Thank you.
I'm sorry, I was speaking.
Chair, we have 28 attendees, and I want to just reach out and see if any of them are our court reporter.
If you're our court reporter, please raise your virtual hand.
I'M PROMOTING OUR COURT REPORTER TO PANELIST NOW, CHAIR.
LEARMAN?
GOOD MORNING.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
GOOD MORNING.
WE CAN PROCEED AS YOU WISH, CHAIR.
GOOD MORNING.
MY NAME IS BILL BERGMAN.
and I will be chairing the ZBA hearings this morning. With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman. Our Board Member, Thomas Holliman. Present, Mr. Chairman. And our Board
Member, James Snell. Present, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Also present is Hillary Emerson,
our Attorney, and our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkit. Here's our virtual format. Be advised,
As the proceedings are being recorded, a video will be available by contacting anyasunkit at philip .gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by 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 address to the property in question.
And finally, the question and answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Sunkin.
Let's look at today's schedule.
Number one, MI 2023 -005 -139 -626 -30 North Delaware Avenue.
That case is continued.
Hold on a minute here.
Number two, MI 2023 -004 -509 -1329 South 22nd Street.
That case is continued.
And number four, MI 2023 -005 -160 -319 Cherry Street.
That case is continued.
Are there any comments relative to the three cases that I've continued?
Good morning, Joe.
This is Nadia.
I will be your co -host today.
We have a Michael Mattione with their hand raised.
I'll allow them to speak.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, Mr. Mattione.
Could you state your name for the record, please?
Michael Mattione, M -A -T -T -I -O -N -I.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chairman.
I continued your case.
Is there anything you want to add?
Yeah, I did want to add a couple things.
I do represent Biagio DeSimone, the owner of 626 North Delaware Avenue.
While we have no objection to the continuance because Mr. Reuter is out of the country, and I can't oppose the continuance with that, we are requesting that this be rescheduled as soon as possible.
This matter involves a permit for a 14 -story, 96 -unit mixed -use building.
Developers spent over $300 ,000 in reliance on the permit,
and we're just requesting that this be resigiled as soon as possible,
given the circumstances of the case.
Mr. Mattione, I appreciate your phone call.
We will work with the staff afterwards to see what we can do, okay?
But we do have your comments.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else requesting it continues?
I see no hands.
We're going to move to number three, MI 2023, 004 -726 -113 Bridge Street, number 3F1.
113 Bread Street, number 3F1.
Matthew Monroe is the attorney.
There's a recommendation of support from the Old City District
and a letter of non -opposition from Council Member Squilla.
They have been promoted to panelists.
Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Monroe.
Good morning, Chairman Bergman. Can you see my screen?
We can. Could you put yourself on video, too, please?
Okay. Thank you. Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court sonographer?
Yes, Chair. My name is Matthew Monroe, M -A -T -T -H -E -W -M -O -N -R -O -E.
right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do um could you identify your client
uh i'm pleased to be here today with my client caladrino um owner of the property uh and the
um and uh yep in mr caladrino and his uh partners are planning to build out our our vice chair has
a few questions for you yes good morning counsel do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate towards accuracy yes have you emailed in all the required documents that is
needed and required you with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes and yes thank you
counsel please proceed and share your screen um good morning uh again chairman bergman members of
board um so i'm presenting a a case this is similar to a case that mr calendrino and i brought
back in september um this was actually a a plan that we uh that were filed around the same time
and we'd hoped to present together because they were related projects in the same condominium
building but uh because of some differences in uh the timing that we received the special exception
or the referral for special exception from lni uh we were unable to calendar them at the same time
The previous application was for, I believe it was 112 North 2nd Street. I may be wrong about the exact address, but this is a similar project by the same owners and Mr. Calendrino and his partners have owned a few of these commercial condominiums in the National at Old City.
and during COVID we saw a lot of retail leaving the area and after being unsuccessful in finding
a tenant with an existing building or an existing business to fill the space, Mr. Calendrino and
his partners went to work and looked at needs that they believed were needed for the residents
of the National, the residents of Old City and anybody who might be coming back. They lost some
businesses like Pinot during the pandemic and a few others. But what they're planning on doing
is bringing in specialty Italian foods and selling high -end Italian wines. They have some
great partners that they're working with on this and are excited to bring some of these uses to
the neighborhood. Just as a quick note, this is a referral for a special exception, which as the
board knows is a different standard than a hardship. It's effectively just demonstrating
that there's a do no harm issue here. And we believe that this project clearly does that.
So this is 113 Bread Street, number 3F. And we're seeking to program the space for as an eating and
drinking establishment. Effectively, a sit -down restaurant in Old City requires a special
exception, and that's why we're here for the board. We put together in our table of contents,
we have the deed, the referral for a special exception, application to the board. We met with
the Old City District RCO, and as the chair noted in the opening, we have a letter of support.
We properly posted notice. We don't have a site plan on this. This is a use change only.
so that's uh just wanted to make a note of that but we do have some context photographs and
the tax certification as well as the letter from the old city district just scrolling quickly um
i'll go down through uh some of the here's the deed and the board documents um but the um uh
the issues that we presented uh to the uh to the board that that came up and were answered
satisfactorily uh were related to how is um uh how is trash going to be stored it's going to be
stored internally and there's going to be a commercial pickup as there would be for any commercial.
as there would be for any commercial property.
