rosario, R-O-S-A-R-I-O.
Right. Do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Thank you. Proceed.
I want to say good morning to everybody and thank you for allowing me to speak.
I do ask for patience so that I can articulate my thoughts properly. I'm not as good as everybody
else that's been speaking so far. I am a near neighbor. I live on the Randolph Street,
right behind where the new addition would be. So my yard would be impacted by this new
addition that would be going up. I noticed that, well, I would like to say that I do
share and agree with statements made by Jessica Rodriguez and Brett Cohen. I was in attendance
of the community meetings both in October and both two days ago. I will, you know, state that
I will, you know, state that I am not in favor of this project, although, like, I do appreciate
I am not in favor of this.
the great efforts at which they, to preserve the property and its historical value, and
I do appreciate a lot of the concessions that they did make. I did want to point out that
one of the, one of the things that we had spoken about in the meeting was that the idea of having
a mural put on the back wall so that the neighbors wouldn't have to look at a 66 foot black wall in
their backyard. And we were told that the owner or Mr. Toner's client was not opposed to that and
was wondering if they were still planning on offering that as, you know, as a way to not make
it like being crushed under the black wall that when you go out to your backyard. I would like
to say that yes the the parking is definitely uh an issue we are severely crippled um in this area
with a lot of new additions that are coming up one that is not very far away i think i believe
it's on marshall which is the next block over from uh 6th street that i if i'm not mistaken i may be
wrong but i think it has like 88 units or something like that so um that was definitely an issue and
one of the reasons why I'm opposed to this project. But that's all I really wanted to say.
Thank you very much for calling in and your comments. Mr. Turner, do you want to respond?
I would, Mr. Bergman. Thank you very much. In terms of the mural, we indicated on Monday that
our clients are open to the mural. It's not a zoning contingency or condition, and we remain
open to it. The only one of the reasons we don't want to commit today to any specific mural is
it truly would only be visible by the Randolph Street neighbors. So we're talking about
four or five lots that would be able to see this and if we were going to commit to any mural we
would want input from all the neighbors as to the artist selected and the type of mural that would
go up but we certainly remain open and we we told the neighbors that we'd be willing to work with
them going forward if that is what the community truly wanted, was a mural for those backyard
areas. And in terms of her other comment, and also the comment by Mr. Cohen about the new
proposal and underground parking, so what they're referring to is what's known as the former movie
theater lot that has been completely demolished is now proposed for redevelopment. Now they have
the great benefit of completely demolishing the existing structures, and those structures are all
gone and so when they add their underground parking they're able to do so easily because
they were able to demolish all their structures again going back to the core component of this
proposal the reason why it's garnered so much support is we're preserving historic structures
and so we just we hope the neighborhood is understanding that to cut into the historic
fabric is something that's going to not be supported by the philadelphia historic commission
and the vast majority of community members who want to see this structure return to its grandeur.
All right. Thank you, Mr. Toner. Any other comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have a Carolina Ross. Ms. Ross, you can unmute yourself and speak now.
Hi. Ms. Ross, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
yeah it's carolina k-a-r-o-l-i-n-a last name is ross r-o-s-s thank you do you swear or firm to
tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed please um i'd like to second
the opinions of miss rodriguez and mr cohen and i'm sorry i forgot the name but whoever just spoke
she as well. I'm also a near neighbor. I reside on 6th Street between Girard and Poplar,
and I'm completely opposed to this proposal because of the impact that these 40 units would
have on residential parking. It's already extremely difficult to find parking. The school right across
the street, the city school, limits parking. About 50% of parking, half the street, is closed between
7 o'clock and 4 30 p.m. for all parking and then overflow goes to 7th Street which is already
as the previous speaker said all taken up by the Marshall Street property
and those 80 units. I know that there's a property on Poplar and 6th Street that faced a similar
issue and they provided 29 spots of parking in their building for their 39 units. So something
can definitely be done about it. Claiming that their residents can rely on public transportation
doesn't guarantee that they won't all have cars with them and rely on 6th Street to park.
There's no parking here.
There's no parking here. If they're not providing parking, this is not a good idea.
If they're not providing parking, this is not a good idea, in my opinion.
Thank you very much for calling in.
Is there any other comments?
Chair, we have Charles Adams.
Mr. Adams, you can unmute yourself or wait for the chair.
Hi, this is Charles Adams.
Can you do me a favor?
Could you spell your name for the court reporter, please?
Yes, C-H-A-R-L-E-S-A-D-A-M-S.
Do you swear for them to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed.
I am the neighbor who is on, I own 1217 and 1219 North 6th Street.
I am just on the north side of the project and clear a bloody wall with the project.
And I moved on to 6th Street in 1986.
And for 36 years, I've been really hoping someone would do something positive with this
building.
And that being said, I would like to speak on, yes, I would like to see this project
take place.
Thank you for taking the time to call on.
Thank you, sir.
Any other comments?
Chair, we have no other hands at this time.
Thank you.
Planning Commission?
Thank you, Chair Bergman, Ian Hegarty with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends cmx 2.5 zoning at this location on
gerard avenue the proposed dwelling unit count is consistent with the recommended zoning district
and the proposed height we feel is the minimum variance necessary to preserve the portions of
the existing structure that are close to the street there is no refusal for parking as the
zoning district does not require off-street parking city planning commission recommends
the board grant the variances with two provisos as stated previously height not to exceed 60
excuse me height not to exceed 66 feet and no more than 38 dwelling units thank you very much
MI 2021 003351 527-37 West Rod Avenue. I vote yes with revised plans of two pages.
Mr. Chairman, we had a... Wait a minute. We got to let everybody vote.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes with proviso. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with both provisos.
Thank you, Mr. Turner.
Yes, Mr. Chairman, the proviso for and that was included within our packet includes both provisos that were requested.
Then they're right, the two-pages revised plans.
Thank you very much.
All right, here we go.
MI 2021, 003346, 611 North 20th Street, Spring Garden Civic Association, Letter of Support,
Pro Se, Jamie Luntz and Philip Yarborough.
Chair, Mr. Luntz is coming back in now as a panelist.
I appreciate it. Thank you.
good morning can you hear us yes could you do me a favor please could you uh state your name and
spell it for our court reporter please sure my name is jamie lontz j-a-m-i-e-l-o-n-t-z
my name is philip yarborough p-h-i-l-i-p-y-a-r-b-e-r-o-u-g-h all right do you both swear
to affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth yes yes our vice chair
has a few questions for you hi good morning it appears that you've submitted all the required
documents that are that we've requested and there is also a letter of support from the spring garden
civic association so you may proceed thank you um good morning uh mr chairman and uh board members
I'm speaking on behalf of Jamie, my partner.
We appreciate the opportunity to present our case today, and we hope you'll bear with us as pro se applicants.
When Jamie and I purchased our house back in fall of 2020, it was our vision to erect a second-story deck in the rear of our home.
And the inspiration for that deck really came from our next door neighbors who had previously erected a deck that is substantially similar to the one that we wish to build.
And so I'd like to pull up a picture of what they've done, and that will give you just a flavor for what we'd like to do as well.
And so I'd like to pull up a picture of what they've done.
So as you can see, our next door neighbor's deck is seven feet deep from their house, which allows for a three-foot setback.
What we didn't know at the time when we obtained our architectural plans, which were approved by
an engineer, was that in the interim between when our neighbors built their deck and when we submitted
our plans, apparently the zoning had changed in terms of a rear setback from three feet to seven
feet. So as it currently stands, to the extent we would build our deck under the current zoning
zoning requirements, we'd only be able to build a three-foot deck, which we don't feel would be
a usable or even a safe structure. So today we are requesting a variance from the seven-foot
setback to a proposed three-foot, three-inch setback, which would be about three inches
um farther from the our neighbors property than our um than our adjacent neighbors and we're also
proposing a um another setback in terms of our adjacent neighbors i think for vertical supports
distance from lot lines the minimum is 18 inches we're requesting nine inches um with respect to
our adjacent neighbors we've received um letters of consent from both of them we showed them our
plans and they're in support of our proposed project and even our rear neighbors um one of
our rear neighbors on on his own accord submitted a letter of support for a project which we were
very much appreciated um so as you can see um if you want to turn to the other one
This is our backyard, the plan that shows the comparison of what ours would look like.
So basically this is what our rear deck would look like.
We've received a letter of support from our RCO and as you'll see in their letter, they've
stated that um they view the deck as adding value to our home uh while at the same time not
creating any potentially adverse effects for other nearby properties or property owners
um um so you know that's really our case today and we're hoping that you know we can create this
deck and that'll uh add value to our home and help us to love it even more than we already do
okay questions from the board no mr chairman yes mr chair no questions from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty
for the philadelphia city planning commission uh members of the board comprehensive plan recommends
no change the existing zoning on this site. The proposed dimensional variances here are minimal
and consistent with the adjoining property and other properties on this block. City Planning
Commission therefore recommends that the board grant the variances. Thank you. MI 2021-003346-611
North 20th Street, I vote yes. Harold Tenere, my vote is yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
MI 2021-003463, 735 East Rod Avenue,
Fishtown Neighbors Association, letter of support.
Councilman Squill letters of non-opposition
Darlene Thray
Mr. Chair it's 725
Okay 725
Easter Island
Council
Sarah we have Ms. Threat coming back
as a panelist now
Thank you
good morning commissioners darling on behalf of the applicants
good morning could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter please
darlene threep d-a-r-l-e threep t as in thomas h-r-e-a-t
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes proceed well i'm sorry our vice chair has a few questions hi darlene do you agree to waive
the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy hi carol yes i do it appears that you've
submitted all the required documents uh there's a letter from councilman squilla of non-opposition
fishtown neighbors association has submitted a letter of support and you may proceed thank you
Thank you.
you see my screen now yep good morning commissioners this is a straightforward case here today
i'm showing you my presentation package with alyssa that i submitted to you today
We have the refusal, the appeal, the product information form, tax information, D, pictures, plans, community letter, kit of mailing.
I'm just going to scroll down very quickly to give you a project here.
Taking my computer a little time to catch up here. Here we go.
Commissioners, this is a property that's in question today.
I'm showing you here a picture of posting of this property.
Basically, this is a property that is next to, but this property has never had a history
of a commercial use for the properties in the block, except the two corners properties
have a use.
My clients bought this property back in 2019.
They thought it was a single-family property, and they started renovating this property.
Unbeknownst to them, it was a CMX2, which requires a commercial use on the first floor.
Before we follow this appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment to allow this property to simply be used as a single-family residence.
Community Association, the Fishtown
721. We did receive it. It was in excess of 40. No one pretty much had an objection as a single
a family dwelling. Basically, we're in the sense of renovating it and are seeking approval from
the board. I'm going to show you the property. This is the adjacent property. It's the same.
The property over here is the same. It's used for the single family. It changes to the footprint
of this building. The only change that will be made to the building is that update the siding
in the front of this building. I'm just going to us to the plans very quickly.
And if you'd like to see the exterior or interior pictures, I'll show them to you.
But these are the plans.
Basically, this is the front renovation of the property.
And then we have the, let's see if I can get a better picture.
Thank you.
What's going on, let's pitch a little bit.
I'm having a lot of trouble with that.
Excuse me, ma'am.
This is Pauline from IT.
I was just wondering what kind of trouble you're having.
Let me just see if I can read.
So you can see the point in a little bit.
i apologize it's fine
here we go
okay here we go so you can actually see here basically we have a empty basement the first
the living room dining room and kitchen the second floor has uh excuse me women and this
is pulling from IT. Again, it just zoomed out to 10%, so you might want to zoom back in for the
board. Is that better? That's fine. Yep. Yep, that's good. Okay. So we have a basement with
utilities only. The first floor has a living room, dining room, and a kitchen.
the second floor has a the third floor has the fourth bedroom with the master suite
we did uh sent out a notice uh to the community
have the uh certificate of mailing receive a letter of support from the fish town neighborhood
association to answer any questions that you may have do you do you want to have your client come
adopt a testimony?
Ms. Yang, are you present in the hearing today?
Ms. Yang?
Sarah, I don't see anyone by that name
with their hand up at this time.
Her name is Pidor, P-I-D-O-R, Yang.
Sarah, she just raised her hand.
Ms. Yang, you can unmute yourself
and wait for the chair we are on mute could you do could you state your name and spell for the
court reporter please yes my name is pidora yang first name p-i-d-o-r last name y-a-n-g
do we swear firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do thank you ms shang presented today i'm sorry darling i didn't get the full question
only as presented today yes would you adopt it as you yes at this time we're
willing to take any questions from the board questions from the board no mr chairman
Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from the virtual audience? Comments?
I see no hands at this time, Chair. Planning Commission?
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Members of the Board, in 2015, the zoning map was amended from RM1 to CMX2 in accord with
recommendations from the comprehensive plan however uh as presented here by council the
existing structure is not configured for ground floor commercial use presenting a hardship city
planning commission recommends that the board grant this variance thank you mi 2021-003-463-725
east rod avenue i vote yes carol tenere my vote is yes thomas holliman my vote is yes james snell
my vote is yes ishmael shaheed my vote is yes thank you very much is there anyone in the
audience whose case wasn't heard still waiting for a case
i see no hands at this time chair all right
i see no hands at this time chair all right we're we're gonna we're gonna break for lunch
and we'll be back at two o'clock thank you everybody all right
Are we on?
there you go sir you're good to go okay good afternoon my name is bill bergman
and i will be chairing the zba hearings this afternoon with me is carol tenary our vice
chair present ismail shaheed our board secretary yes dear thomas holliman our board member
President Mr. Chairman James Snell our board member
President Mr. Chairman also here is our board administrator
Tanya Sunkit and our board attorney for the day Rebecca Cole
before we start just a few comments about our virtual format
one be advised the proceedings are being recorded
participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded
A video will be available by contacting the Board Administrator, Tanya Sunkett, at tanyasunkett at phila.gov.
Two, for the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
Three, if you are participating in my phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and your address of the property in question.
That phone number is 267-270-5548.
And lastly, you'll see there's a box that says question and answer box.
It is not intended for any comments.
Any comments should be directed to Tanya Sunkett, the Board Administrator.
So let's look first at continuances for the afternoon.
Our first continuance that I want to mention here is our number five, MI 2021-003951-20
West Queen Lane. It's a contingence requested by the attorney. Is there anyone in the virtual
audience who want to have a comment about that or object? I see no hands at this time, Chair.
That case is continued and must be tried. We also have
Case number 12. MI 2021-003952-6237-45 Germantown Avenue. There's an attorney, Mr. Scherner,
who wants to request a continuance. I want both attorneys to be put in the queue to talk,
Adam Laver and also Mr. Scherner.
Mr. Laver, you can unmute yourself or wait for the chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Adam Laver of Blank Rome on behalf of the applicant, Hatch Real Estate.
Mr. Laver, could you spell your name for the court reporter?
Yes, Chairman Bergman.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
How about the second attorney?
What is his name, Chair?
Sharmer.
Mr. Sharmer.
Yes, good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Schirmer, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Yeah, Mr. Schirmer, just state your name and spell for the court reporter, please.
Good afternoon. First name is Hal, H-A-L, last name Schirmer, S-C-H-I-R-M-E-R, representing neighbors.
All right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Schirmer, I understand your request and it continues.
Yes, Mr. Schirmer.
The reason why is I was just recently retained to look at
uh the reason why is i was just recently retained to look over the record in this appeal when
looking at the record and looking at the prior zbo it turned out the sorry the prior rco zoning
hearing many people did not receive notice of the rco hearing and it was necessary to schedule a
second hearing we've had a fairly similar situation where a lot of people did not have
enough time to find out about this particular issue and also looking back it turns out that
that this is one of uh two properties which are the main parts of this zoning district which is
scheduled to be rezoned as part of the germantown 2035 uh logically it makes sense to have pushed
this in front of the planning commission rather than have probably two variances going through
and then rezone it. Second, as I said, I just came on to the case. Finally, I just found out
yesterday that one of the city officials had been advising the neighbors that they probably didn't
have legal standing to participate in this public zoning hearing, and therefore they shouldn't be
involved. In order to cure those problems, I would like a continuance so that we can go back
and clarify that no, actually the Philadelphia Code 14303, I think it's, sorry, 14303-14E
actually says interested parties get to speak, worry about who is standing after the zoning
board has made a decision. So that combination that the record, the RCO letter confirms that
they've had problems getting noticed to people, I just got on the case and we had some active
misinformation that no you really shouldn't be talking at this public hearing in order to clear
that and give a reasonable chance to actually get people involved and meet through process i'm
requesting a continuance mr labor you want to mr labor could you thank you chairman bergman and
members of the board thank you for the opportunity to to respond uh this this matter actually has
been one of the most well attended community meetings that I can recall going back to October
of 2021 with two virtual meetings having approximately 70 plus community members
attending both times lots of dialogue in between the meetings over the course of a two and a half
month period uh the uh notice was uh properly made there were no issues with the notice uh and uh
in fact all of the rcos including the coordinating rco have entered into a community benefits
agreement and uh this has been an open process completely in line with the zoning code
uh respectfully a continuance would not be appropriate at this time
Chairman.
We also have a council representative here.
We have Mr. Charles Richardson on the line, and we also have the city attorney, Mr. Leonard
Ruder on the line.
They're both unmuted, waiting for your instructions.
Tell them.
Mr. Richardson can be unmuted.
We only have the attorneys present now.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
How are you, Mr. Richardson?
what what mr richardson do you have comments on this
mr richards okay he's lost okay so so mr shermer um you know mr uh um um for for both of you here's
where we want to be i i don't want to continue this today i want this to go on so this will be
case number 12. You know, please hang in there. We'll get to you. We're going to hear the case
today. Thank you, Mr. Sharman, members of the board. We'll be on standby. Mr. Sharman, did you
hear that too? Yes, I did, Mr. Okay. Thank you very much, both of you. Okay. I have one other
one other case that was from this morning that we're going to continue to Tuesday.
MI 2021-00-3486-929-NORF 40th Street.
We're going to hear that Tuesday morning at 930.
Mr. Anastasio will notify all the RCOs that are involved.
Are there any other continuances?
Any other requests for continuances?
Chair, we have Alan Knackleton on the line.
Mr. Knackleton, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Yes, good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Alan Ockamson.
