road this condition of no accessory off-street parking is a common condition along this block
face of Girard Avenue the City Planning Commission recommends the board grant or proposed variance
so Zen I I uh there's been a lot raised here a lot of conversations and I and I think I'd want
to get it to a point and wait till next week to vote on the 14th at 9 30 a.m and the executive
session will just go over everything and try to understand it a little bit better okay will do
thank you thank you very much is there anyone in the audience whose case has not been called
on the 9 30 list no hands at this time see everybody at the 2 p.m thank you
well we get a lot of people going places poor poor him being you're the only one to come with me here forever
okay here we go good afternoon everyone my name is bill bergman i will be sharing this afternoon's
meeting of the zoning board of adjustment with me is our board secretary cheryl gaston
president mr chairman board members michael johns president mr chairman i win
president mr chairman ryan mcadams president mr chairman also here is our attorney lynn reuter
uber our executive director ian haggerty and our board administrator lakeisha dandy
this hearing is being recorded and will be posted on the zba website
by participating you consent to be recorded this is an in-person meeting with remote participation
whether in person or on zoom if you're called to speak please state and spell your name
wait to be sworn in and then after that each time you testify please start by stating your name
to enter an appearance indicate the property address in your zoom webinar speak with a staff member
call the zba office by the close of business tomorrow please call 215-686-2429 and provide
your name email and the address of the address of the address of the case remote participation
raise your virtual hand when director so that we can call you to speak
Before speaking, please click the join as a panelist button. Use the Q&A for procedural questions only, nothing to do with individual cases. If you're joining by phone, press star nine to raise your hand and star six to unmute. In person, if testifying, get close to the mic so that all attendees and the court reporter can hear you.
No talking, eating or drinking during the hearings, aggressive behavior will not be tolerated. In an emergency, follow the staff instructions. The main exit is the double doors at the rear. And the nearest stairwell is to the left. If we do evacuate, please go across the street to Love Park directly across our street and remain near so we can account for you. So let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
number one mi 2026 001 104 1510 south lambert street that case has been withdrawn
number two mi 2023 zero zero two one zero five five sixty seven five six two seven to four one
um hegeman street that case is continued until 1 17 27 at 2 p.m number three mi 2024
24-003-464-18 West Evergreen Street. That case is continued until October 21st at 9.30 p.m.
And number four, MI 2026-003-522-2808-12 Almond Street. That case is continued until 10.28
to 12 almond street that case is continued until 10 28 at 2 pm are there any other requests for
Continuances. Let's let's go to our add on list. Number one, MI 2026 002 245 3916 Brown Street. Counselor, you have something to add to this one? Sorry about that. Hold on. No, take your time. I can't get on the internet. It's okay. I have it here.
Yes. Hi. Lynn Reidelhuber, Board Counsel. The Board is reopening the record to accept
revised plans submitted by the applicant. The record is otherwise will remain closed.
The vote is rescheduled to October 21st, 2026 at 2 PM.
Thank you. Number two, MI 2026-002-987-200 Monastery Street. I vote yes with proviso. Per refusal dated October 1st, 2026.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.
I'm McAdams, my vote is yes with proviso.
Tywin, my vote is yes with proviso.
Number three, MI 2025-005-346-58 2nd Street.
Counsel, do you have something to add to this?
Yes, I'm going to read into the record the review by the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing CMX3 commercial mixed-use zoning at this location.
The appellant has demonstrated that the proposed uses will not cause detrimental impacts beyond
what would reasonably be expected. The Planning Commission recommends the board grant the
requested special exception for a sit-down restaurant and a takeout restaurant.
Thank you. I vote yes, with proviso. Per refusal, per amended referral dated October 2nd, 2026, use limited to basement and first floor only.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Ryan McAdams, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Ty Owen, my vote is yes, with proviso.
And I, I believe we're going to start with number 5, right? A regular list or regular list. So M.I. 2026, 003402, 3901 Brown Street. Meredith is the attorney.
good afternoon counsel could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
Meredith Ferliger F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes I do could you identify your client a relationship to the property sure
My client is R-E-K-R-L-L-C, and that is represented today by Rosalind Nikon to my left.
And our board secretary has a few questions.
Oh, good afternoon, counsel.
Have you submitted your documents and exhibits 14 days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I did.