There's a special -
Mr. Monroe, could you get closer to your mic?
I just want to make sure our court reporter can hear you.
No problem.
There you go.
Here you go.
Thank you.
Please let me know if I need to adjust the -
No, that's fine.
There's a, yeah, this is an existing commercial space in a structure.
The proposed use is effectively, you know, no greater impact than you could have for a by right use.
In the past, there's been there was a gym in the in the space, you know, that's got a lot more high, high foot traffic in the area than presumably a specialty food store would in it.
you know different times of the day um they're they're looking just to activate this space um
and and bring you have better safety more eyes on the street and when you have an activated retail
of the ground floor um and it's going to provide an amenity to the the residents of the uh the
national condominium there's uh close to 300 over uh two buildings and um there is a need for this
type of use. And we've gotten some positive feedback and good support from people who live
in the condominium building. The last time we were here, the condominium had voted in support of
the use of the space. Just going through and understanding that a lot of the questions for
these types of presentations can simply come after the presentation can come from the from
Here's the post -it notice as well as the existing space. You can see that it was a fitness space.
Here's the zoning context. It's in a CMX3 zoning district, so commercial use is permitted and
required. And here's some more context photos. Some interiors of the space obviously is going
to be built out differently, but just to show sort of like the breadth of space, there's plenty of
room to support a specialty grocery store and wine store. They may be doing some classes. They've
partnered with a local chef who would come in and do some demonstrations, but this is not going to
be a heavy cooking type of thing. It's more just prepared foods and that sort of thing. They're
talking to other local partners, Carlino's, and a few others. So, with that,
understanding the board has a full docket ahead. I don't want to take up too much of your time.
Why don't you bring your client on and adopt your testimony?
All right. Mr. Calendrino, can you click to raise your virtual hand?
they have been allowed to speak good morning sir could you please state your name and spell
for the court stenographer calendrino s -t -e -p -h -e -n -c -a -l -a -n -d -r -i -n -o
you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
The seat counsel.
Mr. Calendrino, did you hear the factual statements that I made in my presentation?
And were they accurate?
Do you adopt them as your testimony?
And I guess just a quick housekeeping matter.
What was the address for the North 2nd Street Project?
I think I said 1112 North 2nd.
That is 1112 North 2nd.
the unit number is five a is an apple one thank you just wanted to clear it up for the record
questions for questions from the board no mr chairman questions or comments from our attorney
hillary emerson not at this time mr chair why should your comments from the virtual audience
there we have one hand and adam marcus and they have been allowed to speak
Good morning, sir. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
I can. Can you hear me okay?
I can, sir.
Yeah, my name is Adam Marcus. My attorney ID number is 62104. I am here this morning representing the National Old City Condominium.
Okay. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Mr. Monroe.
I am here on behalf of National and Old City Condominium, and just so the record is clear, I'm not here necessarily in favor of or in opposition to this use, rather just to specifically protect the association's interest and get some clarification.
rather just to specifically protect the association's interest and get some clarification on a number of different issues.
So there are a number of different questions that I would have for the applicant.
And if I am allowed to, I would proceed with those questions at this time.
Why don't you raise your questions first? Have you raised these questions at the RCO meeting?
No, I was not aware of the RCO meeting. We did not participate in that, to the best of my knowledge.
Why don't we hear your questions?
So the questions primarily relate to, you know, the impact as it relates to the residential units within the condominium association, specifically as it relates to the issue of cooking, exhaust fans, odors, smells, trash, use in terms of the restrictions under the governing documents, limiting it to no outdoor seating, no takeout windows, hours of operation.
So there was a reference to no heavy cooking. I think the association's concerned as to what that cooking could potentially include. So it's really a matter of getting more specificity as it relates to the potential use to ensure that its impact does not have a detrimental impact upon all the residential uses within the building.
Mr. Monroe, can you handle some of them questions?
I can, Chairman, and I believe that Mr. Calendrino has stated both at the RCO meeting for the first project that we brought through and this one as well.
There are specifics in the condo documents related to no cooking with exhaust, and they understand that that is a requirement, and so they're going to adhere to those guidelines.
There are restrictions related to no outdoor seating.
We are not applying to do outdoor seating here.
That would be a separate license.
And this is in any regulations in the condo docks requiring or limiting the hours of operation.
They will adhere to that as well.
Um, and, uh, I would just say for this board that the, um, uh, that the questions related
to, uh, uh, what the condominium documents permit and, uh, any restrictions therein
are not directly related to, um, the question of the special exception.
Um, those are separately enforced, uh, or, you know, by agreement.
I understand.
And Mr. Calendrino intends to adhere to the specific regulations in the condominium documents.
Okay, thank you.
Mr. Marcus, did you hear that?
I did.
Can I just ask just one or two more follow -ups?
Please.
Thank you.
So can you just, Mr. Monroe, just help us understand in terms of you indicated that the trash will be kept internally.
How much trash, how often will the trash pickup be if it's being kept internally and how you'll be dealing with things like pest control?
Those are probably questions that Mr. Calendrino could answer with more specificity than I can, but those are questions that came up with the RCO, and we did address that.
