to verify my testimony.
The owner's name is
Sachko
Savyatslav
and he is with us.
before I give it to Mr.
Holloman, is this a request for
four or three units? This is
a request for three units pursuant
to our agreement with the community's
request for a reduction of one unit.
We are in
acceptance of all the provisals
after multiple meetings to work
out the terms. Mr. Holloman has a few
questions for you, sir. Good morning,
Good morning, counsel. You do have refusals on this case.
counsel. You do have
refusals on this case.
Do you
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required, such as proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of the refusal, pictures or drawings of the property, five days in advance to this hearing?
Did you meet with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all questions.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the package that was submitted in support of this application.
Can the board see my package on the screen?
Thank you. So we have met multiple times with this RCO pursuant to this application.
The initial application was for four units in the RTA1, two-family dwelling district, with related minimum side yard and parking refusals.
After meeting with the community and with various changes we have agreed to, we have reduced the units to three units, and we're only seeking that before the board today.
There are, however, actual hardships to the minimum side yard and parking space requirements as presented on the refusal.
So this application is actually for a lot.
I'm going to zoom in to allow the width to be more easily seen here.
This application is for a lot that is part of an attached two unit setup that is prevalent on the block.
The issue here is that with the side yard, this is actually built at the same size as what was present on this lot before.
and the side yard cannot be met simply because there isn't enough width to the property to
accomplish it. In addition, the block basically has no off-street parking for any of the units
because there is a slope in the front that actually requires a retaining wall in order to maintain
structural integrity of the yard in the front and also for the buildings. So it's impossible to put
in off-street parking even in the front of the property for even one parking space. That being
said, we've had multiple meetings with the community to go over many of the items that
are mentioned on the RCO letter. I'm going to go through that, and it is in agreement, and we do,
my client, accept all the requested changes. The near neighbors are particularly concerned with the
structured look of the property because this block is rather historical and has very specific
design looks. In addition, although this property, when it was in existence, was legalized for six
units, the community feels that six units or even four is excessive for even as large a lot as this
and asked that we reduce to three units, which we were happy to agree to. They also seek that the
trash be stored in the rear of the property due to having a side yard that is not an issue and all
units can access that trash storage location. The front porch has been redesigned to match
the existing buildings in the neighborhood with their front porch, both in design and look,
and also facade, brick to match, the window styling, the cornice line, and the roof top will
all be redesigned. I will jump to the plans in a minute to show those changes. And in addition,
we're going to repave the property in the front, fix the retaining wall, make sure all that is up
to date for safety reasons, and install lighting and security cameras as per requested by the
community. The community also asked that we try to put a fence and gate in the front and back to
kind of separate our property from the next two building property on the other side.
The design has been revised to, I'm sorry, it's zoomed out, I'll zoom in a little bit,
It's revised to three units per the request of the community.
As you can see from the site plan, we have added in a porch and the bay windows and everything
to match what is requested.
I should have also a front facade drawing.
Here we go.
So we're going to do the design exactly to match the old building that is actually on
this side.
The building to our left is vacant, but actually in a condition that the community is not satisfied with.
So if and when that gets sold and changed, I'm sure this will also end up be the look that they would request.
And this matches further down the block and all the existing buildings.
I'm going to show photographs, which will give a better idea of what we're talking about here.
So the community particularly cares that this building has the look of this with the front porch, all which are now incorporated into our design.
So, based on those changes and the reduction of unit to three, which are now laid out as follow, essentially one unit on each floor, two bedrooms per unit, I believe, I'm sorry, I'll zoom in further.
So based on those changes and the reduction of units...
There's two bedrooms per unit, and it's a rather large, long building with a nice living area and an internal stairwell access for all three floors to the side yard, for the upper floors, directly to the front with the porch for the first unit on the first floor, and everyone would have access to the rear yard.
So based on all those changes, and based on the reduction of the unit, and the hardship that exists for the parking, the community gave us in there in from face CDC, the coordinating RCO, a letter of support, in this case, with the revisions with the vote of the near neighbors and near near neighbors.
So with that, I will leave it open for the board to ask questions, and my client is available
to verify my testimony.
Mr. Jin, could you describe the remainder of the block relative to multifamily houses?
So what has happened with this block is that it's RTA1, so it's actually structured for
two-unit buildings, which are existing.
The remainder of the block is a mix of multifamily.
Some of them are also three.
and lesser uses of single.
But there's actually, I believe,
based on feedback from the community,
there's a by right 90 unit multifamily
that'll be going up somewhere nearby as well.
So it is a heavily multifamily designed neighborhood
and it would not, the three family use
would not be out of character
with the surrounding uses.