And do you waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do, although one of the refusals has now been eliminated via the submission of the revised plans and proviso form that we did submit to the board in advance.
All right. Thank you. You can now share your screen.
Meredith, one question. How do we stand with the RCO?
The RCO, we held a meeting, and I can represent as an officer of a court that it did result in a vote of support.
I followed up with the RCO leader about the letter no response but I can represent that it was a
result of the court proceed yes thank you all right the request before the board today concerns
one property in Mantua located at 3901 Brown Street which sits right at the corner of North 39 Street
like many blocks in mantua this particular block is dominantly multifamily despite its rsa5 zoning
and also has the added unique condition that much of the block is still remaining vacant
i'll orient you to the location of the property but just
administratively the deed and tax clearance are included at exhibits two and three
the deed and tax clearance are included at exhibits two and three as you can see on the
aerial that i have up on the screen here the property sits on brown street at the corner
of north 39 street this is the corner property from the aerials you might notice the unique
nature of this block of brown street this side of the street is fairly uniform three story for about
three-quarters of the block until it reaches that vacant quarter of the block on the other end,
which, of course, joins the significant vacancy that exists across the street. And then you'll
also notice some instances of new construction that have started to pop up on this block as well.
The photographs will give you a little bit better view here, and they are included at Exhibit 16.
So you can see here the corner vacant lot that is the subject of today's request.
Historically speaking, this lot has been vacant since roughly the early 2000s, following its exclusive multifamily use prior to that point.
Now, the block itself is fairly unique in terms of aesthetics.
On this side of the block, as you can see in the photograph I have up on the screen, it is fairly uniform, three-story with front porch type of design, as the board highlighted to another applicant that was recently in front of this board for a case across the street, for which you just rescheduled the vote for another date.
across the street in comparison to that fairly uniform design you can see some of the more
modern looking buildings both new and renovated and then again once you get back to that 39th
street frontage it's again fairly uniform but instead it is two-story instead of three-story
and then i did also include the zoning posters in the packet as well
now looking at the zoning map at exhibit five again you'll see the property is zoned rsa5
having been one of the many blocks that was previously zoned rm1 prior to the 2017
mantua rezoning initiative and just by way of the the context here in terms of where this is
you can see the start of that purple industrial zoning just two blocks north which is where that
pico substation is located right in mantua now candidly as i mentioned the plans that were
submitted to lni were slightly different than the revised ones that are being presented before the
board today ultimately my client elected to modify his plans after having observed the zoning board's
feedback to another applicant with a mid-block proposal just several weeks ago on this block
In fact, that revised proposal now eliminates one of the refusals.
So just so you can see very briefly for comparison, I have the original plans that were submitted to the board up on the screen, which proposed a three story structure with six dwelling units.
And this structure would have extended all the way to the front line on the corner.
brown street is the designated primary frontage for this proposal however the board was quite
critical of the other applicants lack of front porch design so my client instructed his architect
to take another look now as a result we did submit revised plans to the board uh which
and a revised plan proviso form as well, which now provides the code compliant 10.6 foot front
setback, as well as incorporates that front porch, covered front porch design as well.
In addition, Mantua has been quite critical of any proposal these days with a roof deck,
so my client did also elect to remove the roof deck as well, consistent with their feedback.
now as a result of these changes and of the additional setback the proposed density has
also been modified from the original six down to now four so just to point out a couple of things
here about the site plan you can see here that the trash common trash storage is provided in the rear
again because this is a corner property uh that trash can be fenced in and easily accessed from
39th street in addition because this is a corner the non-existent ada compliant corners will be
upgraded here as well i did also include the updated floor plans at exhibit seven
seven i'll highlight a couple of things here all four units are large bi-level units units one and
i'll highlight a couple of things here all four units are
two each have their own private entrance from the street and they are each roughly 980 square foot
one-bedroom units with dining spaces and ample living space throughout units three and four
which also are bi-level units on the third and fourth floor, are over 1,000 square feet,
two-bedroom units, and they can be accessed from that side stair off of North 39th Street,
again, due to that corner location. Now, all units have interior ventilated trash storage closets,
washer, dryers, as well as very large and ample windows due to, again, this corner location.
And then Units 3 and 4 also have Juliet balconies in the rear for some additional light and air as well.