Could you spell your name for the court reporter just so we…
Yes, Alan, A-L-A-N, last name Nockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19109.
Yes, Alan, A-L-A-N, last name, Ockamson, N-O-C-H.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Okay. Go ahead, sir.
Yes, I actually have two continuance requests, the first of which is 1250 North 18th Street under ZP-2021-009003.
Okay, that's fine. 1250 North 18th, right?
That's right. I believe that's number two on your calendar, Mr. Chair.
Yep, yep. And what's the other one?
And number six on your calendar, Mr. Chair, 3440 North 18th Street under ZPP-2021-009386.
Very good. Thank you, sir.
Thank you.
Any other requests for continuance?
There are no other questions at this time, Chair.
Thank you. We have two add-ons we want to do, and we spoke about these in executive session.
MI 2021 002464 1128 North 41st Street. I vote no.
Carol Tenere no. Thomas Holloman. My vote is no. James Snell. My vote is no. Ishmael Shahid. My
My vote is no. And MI 2021-01486, 2427 North A Street, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
okay toward our our cases here we mi 2021 00362 1022 buttonwood street
matt monroe is the attorney rco philadelphia chinese development corporation letter of
non-opposition the rco has a letter of support mr mr monroe is coming back in as a panelist now
Very good.
Good afternoon, Chairman Bergman, Vice Chair Tenere.
Could you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Sure thing, guys.
Matt Monroe, M-A-T-T, M-O-N-R-O-E, with Monroe LLC, 2030 Pemberton Street, 19146.
Right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Boy, what just happened?
Can you see me?
Yeah, I can see you.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And based on my notes, it appears that all the required documents have been submitted, so you may proceed.
That's correct, Ms. Tenere.
and thanks for your time and it's a pleasure to appear before you for the first time Mr. Bergman.
I'm here today happy to be back on 1022 Buttonwood Street with my clients Houndstooth Tattoo and one
of their principals Andrew Johnson Lawley who's also here as well. I have before you our evidence
packet for 1022 Buttonwood Street. Effectively and just one quick clarification we did not get
a refusal on this. We got a referral for a special exception. This is an IRMX building where Houndstooth
Tattoo last year received a variance to operate a tattoo shop on the second floor where they've
been operating for about the last year. And they've been successful and simply sought to expand
from the second floor into a vacant first floor commercial space. And we've gone through that
process and uh since uh we were here the last time the zoning code map changed
and the variance is no longer required in this irmex district uh but a special exception or a
special exception uh is um the difference being uh for a um a variance uh for refusal we would
have to demonstrate hardship for a special exception uh it's effectively a do no harm
standard in our burdens simply to show that this would not change the character of the block or
have any negative impact on uh the surrounding neighbors um so what uh the the initial picture
that i have is of the uh of the building and i'll just uh go through a list of documents
that we've submitted to the board we have the lease uh here the referral for a special exception
Here, the referral for a special exception at Exhibit 2.
We have the petition for appeal at Exhibit 3, along with the public information statement.
We appropriately posted the property 21 days in advance of the hearing.
We do have a RCO support letter from the Callow Hill Neighborhood Association.
We have a non-opposition email from the coordinating RCO, which was the Philadelphia Chinatown
Development Corporation. Last night, we also received a non-opposition letter from Councilman
Mark Squilla, which we submitted to the board last night as a supplemental document.
And just quickly, and I know that I don't anticipate opposition here because we did get
support from the near neighbors and the community groups, but just to make the record and to make
it clear for the board, my clients have been operating the studio, as I've known, for a year.
they're simply going to be expanding to the first floor space. I'll show you for some context
the built out space that they have on the second floor. This is the lobby area. Here is the required
hand wash sink area. And then this is just a shot of the various stations for the tattoo artists
that they use. Mr. Johnson-Lally, who's on the call with me today, along with his, and here's
posted notices. Along with his business partner, Evan Lovett, our longtime artist, Andrew Johnson
Lawley, was a classically trained artist at the Savannah College of Art, where he started tattooing
over 20 years ago. Runs a highly professional operation, charges professional service rates.
They have very little impact on the near neighbors except being a clean operation and
and operating the successful business that people enjoy.
Here's the zoning context chart, and here is the floor plan.
Here's just some photos of some of their work.
And the burden here is that the zoning code sort of treats tattoo shops a little bit differently
based on their past public perception, even though that public perception has changed over time.
And effectively, although the code has been changed to lessen some of the restrictions,
They're still grouped in with some of the more salacious, regulated uses like adult-oriented merchandise, adult-oriented services, drug paraphernalia, gun shops, and that sort of thing, when, in fact, what they really have is an operation that, you know, has just about as much impact on the surrounding properties as an insurance sales office.
um uh here's the sample of some of their work uh mr johnson lally's is here with me as i noted
uh here's uh some of the mural work that is uh performed by uh done by his uh business partner
evan lovett um uh we've seen a lot of this stuff around the city uh and i just want to note for
the record and have it added to the record uh councilman mark scuola's uh support um and with
With that, I think that's the base of our presentation, and we would simply ask that
the zoning board find that the special exception is warranted in this case.
Would you want your client to adapt your testimony?
Yes, I do, and Mr. Johnson Lawley, if you could please raise your virtual hand so the
administrator can let you into the hearing.
Mr. Johnson, you can unmute yourself or wait for the chair.
Can you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
My name is Andrew Johnson Lally.
It's A-N-D-R-E-W-J-O-H-N-S-O-N hyphen L-A-L-L-Y.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you, counsel.
Great.
Mr. Johnson Lawley, did you hear the actual statements
I made to the board?
I did.
And were they true and accurate
to the best of your knowledge?
And do you adopt them as your own testimony?
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from the virtual audience?
There are no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair Bergman, David Fecteau, F-E-C-T-E-A-U, with the City Planning Commission.
Do you swear for them to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the industrial
Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, the Comprehensive Plan recommends no
and residential mixed use zoning at this location.
The applicant has shown that body art services will have no more of an impact than that type
of use would normally be expected to have at this location.
So the City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the special exception
for body art services.
Thank you.
MI-2021-003962, 1022 Buttonwood Street, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Mr. Monroe.
Thank you.
Thank you very much, and I appreciate it.
MI 2021-003958, 1612 North 26th Street, Al Nockamson, RCO from Brewery Town, Sharswood Community Civic Association, has a letter of support.
Chair, we have Clemenza Amazon coming back in as the panelists now.
Great.
Good afternoon, Chairman and members of the board.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes, Clemente Amazon, C-L-E-M-E-N-T-A.
Last name is A-M-A-Z-A-N.
Address is 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Proceed, please.
our deputy
chair there
has a couple of questions for you
I like that new name
do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy
yes I do
it seems that you have
sent in all the required documents
correct
okay you may proceed
thank you
I'll just share my screen
there is a letter of support from the
the Brewerytown Sharswood Community Civic Association as well.
So again today I will be presenting 1612 North 26th Street. During my presentation I will
go through the notice of refusal. Again we do have a letter of support from Brewerytown
Sharswood. We did circulate a petition to nearby neighbors who also expressed resounding
support for the project. We do have some recently granted variances in the area, maps of the
area, as well as recent photographs, our proposed plans and drawings, the notice that we sent
out for the community meeting, as well as our application for appeal, the deed for the
property, and the certificate of tax clearance.
So the notice of refusal we heard today because the property is currently zoned as single
family, and we are requesting to have a duplex, which is not uncharacteristic for this neighborhood
as there are several other properties that have similar use.
We did present to the community, and we did receive this letter in support.
There was no opposition for this project, and we did circulate a petition to nearby
neighbors who did also express support for the project.
And again, this is an uncommon use for this particular area, as you can see here.
These are similar sized lots that have even greater use going up to nine units, and similar
to our project, which is requesting just two units that were granted.
between 2018 and 2021. Here we have a map of the area, so we're just on North 26th Street,
off of Oxford Street, another map of the area. Here we have a view of the front of the property,
a view to the right of the property, a view to the left of the property, a nearby multifamily
on this block, and here we have our plans and drawings. We wanted to create a really
responsible design here, so we created separate entrances. There is a boozeway along the side
as well, and we maintain the brick facade that's common for this neighborhood.
And here we have the floor plans. These are bi-level units, so we wanted to make sure
that they were very spacious. And again, we met with the community on December 16th at 630. This
is a notice that was sent out with a copy of the refusal. 156 properties were notified.
This list of properties that were sent sent notice, as well as our certificate of mailing
showing that it was sent out timely, the application for appeal, again, the refusal, we're just
looking for duplex use.
As you saw earlier, it is not uncommon for this area, we did receive community support
as well.
The project information form, the deed showing that my client owns the property, and our
payment of the taxes that we do so with that i will take any questions that the board may have
Is your client here?
is your client here i'm sorry yes he is um if i could have ulti
I'm sorry.
Yes, he is.
If I could have Olteon Sheha raise his hand.
Mr. Olteon, you can unmute yourself or wait for the show.
Would you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
My name is Olteon Sheha.
First name, O-L-T-I-O-N.
last name
S-H-E-H-A-J
are you going to swear heaven?
you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes I swear
very good
did you hear my presentation today?
is it true and correct?
and would you adopt it as your own testimony?
i couldn't hear you would you adopt it as your own testimony of course yes yes yes thank you
questions from the board no mr chairman
no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman questions from the virtual audience
see no hands at this time chair planning commission good afternoon chair bergman
members of the board, David Fecto, City Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends no
change to the single-family zoning at this location. There is no unique physical condition
that would prevent this 1,101-square-foot lot from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
We are aware of three multi-unit buildings on this block, but L&I also issued permits between 2018
and 2021 each year for one single family home each so single family homes are a feasible use
of properties on this block and so since most of the homes on the block are single family
the city planning commission is going to recommend that the board deny the requested variance for fee
yes. Thank you. MI 2021-003958-1612 North 26th Street. I vote yes. Carol Tenere, yes. Thomas
Hallamann, my vote is no. Jane Snell, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Thank you.
MI 2021-004040-1970 Dentistry, Bart Levy is the attorney, RCO 31st Ward, letter of support, RCO Nicetown, letter of support.
Mr. Levy, can you please raise your hand
so you can be promoted to panelists?
Thank you.
He's coming back in as a panelist now, Sheriff.
Very good.
Close the door.
All right, go ahead and read that, John.
Mr. Levy, state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please.
Mr. Levy, are you there?
He just put something up on the computer.
Yeah, that's supposed to be later.
I know.
Sir, if you're not there, we're going to move on.
Can you hear me?
No, we can now.
Can you?
Yeah, please state your name and spell it for the court reporter.
I'm Bart Levy, B-A-R-T-L-E-V-Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon.
Do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do indeed.
um and it appears that you've submitted all the required documents is that we have
thank you you may proceed let me see if i can share my screen
does that show up oh no it does not all right let me see if i can read through as best i can
because i believe you have the exhibits uh this is okay i'm sorry mr levy i'm sorry
We have to work with you to get this up on the screen.
We have other people who are viewing this as well.
So can you unshare and take this off the screen, open up your documents, and then try to share?
They're open now.
They're open now.
So now you're going to unshare first.
So now you're going to unshare.
All right, stop share.
Now have your documents there.
Now share again and click on your actual document.
I clicked on it.
Did you hit share first and then click on your document?
Share screen.
And then click on my document.
Okay, it looks like it's coming up.
Yes, sir.
Thank you.
Okay, so I have a notice of refusal, a site map, and building plans.
um i'm not 100 sure that whether i can put them all up but let's try the site location first
did that work yes okay all right this house was built in 1930 as a single family home
um it came into use over the years as a storage facility and fell out of use as a family home
and was zoned, as I understand it, industrial,
even though it sits in the middle of a clearly residential community.
My client seeks to re-outfit it as a single-family home
for either himself or his family to live in.
Next thing we have is the building plans.
Let's see. Does that show up? Good.
I hope it does.
um this simply shows the site or an elevation of the plans as it's going to look um once windows
are put in and the outer coverings are placed on um the floor plan um shows the typical locations
of bedrooms i mean this could be like a large four band a family four four bedroom house
with a kitchen it will have the effect of stabilizing the neighborhood because it's
difficult to predict what you can do with an industrial property but it's far easier
to plan and predict what a single family dwelling is going to be that's why we seek relief
that's why that's why what that is why we have appealed so this can be a single family home
okay thanks
are you is your client here he is oh sorry i should mention it was without uh it was five
votes to zero at the RCO in favor which I think I have also no I don't Mr. Chair we have a letter
of support from the 13th Ward yep yep RCO yep yep thank you so much Mr. Levy is your client here
he is um why don't you have him adopt your testimony mr bryant
mr bryant can you raise your hand or or come before this board
mr bryant
you have to enter the meeting now you have to enter the you have to enter the meeting now
um i'm sorry this is raise your hand very good thank you okay thank you has he raised his hand
yet last name bryant yes yes mr bryant you can unmute yourself and wait for the chairs
instructions mr bryant could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter
my name is john bryant j-o-h-n-b-r-y-a-n-t you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth yes sir mr levy proceed mr bryant have you heard my discussion with the
board and my testimony before the board this afternoon? Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Would you
adopt that testimony as your own? Yes, I do. And it was completely accurate and complete?
Yes, it was. Thank you. Thank you. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr.
thank you thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman
questions from the virtual audience
i see no additional hands at this time chair planning commission good afternoon chair bergman
members of the board, David Fecto, City Planning Commission. Board, the comprehensive plan recommends
rezoning this property to residential single-family, so the proposal for a single-family home is
consistent with this recommendation, and the City Planning Commission recommends the board grant
the use of variance. Thank you. MI 2021-004040-1917, Denny Street, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
MI 2021-003961-3570, Cal and Med Street, Mr. Nocklinson, RCO East Falls Community Council, letter of support.
Mr. Nockamson is coming back now as a panelist chair
Good afternoon Mr. Chair and members of the board
Alan Nockamson of Nockamson PC
Alan A-L-A-N
Last name Nockamson
N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N
Address 123 South Broad Street
Suite 1600
Philadelphia PA 19109. Thank you very much. You've already sworn. Our vice chair has a few questions
for you. Hi, Mr. Nockmson. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? I do. It appears that you've submitted all the required documents. Yes, we have. You may
proceed. All right. Thank you very much. Again, Alan Nockmson, Nockmson PC. First of all, I would
to wish everyone a happy uh new year thank you you're welcome uh may i share my screen yes
hi so i'm here to present 3570 uh calumet street uh it's in the east fall section of philadelphia
what you'll see in our presentation packet is our notice of refusal or a letter of support
from the East Falls Community Council. This is a request based on revised plans. So we
submitted the revised proviso form to Ms. Saletta a few days ago, and she had a chance
to review it, I believe. Maps of the area, photographs of the property in the surrounding
area, our plans and drawings, our proof of mailing of our community notice, our application
for appeal we filed, our deed to the property, and our certificates of tax clearance. This property
is owned by 3515 Midvale LLC. I have Mr. Jeremy Terror on the call. He will adopt my testimony.
Notice of refusal. So, this is a mixed use or mixed zoning property. We're looking to combine
3570, 3570R, 3572, and 3574 Calumet Street. Every property other than 3570R is RSA5. 3570R
is CMX 2.5. And the reason why we have all these refusals is the mixed zoning.
As this board knows, generally L&I adopts the most restrictive zoning applicable when there's
mixed-use zoning, and that's why we have many of these variances. All we're looking to do is
consolidate these properties, have three townhomes facing Calumet, which is not out of character,
as you'll see, and to have off-street parking by way of a common driveway and garage parking,
as well as additional parking, non-accessory parking for the building that's behind us on
midvale so the first refusal is the steep slope uh you know again we can't control the slope of the
property uh but it's not out of character to have single family homes on such a slope as you'll see
in the surrounding area so that's the first refusal the second refusal is the accessory
parking because these are rsa5 properties um and we don't have that common driveway
in a sense, we have a refusal as to that. Again, we're using one curb cut with a common driveway,
as you'll see, for parking not only for the townhome units, the three townhome units,
which will be part of this planned community, but also the non-accessory parking for the apartment building.
uh the uh non-accessory parking for the park uh for the apartment building that is in the rear
uh the next refusal has to do with the three dwelling units because this is an rsa5 property
we're not subdividing the property what we're doing is making this a planned community but
each of the townhomes are going to be single-family structures within the planned community
so it's form over substance these are really single-family homes so that's that refusal
The next refusal is the non-accessory surface parking lot. That is actually a referral. Again, we are planning to have dedicated parking to an apartment building facing Midvale, which this property owner is also building, but as of right, by way of a separate permit.
the next refusal has to do with the height of the property because we're on the slope
you know it's it's difficult to meet the 38 foot height requirements and you'll see from the letter
from the east fall community council we have worked with them over time over a year and we
have lessened that height to 41 feet 8 inches also from the design aspect because of the mansard roof
and the setbacks it also lessens the height of the building at least from the view of someone
walking along the street and then finally the last refusal has to do with the drive aisle
technically under the code we need a two-way drive aisle of 20 feet here it's a one-way drive
aisle of 12 feet which is not uncommon with a situation like this so again our letter from
the east falls uh community council um it was provided to the board uh well in advance um it
would say the history of this you know project originally we would we were looking to do an
apartment building here with uh accessory parking um that was you know flatly rejected by the
neighborhood in the community we eventually like adhered to their request of making these
into townhomes and we have three townhomes here on this significant lot with accessory
and non-accessory parking. Based on our year of working with the community, the community
ultimately enthusiastically support this project. The revised proviso plan form which was completed
and given to Ms. Saleta last week, again we're making two changes. One of the requests even at
community meeting once they removed the pilot house from the project which we you know we did
and we obtained their support the second is we just adjusted the garage setback
here's the drawings again this is just a site plan for the proviso plan form again stamped by the
architect if this board does grant this variance we ask that this board grant it by way you know
WITH A PROVISO STAMPED ONE-PAGE PLAN, RIGHT, I THINK IT'S ACTUALLY TWO, I'M SORRY, TWO PAGES, Z1 AND Z2.
EXCUSE ME, COUNSELOR. DO YOU KNOW WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE SITE IS STEEP?