And Mr. Calendrino, if you're still on, if you can answer the question about frequency of the trash pickup and storage, as well as whether you intend to engage in any pass to rodent.
okay um i'm here can everyone hear me we can yes mr marcus can i just get a clarification
who do you represent i represent national and old city condominium okay okay come on listen listen
to me i if you can answer the questions and let's not question the attorney okay
Okay. I'm on the condo board, and I just wasn't aware that he was retained to be on this board.
All I want to do is could you answer the question about the trash?
Yeah, I mean, the trash is held internally. There is a private hauler for the community.
If need be, additional totes would be added at the operator's expense, which would be us.
And the pest control?
Well, pest control, I mean, whatever is necessary, we'll do as far as pest control.
I mean, there is pest control that is run by the condo association that is paid for by the condo fees.
But whatever additional pest control measures need to be taken, so there aren't any pests on the premises, will be taken.
I have no desire to have any pests at the location any more so than anyone else would.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good morning.
David Effecto, F -E -C -T -E -A -U, with the City Planning Commission.
Do you swear or affirm the total truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
uh please proceed thank you thank you sir uh chairman and board members the comprehensive
plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed use zoning at this location the appellant has
shown that a sit -down restaurant will have no detrimental impacts beyond what might be expected
and so the city planning commission recommends to the board grant the proposed special exception
for a sit -down restaurant. Thank you. MI 2023, 004 -726 -113, Red Street, number 3F1, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
El -Shahid, my vote is yes. Thank you, counsel. Thank you.
We're going to move to number six, MI 2023, 004 -507 -900 Wise Mill Road, Meredith Trego is the attorney. There's a letter of support from the Chestnut Hill Community Association, a letter of support from the Chestnut Hill Conservancy, and a letter, an applicant also provided two form letters of support from neighbors.
Meredith has been promoted to panelists.
Good morning, counsel.
Good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Meredith Trego with Ballard Spahr.
My name is spelled M -E -R -E -D -I -T -H.
Last name is Trego, T -R -E -G -O.
We are here on behalf of Friends of the Wissahickon,
operator of the Wissahickon Valley Park,
as well as the Fairmont Park Commission,
owner of the property at 900 wise is an obligation right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do our vice chair has just a few questions
good morning counsel do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate towards
accuracy i do have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed
with this case five days in advance yes thank you um please proceed and share your screen
Great. Can everyone see that? Yes. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members of the board,
we are here today with a request for a variance for the disturbance of steep slopes within the
Wissahickon Valley Park. We want to note up front that the proposed steep slope disturbance is
actually intended to improve the existing steep slope conditions and remedy the erosion and
sedimentation in the Valley Green Run. We are here with the project team, including Ruffian
Tittman, who's the executive director of the Friends of the Wissiken, as well as our project
engineer, Mr. Calvin Bush, from Skelly and Lloyd. Friends of the Wissiken, just a little bit of
background, is the official park partner with the Philadelphia Parks and Recreation. They've helped
to conserve and improve the 1 ,800 -acre Wissiken Valley Park since 1924. Its staff and volunteers
work to help mitigate stormwater runoff into the watershed, reduce erosion, and otherwise
maintain and improve this important park asset in Philadelphia. I'm looking at our exhibit two,
which shows maps of the project area. So Valley Green Run is a small stream located east of the
Wissican Creek. It runs parallel to Valley Green Road. So the Valley Green Run is in this red box
over here, and the white line is the road. The subject of this appeal involves the first phase
of this proposed Valley Green Run restoration project, which will reconstruct the Valley
Green Run stream bank and stream bed to address years of storm -induced erosion. Ultimately,
there will be a second phase of the restoration project, although it's not the subject of today's
hearing, but just for your information, that second phase will involve the construction
of a new pedestrian bridge that will allow pedestrians to access this very popular area
of the park. Looking at some existing conditions, a primary purpose of the project is to remedy
the erosion issues that have been created by the naturally occurring steep slopes in this project
area. And so although the project aims to improve the steep slope condition and remedy,
And so although the project aims to improve the steep slope condition and remedy the problems, the mere existence of these naturally occurring steep slopes are what have triggered the need for a variance.
Section 14702 or 7042 of the zoning code prohibits any disturbance at all of steep slopes over 25 percent.
So, we have filed all of our required exhibits and information with the board, and our exhibit packet includes information about the need for the variance, as well as an earth moving plan as required in Exhibit 6 that shows the extent of the steep slope disturbance, as well as the required affidavit from a project engineer detailing compliance with the variance standards shown in Exhibit 6A.
Friends of the Wisikin has received widespread support from the community for its proposal.
We are happy to report that we have received letters of support from the coordinating RCO,
which is the Chestnut Hill Community Association, as well as from the Chestnut Hill Conservancy,
and two near neighbors of the project located upstream from the project area.
And those are all contained in Exhibits 15A through D of our packet.