Now, regarding the refusal, as I mentioned, the proposal originally received two refusals, one for the multifamily use and the other for the front setback, which has now been eliminated by the revised plans.
the applicant submits to a hardship here on several several grounds both given the history
of the property as well as the transformed character of this neighborhood and block
which is all highly relevant to the applicant's entitlement to a variance
now historically speaking as you can see here at exhibit 11 this property was used as a six-family
dwelling and then later it looks like it may have been reduced to a five-family dwelling until it
became vacant sometime in the early 2000s now fascinatingly it was apparently a synagogue even
before it was granted a variance to become multi-family but even at that there is zero
history that this property was ever used as a single-family dwelling erecting a new single
family dwelling on this lot would also be a deviation from the dominantly multi-family
dwellings that exist and have been constructed on this block and in the immediately surrounding
neighborhood as you can see here at exhibit 12 i've included a map showing the location
of new and existing developments with densities ranging from two family all the way up to six
family uh even just on this block most proximate to this property is 3911 brown street which is
also a four unit despite that one being mid-block now although there is some much more dense
development nearby this development is proposed to be the least minimum request as it is designed
with the corner location in mind to add four large bi-level units that take advantage of the
considerable light and air while still maintaining the aesthetic considerations that this board
raised in the case that was just somewhere in this vacant area just across the street
the proposed four units represent a natural blend of the predominantly multi-family residences on
the block some less and some more dense and is entirely consistent and actually less dense than
the historical multi-family use that existed here as always we submit the proposal will not
increase congestion harm neighbors properties or impair light and air and i did include a more
detailed analysis in the memo of law that was submitted to the board as well and i'd be happy
to touch on any particular point in more detail uh if the chairman wouldn't mind swearing in my client
um sir could you get close to the mic is it on no what do you put it on hi could you please state
and spell your name for the stenographer r-u-s-l-a-n-n-i-k-a-n do you swear or affirm to
tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do counsel uh rosslyn have you heard
all of the testimony and evidence that was offered in front of the board today yes do you agree that
testimony was true and accurate and would you adopt it as if you had given it yourself yes we're happy
to answer any questions yes questions from the board well first first first let me just say
thank you for listening right um and i i think it's it's it really feels it's important that
that folks do listen because we do care right um the board does really care about the communities
and care about context and care about really um things that we we believe wholeheartedly
make a neighborhood better and and by you listening and and adding and changing
i think is is is appreciated well i i would i would give a huge props to uh the zoning board
I would give a huge props to the zoning board staff on that one, because allowing prior histories to be publicly available really makes it much easier for applicants to be able to do that research in advance.
staff on that one because a lot
So thank you to board staff for everything they do to make that easy.
Thank you. I think my question is more just around property management.
I think you've come before us for a few of your properties and just wanting to know what's going to be the plan for management as you keep expanding.
I do manage all my properties myself.
That's what I asked.
Yes, yes.
Second week I'm here, but I'm not that big yet, so I can handle all the properties myself.
And then what's the, I think you did talk about trash, but just.
So, because fortunately this is a corner, so there is going to be a fenced in designated trash storage area in the rear.
And then each of the units would have their own, uh, designated areas within their units as well. So, okay.
Double, double locations. Okay. Other questions.
Questions from our attorney, no questions at this time, but the common Meredith will have to follow up on your proviso. It doesn't necessarily match the plans, but that doesn't.
Delay anything here. Okay. Thanks. Questions or comments from the virtual audience.
Good afternoon, chair. This is Jason hand. I will be your calls for the session.
I do not see any hands raised planning commission.
Amy boy, with the planning commission, and do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth? Nothing, but the truth. I do please proceed the comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the current RSA 5 residential single family.
There is evidence that roughly half of the structures on this block are two to four family on similar lot sizes.
The Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant their requested variance for four-family dwelling.
MI 2026-003-402-3901 Brown Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
Maximum four dwelling units.
Revised plans.
One page stamped by ZBA October 7th, 2026.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Ryan McAdams, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Tayah Nguyen, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Number six.
So it's MI 2020.
Yeah, I got, I thought I didn't. Yeah. Yeah.
Oh, let me see here. So, number 6.
MI 2026-003-456-1678-North 54th Street, the Knopfson Firm?
Well, I don't know which one it is.
I mean, I...
Do you hear anything on the answer for that?
Oh, okay.
all right okay i i'm just going to skip it mr
mr dockamson could you please state your name and spell for us the doctor alan knockamson a-l-a-n