I DO HAVE THE ARCHITECT ON THE LINE AND I CAN HAVE THEM ANSWER THAT QUESTION, SO I SHOULD
uh have uh someone from cano architecture uh to answer that question thank you you're welcome
uh maps of the area again just to show from a zoning perspective uh you know the zoning of
the properties the three facing calamity again our rsa5 properties this 3570r is the cmx two and a
half property and then after that we kind of break it down from a google map perspective so you can
see where we are here's the apartment building that's being built and there'll be common uh
parking between the parking uh the apartment building as well as some of the spaces here by
way of an easement the curb cut you're proposing is parking on that side of the street there is
parking on that side of the street but at the request of the community they actually wanted us
to have a curb cut with off-street parking and to allow, to alleviate, because the 3515
Midvale Street project, the building is as of right, which required no parking. As part of
our negotiations, they wanted us to dedicate some parking spots to the Midvale apartment building,
which we did. Thank you. You're welcome. Here's the front of the property facing Calumet.
Calumet to the right of the property, Calumet to the left of the property.
Again, as you can see, this is a townhome community, and that's what we want to do by way of this project.
And then just an aerial view of our properties, the three Calumet.
and then just an aerial view of our properties the three Calumet properties on Calumet and then
the Calumet property on the rear and this is where the apartment building will be built by
way of a separate project and then our plans and drawings again what we try to really do here
especially to again to fit the character of the neighborhood brick facade you know stone
But also, if you look for the height part of it, especially with the slope, we try to lessen the height of the building by having a two-tier mansard roof.
And then the fourth story is actually even set back even more.
So someone looking at the street, who's walking by on the street, is really not going to notice the height of the building by way of this two-tier structure.
And then here's just a site plan.
Again, the three single-family homes.
Here is the common driveway, the parking would be in the rear with the garages.
Here is the open area for the parking lot at the request of the community.
They wanted to not only make sure that there was parking for these three properties on
Calumet, but there was also going to be some parking for the apartment building on Midvale.
and then here is just the floor plan the common floor plan for each of the each of the single
family homes you walk up some steps you come into a common entryway there's a den to the right
there's a full bath you go down a couple steps you have the garage and storage area in the rear
you go up a flight of steps the second floor you have a common area with a living room dining room
and kitchen and the rear deck. You go up another flight of steps. You have two bedrooms, washer and
dryer, and two baths. And then you go up another flight of steps, and then you have a master suite.
We had our meeting in front of the community November 17th at 7 p.m. It was coordinated by
East Falls Community Council. There were 76 addresses we needed to communicate
their particulars about that meeting. It was a well-attended meeting. These are the addresses.
Proof of mailing. Our application for appeal to the ZBA. Our notice of refusal and referral.
The referral has to do with the non-accessory parking lot for the benefit of 3515 Midvale.
our project information form our deed to the property showing that it's owned by 35 mid
bail llc i have one of the members of the llc on the call jeremy tear
and finally our certificate of tax clearance for each of these properties
uh with that being said i will stop sharing my screen i have i would ask that mr tear virtually
raise his hand.
Can I ask a question?
Could you have one of the architects
come on and answer Mr. Holliman's
question? Oh, yes. I was going to do that, too.
I just wanted to...
Is it, you know...
Just make sure you answer the question, that's all.
Yeah, of course.
Is either Carrie
or Nicole from Cano Architects
on the call?
I don't see anyone by that name with their hand up.
Is David Ross with their firm, Mr. Knockamson?
That's also Mr. Terror's business partner as well.
Okay, the two ladies that you mentioned, I don't see anyone by that name with their
hands up.
All right, let me see if I can figure this out in terms of the slope.
I'm going to reshare my screen.
This is going to show the slope.
I do apologize, Mr. Holloman, that we don't have our architect on the call, but the slope is here.
As you can see, it's rather steep.
Can you blow it up a little more?
Yeah, sure, Mr. Holloman.
Let me move it over.
So it's rather steep where the steps are in the rear.
The steep slope is really more towards the back of the property than in the front.
it does look like it is slope like if you look just visually from the street
but i don't think that gets us to sleep the steep slope most of the steep slope is in the rear
where it connects to the 3515 uh midvale street avenue property okay thank you you're welcome
um mr uh terror have you virtually raised your hand
Mr. Ter, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair's instructions.
Thank you. Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter? Jeremy Ter, J-E-U.
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Jeremy Ter, J-E-R-E-M-Y.
Last name is Ter, T-E-R-R.
T-E-R-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Mr. Ter, you heard everything I stated today.
And is it true and correct?
Yes, it is.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
We have Mr. Ross here as well, if you need additional questions or answers related to
steep slope or design development.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, thank you.
Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from the virtual audience?
You can unmute yourself and wait for the chair, Ms. Langer.
Hello?
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
my name is hillary langer h-i-1-l-a-r-y-l-a-n-g-e-r and i'm chair of the east falls community
council all right do you swear affirm do you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do thank you very much okay thank you um yeah mr knockinson has uh
accurately described some of the process we've undertaken over the last year. We feel we're
mitigating some of the issues of the parking that is not provided at 3515 on Midvale,
which is why you see the parking accommodated up on this particular property.
so we feel as I stated in my letter of support that we've reached a reasonable scheme here which
we hope that you can support there is one outstanding issue for us in that we had requested
a deed restriction or a proviso contained within this that the 12 parking spaces you see in the
rear which are zone cmx two and a half will never be developed as an apartment building
without parking spaces we haven't really received those assurances
Ms. Nakazim has said that neither proviso or deed restriction is necessary in order to prohibit that kind of development.
So I would like to hear and put into the record assurance that part of the lot cannot be developed.
um as a building and that if there are any proposals uh that indeed it would be a variance
that we would um that we would uh oppose yeah um mr chair members of the board i had a conversation
with mr langer uh i think it was yesterday his concern is that after we received this hopeful
variance approval from the board that we would then try to submit a zoning permit application
to erect an apartment building essentially on 3570R, what is known as 3570R.
As I indicated to Mr. Langer, this application is for a proposed consolidation of multiple
lots. Some of the lots are RSA 5. One of the lots, 3570R, is CMX 2.5. If this board should grant
the variance request for the consolidation and for the use of three single-family homes with
accessory and non-accessory parking, if we elected later on to try to erect a multifamily building
on what was formerly 3570R, we would have to go through the variance process all over again.
That's my understanding. So that's why I indicated to Ms. Langer that no proviso was needed because
you'll need a proviso for something that could happen in the future. And if it did,
we would have to go through this variance process again with community input and ZBA approval
necessary. And the deed restriction would not be necessary either under those circumstances.
uh and the deed restriction would not be necessary either under those circumstances
thank you yeah i would like to know if if if there's any chance that that could be a by right
development there so i would need confirmation that this indeed would be a variance if anything
were to be proposed back there rebecca
i would need to touch base with sharon to address this specific issue would you like me to circle
back to this case at the end of the list yeah we could do that we could do that
i'm wanting to hang around a little bit well and we'll figure it out okay and then we'll go
forward why don't why don't we just so that's the only thing we would have
Is there any other comments from the virtual audience?
There are no heads at this time, Chair.
Okay. Planning Commission, where do you stand on this project?
Chair Bergman, thank you for asking. Members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends no change in the residential single-family zoning at this location.
The steep slope does present a hardship to using this property in conformance with the code.
and so after discussions with the neighbors and the applicant has revised their original plans
to be more in keeping with the character of the block so the city planning commission is going
to recommend to you chair that the board grant the requested variances according to the revised plans
so why don't we do this let's just hold on to this a little bit we'll check on this in about
half hour an hour and then what we'll do is we'll just take a vote then is that okay alan
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'll be here a while.
I have four.
Oh, yeah, I noticed.
I noticed.
So, yeah.
So we'll come back to this before the end of the day.
Thank you.
All right.
All right.
Let's move on to the next one.
M.I. 2021-003-960-40-E Silver Street, Mr. Nockamson, RCO-HACE, Letter of Opposition.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Just state your name because you're already sworn.
All right, Alan Nockamson of Nockamson, PC, A-L-A-N, last name Nockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19109.
And our vice chair has a few questions.
Sorry for the noise. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
It appears that you have submitted all the required documents?
Yes, we have.
You may proceed.
Hi, may I share my screen? Yes. Thank you.
Hi, so I'm here for 40 East Silver Street. This is in the Harrogate section of Philadelphia.
We have our typical presentation packet. We have a table of contents which includes our notice
refusal. This is an RSA 5 property, but as we'll explain later, RSA 5 property in name only.
I was here last year on a similar project, which the ZBA granted, with the City Planning Commission recommending for its approval of a two-family dwelling, given our understanding is that the City Planning Commission is recommending that this block actually be rezoned as RM1.
I have correspondence from HASE, CDC. Yes, they provided a letter of opposition, but with no zoning-related issues, it had to do all with affordability and matters like that, which are not zoning-related.
I do have a petition, which you'll see in our presentation packet. There are 43 properties on the, I guess, the 0-100 block of East Silver Street.
So that means 42 properties are not related to our property.
Of those 42 properties, we had 13 individuals sign in support of this project.
So more than 30% of the individuals signed in support of this project.
While the HASE CDC, I don't believe there were any people nearby or on that block.
My understanding, too, is that some of the individuals who live on that block are also in attendance in the audience.
again just like last hearing these individuals are going to testify it's really important to
them to have development on this block especially multi-family in terms of affordability which is not
you know on you know a zoning consideration it's more affordable to have more units on
a property than less but they want this developed it's you know this is a problem this is a property
or a block that's had problems with drug issues, drug-related issues, and they want this development to help.
drug issues, drug related issues, and they want this development to help those issues go away.
The next exhibit you'll see is just appeal number MI-2021-001425. It's proof that the ZBA did
grant 12E Silver Street for two units. You'll see in the notice refusal originally my client asked
for three units. I spoke to my client specifically about what the board was discussing on 12E
silver if this was an RM1 property two units would be allowed as a right and that's why I told my
client so you know that he should you know propose and that's why we changed up our plans is to have
three units two units if this board would grant this zoning request a variance request we would
ask for a proviso maximum of two units we have maps of the area photographs of the property
surrounding area. Plans and drawings are proof that we sent out notice of the community meeting
or application for appeal or deed to a property and a certificate of tax clearance.
This property is owned by Forty Silver LLC. I have one of the members, Lenny Chernak, who will
testify and adopt my testimony. All right, the refusal. This is an RSA 5 property
and essentially the you know do we have a use refusal for the multifamily nature or proposed
multifamily nature of this property again I you know told my client that you know this based on
what the planning commission told us this will be converted into RM1 if that's the case based on the
last square footage two units will be allowed as a right and I told my client that the board has
granted this in the past for two units on a similarly situated property. That's why we're
asking for a proviso maximum of two units. And then we have a de minimis request for the occupied
area where 75% is allowed and we're asking for 78.8%. This is a letter that the board should
have seen that was in our presentation packet that we submitted last week. But if the board looks,
There is actually here, they actually did say that three affected addresses were in support.
They indicated nothing about the people who were in the affected area against it.
So there were three in support.
The only opposition is the board themselves who are not in the affected area.
and then further proof of the people on that block
who are most impacted or in support of this project
are the people who are on 88 e-silver,
10 e-silver, 17 e-silver, 43 e-silver,
20 e-silver, 30 e-silver, 32 e-silver,
22 e-silver, 18 e-silver, 17 e-silver,
45 e-silver, 24 e-silver, and 39 e-silver.
Actually, my client didn't even get 12 e-silver,
the one who actually got the variance last time.
So in actuality, we had 14 of the 42, which would be a greater percentage of that block.
And it's really difficult to, you know, get people to open their doors.
This is not the, you know, it's a neighborhood that's going through a transition, but still has a crime problem, plus the pandemic.
But we still were able to get almost a third of the people on that block to sign and support it.
And then here's our application for appeal under ZP-2021-002616.
Again, 20 East Silver, July 20th of 2021, this board granted a similar variance for its two-family household living in, you know, there was an existing structure.
And then just showing where we are in the neighborhood, as you can see, this little pocket is RSA 5, but we are surrounded by multifamily and ICMX.
We're on, you know, we're not that far from East Lehigh, which is, you know, a commercial-ish corridor.
Then just maps it from a Google perspective, and then photographs their properties.
This is a vacant lot, showing that this is a residential property in nature, to the right of the property on the East Silver, to the left of the property, East Silver.
And then here's, again, other properties on that block that have a multifamily history.
16 East Silver is a triplex.
24 East Silver is a duplex.
30 East Silver is a triplex.
34-e silver is a triplex.
And then just our site plan showing, you know, that we're proposing a three-story structure.
And again, if you look at it, we have a significant amount of open area and outside area.
And then what we're trying to do is replicate the traditional brick facade with a modern feel.
with the modern feel, but you'll see that we do have a cornice line with a cornice,
but you'll see that we do have a cornice line with a cornice.
which would try to replicate the old Philadelphia row home.
And then just our floor plan.
Both of them are bi-level units.
Unit one is a one-bedroom, two-bath unit with flex space in the basement.
Unit two, which is on the second and third floors, is three bedrooms, three baths.
So it's a mixture of people who are moving into a neighborhood, the one bedrooms, as well as then the unit number two is for someone who is, like, looking to have a family, not have the responsibility of homeownership who can, like, move into this property as well.
Excuse me, counselor.
Your plan showed two units or three units?
This is unit one.
So you only asked for two units?
That's right.
After my client engaged me about this matter,
I indicated that I did handle 12 East Silver
and this board granted it.
And based on the last square footage of 860 square feet,
I tried to keep my clients in line
with what happens if this was RM1.
And I didn't think it was appropriate
to have three units there under this.
Okay, so with two units,
can you come into 75% billable space?
no because we we cannot just because of the bedrooms we want to make this as spacious as
possible if we could we would honestly but just given the floor plan we would you know we're
hoping the board can allow us this additional variance for that as well thank you I appreciate
that uh our notice to the community um we um we met with the community december 8th at 5 30 pm
virtually we mailed notice of the community meeting to 158 addresses addresses are here
proof of mailing our application for appeal
Our deed to the property, showing that 40 Silver LLC is the owner of the property right
here, our certificate of tax clearance.
With that being said, I would like to have Mr. Chernak virtually raise his hand and to
adopt my testimony. Mr. Chernak, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Would you please, Mr. Chernak, could you please state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Hi, my name is Leonid Chernak. It's L-E-O-N-I-D-C-H-E-R-N-Y-A-K. Do you swear for him to tell
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do thank you uh mr chernak you heard everything i
stated today yes is it true and correct yes and do you adopt it as your own testimony i do all right
thank you um so mr chair again if you look at the letter um from hasse cdc the three members
who are not on the board who attended the meeting who are in the affected area all voted in support
this project we obtained a petition from almost a third of the houses on that block who are in
support of it my understanding too um i don't want to you know misstate anything but my understanding
is that there are a few members of the community who are in the audience who want to express their
opinion about this project i understand um questions from the board no mr chairman no mr
chairman no mr chairman questions from the virtual audience or statements
there are no additional hands at this time hold on chair we have mr sloan folks with his hand up
mr folks you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair's instructions
good afternoon chairman brick cbe board
mr folks please state your name and spell for the court reporter
Yes, my name is Sloan Fuchs, S-L-O-A-N-E, F as in FIRE, O-L-K-S, representing the Office of Council Member Maria Quinonez Sanchez, room 508, City Hall.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do. Thank you.
Please proceed.
Thank you, sir.
the council member having received a letter from the coordinating rco uh offering opposition to
this variance request she does not support this variance request thank you okay
other um yes
the block captain
is texting me she's asking how
does she raise her hand
her name is Carmen Ortiz
she's trying to she's trying to speak now
she's having trouble
hold up hold up
yep I hear you
okay we I don't know where the hand went
we had someone up by the
with their hand up by the name of Jose but the hand
just disappeared
is jose cruz the hand is up again okay put him on mr cruz you can unmute yourself and wait for
the chair's instructions could you state your name and spell for the court reporter jose cruz
j-o-s-e-c-r-u-z do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Proceed
Yes, I see what's going on
On our block
I've been living on the block for the past 40 years
I'm 39 East Silver Street
And I see what
Lenny is doing on the block
He comes around
He cleans the lot
He makes sure it was cleaned
Before he even came around
All there was is trash
People
You got needles on the floor
You got a bunch of drug addicts
hiding inside of the lot so I think what he wants to do there is it's a great thing
not only for us that we live on the block but for for the community
so um you know I'm really really in favor of seeing this block change and we've been here
a long time we've seen a lot of stuff that's going on on the on the block and and you know
bringing bringing you back homes new homes to the block and you know just bringing families
he's back to the neighborhood where we can get rid of all these empty lots and the drug trafficking
back and forth, the people hiding in these lots and just, you know, sleeping there without, you
know, it's really bad. So I'm in favor for her. Thank you very much for calling in. Any other
comments from the virtual audience?
no no no other comments it appears to be a call-in user
uh could you allow the call-in user to um speak sure call-in user
please unmute yourself and wait for the chair to give you instructions to move forward
could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
yes my name is carmen ortiz c-a-r-m-e-n my last name is ortiz o-r-t-i-z
i live at a.e silver street and i am the captain of the block
you swear or firm to tell to wait a minute wait a minute do you swear or firm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you proceed
since lenny came to the block we do see a big big difference um he helps out with the community
we have a community meeting once a month with um maria quinones
um jose cruz um a lot of our neighbors go to this meeting this is the first i heard that
Luria Comunas voted no because we all voted that that would be right for Lenny to
build this property that he's built and he'd like to build.
Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Any other comments?
I see no other hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission?
Good afternoon Chair Bergman, members of the Board, David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in the residential single-family zoning at
this location.
This neighborhood was rezoned in 2018 in accordance with the comprehensive plan at the request
of the Neighborhood Association.
It's nice that the applicant helps to clean the block, but that's not a viable reason
to grant a variance.
So there is no unique physical condition of this 860 square foot plot that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
We are aware of five duplexes on the block. However, the remaining homes are single family.
So the City Planning Commission is going to recommend that the board deny the requested variance for two units.
MI 2021-00396040 East Silver Street. I vote no.