To document our record for the appeal, we would like to just briefly
have Ruffian Tittman, who's the executive director of Friends, as well as our project engineer,
Calvin Bush, speak briefly to just introduce their testimony. I just want to relay a few
facts about the property. So the project area, going back to this red box, is roughly 23 ,000
square feet in size. It's located within and surrounding the Valley Green Run Stream,
which is adjacent to the Valley Green Road. The project is zoned SPPOA for parks and open space
right here. And the project area consists of wooded parkland, which includes a variety of
landscaping trees and moderate to steep slopes. Essentially, I mean, really due to the properties
topography and the existing steep slope condition, strict compliance with the requirements of the
zoning code would be an unnecessary hardship. Without a variance, friends with Alyssa Hicken
cannot undertake this very important stream bank restoration project, and the condition of the
existing stream bed and stream banks will only continue to worsen over time. No action by the
applicant has caused or created these circumstances. Consequently, we note that the proposed
project meets all of the variance criteria contained in section 143038 of the zoning code,
including that the variance will not injure the use of adjacent property or impair adequate supply
of light or air to the adjacent property. The variance will not create any significant
environmental damage or erosion, and as we will hear from our project engineer, will in fact
improve the condition of the property. The variance will not alter the essential character
of the neighborhood and will not be detrimental to the public welfare. In fact, this project will
be a benefit to the community by improving the condition of this stream bank and stream bed.
And lastly, there are no physical circumstances or conditions that, or there are unique physical
circumstances that prevent the property from being used in strict conformance with the zoning code.
I'd like to elevate Ruffian Tipman, the executive director.
Counsel, why don't we do this? Why don't we have the head of the Wissahickon come on and adopt your testimony? I think your photos and your maps have really laid out what the issue is. And then one is the engineer to be available to answer any questions from the board or anyone else who has. But I think at this point, why don't you bring the head of the Wissahickon on and adopt your testimony?
Thank you. I'd like to elevate Ruffian Tittman, Executive Director, to a panelist, please.
they have been promoted good morning could you state your name please and spell for the court
sonographer
good morning good morning hi could you state your name and spell for the court sonographer please
ruffian tippman r -u -f -f -i -a -n last name tippman t -i -t -t -m -a -n -n great do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel great uh thank you
miss tippman did you hear my description of the project and the existing conditions um and would
you agree that it is true and accurate i did and yes and would you adopt it as your own testimony
yes thank you questions from the board no mr chair questions or comments
no mr chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands planning commission thank you chair bergman and good morning david effecta
with the city planning commission chairman and board members the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the special purpose open space zoning at this location the appellant
submitted an earth moving plan which the city planning commission staff has reviewed the
appellant has shown that the proposed earth disturbance on slopes greater than 25 percent
is the minimum needed to afford relief and so the city planning commission recommends the board
grant the proposed dimensional variance to allow for a stream bank restoration project thank you
So MI 2023 -004 -507 -900 Wise Mill Road, I vote yes.
Excuse me.
Sorry, Mr. Chairman.
Would you like to hear from our engineer?
I think you've made your case very well and explained it.
What I had mentioned was if anyone had any questions, the engineer would be available.
So we're fine.
We're fine.
So MI 2023, 004 -507 -900, Wise Mill Road.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Mahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
I would just also like to move applicants' exhibits 1323.
Absolutely.
They're all moved in.
Wonderful.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Have a great time.
We're going to go to number five.
So MI 2022 -007 -347 -224 -230 West Tulpa, Hawkins Street.
Michael Phillips is the attorney.
Also, Steve Masters is an attorney involved in this.
and i believe that maggie white will represent the first witness that'll that'll be involved so
will all three come on please good morning mr chair members of the uh
mr phillips could you state your name and spell please for the court stenographer
michael phillips claire harris and harvey bransburg that's p -h -i -l -l -i -p -s
1835 Market Street, Suite 1400,
WPA 19103 here on behalf of the applicant
Topahawken Mansion, LLC.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. Mr. Masters, could you please state your name and spell for the
court's sonographer? Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board,
Steve Masters, S -T -E -V -E, M -A -S -T -E -R -S.
right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do maggie white please state your name and spell for the court sonographer
maggie white m -a -g -g -y -w -h -i -t -e for the city of philadelphia
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do okay and i i believe mr masters i think you've had some conversations
with our attorney. And I believe we're going to go to the testimony of Robert Montanez.
Is that correct? Yes, that is correct. Okay. So, Mr. Montanez, Richard Montanez.
I can confirm he is on. He just let me know. So,
Could you promote him to panel so that we could see him?
We will.
Alright, he's actually on a panelist now.
If you could put your camera on, Mr. Montanus.
Good morning. Good morning, Mr. Montanus.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. Richard Montanis, R -I -C -H -A -R -D -M -O -N -T -A -N -E -Z.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Mr. Masters?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm going to share my screen.
all right um mr montanez i am we are now looking at tab 15 of the
We are now looking at tab 15 of the applicant's exhibits, Mr. Bilby's exhibits.
Can you confirm if this is the streets department approval of this project's proposed parking and curb cuts?
It is a streets department eclipse approval.
Part of the letter.
And is this a copy, Mr. Montanez, of the streets department's review of the proposed right -of -way or the plans that were submitted to the streets department?
I would have to see that stamp, the blue stamp says streets department.
That would show that we reviewed it and it's the plan submitted to us.
I'm trying to make it bigger.
It's really bad.
I think, wow, we really got to work on that.