Thank you.
Could you have your client come on, please,
and have your testimony adopted?
Mr. Satchko, can you raise your hand and be identified?
I see no one by the name at this time, Chair.
Counsel, could you do me a favor?
Could you spell your client's name for the court reporter?
Absolutely.
So the name of the owner is Sachko, S-A-C-H-K-O, first name, and then last name, S-V-Y-A-T-O-S-L-A-V.
All right.
Counselor, you're an officer of the court.
We will take your testimony.
Questions from the board?
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Counselor, can you go back to your site plan?
I believe I saw four units on your site plan.
Let me go ahead and reshare the exhibit.
I will jump to the site plan.
So as you can see, they marked it as three family,
but I will go see if perhaps something...
Oh, yes, I'm sorry.
They did not fix this caption here.
Hillary, how should we handle this?
Well, so actually I was going to ask Mr. Jin if he, because there were some changes made pursuant to the RCO, if the board decides to grant this, if he would like to have revised plans stamped, we would just, we would need this corrected to say three family and we would need a proviso plans form, but the board could adopt with revised plans today.
I would also recommend a proviso that specifies that three units would be approved if the board decides to approve today.
I have no problem with the proviso for three family as the highest use permitted.
I don't know if we need to stamp the plans. It's up to the board.
Because I think if we go with the revised plans, the revised plan, well, the site plan perhaps would need to be corrected
because we want to do the front facade.
Thanks, Tom.
Any other board members with a question?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Charles Richardson with his hand up.
Mr. Richardson, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair, please.
Good morning, Mr. Richardson.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court report?
Certainly. Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, Room 503, City Hall.
Certainly.
Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N.
Right. Do you swear for them to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, sir.
The Councilwoman is in support of three units at that location with the associated provisos as applicable.
Thank you very much for calling in. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Allison Weiss with her hand up.
Ms. Weiss, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Good morning, Ms. Weiss.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes, good morning.
Allison, A-double-L-I-S-O-N, Weiss, W-E-I-S-S.
You swear to God to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Proceed.
I just wanted to clarify our position, Solo Germantown Civic Association. While the board did not reach an agreement, the majority opposed this, and the two near neighbors also opposed.
and as was stated this is already zoned rta1 for two families and we have multi-family going up
just across the street 90 by right units and the community feels that this is
enough development of multi-family and we have other developments in close proximity
that's quite enough that's why so officially you're not taking a position
well i solo germans count the majority of our board is opposed and we're supporting the near
neighbors who are opposed all right thank you thank you chairman chairman bergman if i may
uh it's my understanding that uh face cdc the coordinating rco actually took the vote of the
near neighbors in consideration in their total vote for support i just want to point that out
to the okay thank you i'm just going to go what we have we have not taking a position
faith development corporation in favor of so thank you um anyone else in the virtual audience
here i see no hands at this time planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty
for the philadelphia city planning commission board members the comprehensive plan actually
recommends a zoning map amendment from rta1 to rm1 multifamily on this block which is consistent
with upper northwest district plan the proposed use in bulk are consistent with the recommended
zoning district so the city planning commission recommends that the board grant this variance
thank you mi 2021-005-423-4629 wayne avenue i vote yes with provisos maximum three stories
maximum three units trash stored in the rear of the property hillary how do we want to handle the
mistake on the site plan um unless unless we're doing a revised um unless we're doing revised
plans um we don't we don't need to worry about that unless we're docking that plan all right
thank you very much thomas holliman my vote is yes with provisos james snell my vote is yes with
provisos ishmael shaheed my vote is yes with proviso thank you counsel thank you have a good
day. Number nine, MI 2022-003-305-1005 South 3rd Street. Shubba Jaganath is the owner applicant.
This application is for visitor accommodations at third floor in the same building with two family
household living at first and second floor. The proposed two family household living is prohibited
in this zoning district. The proposed visitor accommodation is prohibited in this zoning
district. The proposed multiple principal uses is prohibited in the zoning district.
Letter of support from Queen Village neighbors. Letter of non-opposition from Mark Squillip.
Mr. or Ms. Jaganath, could you please raise your virtual hand?
Chair, they're coming back in as a panelist now.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good morning.
Jaganath?
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Hi, that's okay.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
My name is Shuba Jaganath, S-H-U-B-H-A-J-A-G-A-N-A-T-H.
All right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Chairman.
Could you turn your camera on, please?
Sorry, I apologize.
No, no, no, no, no, you don't have to apologize.
Good morning.
Mr. Howland has a few questions for you, okay?
Yes, thank you.