3960 40 East Silver Street. I vote no. Harold Tenere, my vote is no. Thomas Holliman,
my vote is no. James Snell, my vote is no. Thank you. Okay. We're going to go back to
MI 2021 003961 3570 Cal and Met Street. Our attorney tells us that we cannot
say that you know you can't use that property in the future and things like that it has nothing
to do with the zoning board um the planning commission's in favor of it i'm going to call
for a vote mi 2021-003961-3578 cal and med street i vote yes with the revised plan of two pages
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes with Proviso
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with Proviso
James Snell, yes with Proviso
Ishmael Shaheed, yes with Proviso
Thank you
MI 2021-003387
432 Fanshawe Street
Long Crest Alliance Letter of Non-Opposition. Mr. Nockamson.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Alan Nockamson of Nockamson PC.
Alan, A-L-A-N, last name Nockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N, 123 South Broad Street,
Suite 1600, Philadelphia PA, 19109. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Nockmson. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Because I'm not sure if we have the entire exhibit packet. Have you sent in proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, referral, photos, and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing? And have you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter?
Yes, in all respects.
Okay, great. You may proceed and yes, you may share your screen.
All right, thank you. Let me get to the right screen.
Um, okay, here I am.
This is an Alan Notkinson day, I see.
I see that.
You know, I haven't been in front of the board in weeks, and I was just, like, gearing up for this one.
Um, so, uh, anyway, 432 Fanshawe Street.
I think this will be a little bit smoother than 40 East Silver.
Um, this is a property where we're legalizing it in name only.
this is a property that my client has owned since 1975. When we have proof that we received
a certification statement from the City of Philadelphia saying that this is a six-unit
structure, we have the zoning permit that has been in effect since 1959. For a number of years,
he's had issues getting a rental license. We don't know why. We showed them exactly what we have.
We're doing the path of least resistance. We're just getting the variance.
So in this packet of materials you'll see our notice of refusal or a letter of non-opposition
from Longcrest Community Association where 45 members that were in the audience to vote
and all 45 voted in non-opposition to this project. Exhibit three you'll see our permit
which will show that since 1959 this has been a sixth family dwelling. You'll also see in exhibit
3 are certification statement which shows in 1975 the city confirmed that. Exhibit 4 are maps of the
area. Exhibit 5 are photographs of the property in the surrounding area. Exhibit 6 are just our
floor plans but in the photographs you'll see a couple things. First of which is no basement
living. Second of which is that we store our trash off of the side of our building where each of the
unit owners have access to that. Exhibit 7 is our proof of mailing for our community notice. Exhibit 8
is our application for appeal that we filed with the ZBA. Exhibit 9 is our deed to the property
showing that Joseph Wharton Hadley, Inc. is the owner of the property and has been since 1975.
Exhibit 10 is our certificate of tax clearance showing that we're a good standing with respect
to our real estate taxes. In the audience should be Mr. Haidley who will hopefully adopt my testimony.
Our notice of refusal, while this is an RSA 3 property and we were receiving a refusal,
the use significant over the course of almost 65 years says something very different.
Again, you received a letter dated January 12th of 2022, indicating that based on a vote of 45 people in non-opposition, zero against.
Based on a vote of 45 people in non-opposition, zero against this proposed variance request,
the Long Crest Community Association is in non-opposition to this project.
Again, showing evidence of that vote.
Just indicating just the notes for that meeting.
Here's our notice for a zoning permit showing 1959.
This was six units.
Again, our certification statement showing that this was six units in 1975.
Our maps of the area just showing where we are.
We're not that far off from Rising Sun Avenue.
Google Maps, photographs of the property.
As you can see, my client keeps the property in good repair.
As you can see, there's a significant side yard.
There's a side yard.
Here's the backyard.
Here's where the trash is stored on the side.
the multiple meters. Again, Fanshawe to the right of the property, Fanshawe to the left of the
property, nearby multifamily, 430 Fanshawe, 4515 Fanshawe, then just examples of like the interior
of the property. And then just the floor plans. Again, quickly to go through it, showing no
basement use. Unit number 1, which they know as unit number 7, is in the front. There's
a door to go up to a flight of steps, which is unit number 2. There's a unit back here,
which is unit 3 on the first floor. Unit 4 is you go up a flight of steps in the front.
It's right there. Go up another flight of steps is unit 5 and unit 6. Showing proof
Proof that we mailed notice for the community meeting, again, our community meeting was
November 18th at 6.30 p.m. It was mailed to 63 addresses. Those are the addresses, proof
of mailing, our application for appeal, our deed set property showing Joseph Wharton
Headley, Inc. is the owner of this property since 1975, and our certificate of tax clearance
showing they do not delinquent in their taxes. With that being said, Mr. Headley is in the
virtual audience. I would ask that he virtually raise his hand.
Alan, how do you spell your client's name?
H-E-A-D-L-E-Y.
Just to save some time if he's somehow unable to testify.
You're the officer of the court. We understand it.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from the virtual audience?
chair we have hillary emerson with her hand up miss emerson you can unmute yourself or wait for
the chair good morning mr sorry good morning good afternoon mr chair members of the board
hillary emerson on behalf of councilwoman sherelle parker could you could you spell your name for the
court reporter sure hillary is h-i-l-a-r-y last name emerson e-m-e-r-s-o-n right do you swear
a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and not support the truth i do proceed thank you um the
councilman is not opposed to the granting of the variance in this case um given the history of the
property um as having six units um as showed by mr notcomson um and the community also supported
the continuing use of the property as six units um we would ask uh sorry one quick thing we would
ask that there be a proviso that a certificate of occupancy be obtained within nine months to
ensure the building is in compliance with fire codes.
And I did speak to Mr.
Nockamson about this earlier, and he was in agreement.
Yes, I am.
Thank you.
Appreciate it.
Any other comments from the virtual audience?
Planning Commission?
Thank you, Chair Bergman and members of the board.
David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
And I think Mr. Nockamson is right.
I think this is a pretty easy call here.
So the comprehensive plan recommends no change in the residential single-family zoning at this location, but the building has been a six-unit dwelling since at least the 1950s based on the same documents I'm sure Mr. Notkinson found that we found in the zoning archive.
The City Planning Commission, therefore, recommends that the board grant the variance for six units.
Very much. Good. Thank you. MI 2021-003387-432 Fonshaw Street. I vote yes with provisos for
Very much. Good. Thank you.
MI 2021-003387.
Certificate of Occupancy. Carol Tenere, yes with proviso. Thomas Holloman, yes with proviso.
James Snell, yes with proviso. Ishmael Shaheed, yes with proviso.
Thank you very much. MI 2021 00380467 West Queen Lane, Mr. Nockamson. No RCO letter from the 12th Democratic Executive Committee. Solo Germantown letter in non-opposition.
good afternoon mr chair members of the board alan knockamson a-l-a-n last name knockamson
n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-n-1-2-3 south broad street suite 1600 philadelphia pa 19109
our vice chair has a few questions do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy? I do. It appears that you've submitted all the required documents. Is that
correct? That's correct. You may proceed. Yeah. And as an officer of the court, I would like to
admit that there is a letter from the 12th, I think it's the 12th Democratic Court. They did
submit a letter of opposition and I do have that in my packet, but I would contest that it's really
opposition. And, you know, there was a split between the RCOs, but I just want to make sure
that the board understood that thank you you're welcome all right may i share my screen yes all
right so this is a 3 500 square foot structure you're looking at it right now right and this
screen this is supposedly an rsa 5 structure uh this was previously a c2 property under the former
zoning code this is clearly misclassified um this is subject to a zoning permit to allow for the
the garages are for accessory storage. There's allowed under the zoning permit, which we'll show
you, two residential and one commercial. My client, who is actually a real estate broker,
was unable to rent out the commercial space and converted it into two residential. Obviously,
we're here to legalize that use. But again, he tried his hardest to rent out that commercial use
and instead mimicked the residential use by cutting the commercial space in half to create four residential units.
Each of those residential units have their own front door.
There is no basement living.
And we would agree to reasonable provisos, which are set forth in both letters from the applicable RCOs,
to allow for trash storage inside one of the storage units, the one closest to here.
and we'll go through those letters.
In my presentation packet,
you'll see the notice of refusal.
Again, this is technically an RSA 5 property
on the 3,500 square foot lot,
but as you can see, it doesn't look RSA 5 at all.
And it's a significant lot of 3,500 square feet.
You'll see the permit, 304-025,
which shows that currently the legal use
of the property is two residential,
one vacant commercial,
which they were never able to find someone to rent it out, and accessory storage.
Just a little bit more background, this property is owned by Habana Holding Corp,
and I have Tobias Bill, the owner's representative on here.
When Habana Holding Corp purchased this property, they purchased it by way of drug forfeiture proceedings.
They purchased it directly from the DA's office.
So this was a property in desperate need of some TLC from a fiscal standpoint, but also to get a nuisance property off the streets.
And Mr. Biddle, his company has owned this property for over 15 years and has done an excellent job in rehabilitating this property.
And he's just looking to increase the residential use by two units to replace the one commercial unit, which he was never able to rent out.
and he'll state as a professional, he would be unable to rent out as well.
You'll see the correspondence from the 12th Democratic Executive Committee.
Again, there's some dispute as to how many affected properties were property owners or
individuals were at the meeting. I don't know if the solo German Town Civic Association's
Representative Allison Weiss is in attendance,
but according to her letter,
there was one affected occupant of a property.
occupant of a property. According to the letter for the 12th Democratic Executive Committee,
According to the letter for the
they took a vote of three, but they only said that two people were there in the narrative,
and it was a two-one vote against the project. But you'll see from the Solos Germantown Civic
Association, they're in non-opposition to this project. This has not been a problematic property.
We're just trying to legalize that use.
We're agreeing to some reasonable provisos, which are enforceable in terms of trash storage.
There are other provisos in terms of working with the Fairmont Park Association in terms of putting trees around this corner property,
putting mail slots in the door rather than having exterior mailboxes,
Painting the front of the door to kind of make it pop a little bit more from just an aesthetic point of view.
You'll see maps of the area, photographs of the property, or plans and drawings showing our use.
Again, no basement use.
We're agreeing to a trash room, so trash should not be an issue.
We have proof of our mailer to the surrounding community.
Again, this was not a well-attended event at all, to say the very least.
SOLO thought that one person who was in an affected property was there.
The 12th Democratic Ward, whether it was two or three, but it was clearly not well attended.
Our application for appeal, our deeds of property showing Habana Holding Corp owning the property, and our Certificate of Tax Clearance.
So again, this is our refusal.
This is an RSA 5 property.
Our refusals, and again, what we're trying to do is four dwelling units,
an existing structure with existing accessory storage in the garage spaces. Again, based on
the previously granted use permit, there was one vacant commercial space, which we could never,
ever, ever rent out. And this was as of right, by the way, because this was a C2 property.
And we had two residential units. We have rented out the residential units. Once we were successful
in renting out the residential units, and we knew there was a market for these type of residential
units. My client took it upon himself to convert the commercial to residential. We're here to
legalize that use. Again, this is the 12th Democratic Committee, right? This is their
letter. They said two nearby neighbors opposed it. One was a non-opposition. But if you look
at their, and by the way, they stated in their letter, if this board should grant the variance
request in their way, and I'll just zoom in in because you guys didn't have the benefit of this
letter previously. If they did grant it, if this board did grant the variance request, they would
want a proviso in terms of trash storage in one of those accessory units, the one closest
to the residential use, which we have no objection to. They, you know, they said, you know, one of
their comments and they said they wanted you to put as proviso paragraphs two through five
in terms of three two was the trash storage three was the facade of the building is very
industrial and does not fit with a residential property or the neighborhood well we can't change
the facade right but what we did tell them and we told you know solo organization is that we would
you know do the best in terms of beautifying the property in terms of painting the doors putting
mail slots. Again, this has always been a residential or at least been a residential
property approved for two units since 2007. Number four was sidewalk trees would add to
neighborhood beautification. Again, even though it's not an enforceable proviso, we have agreed
with the community groups that we would do that if this board did grant the variance request.
And then the fifth paragraph, remove outdoor mailboxes and replace with mail slots and doors
would be safer for tenant privacy, in fact, and we agreed to that as well. Again, I don't believe
that's an enforceable proviso. I believe the only enforceable proviso is to have trash stored in the
accessory storage space. So if this board does grant it, I would request granting with proviso
trash stored in the accessory storage space for the tenants. And then this is the letter from
you know, Solo, another RCO in the community, which attended the meeting. Again, they stated
only one in attendance was from the affected addresses. So I don't, there was some controversy
as to who was in the meeting, but that board unanimously supported or non-opposition of this
project. They did provide a letter, a narrative letter as well, to kind of explain the history
of this property. And again, the provisos or conditions would be similar to what
And again, the provisos or conditions would be similar to what the 12th Democratic Ward stated.
The only thing different was that we were going to add exterior lighting and security hammers around the property.
Again, we have no objection to that.
But again, I don't know if that's an enforceable proviso.
And then maps of the area.
Again, we're a corner property.
It's a significantly sized property of almost 3,500 square feet.
We're surrounded by apartment buildings.
We're surrounded by multifamily use, so it's not out of character to have this use, and again, if this board should deny this, the only thing we would be left with is two residential and one commercial, and my client would testify as a professional, as a licensed broker.
he can't rent a commercial and that's his hardship in a nutshell. And having four residential units
on the 3,500 square foot block where each has access to their own front door is the most minimal
request for variance of the zoning code one can ask for. Maps of the area showing where we are.
photographs of the property again here are the uh the stalls for the garages we don't use it for
vehicular uh storage um there was also i had a discussion with miss weiss earlier today there
was i guess a yellow painted line we don't use it for storage we allow like i mean for vehicular
storage we don't park cars on on the sidewalk here um we would be more than happy to paint this
yellow line gray so you know we allow for off-street parking as you can i mean on-street
parking as you can see from this picture and we encourage that as well and then there's pictures
of the property from queen lane uh showing proof of the zoning poster being posted and then just
nearby like rsa 5 forget about the parking assuming apartment buildings but 451 clean lane
is nearby RSA multifamily structure and then you can see Queen Lane to the right of property there's
a number of apartment buildings here uh Queen Lane to the left of the property uh Lawrence
Street because we're at the corner of Lawrence and Queen you can see more apartment buildings
you can see our building right here then Lawrence to the left of the property and then just our
interior photos I'm just gonna make this a little smaller but as you can see we really did try to
keep up these properties nice. They're all one bedroom, one bath. They all are housed by single
women. We try to keep the rents very affordable. I know that's not a zoning consideration, but
we do try to keep them below market rate even. And our tenants have stayed in our property for years.
So we try to be a good landlord as well. And then just our plans. So like I said,
But, you know, there's unit A and B are the one is basically the commercial space that we convert into residential.
Each of them mimic essentially C and D, which is the legal residential space.
Each of them have one bedroom, one bath.
Each of them have their own entrance.
And then here's the five garage stalls for accessory storage.
We would agree there's, you know, one of these stalls is right here.
we would convert that into a garbage room where all the tenants would have access to that.
And then proof of our mailer.
We met with the community on January 4th at 6 p.m.
There were 81 addresses that were notified of this meeting.
These are the addresses.
It was not a well-attended meeting other than the executive board members of each of the RCOs
that attended, but here's our proof of mailer, our application for appeal, our deed to property
showing this is a corrected deed, but this is the last recorded deed showing Habana Holding
Corp. as the owner. They have owned it for the last 15 years, and our Certificate of
Tax Clearance. With that being said, I have Mr. Biddle online. He can hopefully adopt
my testimony.
Alan, what's your client's last name?
Biddle, B-I-D-D-L-E.
And while you're looking for him, the other thing is, if this board should believe that
the use of four units is too great for a 3,500 square foot property instead of the two residential
and one commercial, we would ask for
to simply swap out the
commercial unit for just
commercial unit for just one residential to make it three. So we would ask that if the board thinks
one residential to make it three.
So we would be
that it's an overuse of the property for four residential units, we would ask the board to
grant a maximum three units. Because we're allowed three units, it's just one of the units
is commercial, which we can't rent out, and we want to make that residential.
We have a hand raised.
You can unmute yourself or wait for the chair.
hi please state your name and spell for the court reporter
Tobias Biddle t-o-b-i-a-s as in boy i d like in david d like in david l like in leo e like in
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do chairman thank you yeah mr biddle you heard everything i stated today
Yeah, I'm willing to adopt your testimony as my own.
Okay, thank you. Mr. Bill, you're also a licensed real estate broker, is that correct?
Okay, and you did make attempts to rent this commercial space, right?
In the past, yes.
Yeah, and those attempts were unsuccessful?
Correct.
And in your professional opinion, would it be successful if you tried to rent out the commercials, if this had to be converted back to commercial space, would your efforts be successful?
Not to my knowledge, no.
Thank you.
We have a neighbor who's available for testimony, too, if you'd like to call him.
Sure. What's the name?
Mr. Biddle, what's the date?
Eugene Smith.
Mr. Smith, raise your hand, please.
Mr. Smith, you can unmute yourself or wait for the chair's instructions.
Mr. Smith? Okay, why don't we, questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from the virtual audience, anybody else out there have comments?
no hands only mr smith's okay is mr smith's hands up
i don't i do see a mr smith that he's on i'm sorry is the staff there
i'm here tanya okay there is there mr smith or is there someone else here to testify
i am muted mr smith and i told him to hold on for the chair's instructions i don't know what
happened okay mr smith state your name and spell for the court reporter you have to unmute
it seems that he's unmuted yes he's unmuted now it's muted he was we can continue on yeah
mr chair members of the board my understanding is that mr smith is a nearby neighbor who has
owned the property as long if if not longer uh than mr bill's company and he the proffer would
be that he would testify that he's in support of this project thank you thank you um planning
commission thank you chair bergman members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends this
property for residential multi-family use in 2015 the zoning at this property was changed to single
family however the planning commissioners at the time recommended against that zoning change
so the multiple principal uses are an existing condition the storage garages at the back of the
building have been recognized by l and i in previous zoning permits and the proposed dwelling
unit density is consistent with the comprehensive plan's recommendations. So, the Planning Commission
recommends the Board grant the requested variances.