Division of Highways Right -of -Way Unit, so final approval site.
So, yes, this is the one we approved.
You personally did not issue this approval.
Would that be correct?
That is correct.
But you have been personally out to this location. Is that correct?
I walked the site one time as a community meeting before it started due to concerns on Wayne Avenue.
And you also attended a meeting at the home of one of the neighbors and spoke about safety issues at that point. Is that correct?
It was about traffic calming on Topahawken, yes.
okay on top of hawk and or on pastoria pastor i'm sorry i apologize it was about traffic
okay um these approvals um that the streets department issued for these plans um do you
agree that the streets department any approval that your department issues cannot cancel or
nullify the terms of a zoning proviso that would be issued by the cba
i'm trying to understand your question are you asking can the streets department override the cba
yes uh the streets department cannot override the cba okay did do these streets department
approval is actually um were they actually um resulting in a permit being issued for for this
project the streets department issues curve cut permits to developers that allow them to make
their curve cuts to access public right away so is it your testimony that the streets department
issued permits for those curve cuts that are that are in existence at the moment at the
property it looks like the streets department did issue those permits by the stamp that's
right there approving the plans okay
did the streets department in their in their review of this project for approval
did they determine that there was compliance with the city's vision zero and complete streets
policies? We review all our projects in regards to Vision Zero and Complete Streets. Hold on,
give me a minute. Close that for me. Apologize, I have construction outside my office.
Oh, okay. Well, is there any Complete Streets or Vision Zero documents that are associated
with this project? There are not. The Streets Department reviews all the plans in regards to
the Vision Zero policy set forth by the mayor and our complete streets guidance policy.
Do you know, as you're testifying today, whether or not or how the streets department made a
determination that that these curb cuts and parking spaces either complied or did not comply
with the Vision Zero or complete streets plans? I do not know what we review, but
We review everything based on our guidance and policies.
All right.
I'm showing you now a letter dated July 9th, 2019.
It appears to be from Benjamin Barron.
Is that someone who works in your department?
Ben Barron does work in the department.
At the time, as you can see by the signature, he was working in the right -of -way unit.
Okay. In this letter, is this the normal course of events that your department would prepare a letter and give it to a property owner upon approvals of a review of right -of -way?
Okay. In this letter, is this the norm?
Yes, we do provide a letter of approval to them.
And as you can see, this is an approval based on the condition that the street lighting unit make or the street lighting be upgraded.
is there anything on this letter that refers to vision zero or complete streets no is in fact
isn't it true that the streets department does not have to make any findings concerning street
complete streets or vision zero when it makes these approvals the streets department reviews
all the planes based on our guidance and policy of vision zero and complete streets
Is there anything mandatory in Vision Zero that would make you either approve or disapprove of a project?
If we determine that the project is unsafe for pedestrians to walk or an unsafe movement, we will not approve the project.
What did your department do to evaluate whether this project would be safe or unsafe for pedestrians?
We take a look at the conditions, the current conditions, the proposed conditions.
Are they making any improvements to sidewalks, crosswalks, intersections, right away, things like that?
Do you, in fact, know whether any of this was actually done in this case?
I will have to take a look at the plans to take a look to see what was done.
Okay, we have the plans here.
So I'll start from the beginning.
this looks like the first plan
if you want to just indicate to me what i should be expanding so that we could see whether there
sorry excuse me mr masters can you just clarify for me are you asking him to review the plans
now in real time or are you asking him what the streets department did
i'm asking him if he can he can indicate if there's any indication on any of these plans
that vision zero and complete streets was taken into account in any way whatsoever but i thought
he answered that question when he said the streets department stamp is on the plans as a part of our
review we review in accordance with these policies so by the stamp on there didn't he answer your
question already no there's no indication that complete streets and vision zero had any impact
at all on the streets department approval we don't know we don't have in front of us today
the person who actually did the the review and we have nothing there's no notations or or stamps at
all that indicates that vision zero complete streets was taken into account in any way there's
no forms there's no checklist there's no that's argument that's the fact that you're getting from
this witness i'm just gonna you know yeah okay right that's fine mr matandas if you if you want
to tell the board that you have no information and you cannot testify as to whether or not any
uh any specific um findings or evaluations were done according to vision zero and complete streets
i'm i'm fine with that but you you said he just testified to the opposite wait a minute one at a
time one at a time please steve finish up please yeah so mr montandis if your testimony is you
personally did not do this review and you don't have any information that you that you personally
know as to what what in terms of vision zero and complete streets was was evaluated that's
if that's your testimony i'm fine i can move on miss white i'm just going to object to ask and
answered, he asked, and Mr. Montanez answered, and he just re -characterized his testimony as
contrary to what he stated on the record. So he's going to keep asking these questions in a
different way. I think Mr. Montanez answered that as a supervisor, what I know is that as a part of
these reviews, we have to, the review is done by referencing these policies. So, I mean, he represented
to his personal knowledge as to what the people beneath him are trained to do that based on his
understanding that was done here because there is the stamp so so so mr masters i agree with that
i agree that the stamp is there but i also understand you're saying there's nothing
on the plans relative to what the the other issue but i do agree he's he's answered the question
that it was reviewed it's stamped and this is what they normally do in the background period okay
it's stamped and this is what they normally do in the background period okay uh i'm going to now look
at, let's see. Okay, Mr. Montanis, I'm now going to show you the
site plan that was submitted by the applicants for the project that we're here for.