Chair, Tanya, if I may interject a thought. We did receive in a Q&A, as Mr. Natchimson said,
Mr. Smith is in favor of the project, but we also have a member from the RCO, Ms. Weiss,
whose hand is raised if it's agreeable to you may she uh put it sure yes she can
yes hello good afternoon hi could you could could you do me a favor state your name and
yes hello good afternoon hi could you could could you do me a favor
spell for our court reporter allison weiss a double l i s o n weiss w e i s s solo germantown
civic association thank you do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth yes thank you i just wanted to make myself available since there seemed to be some
confusion uh so if there were any questions i was at the meeting that if i could help answer
well i guess the only question would be are you in favor of the project or not
we sent a letter of non-opposition okay that's fine thank you thank you perfect okay um
MI 2021-00380467
West Queen Lane. I vote yes with provisos about using
the trash storage. Carol Tennery, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, yes with proviso.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Al.
I'm sorry, Chair. This is Tonya again. Mr. Nakasso, may I please request that you state the exact proviso on the record, just so we're clear?
Yes. My proviso would be trash storage in one of the accessory spaces.
Which is right next door to the residential, if I remember.
That's right. That's right. Exactly.
Thank you. So very kindly.
Thank you.
MI 2021-003-766-620-Eastrod Avenue, Oleg Sokoloff, RCO Fishtown Neighbors, letter of support, Mark Squilla, letter of non-opposition.
Oleg Sokolov.
Good afternoon, Chair Bergman, members of the board.
Chair, it's nice to meet you and be before you for the first time.
Everyone, it's nice to see everyone.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Sure, it's Oleg Sokolov, O-L-E-G, Sokolov, S-O-K-O-L-O-V,
Rabinovich Sokolov Law Group
1700 Market Street
Suite 1005
Philadelphia PA 19103
Do you swear for him to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Okay, our Vice Chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Sokolov.
Have you, do you agree
with the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
And have you submitted all of the required documents?
Yes, we have.
Thank you.
you may proceed thank you very much members of the board good afternoon again um this property
has just to give a little bit of a background on before i go through my exhibit packet
this property was rolled up in a rezoning that occurred on gerrard avenue between burks and
wilt street uh we're unsure if it was 2014 or 2016 but long story short a number of
single-family residents were rezoned to CMX2. My client Mr. Tomac and his wife Monica Bernal
purchased this property with the understanding that it was a single-family residence. It had
always been a single-family residence and only upon submission of some minor interior alteration
permits did they find out that this property is in fact zoned CMX2. We also found out at our RCO
meeting before the Fishtown Neighbors Association that there were a number of other properties that
suffered from this same fate as a result of the rezoning. So that's just a simple
background on what's going on. If I may take you through my exhibit packet please.
can everybody see that yes okay great here's our notice of refusal as stated a single family
dwelling request in a cmx2 district um just please note that there are no dimensional variance
requests or anything in that matter the all of the alterations are going to be within the existing
footprint of the property. Here's the deed to the property. Mr. Tomac and Ms. Bernal bought this in
May of 2021. Our tax clearance certificate. I have a few timeline photos of the subject.
I have a few timeline photos of the subject premises here it is the black door here this
is in 2007 the red door here in 2011 the red door once again in 2015 and most recently on Google
it's 2019 I believe the door has actually changed color one more time if I recall correctly but
we'll get to that when I present the notice poster. So here's a zoning map. Basically all of these
or a number of these properties and some on the north side of Girard have been rezoned to our
to CMX2 and are in fact single-family properties. Here's our project information form.
our appeal application
which has the additional information
here are our certificates of mailing
nope nope still still a green door
pardon me went a little too fast there
There are notice posters.
We met with the Fishtown Kensington Area Business Improvement District on September 22nd where
we received a letter of support and then met with the Fishtown Neighbors Association on
December 6th. And here is our letter of support from them as well.
At this time, I'd like to ask Mr. Tomac to just raise his hand, please, so he can adopt my
testimony and give any additional. Mr. Tomac, you can unmute yourself. We'll wait for the chair's
instructions. Hello, everyone. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes, Mr. Bergman. It's Gino Tomek, G-I-N-O-T-O-M-A-C.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Okay. Go ahead, counsel.
Thank you. Mr. Tomek, you've heard my presentation and my testimony today?
And do you attest to its authenticity and it being true and correct?
And is there anything that you would like to add?
Mr. Tramag? I would just like to thank everyone for their time. Me and my wife are really eager
to move into this house and start a family here in Philadelphia. So just excited for this next
chapter in our lives. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mr. Tramag. I forgot to ask, just for the
record, will you adopt my testimony today as your own? Yes. Okay. Thank you very much.
Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. Questions from the virtual audience?
i see no other heads at this time chair questions from the planning commission
good afternoon chair bergman and members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the commercial mixed use zoning at this location the zoning in fishtown was changed
from rm1 residential multifamily to commercial mix to commercial mixed use at the time
I'm sorry, in 2015, in accordance with the comprehensive plan and at the request of the
Neighborhood Association. Since this is a long-standing non-conforming use, the City
Planning Commission recommends the Board grant the use of variance. Thank you very much. MI 2021-003-766-620
East Gerard Avenue. I vote yes. Good evening. My vote is yes. Thomas Holloman. My vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Okay, thank you.
We have one more case from the 2 o'clock start.
I'm going to take a quick break here for the court reporter to get a little bit of a break.
We'll come back and handle that case, and then we're not going to break.
We're going to go right into the 3.30.
So let's get a five-minute break right now.
Is that okay, Tanya?
Yes, sir, Deputy.
I'm answering.
Let's go.
Here you go.
Perfect chair.
Thank you very much.
You're welcome. Good luck.
You're welcome. Good luck.
Sometimes you're here.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
How are we looking, Tanya?
We are ready when you are, Chair.
Okay. Let's start.
We are good to go, sir.
Okay. Okay.
MI 2021-003952-6237-45 Germantown Avenue.
Both attorneys have been sworn before.
Could you re-admit Adam Laver and also Hal Shermer?
Mr. Laver is coming back in as a panelist now.
Thank you.
Mr. Shermer is also coming back in as a panelist.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Mr. Laver, just mention your name for the record so we start again.
You've been sworn.
You've been sworn.
Thank you, Chairman Bergman.
Adam Laver, L-A-V-E-R.
Adam Laver, L-A-V-E-R.
Good afternoon, Chairman.
Hal Shermer, S-C-H-I-R-M-E-R.
Thank you.
You've been also sworn.
Mr. Laver, we're going to start.
You've been sworn.
Our Vice Chair has a few questions for you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, Mrs. Tanara.
Good afternoon.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with all of the required documents consisting of proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos under plans of the property, five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all, Mrs. Tenere.
And pardon the interruption, I see that Mr. Reuter seems to have his hand written.
Okay, and I'm not waving and stipping on this, correct, Mr. Bergman?
What's that?
Do I waive and stipulate on this because it's an appeal against Illinois? Correct. So I do not do that, right, Tanya? Right. Okay. Correct. Thank you.
Actually, if I may, pardon the interruption. Leonard Reuter, R-E-U-T-E-R, Senior Attorney for the City of Philadelphia. First, I want to apologize. Our network is extremely slow today, so I've turned off my camera because it'll just freeze up, so I won't be on camera.
But, and Mr. Laver can correct me, I believe he has questioned two of the refusals, but not all of them. So I think it's partly waiving a challenge on some of the refusals, but not two of the others. And I'm just here for those two particular, those two particular refusals that he has questioned.
I don't believe he actually formally filed an appeal against L&I, but I'm essentially just going to be here to address those.
But I believe the main refusal, which is against the use, he is accepting the accuracy of that, but Mr. Labor can speak for himself on that.
Chairman Bergman, members of the board, Mr. Reuter is correct.
There are two refusals noted on the September 22, 2021 notice of refusal that we believe
were issued in error, which I brought to the attention of the department but did not get
a satisfactory resolution on.
The two refusals that we take contention with are as follows.
minimum accessory off street parking spaces listed as required as 203 spaces
and minimum front yard setback listed as required as eight feet. Regarding
minimum accessory off street parking, we have set forth that under the zoning designation of CA1
And net leasable area is how the department should be making calculations concerning off-street parking.
And we actually obtained an opinion from the department stating that the residential apartments, which you'll hear about in a moment or two, do not count towards net leasable area.
So we believe that the 203 spaces and, in fact, the entire refusal is issued in error on that particular matter.
and regarding minimum front yard setback there is no minimum front yard setback within the ca1 zone
don't mean to distract the board we're prepared to move forward but it was very important to state
that on the record with that if the if the board doesn't have any questions on that issue i'm
prepared to proceed mr chairman so this is not this is this is not an l and i complaint this is
not an official L&I complaint yet it's not an official L&I so this is just you're going to
have your hearing today relative to the other issues around it yes that's that's correct
I'm prepared to proceed chairman okay um if I could then just ask for just a little bit
of clarification on that uh Mr. Laver if you don't mind if I ask Mr. Laver a direct question
No, sure.
Are you, I mean, I think you are still intending to address the two refusals that you disagree with.
Is that correct?
Yes, of course.
All right.
I just want to be clear.
So, you know, so if you're not seeking, I mean, are you seeking a variance in the alternative for those?
Yes, of course.
okay all right just so that's clear clarification sure
All right.
Just so that's clear.
Thank you for the clarification.
i've uh shared my screen and up on the screen you should see an aerial view as as i begin
and i beg the board's indulgence for being a little bit more verbose than i would normally
like to be but i i'm sure the board understands with uh opposing counsel involved uh that is a
prudent. Adam Laver of Blank Rome on behalf of Hatch Real Estate. Hatch Real Estate is a
Philadelphia-based and Philadelphia-focused real estate development company, which was founded by
brothers Seth and Matt Shipon. Seth is with us today. Matt was here during the important task
of working with the community over the last two and a half months, and he left for his honeymoon
this afternoon. So Seth is with us, Matt is not. Seth and Matt are the equitable owners,
Mr. Chairman and members of the board, of the former Comer Paper property at the corner of
Germantown Avenue and Washington Lane. You can see the property bounded with the red line marking
the uh the perimeter of the property and here is a view along germantown avenue with washington lane
in the left of the uh photograph also with us today is architect gabrielle cano of cano design
and we have submitted uh a exhibit package with 15 exhibits as well as a revised proviso plan
submission which is in the board's possession and has been reviewed by counsel for the board
this case concerns the proposed reimagination of a neglected corner property along germantown avenue
seen in the photographs before you placing the property into context for a moment
as the board knows germantown avenue stretches from north philadelphia through chestnut hill
it's one of the oldest streets actually in the country. Here's another photograph of Germantown
Avenue looking across the street. Germantown Avenue is often referred to as a microcosm of
our city. It is home to many sites of historical significance. The Deschler Morris House where
George Washington once lived, the Johnson House which you can see right across the street
from the property, which was a station on the Underground Railroad, and the Cliveden where the
Battle of Germantown took place. I should mention as we're looking at this photograph showing the
Johnson House right across the street that we have a letter of support from the immediately
impacted neighbor, the Johnson House, in the exhibits that we'll see today. Yet with the
presence of these historical resources the avenue has also changed over the years in former times
the city planners believed that germantown avenue and the surrounding neighborhoods might see a
redevitalization through car centric commercial use and indeed this particular property is zoned
CA1, auto-oriented commercial. So in this photograph before you, the subject property I'm
indicating with the hand icon, CA1, but you also get a sense of several other properties that have
that car-centric focus. A gas station across the street, a self-storage across the street,
a Rite Aid with lots of parking, a setback, not so much of a pedestrian-friendly environment.
Here's another photograph also where the subject property is here where I'm indicating to the left
with the hand icon. You see the gas station, the self-storage, the Rite Aid, etc.
The zoning code states that the primary purpose of auto-oriented commercial zoning is to accommodate uses, often in the physical form of shopping centers and other destination-oriented uses, in which a large percentage of customers will arrive by automobile.
Although there is a place for auto-oriented zoning, time has revealed that a dynamic, diverse Germantown Avenue is not that place.
Imagine, for example, members of the board, Chestnut Hill's walkable section of Germantown Avenue, changed by immense shopping centers and parking lots.
This neighborhood deserves the same as Chestnut Hill or any other neighborhood.
And that is why here I have excerpts from the Philadelphia 2035 vision for Philadelphia's growth.
I have excerpts from the Philadelphia 2035 vision for Philadelphia's growth and development
from the Planning Commission. Together, the Philadelphia City Planning Commission and the
RCOs, including all of those represented here today as official RCOs, crafted the 2035 vision
for Germantown North rezoning mapping, recommending, as I've highlighted at the bottom,
cmx2 for most properties along germantown avenue including the subject property and removing that
failed auto oriented zoning designation so here we have as part of the philadelphia city planning
commission's materials which were just revised in late october and publicly posted in the pink
color where my hand icon is ca1 is the subject property that's existing i'm going to go to the
next and you see that the subject property becomes red cmx2 in line with the cmx2 that dots along
germantown avenue the cmx2 that promotes a mix of healthy commercial and multi-residential the
residential to support the commercial that is deserved and needed along germantown avenue
So with this important background in mind, Seth and Matt designed their proposed development to meet the goals of the neighborhood's 2035 vision.
And I want to say that, again, not just the Planning Commission, but the stakeholders were involved.
I know that we have opposition, some opposition, but it's important to mention this.
Additionally, late last year, or mid last year, I should say, April of 2021, the Shiphans met preliminarily with Councilman Bass, and following that meeting, further refined their proposal with input from the district member prior to applying for zoning.
And what you're going to see in just a moment is a result of those meetings.
So here we are. We have this one-story property, which has been significantly underutilized, vacant for four years, listed for sale for 2017.
This is not in line with what the revitalization calls for.
Here you see a view looking towards Germantown Avenue, subject property on the left.
in place of the derelict existing property compatible new construction is proposed you see
photographs of the neighborhood around here and i bring these up because what uh is being proposed
respects the historic johnson house across the street as well as a mix of eclectic homes mixed
commercial and residential use and yet it's slated to coexist with the gas station across the street
the self-storage, the rated parking lot, all within yards of the property.
Unfortunately, there are those who have steadfastly opposed virtually all aspects of the project on
principle based on the underlying zoning designation of the property, CA1, and have been opposed
completely to multifamily residential, waging a concerted and absolutely shocking, belligerent,
jarring effort to halt the development. So an insistence on an outmoded zoning designation
is not practicable. It's at odds with the collective wisdom of the Planning Commission
and the neighborhood. Let's move to the proposed development. This is the proposed conceptual
rendering of an otherwise functionally obsolete structure. It's a tremendous opportunity,
which has been recognized by near neighbors. Among others, there's a community benefits
agreement in place, and we have scores of near neighbors and the coordinating RCO and
others that are on board. The proposal calls to design this multi-use project to CMX2 standards
in line with the Germantown North Rezoning effort to erect the four-story mixed-use building
that you see before you i'm going to zoom in just a little bit more so we see it better
germantown avenue at the front washington to the left calling for 47 residential apartments
accessed off of washington lane so where the icon is to the left the red brick denoted entrance off
of washington lane accessory parking beyond also off of washington lane with 41 parking spaces
for 47 apartments.
Side note, under CMX2, no parking would be required.
Here along Germantown Avenue,
strong ground floor retail commercial is proposed,
Approximately 4,000 square feet to support the strong, walkable Germantown Avenue.
approximately 4,000 square feet,
to support the strong walk-on.
And the larger commercial space has been designed with commercial-grade venting through the roof
to accommodate a potential future restaurant tenant, which was desired by some in community leadership.
Here we have the zoning.
Again, you can see the CA1 where the site is, the red CMX2 surrounded.
Consider that underlying zoning.
The map clearly shows CMX2 all along Germantown Avenue in the nearby vicinity.
The current zoning designation is a relic.
It's a mistake.
The refusal is the heart of what the board is considering.
Number one, and I'm going to take these in order so that it is as clear as possible.
Residential living is prohibited in the auto-oriented district. The application before
the board calls for 47 residential dwelling units, as would be permitted in the CMX2
zoning district, which has been identified for this site. We are not seeking to maximize potential
CMX2 density either. We are seeking to work with the community and to put forth a reasonable plan.
Additionally, we are committing to 10% on-site affordability at the moderate income level
as documented in a fully executed community benefits agreement.
Two, we discussed at the outset the refusal concerning minimum accessory off-street parking.
Forty-one parking spaces are proposed. Refusal states that 203 parking spaces are required, which I'm sure in the Board's review, it seems very unusual to see a refusal like this.
Well, zero parking would be required under CMX2, which is present along Germantown Avenue in the near vicinity.
Furthermore, the zoning examiner incorrectly issued the particular refusal.
There is less than 4,000 square feet of net leasable area proposed, being the commercial ground floor.
That would amount to approximately 12 parking spaces under the current zoning, not 203.
We are providing 41.
Even if it is determined that variance relief is needed on this issue, based on the constraints
of the site, the amount of parking being provided, the efforts to meet the city's comprehensive
of plan, we expect that this is appropriate. Next, maximum occupied area calls for 60% of the lot.
79.68% is proposed. This is an existing non-conforming site. Furthermore, by providing
additional parking in response to the community, a de minimis variance is appropriate to meet the
greater community needs. Maximum height is the next refusal. We're almost through.
38 feet is permitted within the commercial auto-oriented zone. 45 feet is proposed.
The 45 feet proposal is designed to meet CMX2 standards as proposed in the 2035 plan.
This is a minor deviation in height within existing districts to accommodate, again,
the prevailing desire for the parking that we're providing and the fifth uh refusal
minimum front yard setback is purportedly eight feet there is no required minimum front yard
setback in ca1 but furthermore as the photographs that i shared with you show
uh in very few instances do you actually see that type of setback in the community
So, in perspective, the CMX2 zoning district that's recommended by the plan would permit this proposed development. Numerous other existing CMX2 sites along Germantown Avenue would permit the development.
In partnership with our architectural team, and at significant expense, efforts have been made to improve the proposed building, provide off-street parking, add vibrant residential communities surrounding Germantown Avenue, additional residents to support and patronize revitalized commercial along Germantown Avenue.