Let me make it bigger so you can see what it actually says, in total.
Have you seen this plan before, this drawing?
I have not.
I'm going to expand this area here called landscape, which indicates a landscape buffer.
And it says that landscape buffer separating drive approved in 2019 and 2021 by the streets department.
So I'm going to ask you a couple of questions about that.
Did the streets department, in fact, issue any approvals for a landscape buffer in this area here?
I would have to see what's on the record and when that got submitted to the streets department.
And if there's a stamp by the streets department.
there is no stamp on this on this drawing uh from the streets department or from any uh department
uh is our landscape buffers something that your department actually issues approvals for
the streets department does not have jurisdiction within the property
streets department maintains their right of way and has jurisdiction in the right of way
OK, so when it says that the streets department approved this interior landscape buffer, your testimony is that's not that's not true.
The streets department does not have jurisdiction within the property.
OK, and would you also agree that the streets department doesn't have jurisdiction to approve a landscape buffer if it would nullify or or violate a zoning proviso issued by the zoning board?
The streets department cannot override the CBA.
I wanted to turn your attention to an earlier hearing that you testified to concerning this location, but not specifically this project.
at um at an earlier hearing you testified about the streets department's decision
to revoke the authorization of the original design for these parking spaces and curb cuts
there was over 200 feet as you recall of saw of of continuous curb cuts and your department uh
revoked your prior approval of that can you describe the circumstances that led your department
to revoke the earlier approval of those curb cuts?
I believe we were notified of the ruling by the zoning board
that they were not allowed to have those curb cuts.
I would have to check what's on the record that we received.
Okay, so you don't actually, as you're sitting here today,
you're not really recalling the circumstances of this?
I would have to look on the record to see what we received,
but I do recall that we were notified that they were revoked by the CBA.
Okay, I guess we will go on. I'm going to go back to the site plan here.
Mr. Montana, do you recall that there is a curb cut on Tubble -Hawkins Street that provides access to the property?
According to his plan, there's an existing curb cut. So, yes, I'm assuming there's a curb cut there. It's been a while since I visited the site.
Okay. Do you agree that the curb cut is legal and that it conforms to the code and street department regulations?
If we approve the curve cut, then it's a legal curve cut, yes.
If we approve the curve cut, then it's a legal curve cut, yes.
Well, I showed you before the streets department reviews of the plans that were submitted to the right -of -way unit, and there was no indication that this curve cut was anything but legal and proper.
Yes, the plans you showed me before had a stamp approval from the streets department, which then makes it legal and proper.
Okay. Do you agree that the Philadelphia Code and your department's regulations would allow the property owner to expand the width of this curb cut if the property owner wanted to do such a thing?
Curve cuts over 24 feet require an ordinance under 24 feet or within the streets department regulations, unless otherwise shows that we need to expand it for emergency vehicles.
okay so if this curb cut was was less than 24 feet it could be expanded by right to 24 feet
and beyond that would require more authorization from your department correct okay um are you aware
of the actual size of this curb cut the plan has no dimensions and i didn't measure it on the street
Okay. So I will move on from that.
Is there, let's go back to the plans that were recently approved by the streets department.
All right, these don't appear to include the termination of the driveway onto Tupperhawken.
All right, I'll go back to this one.
I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.
have denied the permit or the approval
back in 2022. Is that correct? The streets department looks
at our projects when it comes to pedestrian movements,
driveway movements, vehicle movements, deliveries, things like that to make
us safe per our complete streets guidance and our vision zero guidance.
do you recall, Mr. Montanez, the specific request by
streets department that certain landscape buffers be added in between some of these parking spaces
so that instead of there being one continuous 181 foot curb cut that it was broken up by the
landscape buffers? I do not recall. I would talk to my staff and see their notes to see that.
Okay. And then same question just about the relocation of the driveway. Do you recall
while the driveway being relocated so that it was a straight entrance rather than curved, you know, to wrap around the former nursing home extension?
I do recall that the streets department asked them to line up the driveway to make facilitate the movement of emergency vehicles a lot easier.
And that was done, to your knowledge?
And that was done, to my knowledge.
Okay. I have no further questions.
Do you have any follow -up?
No, I don't.
Ms. Montanez, thank you.
And Counsel White, thank you.
Thank you.
May I be excused?
Thank you.
You most certainly can.
Thank you.
Have a good day, everyone.
Steve, are you going to call both people for your next witness or witnesses?
I was going to call Mr. Cromey first, and then I was going to call Ms.
is um okay yeah benjamin cromey please
they have been promoted to panelists
good morning mr cromey could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
Mr. Cromie?
Yes, can you hear me?
I can.
Yes, Benjamin Cromie?
Can we have one video with Mr. Manchin?
Yes, I would like him to be on video as well.
Yes, Benjamin Cromie?
Good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell for the course stenography?
Yes, sir. B -E -N -J -A -M -I -N -C -R -O -M -I -E, Benjamin Cromey.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Pleasure to see you, Mr. Masters.