I'd like to move to the proposed floor plans here you see the proposed floor plan first floor at the bottom is the proposed commercial.
first floor at the bottom is the proposed commercial the two spaces that i mentioned
the larger commercial space wrapping around uh washington lane corner uh accommodating
potentially a restaurant uh but being uh open to any uses uh permitted appropriate uses within the
district and a similar space they're not quite as big to the right along germantown avenue the total
is approximately 4,000 square feet. You see along Washington Lane the main entrance to the residential
and beyond that a single curb cut into the parking for the provision of the
41 parking spaces that I have previously mentioned.
here is a rendering mr chairman and members of the board along washington avenue showing a close-up
of the proposed residential entrance there would be a bicycle room right off of the proposed
residential entrance package room and nail room here is a full uh elevation along washington
Again, we just looked at the close-up for the entrance, and to the left is that curb-cut vehicular access to preserve through one curb-cut pedestrian walkability.
going back for just a moment to the first floor plan commercial trash pickup you'll see resident
you'll see trash right here is proposed from the interior of the parking area and outside of
you additionally looking along the perimeter along the sidewalk you'll see that there is
landscaping along washington lane uh there is lighting and security cameras wrapping both
facades per neighbor request and as documented in an executed uh community benefits agreement
and these small uh little marks indicate extra bicycle uraps along the public sidewalks
beyond what is required and what is shown internally.
Moving to the upper floors.
Here we see a typical layout for second, third floor.
A mix of large one-bedroom and two-bedroom units.
There are four stories total.
This is on the left is the fourth floor.
And on the right, you can see a landscaped setback roof deck with a 10-foot green roof buffer surrounding the deck to keep it pulled back from the community, residential only.
The proposed unit mix for these residential floors, two, three, and four, 34 one-bedroom units, six two-bedroom, one-bath, seven two-bedroom, two-bath.
The authorization of variance relief will not alter the character of the neighborhood
or district or be detrimental to the public welfare.
The proposal fits into the surrounding neighborhood as evidenced by the Philadelphia City Planning
Commission's indication of proposed CMX2 for the site, which speaks to the granting
of variance relief being of benefit to the public and within the scope and spirit of
the code. There is significant support, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. I've taken
the liberty of highlighting some of these letters for the board's ease since these letters were
coming in in the most recent days. Here we have a letter of support from the immediate next door
neighbor along Germantown Avenue. A letter of support from New Bethel Church of Germantown
which is at 6206 Germantown and 6215 Rear, 42 West Washington Lane, Neighbor,
6228 Germantown Avenue, near Neighbor, 6214 Bainton Street, near Neighbor, 62220 as well.
So you see a mix of residential as well as civic and communal uses and neighbors who are coming out
and support within a close area of immediately impacted neighbors. 42 East Washington Lane,
Brand New Life Christian Center also offered its support and encouragement. Johnson House
Historic Site, which I showed you right across the street from the property early on, the site
site of the uh underground railroad stop little einstein daycare another near neighbor
of the Underground Railroad's little Einstein date.
another as well as the concord schoolhouse and upper burring grounds of germantown
which strongly supports the work mentions the community benefits agreement and goes on to
state and i quote the developers have shown a willingness to participate in writing such an
agreement, they're referring to the CBA, and in following it, and we very much hope they can be
encouraged to do so. Sunoco across the street, we have as well, and some additional neighbors.
The Chiffon brothers are very proud of the investment that they're making in the community.
They are looking forward to being a further part of this community. The variance relief that it
would allow for this new structure to be built would be the minimum necessary to afford relief
would represent the least modification possible of the regulations at issue. The grant of variance
relief will not substantially increase congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire
or otherwise endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare. Based on the condition of the
building presently and what I shared with the board concerning the long period of vacancy
And the difficulty of having this listed for so long without anyone stepping up to redevelop or to actually use the property as permitted within the commercial auto-oriented district, this would be a huge improvement.
There are no environmental issues.
At this moment in time, Mr. Chairman and members of the board, I would pause.
We do have Seth Shippon with us, we have Gabrielle Cano, the architect, and I'd like to reserve time, depending on what my esteemed colleague, Mr. Shermer, raises.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Bill, you have to unmute yourself.
i do apologize why don't you bring why don't you bring your client on and let him adopt your
testimony uh mr ship on steph ship on would you kindly raise your virtual hand so that you may be
sworn in. Mr. Shippon, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair's instructions.
Please state your name and spell for the court reporter. Seth Shippon, S-E-T-H,
last name S-H-I, P as in Paul, O-N. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Mr. Shippon,
have you been present for the entirety of the presentation
that I've made on your behalf regarding 6237-45
Germantown Avenue?
And would you adopt and affirm the testimony
that I've offered as your own?
Thank you, Mr. Shipon.
Nothing further at this time, Mr. Shipon.
What I want to do is let members of the board,
questions for counsel?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Sharma, do you want to respond to anything?
Yes, sir.
One of the most important points, and if I can share a screen.
Let's see if this will work.
Okay. I did want to briefly go through my presentation, which is basically in response
to Mr. Labor. Most importantly, the minimum access accessory of off-street parking, I
believe these are going to be apartments, so it makes perfect sense for L&I to calculate
the number of parking spaces based off the net leaseable space because they are leasing
apartment space as well as commercial space so you shouldn't be doing a double dip in claiming
you have parking for 40 you know so many units of parking when actually you're claiming that
one in one half of the presentation you're claiming that is for the commercial the other
half you're claiming it's for the least least space and it appears that ellen i made the correct
decision figuring that well wait a second you're talking about 47 spaces and you're counting them
double some of these will be needed for the commercial that you talked about putting in
and you're also going to need it for the people who are going to be coming in.
and you're also going to need it for the people who are going to be coming in.
This is not a minimum variance by any stretch of the imagination. When we look at the CA zoning,
This is not a minimum.
they're looking for 20% more than what is allowed. You're talking about 60% maximum area
versus 80. If you talk about 47 units and you followed what the code actually says,
that 47 units would drop to 35 units based on maximum area. Based on the maximum height,
they're going up from 38 feet to 45 feet. If you would apply that, that brings this down to 30
units if you would have a conforming plan. They're going to drop the entire building. There is no
reason you cannot build a conforming building after you have created a vacant loft. I do agree
that the minimum front yard setback does not need to be there because it actually matches what the
other properties in the area have, they have zero front setback. Now I did want to go to the second
part of the notice of refusal, and I did want to quickly go through. There are actually two RCOs
which voted on this, and the vote was to oppose. There's the CNBCR and Chewendell, sorry the CBNC
is one RCO, Chewendell Field is the other RCO, 49th Ward did not attend the meeting.
Now, we had, as Mr. Leaver said, they had a lot of turnout for the second time when the neighbors were finally notified of this.
And I'm not sure why Mr. Leaver is working on a CBA, because of the neighbors who came out, only one said that they would support it with a CBA.
The ones which is up here.
Then you look at one would say they'd support it with provisos.
Otherwise, objection, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
this is not the current uh letter that was submitted to the board this is this is a former
version thank you thank you well i would report i would mention to the board that we had requested
that the rco provide copies of the letter and uh i know people have said that zoning boards are the
last part of trial by ambush we have i have not had any chance to see any of the documents
The RCO would not provide them, and I've never seen the package that Mr. Laver is talking about, which is why we requested a courtesy of a continuance.
But we still have a number of, I don't believe the number of attendees would have changed, and I don't believe that the RCO board re-voted.
So I'm curious how the number of votes for a meeting earlier this month would have changed.
Mr. Chairman and members of the board, respectfully, I'd like to make a standing objection.
I object to the testimony that is being offered by Mr. Shermer.
There has been no proffer of aggrieved persons under William Penn. We don't even know who Mr.
Shermer is representing. Well, with regard to that, the proffer under William Penn deals with
after the zoning board has made a decision and we argue about who has standing to appeal. Right now
we're talking about 14303A, sorry, 15A, where the standard is people who are interested.
Any party may be present if they are an interested person. That tracks the language
of the local agency law, people having a direct interest. That is the way the code is written.
We will get to this. I'm right now simply going back against the documents
to response to what Mr. Laver has said,
we're essentially arguing over paper.
We will get to actual people.
Mr. Laver, I understand what you're saying.
And Mr. Shermer, could you move this along, please?
Yes, sir.
I'm Mr. Chair.
I want to know, who is Mr. Shermer representing?
Just all in opposition, all over?
Well, as of right now,
I'm representing the Coalition of Germantown Neighbors.
You should be able to see people on there,
specifically Ian Baker, Carmen Finney,
Laurie Lickman, Dave Todd.
Okay, I don't need older names.
Stephan Vogel.
And I believe most of them
are still here on the line.
One of the other important parts
that Mr. Laver did say
is yes, this property is up
for the possibility of being rezoned.
62, 25 through 27
is an adjacent property,
17,000 square feet.
This one is 19.
uh this property will be the property will be coming up to close sometime in march so we're
going to have a huge block of the last sections which will be redeveloped which will be probably
redeveloped before the planning commission gets around to rezoning it that doesn't make sense
that we have a process that goes through the variances now and we create new code this should
really go in front of city council because we're asking to change the minimum number of lots,
lots the minimum amount of lot coverage the minimum height uh mr sherman i'm not i'm not
the minimum amount of lot coverage, the minimum height.
i'm not sure what relevance that is but i want you to try to move move your presentation i'm
trying because there are people who want it there's are people who want to get in when we we go
i am uh there was no statement by a real estate broker that the property was not available and
was not desirable for sale and this is from the right multiple listing service showing that
When this property was listed by, I believe it was Green Street, they actually did have two offers in August of 2019 and then February of 2020.
So saying that there is no interest in the property, somebody had the time to write up an offer and they had the time to accept it.
Looking through LoopNet, I would also mention the advertising for the property focuses on how the CA1 is a good zoning option and is appropriate for the site.
uh 1900 square feet for this lot and under contract so we're dealing with equitable owners
can be used for shop and warehouse i'm trying to get through i'm moving
uh same thing about the other later discussions also all point out that this is a perfect
location for this sort of work uh tripping along zipping along this is the 2035 plan
which does show this exact property, which should be going from CA1 to CMX.
That is the decision of the Planning Commission.
When it comes to actually figuring out what it should be rezoned at,
the neighbors should be brought in as part of that.
I would note that under CMX2, Mr. Laver is wrong.
This would still require a variance because the 47 units are more than you can get under CMX2.
Look at the table of uses in Note 2 and Note 3.
You would not have 47 units.
is not that is not correct i specifically stated mr chairman and members of the board
that the developer has committed to providing on-site affordable housing that is completely
in line with cmx too right but the number of units that you have would be determined by 480
square feet when you divide 19 000 by 480 you do not get 47. uh the neighbor is also in the rco
letter and is one of the concerns for overtaxing this is the map from the city open maps of all
the areas which have combined sewers those are the sewers that overflow and back up into the
residents basements in this particular case the concern is if you have second floor third floor
and fourth floor as a new construction and then you have neighbors neighbors nearby if you've got
about 50 people in the high rise and about 50 neighbors in the low rise when it comes time for
the super bowl halftime and everybody flushes and the pipes are can't take it the neighbors on the
fourth, third, and second floor win
and the basements of the neighbors nearby lose.
Mr. Sherman,
I understand that, but I think,
let's try to
move it along.
I had enough time to talk.
I'm trying to zip through.
This is from the USGS open file report
showing that the property
which is up here, right by the A
of Germantown, is part
of a filled-in stream network.
This is done by the City of Philadelphia
in concert with the USG logic survey.
trying to figure out how do you deal with all of these combined sewers that are built into filled in areas of overflow of filled in valleys.
So here we are right at Germantown and Washington, and you can see the property drains down.
The sewers drain down. And from here, they drain all the way out into Torresdale, which is why we have problems currently with water and sewer.
What I had mentioned is that under 14-303-12, there's a requirement for notice to all the residents within 250 feet.
Under 14-303-12-B, there is also a requirement that you notify everybody along the primary and secondary frontage of the properties.
That was not done, as you can see, just by looking at Mr. Laver's paperwork.
They left out neighbors who never received proper legal notice.
notice was uh provided to all uh parties required under the philadelphia city code
and reviewed by council for the bone and board of adjustment
well then why does the map omit people who are on washington lane if they're all supposed to
oh never mind we're not i'm not sorry i shouldn't be let's let's move on yes ma'am
and then finally i would note that we have
we lost your screen oh sorry
okay is that back yes it is okay this is simply another section of the open maps showing that
the property directly across the street which we all know as johnson house is historic
Germantown Avenue is its own historic district, and the property immediately adjacent to the
Germantown Avenue is its own historic district, and the property immediately adjacent to this large property is also historic as well.
So that is one of the things which has not been considered is the effect on this historic street, on the historic property directly across the street, and on this location directly adjacent to it.
And then finally, under open maps, this is the city of Philadelphia's list of bike networks.
I know that the project makes a big point of this being acceptable to have reduced parking because
you're along Germantown Avenue. However, there are no bike network or bike-friendly streets
anywhere within several blocks. Further, you're not going to be riding on Germantown Avenue,
which has approximately 9,000 cars per day, is cobblestones and also has trolley tracks.
the main effect of trolley tracks and a cobblestone road is your bike tire gets caught in it you go
over the handlebars and get thrown into all incoming traffic uh there are a couple other
points that i did want to make i'm grateful that mr shermer has raised that the subject property
is actually a unofficially a transit-oriented property in that you have public transportation
running along charmantown avenue highly let's let's mr sherman let's finish up for you because
we got a lot of people we want to get to okay and uh i just would need one of my clients to
adopt the testimony so and actually if i'm while i'm thinking of it could if i could ask that the
chair would request that all of the uh zoo members who are neighbors and oppose this raise their hand
And then if we could pick out Mr. Baker, Finney, Lickman, Tavani, Vogel to adopt testimony.
Thank you.
I'd like to make a general relevance objection for the record.
Sewer capacity and bicycle lanes are irrelevant to zoning issues.
I understand.
Before we go on, let's work it the same way.
Does any board members have any questions for Mr. Shermer?
No, Mr. Shermer.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
And so what we're going to do is we'll go to the virtual audience.
Who has questions or statements in the virtual audience?
Chair, we have seven hands that, well, we have seven to eight hands that are up, Chair.
I don't know if they're raising their hand because they're opposed or they want to say something.
Right.
So why don't we do this?
Just pick somebody out of the audience.
If I could, Chair, this is Tanya.
Could I please ask the virtual audience to put your hand down if you do not want to put testimony on the record?
Only those who wish to respond with testimony.
Thank you.
Okay, Mr. Chairman, we have Erica Almiron.
Mr. Almiron, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
hello hi could you do me a favor could you state your name for the court reporter yes my name is
erica almiron and you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes and do you live where do you where do you live what block do you live
46 east washington lane
okay please proceed yes um so i'm i'm uh present here today because
i uh just got wind of this development probably like a week ago and uh i have some real concerns
about how fast this is moving without real input from communities because i um was not aware of
the first hearing in December. It wasn't until the neighbors from the Coalition of Germantown
Neighbors put something in my mailbox on New Year's Day that I even heard anything about
this development. I've been here 10 years. I know of other neighbors on the same block
who have not heard of what's going on in the corner, including 44 East Washington Lane,
48 east washington lane so we are literally within feet from this proposed development
i have we have a lot of concerns uh concerns about and i know that um sewer like our water backs up
and sewage backs up already into a lot of the basements in this neighborhood our houses are
my house is 110 years old um i wonder what kind of construction on this block will do to the
foundation of my house um on top of of course parking uh which is already difficult to find
in the neighborhood uh we have a lot of people who um are just concerned about air quality and
quality of life um so i'm i'm here to say that i i oppose the marriage changes and and i'm sure
thank you changes and and i'm sure there are other people here as well thank you for calling in mr
that there are other people here as well.
chairman and members of the board i i don't wish to unnecessarily cross-examine i'd like to simply
make a statement but i'm puzzled i've heard mr schirmer and ms almiron mentioned the coalition
of germantown neighbors as if it's a incorporated or official type of organization i i still have
not heard any proffer as to standing on behalf of this supposed coalition. Thank you. Thank you.
If I might well pick up, the Coalition of Germantown Neighbors would be an unincorporated
association, which includes near neighbors. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Shermer.
Anybody else in the virtual audience? Chair, we have Stephanie Vogel. Ms. Vogel,
you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair's instructions. Thank you very much. Could you
please state your name and spell for the court reporter? Yes, sir. Thank you, Chairman Bergman,
for recognizing me. My name is Stephanie Vogel. Vogel is spelled V-O-G-E-L. I live at 38 West
Pomona Street. I am part of the Coalition of Germantown Neighbors, and I live just around
the corner from this property with my children. Right. I submitted written testimony last week
in opposition to the variance request. I am well aware that there is widespread opposition to this
proposed development. We believe that the impact that this proposal has on the infrastructure
and very critically on the environment and on the community posts serious risks that have not been
considered and I am disheartened by some of the testimony that I've heard under oath
because I know it to be not true by Adam Labor. There are significant concerns about the
infrastructure impact such as the sewage that's already been mentioned, fire prevention, police,
lighting, traffic safety. None of this has been discussed or brought to attention. Public health
issues have not been considered and concerningly there are 200 very similar apartments that are
currently coming on the market within a matter of blocks. There has been no hardship justification
made or need to change the setback from eight feet to zero feet. I'm concerned about the flooding if
that happens and I also don't believe that there's a hardship justification to exceed the maximum
occupancy above 60 percent. There are in fact serious concerns with this rapid increase in
in urban density.
And I am actually in favor of more density in this area,
but I would like to have smart density.
And I strongly believe that this is poorly designed density
and there is no community benefit.
And I strongly request that you deny this proposal.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Anybody else?
Mr. Chairman, if I may,
I just have one or two questions for Ms. Vogel, please.
Ms. Vogel, you've stated on the record that I've made lies to the Zoning Board of Adjustment,
and I'll allow the Zoning Board to make their own determinations regarding that.
I've shared on the screen an image, which I believe, based on the testimony that you
offered shows the closest point between your residence and the subject property uh you stated
that you're around the corner it's actually quite a far corner um and in fact uh mr chairman and
members of the board miss vogel is not even uh listed on the planning commission's list of
immediately impacted neighbors as this chart shows uh she is located at the closest point 370 feet
away in the interest of time i would like to simply make an objection on the record to miss
vogel's testimony as not being an agreed person under william i i i understand mr labor thank you
any anybody else anybody else have something different they want to offer uh mr chair do i
get across sure well essentially a response to mr labor uh provco partners the 250 foot distance
is the minimum necessary for the people who are deemed aggrieved and it's not worth arguing about
whether or not they are impacted under case law and commonwealth court provco partners people can
be impacted up to 200 feet 400 feet 600 feet up to a half a mile depending on where they are and how
big the project is obviously if you're within 200 feet and we're arguing about how high a fence is
Obviously, if you're within 200 feet and we're arguing about how high a fence is, that probably doesn't matter.
that probably
When you're talking about the major redevelopment, bringing in 50 units along with all the other units, that test, 250 feet, is not a test for standing.