Okay. I'm going to show your resume first.
All right, Mr. Crumey, can you tell the board where you are employed at this time and what your position and responsibilities are?
Yes, I'm a Managing Associate at CH Planning Limited. We are a multidisciplinary planning firm where I work on a number of projects, including transportation, municipal planning, zoning, sustainability, and bike and ped safety.
Can you share what your educational background is that qualifies you to do that work?
I have a master's degree in city planning from the University of Pennsylvania, and I am certified by the American Institute of Certified Planners.
Have you ever been employed or retained by the city of Philadelphia to engage in any planning projects concerning the city?
Yes, I have.
I've worked occasionally indirectly.
When I was at the Bicycle Coalition, we were partners with the Mayor's Office of Transportation Utilities
to evaluate transportation safety issues specifically and generally on projects throughout the city.
And I've worked on a number of other, often in civic engagement, particularly through the Vision Zero program, on coordinating with neighborhood groups on the types of safety interventions and infrastructure they would like to see in their neighborhoods.
Are you also on any teams or retained to assist the city in specifically street -related planning on the parkway?
Yes, I'm part of the team that was selected, the international team that was selected for the Benjamin Franklin Parkway, often in civic engagement, describing the project to folks.
And that project has a major safety element and pedestrian orientation element to it. That's going to be very exciting.
Have you worked specifically in terms of evaluations of using the City of Philadelphia's Vision Zero and Complete Streets policies and protocols?
Yes, I have. I've been working with that system. As I said, the civic engagement element is a favorite part of the work that I do in going into communities and working with people to understand the issues, the safety concerns, issues around speeding in particular, and ways to reduce speeding.
We would like to certify Mr. Cromey as an expert witness for today's clearing.
mr phillips you have any comments uh my first this is a question is uh for mr masters what
uh specifically uh is the proposal to accept him as an expert witness and what are we talking
city planning are we talking traffic what exactly is the scope of his proposed expert testimony
his scope of his expert testimony was shared with you mr phillips in his report
He is going to be testifying as a city planner to the issues concerning your your your client's project and whether or not it is it it it meets the criteria in the zoning code for for approval.
So then we're talking planning, not traffic.
it includes it includes impact on uh on traffic in in his in his uh expert opinion all right uh
in in his in his uh expert opinion all right i would object i don't believe that uh
mr cromey has been has been uh sufficient experience nor has any been uh detailed uh
in terms of traffic studies traffic engineering or traffic background i have no objection
to mr cromey's uh credentials in terms of city planning no so mr masters i'm going to
accept him as an expert witness, and Mr. Phillips, you'll have the ample opportunity to cross -examine
him. Okay. Thank you. All right, Mr. Cromey, we're going to go through your report that's
dated November 9th of this year. Can you first tell us, describe how you went about
designing the evaluation of this project
when we retained you for this opinion?
Yes, I reviewed the background materials,
including the previous exhibits
from other court appearances and testimonies.
I visited the site with my colleague,
Nicole Finchian Sheehan,
And I reviewed the plans for the current plan and the current state of the development, and I conducted online research, including a Google Earth view, which shows what the property looked like before development, as well as reading substantial materials on the zoning code and the zoning guide, as well as complete streets and the city's bicycle pedestrian plan.
and Complete Streets and Vision Zero documents and reporting as well.
Did you also review transcripts of prior hearings in this case,
and specifically the testimony and the report of Mr. David Horner?
Yes, sir.
In your background and context section,
Would you would you share with the board your your belief of what the proviso is that governs the the this property in terms of the prior variance?
Yes, the high the the indented line here, no parking on Pastorius Street, parking curb cut on Tulpa Hocken only, no additional curb cuts on Pastorius.
That is the original proviso, which I support.
So in this proposal of 15 parking spaces along Pastoria Street, in your opinion, does that proposal, how does that proposal square with the proviso that you just stated?
Well, rather than zero curb cuts, it goes to, well, 16 curb cuts with 15 parking spaces and an opening for egress ingress. So, yeah, it's contrary.
um your sex the next section of your report um concerns the city of philadelphia's pedestrian
safety and accessibility policies can you review that for the board and explain why that was
important to your evaluation of this project yes uh and rather concisely there's a there's a good
line here from the a good uh indented uh section from the uh vision zero annual report that came
out earlier this year. Essentially, the line that, you know, how much loss of life should we
accept? And, you know, in modern life, people just tend to shrug and say, you know, car accidents
happen. But it is, in fact, the city's policy and many other municipalities throughout the country
that, you know, traffic crashes that result in injury and death are unacceptable. And so the
The city is investing hundreds of millions of dollars and integrating, as we heard earlier, Vision Zero policies into, you know, throughout the policies and budgets of the streets department and other departments to make the city safer.
In part through civic engagement projects like the one I mentioned earlier that we've been involved in and the investment in infrastructure.
And the recent report, the same report, which I recommend for everyone to read, is that, in fact, this is a very successful program.
And we've seen a significant decline in injuries related to traffic.
In in injuries related to traffic speeding and crashes as a result of these programs in the areas where these investments have been put in.