It is a test for notice of a public hearing.
And again, William Penn doesn't apply to any of this because we haven't even made a decision.
This is talking about people being allowed to speak at a public hearing.
but it does not go to the standing
to appeal a decision to the Court of Common, please.
Thank you, Mr. Shermer.
Thank you, Mr. Shermer.
Chair, we have a Sabra Townsend.
Mr. or Ms. Townsend, you can unmute yourself
and wait for the Chair's instructions.
I'm unmuted.
Okay, could you state your name
and spell it for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Sabra.
First name is S like Sierra.
A, B as in boy, R-A, last name is Townsend, T-O-W-N-S-E-N-D.
Do you swear to or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Okay, thank you. Proceed.
Thank you for the opportunity, Mr. Bergman, Mr. Laver, Mr. Shermer.
I've already sent in a letter to the Zoning Board of Adjustments asking for denial of the application for five variants on this property.
The main one is the first-use variants.
I don't want to repeat what I have submitted, and I would offer that to the record,
specifically that there have been challenges with the United States Postal Service in 19144
that is documented that there have been difficulties with delivering mail.
I would also state, as Mr. Laver pointed out in a public meeting, that I do live at 67
West Washington Lane as an interested party. I would say that I was also emailed by one of the
listed RCOs on the blank Rome letter that includes the note of refusal. Mr. Patrick Jones, who
represents himself in this letter as one of the RCOs, but in the email that he sent to me and
other neighborhood folks and asked us specifically to stop speaking with other neighbors about their
opinions of this development and i find that i'm not an attorney but it seems to me that that would
be a bit of a conflict for an rco to pointedly email uh active community members uh to stop
talking about a proposed project that will affect them um actually mr chairman i think there's some
confusion of issues and this is not relevant it's not even something that's come up in testimony
So I mentioned that, Mr. Labor, again, I'm not an attorney, but it seems to me that a person who's listed in your blank, maybe not yours, but from the blank room law firm as an RCO would ask members of the community to not speak to other neighbors about a development that is proposed for the neighborhood.
So as an interested party, I wanted to make that point that this development was rushed through.
It appears even in this hearing to allow Mr. Labor the luxury of his total presentation, but not allow Mr. Shermer to continue his presentation does seem a bit unfair.
So with that, I will defer to other near neighbors and neighbors who have their hands up.
Thank you so much.
excuse me mr chairman yes i apologize but i have to uh sign off at this time yes thank you
sure mr chairman regarding ms townsend's testimony i'd like the record to reflect
that ms townsend has put on the uh record her address and on the screen before you show it
It shows closest point 647 feet to the property.
We would concede that anyone may be an interested party, but we would further state for the
record that the near neighbors, those who potentially are most aggrieved, who have shown
their interest in the property, are those with whom we have negotiated largely a community
benefits agreement.
There are several people here who are in support of this project who represent those who are
are most closely affected.
For example, Mr. Chairman,
for example mr chairman in the interest of trying to move the uh the schedule appropriately uh
in the interest of trying to move the schedule
cornelia swinson uh worked to uh put a benefits agreement in place if the board so wishes to hear
from ms swinson sure it's could he could he raise his hand please ms swinson uh if you're present
would you kindly raise your virtual hand so you can offer testimony to the board
I don't see anyone with the last name Swenson.
We may have lost some members due to the late hour.
I wasn't aware of that.
I've heard that her speaks for itself.
All right.
Is there anybody else with their hand up?
here we have someone by the name of david urts mr urts you can unmute yourself and wait for the
chair thank you mr urts state your name and spell for the court reporter my name is david urts
d-a-v-i-d-e-r-t-z do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth? I do. Please proceed. I've lived in the neighborhood for 35 years and Comer Paper was
sort of an eyesore even back then. It's really been, I mean, the company was a wonderful company.
The women who ran the company were great, but the building is an eyesore. And I believe, you know,
the variances that are being requested are really pretty modest and the building when you look at
some of the things that have gone up further up germantown avenue and mount airy the building is
head and shoulders and quality above them so i would firmly support this project thank you thank
Thank you, Mr. Ertz. Any questions for Mr. Ertz? Okay. Look, there's hands up. We've heard a lot
of testimony. If someone has something different to say, please raise your hand and we'll let them
say that. But if not, we're going to have to move this along. Chair, if I could mention,
this is Tanya, the administrator. We do have a representative from council office, Mr. Richardson.
please please please allow him yeah absolutely thank you
good afternoon mr chair i'm mr richardson how are you i am good your name and spell your name
for the court reporter charles richardson office of councilwoman cindy bass room 312
city hall do you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do proceed sir okay i do have a statement from the councilwoman and do need to clear up one thing
that mr laver did did mention a little earlier uh the councilwoman and i did meet with the uh
owners of the property back at the end of april last year and um they came in with a five-story
building with 64 units and she actually stated at the time that she thought it was way too big
and that, you know, she didn't think that it would be accepted by the near neighbors
and that they needed to go back and rethink it so that they came back.
We actually hadn't seen anything about this until they filed for the variance.
And, you know, we moved forward with the RCO process.
So let me read the Councilwoman's statement.
And I also have on the phone Connie Swenson, who's just called me because she said she's got her hand raised,
but nobody's able to see her or to recognize her but let me finish with the councilwoman's
statement at this point dear chairman bergman and board members my thoughts on this development are
very mixed i definitely believe there are too many new rental units being developed in the 61
to 6300 blocks germantown avenue all of these developments have been done by right and required
no community input this proposed proposed development requires a variance so the near
neighbors needed to weigh in. I am concerned because in the future, this development, as well
as the other new developments, may likely have unforeseen impacts on the surrounding neighborhood.
That being said, I acknowledge the fact that the neighbors nearest to the project are now supportive
of the development and have worked out a community benefits agreement with the developers. I have been
informed that the majority of those near neighbors originally voting in opposition have reversed
their votes. I also acknowledge that a number of the unaffected community members in the greater
Germantown and Mount Airy area have expressed opposition to this development, but unfortunately
they lack standing regarding this site and this case. Although I still have concerns regarding
Although I still have concerns regarding the potential impacts the new units may cause
the potential impacts the new units may cause in this
in this four-block span, I will not stand in the way of the desires of the nearest neighbors
in light of their support of the project.
I would request that if the variance is granted, that the number of units be reduced to equal
or below the number of proposed parking spaces.
And she signs it sincerely, Councilwoman Cindy Bass.
Thank you.
And what's the name of the woman that you said has her hand up and nobody's calling on her?
Connie Swenson, hold on one second. Connie, what is your, what is your, what are you listed under?
Okay, so we have her listed. Her hand is not raised.
And I, put your, put your, put whatever you're listening to on mute so I can have you on, on a speaker.
Okay, you there?
No, it's not, you know, you still have something going. You have two devices going.
Yeah, I don't think you can use a laptop and a phone at the same time.
Turn your volume down. Just turn the volume down on the laptop.
It will be helpful to have Ms. Winston testify as she was the party that we were trying to bring on earlier. I don't know if that's possible.
yeah she just she she she she uh lost it when she uh disconnected her laptop so i don't have
her on any longer but um no other hands at this time thank you thank you charles okay so
planning commission thank you chair bergman and members of the board david fecto city planning
commission uh board members the comprehensive plan recommends this property for commercial
mixed use 2 zoning. Commission staff conducted a public neighborhood process in 2021 with
the goal of changing the zoning maps in this part of the city. The final recommendation
with community input was commercial mixed use 2. That input included nearly 180 discrete
comments on an online zoning map that we asked for input on and that does not count the public
meetings that were held. So there was more public input than that as well. The proposed
CMX2 zoning is reflected in the maps that we sent over to the council office. The proposal for 6237
Germantown Avenue is broadly consistent with the recommended zoning. However, the applicant
proposes 47 dwelling units. Well, by our calculation, CMX2 would allow only 40. Bringing the unit
count down to what is allowed in CMX2 would alleviate some of the concerns of their neighbors
and still satisfy the goals of the comprehensive plan. We also wanted to note that the proposed
affordable dwelling units cannot be enforced by the city uh the city planning commission therefore
recommends that the board grant the variances with the condition that the unit count be limited
to 40 40 units thank you very much um both what we're going to do is we're going to take this
to our executive session then we meet next week and we'll get back to you um chair yeah
yeah leonard reuter hand is up okay i i didn't say i don't say leonard go ahead uh hi uh thanks
again uh members of the board leonard reuter senior attorney for the city philadelphia i just
wanted to address uh the two refusals uh that were being challenged um you know again i think
we're challenging a couple refusals out of several is arguably a moot point but to the extent that
it might not be considered moot. We do agree that with respect to the setback that
CA1 does not require setback. The reason why that refusal was given is that the plans that were
presented themselves indicated that an eight-foot setback was required, which I think that just led
to some confusion. And because they were proposing zero setback, the current building has no setback,
But, of course, they don't get the benefit of a nonconformity since they're demolishing that and building a new building.
So typically what would happen is that they should submit a revised plan to just fix that calculation on what was submitted.
But, again, to the extent that, you know, if the board were inclined to grant a variance as to all things, it really doesn't make that much difference.
In other words, I think if the variants were denied and they get zero setback for a building
that doesn't exist, I'm not sure what purpose that serves.
With respect to the issue that was raised about the parking, again, it's sort of the
same thing.
I mean, I think, you know, they're essentially asking the board to conclude that there is
no parking requirement in CA1 with for this building and the relevant code provision.
for this building and the relevant code provision uh does calculate uh the number of spaces
required for ca or one or ca2 based upon what's known as the net leasable area
but net leaseable area is defined in 14202 rules of measurement sub 11 and it just simply says
and the board i think can take judicial notice of it since it's a code provision that the total of
all gross floor area the total of all gross floor area of a building within interior walls excluding
areas devoted to rubbish rooms custodian closets vestibule stairways escalators and elevators
areas used for electrical telephone computer or mechanical equipment loading docks receiving areas
non-occupied areas devoted to building structure support aesthetics etc mall and concourse areas
not occupied by retail kiosks, public walkways, public restaurants. I believe now Mr. Laver
had said previously that he had received a communication from L&I indicating that residential
spaces would not be considered net leasable area. I think where there's confusion about it is
net leasable area is essentially a term that's used pretty much exclusively with
CA1 and CA2 type structures. So if you were building a CA1 or CA2 type structure,
how many parking spaces you would require are going to be based upon those calculations.
Unfortunately, the definition and the rules of measurement section is broader than that. In
other words, it doesn't say if it is going to be a mall that you're building or if it is a car
oriented structure that you're building then you use this it says any building uh that may be
needed to be tweaked in the future so again it is a it is i would call it a a technical refusal
because we understand that that usable area typically conceptually really only applies to
a car orient or an auto car oriented um project but because the the way it's written it applies
to any building it will apply to any building that happens to be in a ca1 uh parcel so um
based upon that the net leasable area of the prop of the property uh is i think uh 50 000
just under 50 000 square feet which would result if so for you get you need four spaces for every
thousand uh square feet of net leaseable area which would uh which would then require you to
have the 200 spaces. But again, we're not taking any position with respect to the variants. I think
the Planning Commission representative has already stated what the city's position would be and what
planning's position is on the variants. I just wanted to address the technical aspects of the
refusal. I'm not sure it's particularly important to get further into that dispute because, again,
And if you grant the variance, the variance is granted as to all aspects of the application, leaving aside any provisos.
And if you deny the variance, it really doesn't make any difference if they get the no setback or the parking space issue.
So it's kind of a moot point, but I understand why Mr. Labor has raised it, but I don't think the board needs to directly address it.
Thank you, Mr.
mr chairman i i have one small nuance to leave you with and i will not address what mr reuter
said he's correct the hour is too late but there's a very important nuance which goes to the planning
commission's comments the proposed density is in line with cmx2 with the affordability that
we are committed to and we are not seeking to maximize the density we are i just want to leave
the board with we are seeking cmx2 with the affordability that we are proposing thank you
mr chairman and members thank you sir thank you mr shirmer so next week in our executive session
you do you have something to say mr shirmer go ahead oh yes sir uh really brief uh since there
were people who attended the meeting but were asked not to add additional items if they've
already been brought up but did not have a chance to then adopt them and inform the board i'd ask
that the board would hold the record open
for like two or three days
so that the people who did come up
but already had their issues raised
could email the board
so they actually get a chance
to quickly let the board know
what their issues are.
Sure, that's fine.
We're going to bring this up
at our executive session next Tuesday morning
and then we'll get back to you.
If I could just, I'm sorry,
and I apologize,
but just to follow up on what Mr. Laver said again,
Leonard Reuter again,
And Mr. Laver, I believe, understands this, but just to make it clear, the affordable housing...
But just to make it clear, the affordable housing that they are intending to provide, which presumably is within the CBA that they've drafted, that is not enforceable by the city.
It is privately enforceable.
The zoning code recognizes private agreements that do not conflict with the zoning code.
We don't get involved.
L&I is not going to enforce it.
they can have a private agreement that's fine but i just want to make it clear the board
and i think the board's been maybe separately advised the board cannot
cannot make a proviso requiring the cba or requiring affordable housing
this is but i mean it's simply part of the record and mr labor has said and people have
you know there's foreign essentially sworn testimony that's been adopted that they will
do that, that's fine. But beyond that, the city can't enforce private agreements. So I just want
to make that clear. And I understand Mr. Laver's point about if it were CMX2, they would be able to
get theoretically the MIHB. And in that context, the agreement would be with planning. It would
be with the city and therefore we would be able to enforce it. But because it's not CMX2 and
Because MIHB is not available, that's why they're doing it as a private agreement.
So the difference is that that would have to be privately enforced.
So I just want to make that clear just so that's understood.
Thank you.
Thank you, everyone.
Thank you.
Hi, Mr. Chair.
This is Tanya.
If I could just interject, if we could, on the record, agree that we would only hold
it open until friday for input for the individuals requested by mr sherman that's fine friday by
close of business i i would ask mr bergman uh chairman bergman that if uh that courtesy is
being extended uh as the hour is late and it seems like some confusion has come up that i'd be
permitted the opportunity to submit uh some documentation concerning the proposed density
any affordability. Thank you. Sure. Sure. Okay. Thank you, everyone. Okay.
All right. Moving on to our 3.30.
well um sharon told me this was going to be long so all right so i'll start the preamble again tanya
yes yes okay all right my name is bill bergman and i will be chairing this
late afternoon meeting of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. With me is
Carol Tenere, our Vice Chair.
Present.
Okay, all right. Ismael
Ismael Shaheed, our Board Secretary.
Here. And James Snell, our Board Member.
Present. Also with us is Tanya Sunkit, our Board Administrator,
and Rebecca Call, our Attorney.
before we begin here's our virtual format be advised proceedings are being recorded
by participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded a video will be available by
contacting the board administrator tanya sunkett tanya sunkett at philadelphia gov
two for the benefit of our court sonographer we ask that our attorneys and witnesses id
themselves before testifying. Three, if you're participating by phone, if you wish to testify,
press star nine to raise your hand, star six to unmute. To enter an appearance statement,
call 267-270-5548. Leave your email and address of the property in question.
lastly please note that the question answer box on the screen is not intended for comments any
comments should be directed to tanya sunkett our board member and now as we look at our case
case this afternoon i do not see any continuances is there anyone who has a
continues they want to bring to our attention. Chair, we have someone by the name of Haki Mana,
Mr. or Ms. Mana. You can unmute yourself and wait for the chair's instructions.
Good afternoon. This is Haki Mana. Could you do me a favor? Could you spell your name for
the court reporter. My name is Haki, H-A-K-I. My last name is Haki.
My name is Haki, H-A-K-I.
My last name is M-A-N-A, Manna.
Do you affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
What case do you want to talk about?
It's my property located at 1624 South 20th Street, Philadelphia, PA, 1915.
That's number three on our list.
What about it, sir?
Do you want to continue the case?
No, no.
It says you have an attorney, Scott Sigmund.
Yeah, I know.
So right now, this is about continuance.
If you want to continue your case, you don't want to continue the case?
No, because I waited for Scott.
Okay, so you're number three on the list.
We'll get you as soon as we can, okay?
Does anybody else have any continuances they want to raise?
Okay, I see no other hands at this time.
Okay, good.
Number one, MI 2021-002916113 Hedgegro Lane, John and Mercy Amadi.
No exhibits are listed.
Chair, we have someone named Bernard Jadash.
I don't know if he's associated with this case.
Mr. Jadash, is this the case you're here for?
Please unmute yourself.
Okay, hold on a moment.
Chair, he's going to be promoted to a panelist.
All right, thank you.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
mr judash
you have to unmute yourself mr judash okay can you hear me yes could you state your name and
spell for the court reporter uh bernard jadak j-a-d-a-c-h
i'm with the greater bustle and civic league wait a minute wait a minute wait a minute
do you swear to firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do okay so how are you connected to this case uh i'm with greater bustle and civic league
i'm the zoning chair uh the property owner is has never contacted us to go over this situation or
anything so that's fine thank thank you thank you let let let us figure it out what he he has not
raised his hand yet to be in the audience i that's why i just wanted to let you know that
they haven't contacted perfect thank you so much
no no hands raised from the from uh the amadis
no chair there are no hands up at this case case cases continued must be tried
MI 2021-003552, 1382 Ridge Avenue, RCO 14th Democratic Ward, Executive Committee, Letter of Support, Zen Jin.
Mr. Jin is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Good evening.
Hi, Mr. Jin, state your name and spell for the court reporter.
Yes. Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N-J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838, Philadelphia EPA 19103, here on behalf of the applicant.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Hi, Mr. Jin. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
It appears based on the notes I'm looking at that you have sent in all the required documents.
Is that correct? That is correct. You may proceed. Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the
information relating to this case. We have previously submitted documentation. If you
could just bear with me, I'm going to go ahead and start sharing. Can everyone see the screen?
yes great thank you so we previously submitted the refusal letter from the rco photos plants
and related documentation for this case this property has a sole refusal due to its cmx4
zoning what we are proposing as a new build well it's an extension to a single story building
as a new build well it's an extension to a single story building um with addition of residential
units it requires one accessory off-street parking under the zoning code this property
has the support of the rco in this case due to the fact that it is in fact on a commercial corridor
and that based on the fact that it is in a commercial thoroughfare and what is surrounding
it, the proposal is in line with what the neighboring properties have. The hardship here
is that it's really basically impossible to get an off-street parking spot in this location.
There is an existing garage, but it's really a commercial garage. In order for us to give a
commercial space on the first floor, it necessarily means that this width cannot also accommodate an
off-street parking space. The future proposal, based on the plans, shows that what we are trying
to do is to provide a commercial frontage on the first floor, three stories above, that would be
used as residential in its specific use. The commercial currently would be vacant as we do
not have a tenant proposed at this time. Because the street itself is also on-street parking,
even though we do have a curb cut, it is consistent to the block that on-street parking on this side
of the street, the community would rather keep than to have just one off-street space that takes
away the on-street parking that would be otherwise available. So as a result, we do have the support
of the community for this proposal. This proposal does contain some agreed-upon provisals with the
community. We are going to make sure that the trash is stored in a container in the rear and
not be left out on the street prior to pickup, and also that the residential units would have
garbage disposals and its own internal storage of trash built into the space that is reflected
on the floor plans. However, there's no changes in the plans that would require any stamping.
These are just the provisals we have agreed with the community. So that is essentially why we're
asking the board's favorable decision in allowing us to waive the one off-street parking requirement
in this particular project.
I'm happy to answer any questions
or redirect to any other portion of the exhibit
for the board's review.
Is your client here?
Ms. Jun Chen should be present.
Ms. Chen, if you could raise your hand virtually
so you can be identified.
Ms. Chen, you can unmute yourself
and wait for the chair.
Hi, Chen.
Hi, Ms. Chen, state your name
and spell it for the court reporter.
J-U-N-E-N, that's named C-H-E-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thank you.
Proceed.
Ms. Chen, you saw my presentation to the zoning board and heard my testimony before the zoning board?
Can you verify that what I have presented is true and correct and adopt it as your own testimony?
I'm sorry.
Oh, can you just verify that it's correct and accept it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning, spelled R-O-N, last name Bednar, B-E-D-N-A-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
This property is indicated for commercial on the city plan.
Given the surrounding existing use consistency, we recommend the quest for variance be granted.
Right.
MI 2021-003552, 1382 Ridge Avenue, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, everyone.
MI 2021-002431-1624 South 10th Street, RCO, Point Breeze Development Corporation,
letter of support, Scott Sigmund.
Mr. Chair, it's South 20th Street.
mr chair it's south 20th street i'm sorry what did i say
I'm sorry, what did I say?
It's okay.
Is Mr. Sigmund here?
Mr. Sigmund, if you're in the room, please raise your hand.
He's coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Great.
mr sigmund state your name as spelled for the court reporter
i'm here can you hear me yeah i can i'm trying to get the video
um okay as scott sigmund here on behalf of the property um i'd like to call uh wait a minute
wait a minute just spell your name for the court reporter scott sigman s-i-g-m-a-n attorney on
behalf of the property all right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
but the truth i do proceed uh mr sigman do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and
stipulate to its accuracy yes i do i it appears according to my notes that you've sent all the
required documents in? Yes. Okay, you may proceed. So this property at 1624 South 20th,
it's a corner property. My client has rehabbed the property and needs a variance to allow for
residential units upstairs or commercial downstairs, and there'd be an area for trash.
I'm going to call my client to give some more explanation and present the documents, which they have on their screen.
But just an overview would be they went to the RCO. The RCO was in support of this.
They submitted, obviously, tax compliance. They own the property.
It would be a great hardship if this variance wasn't granted.
And my client's own children are going to live in the property.
The first floor, again, would be a commercial space.
There'd be a unit that would occupy the basement level and part of the first floor, a unit on the second floor, and a unit on the third floor.
So there'd be three residential and one commercial, a trash area, and parking area.
It would have very little, if any, impact on the community.
There's other similarly situated properties in this neighborhood.
um and at this time i'd like to call my client uh and he can then present show you these documents
the schematics and all the architectural drawings and everything um mr chairman
councilman squilla also is in non-opposition is this the legalization we're doing yes i mean
they built the property they just can't occupy it at this point okay
Okay. Thanks.
Sure. At this time, I'd like to call Mr. Mana. You there, sir? They're going to call you and
we're going to put up these documents so they can see your pictures and you can explain your
situation. Mr. Mana, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
He has to be promoted. I promoted him to panelists.
Yes, my name is Saha Kimana.
Okay, and I think I swore you once before, so why don't you just testify?
Go ahead.
Yes, I got a ready permit for this property starting in 2017, and at that time, around
the area he doesn't uh uh accepted the commercial or no no commercial but uh second and third floor
they don't accept it to do a rented apartment and then i i i apply for a single family home
on second and third floor but later on around me and next to me they um they accepted they accepted
all that kind of things to have units around for rent. And I stopped to divide it inside
a house. I built on the outside. Outside and I didn't divide that and I reapply for this
divided for new plan i decided for new plan and for the uh the i have my uh to explain this uh
this thing i have um i have a the designer names magda should be here to explain to you
The designer named Magda should be here to explain to you much better.
I mean, I don't think we need to go into all this great detail.
I kind of outlined it.
You could see it on this schematic here.
Apartment three on the top floor, apartment two on the second floor.
As you see on the first floor, you see the front would be commercial.
The back is part apartment one.
The basement is apartment one.
There's an area for trashing utility.
There's parking in the rear.
Why don't you, Mr. Manas, show some photos of the outside of the property.
He did a real nice job on the outside of the property.
The schematics show what I just described.
Yes, I'll show you right now.
Thank you.
This is inside the inside first floor.
This is inside first floor.
This is up to the second floor.
and this is third floor.
This is the top roof.
And you're going to see now the outside is a corner on left.
It's that corner property with the white door with all that nice siding on it.
Yeah, on left.
So next to me is another, next to my house is two renting apartments.
So they have already on the right side.
On this side you're showing right now is my house.
On the back is, yeah.
And there's two separate entrances,
one for commercial and one for residential.
And this is from far away.
This house is showing over here.
This is just recently built.
It's all a renting apartment.
And I have that house looking there on across the street.
On the left-hand side across the street, right there is yours.
And as you can see across the street, there's lots of apartments.
This is the condition right now.
It's from the egress from the basement.
And this is the front door of the commercial.
Our front door over here, but we saw another picture before.
Okay, questions from the board?
no mr chair
no mr chairman
questions from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair planning commission uh properties indicated this is
ron bednar city planning this property is indicated for commercial mixed use on the city plan
on our doctor district plan recommends no changes to the existing zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances
or conditions of the site that would prevent it from being used in conformity with the code.
Therefore, we recommend the request for grants not be granted.
MI 2021-002431-1624 South 20th Street.
i vote no my vote is yes carol tennari james now my vote is now
we have support from the community um i'm sorry i'm sorry don't speak right now don't speak right
Ismael, are you there?
We got a 2-1 vote.
Thank you.
The 2-1 goes nowhere.
Yes, Ismael, are you there?
If so, sir, you just need to unmute.
Oh, can you hear me?
I'm sorry.
I thought I'd unmute it.
okay yes my vote is no thank you thank you everyone mi 2021 003550 1831 south camac street
no rco letter east passion civic association councilman squilla
and non-opposition refers to the rco letter of support
Andrew Miele
Andrew Mealy is coming back in as a panelist. Thank you.
is coming back
Hello? Mr. Mealy, state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please.
My name is Andrew Mealy, A-N-D-R-E-W, last name M-I-E-L-E.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Our vice chair has a couple of questions for you.
Hi, it appears according to the notes that you've submitted all of the required documents.
Okay, are you an attorney?
I am not.
No, you're per se.
Okay, you may proceed.
uh so what we're looking at is uh we currently have a third floor with an eight foot setback
uh we're looking to put a railing around that setback um uh and uh a deck so that we could
use it as a patio space um that's that's where we're at yeah do you have any drawings of it
Andrew? Yes, how would I share that? What kind of device are you working with today? I'm on a PC.
So, is it a regular, just a regular computer? Just a regular computer. If you go down to the
bottom of your screen on the Zoom application, you'll see a green share screen button. There it
is. So, before you do that, do you have your documents open that you want to share? I do.
okay let's try hitting the share screen okay and then click on your documents and it's coming open
there you go is that can you say that that's it yeah yeah okay um so this this is our current
property and uh right here is where our setback is located and we're just looking to put a railing
around it that's that's really yeah that's that's it
okay questions from the board no sir
no chair mr chairman questions from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair planning commission
this is ron bednar city planning this property is indicated for
residential use on the city plan or adopted district plan recommends no changes to the
existing zoning at this location. The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique
physical circumstances or conditions of the site that would prevent it from being used in
conformity with the code. Therefore, we recommend the request of ranch not be granted.
MI 2021-003550-1831 South Camac Street. I vote yes.
Harold Tenere my vote is yes. James Snell my vote is yes. Ishmael Shaheed my vote is yes.
Thank you. MI 2021-003489-420-West Shoe. There's no RCO in this area. Councilwoman Parker's office has been working on this.
Latia Barnes is the pro se owner.
or tatcha brown barnes miss barnes
chair yes
okay i'm waiting for her to raise her hand i see i don't see her here
i just saw her name a minute ago i don't know what happened
yeah they they parker's office called about this today too hi hi hi yeah could you state your name
and spell for the court reporter please certainly my name is latisha barnes spelled l-a-t-e-a-c-h-a
last name barnes b-a-r-n-e-s do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth but and
nothing but the truth? I do. Our vice chair has a few questions for you. Certainly. Hi. It seems
based on our notes that you have submitted all of the required documents. Is that correct?
That's correct. Okay, you may proceed. So is this where I just tell exactly what I'm trying to do?
Yeah, and if you have any pictures of it or, right? I do. Yeah, so it's just, it will be a
So it's just, it will be a small event space for gatherings such as baby showers, repass, and things of that nature.
small event space for gatherings such as baby showers.
It's a space with 200, I'm sorry, 2,000 square feet.
It's just an open space.
I have pictures of it if you guys need pictures.
Do you have anything you can show on the computer?
It's just I'm on a cellular device, so if someone can just assist me with how to get to the photos.
ma'am which um type of phone are you using iphone or android it's iphone do you have um zoom app
installed i do have zoom app installed okay um when you open it and you're on the screen
and your files open does it show um share towards the bottom of your screen
um it doesn't it just has at the bottom of the screen it just has stop record it has more
but it just allows me to raise my hand background and filter and let me see if this would be
if not we might have to enable um your screen sharing your settings
okay um whatever we have to do i'm willing um sir would you like me to work offline
while you continue on with the case okay um miss barnes i will um can i write with her
or how can i troubleshoot if you want to chat with her offline that's fine okay thank you
that's what I'll do, Ms. Barnes. Okay, no problem. Thank you. Ms. Barnes, please close your video and
we'll come back to you. Thank you. Okay. MI 2021, 003522, 518 South 7th Street.
RCO, Washington Square, neighbors, letter of non-opposition with provisos. Appellant must
to be represented by an attorney who's here for that case chair we have someone with a hand up
by the name of hagana kim sure mr or miss kim you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair
hi mr chairman uh my attorney is callie kim she's also attorney here yes he's just been
promoted to panelists share okay let me let me go to him first
mayanna oh hello i'm i'm connected i'm sorry i'm sorry leticia please mute yourself thank you i'm
sorry go ahead okay hi i'm callie could you uh could you identify yourself for a court reporter
to spell your name? Sure. I'm Callie Kim, C-A-L-L-I-E. My last name is Kim, K-I-M, as in
Monday. And I'm here on behalf of the tenant of 518 South 7th Street, who also happens to be my
husband, but I'm his attorney. That's a good client. That's a good client. You swear for him
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Yes, I do. Okay. And our vice
Chair, I have a few questions for you. Sure. Hi. Do you agree? No. I'm asking, are you the attorney?
Yes. Okay. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes. And I assume that you have sent in all the required documents? Yes. You may proceed
and start sharing your screen. Sure. So I'm going to share my screen and go through a few exhibits,
but just before I wanted to give you quick, and I promise it'll be brief, a very brief overview of
the issue. We're seeking a use variance for the first floor commercial space of 518 South 7th
for a yoga studio. The yoga studio has been open there since July 2019, although we were closed
for approximately a year due to COVID. We've reopened now since March of 2021. We are a beloved
to yoga community in the neighborhood. The majority of clients that come into our space
live within a few blocks, so very little impact on parking. And we did meet with the RCO and we
received a non-opposition letter from the RCO. So I'm just going to share my screen so you can
see this here. Now, what you see here is the exterior of 518 South 7th. As I said, it is
zone for RM1, the personal use is not allowed, so we're seeking a variance with the proviso
of no body art service and no fortune-telling service, given the feedback from the Washington
Square West RCL. This is the exterior. Here's our denial.
This is the exterior. Here's our denial from L&I. And yeah, it says personal services expressly prohibited in RM1.
This was our project form. This is our lease that was signed with the owner, 518 South 7th Street LP.
and we have the authorization letter from the owner to pursue the variance, which let me see
if I can get to that. Here we are. So this is from the owner to pursue the variance.
This is our certificate of tax clearance for Tuck Bar and Yoga. And then this is from the RCO,
from Washington Square West, 15 folks non-opposed. And they did send us this proviso we worked with
them. They were super helpful. They were just concerned that, you know, they didn't want a
tattoo parlor or a fortune teller coming in later, but they actually really appreciated the use and,
you know, thought that it was beneficial to the community, although I don't mean to speak for
them in any way, shape or form. And so we are seeking that use variance for personal services
with this proviso, the no body art service, no fortune telling service. And with that,
I'll leave it to you all for if you have any questions for me or for my husband, Haganah.
Could we swear your husband in, please, and he could adopt your testimony?
Sure. Haganah, are you there?
I'm here.
Haganah, you heard my testimony. Do you confirm that everything is true and accurate?
And you adopt it as your testimony?
yes i do just do me a favor could spell your whole name for the court reporter
sure h-a-g-a-n-a last name is kim k-i-m good any questions from the the board no mr chair
no mr chairman no mr chairman um chair i don't know if i missed it this tanya i apologize
but did he get sworn in i did not yeah thank you so i thought no i'm sorry i thought i did it
before. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. Okay, thank you. Questions from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair. Any commission?
This is Ryan Bednar, City Planning. While the property is currently indicated for residential
in the city plan, given the site's physical condition and its documented use history,
We recommend that a request for variance be granted, provided that all L&I violations have been resolved on this property.
MI 2021-003-522-518 South 7th Street, I vote yes with provisos for L&I correction, if any exists.
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Snell yes we're provisos
thank you so much
yes we're provisos
thank you
thank you very much appreciate it
Mr. Chairman Bergman
will you record that the
provisos for no
the services no
body art service and no fortune telling service
on the record sure thank you
appreciate it Rebecca
All right. Let me take the last one because I'm not sure. MI 2021 007185732 Catherine Street. No exhibits, multiple listings. James Beasley.
chair this is tanya the administrator i have received correspondence from this applicant
stating that they wish to withdraw their case and come back with something different thank you case
withdrawn how are we making out with uh miss barnes i think i'm able to share content now i
can try it. All right. So this would be the outside. Are you able to see this? We're not
seeing it yes now yeah miss burns okay oh wait it's coming now okay so that's just yep the inside
entrance when you first walk in forgive me i just need to learn how to navigate around
Walk in.
Forgive me.
I just need to learn how to navigate around a little bit.
This would be the inside.
That's a full view of the inside.
Ms. Barnes, you have to restart screen sharing now so that we can see it again.
There you go.
All right.
So that's a full view of the inside.
um completely empty with no decorations no tables or anything that's just like
a full view um let me just go back
can you see the street view
yes yes okay so that's the outside it's the black building um it's between two
two um two churches and um i'm very friendly neighbor with um and then let me just i have one
more photo sorry and this is just like a further street view just to show you um I don't know why
I had one more picture where you could see like the full view of the block I just want to see
just so you can see the other businesses and the surrounding
then. Ms. Tenere, if you're speaking, you're on mute. I was. Can we see the inside? Sure. This
is the inside are you able to see that yes okay um i think i have would it allow a video
it should it just depends on your internet connection if it will okay let's see if i could
You know, I think we're okay. I think what we saw is enough visual. So I wouldn't worry
about the video right now. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman.
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have one question. What is the capacity you're looking to have on
this event space no more than 60 people no further questions mr chair okay um questions from the
virtual audience chair we have hillary emerson miss emerson you can unmute yourself and wait
for the chairs good evening mr chair members of the board you've already sworn just mention
your name and and we're ready for you sure hillary emerson on behalf of councilwoman sherelle parker
um here on behalf of both the councilwoman um and the community as our office served as the
coordinating rco for this matter because there was no other rco um i had submitted a brief statement
in writing previously indicating that the community did not have opposition to this project we had a
meeting with a few members of the community that attended and we met at the site and spoke about a
lot of issues that Ms. Barnes seemed to answer to the community's satisfaction. Based on the
location of the property on a commercial block adjacent to the North 5th Street commercial
corridor and the history of the building as a commercial building, we have no objection to
the proposed use. We do ask for two provisos and Ms. Barnes and I have spoken about these
and she is in agreement. We ask that she closes by midnight and that she obtains a certificate
of occupancy prior to opening. Thank you. Any other questions from the virtual, any other issues
with the virtual audience.
I see no other hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
We're in Bednar City Planning.
This property is indicated for commercial
on the city plan,
given the site location,
nearby a major commercial neighborhood corridor.
We recommend the request for variance be granted.
MI 2021-003-489-420 West Chew Avenue.
420 West Chew Avenue.
I vote yes for provisos of certain
I vote yes with provisos of certificate of the occupancy beforehand
and all events to be in by midnight.
Carol Tineri, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Snell, yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shahid, yes with provisos.
Is there any other body waiting for a case still there?
did we miss anyone
I see no hands at this time
thanks everybody
I'm really sorry we were this long
but I knew that one case was going to be long
and I appreciate everybody hanging in there
thank you very much
have a good night
have a good night
take care have a good night