So it's doing a lot of good and having a high standard for pedestrian safety is, I think, essential for quality of life and length of life in the city.
when you as we scroll down here um you after you are reviewing and and showing the this the
significant gains and um and positive impact of of the vision zero uh and complete streets policies
um then did you make specific uh references and and findings concerning um the this this block
at pastoria street and how it relates to these policies yes we see uh the the the bottom um
indented bullet at the bottom of the page now uh three speed cushions actually since my site visit
in september three speed cushions have come up on pastoria street indicating an awareness by the
streets department of a concern for speeding on pastoria street and that is a a good but not
in and of themselves sufficient uh measure for reducing harm on the on the street all right are
we looking now at photos of two of those cushions yes two of the speed cushions and there's one
uh as you get closer to green street as well okay but you just um testified that you said
it was good but not sufficient um yes you're saying that you're saying that the story's not
over with these speed cushions that they're that you still have concerns as to adding these parking
spaces to to this project um as in even even with these speed cushions yeah i mean the image to the
right it illustrates the crux of the issue is that you see that there are there are some sidewalks
and some places for people to walk. But it is widely, it is inconsistent across the block. And
to a large extent, you know, there are areas with average, you know, I would say to the right,
you know, acceptable, you know, historic sidewalks and to the left, sort of leftover
space that a person could walk on, but no easy curb cut there. It's a very high curb there.
But throughout the length of the block, it's inconsistent. There are grassy areas, there's wooded areas, there's fences and buildings that come up right up into the edge. So this block and having, you know, my colleague Nicole can testify to herself, but having walked it with her, does not offer a lot of safe, sufficient safe harbors for pedestrians.
So, as you see from the person walking their dog, people are pushed out into the street, and this is essentially a shared street with pedestrians.
So, any diversion of traffic onto this block would decrease safety for pedestrians.
When you call it a shared street with pedestrians, that's something that many people probably have never heard before.
Or is that actually how common is that in the city of Philadelphia to have to have what you are calling a shared street for pedestrians and and vehicles?
It's very uncommon. In fact, I was one of the surveyors for the the citywide sidewalk survey back in, I believe, 2010.
And I looked at almost every street in South Philadelphia. It's uncommon.
And usually it's just a result of, you know, a decline in infrastructure and deferred maintenance.
In this case, it looks like some of the sidewalks were never put in.
And, you know, you have some wilder areas or some wooded areas that come right up into the edge.
And some very old properties that have buildings, like I said, that come right up to the edge.
So a combination of reasons.
So it's not necessarily the preferred status for the road in the long term, but in the short term, the best remedy is to require all developers of the properties to put in five foot wide sidewalks and reduce all obstacles wherever possible and at least incrementally work towards a better street.
so this next section of your report uh is referring to the safe roots philly program
can you describe that for the board and explain why that's relevant to this project
well because safe roots is targeted towards schools and making roads uh safer for children
to walk as well safe roots to school and it's for walking and cycling because we want to encourage
And it's for walking and cycling because we want to encourage an active lifestyle in students.
active
And so it has four components, creating educational modules, training teachers, more involved program support with providing trained teachers and resources for the larger community.
And there are four schools within a half mile radius of this area.
And as indicated here, Lingelbach Elementary, Atonement Academy, a Settlement Music School branch, and a Waldorf School, Philadelphia.
And my discussion with neighbors is that they have seen, they know that children do use this as part of their walk to school, as well as commuters and seniors and people with mobility devices.
All right, we're going to go to the next section of the report. This deals with pedestrian safety and accessibility concerns on both Pestorius and Topahawken Street.
Can you share with the board what your findings and conclusions were on this area?
Yes. So again, the major issue being that it is effectively a shared street.
And when you cut off use of the Tulpahawken or reduce the use of the Tulpahawken ingress, egress, you are pushing traffic around down Pastoria Street and increasing the volume of traffic.
And so, as I said, that's the first issue is that it's a shared street.
It is a narrow two -way street. And so, as I mentioned, people with individual mobility and stroller cannot walk down the street safely and comfortable.
I might add, even though I am personally, professionally pro speed cushions, and they do present improved safety on the street, because pedestrians and people with mobility devices are pushed out into the street, they constitute another barrier as well for folks who, at least might have trouble seeing, and they do, you know, narrow the walkway.
um you're saying that's an aside you're saying that that while speed cushions are have have a
positive impact on slowing cars they also present a hazard to some pedestrians yeah a minor hazard
in aggregate they're a positive i think we would all could agree on that but in this particular
instance where there isn't a place safe place to walk that they're they're another issue uh for
for some pedestrians to be concerned with. So my next point that I would like to make is that the
parking spaces are contrary to city policy as they, as I said, eliminate sidewalk access or
significantly reduce sidewalk. There is a sidewalk there, but they reduce and compromise sidewalk
access, uh, with the curb cut and with multiple turning, uh, uh, turning motions. Um, and it's
visually disruptive. There is an aesthetic effort, um, issue here, I should say, uh, which is not,
uh, not without import in and of itself. Uh, and it does emphasize cars over people
and residential character when you have a line of cars like that uh on a on a quiet street
did you notice in the 2017 transcript of the of the zoning board members when they were discussing
this that they um did you recall what they said about the the um the aesthetics of of what that
would look like uh i i don't recall that individual uh personally uh but i uh i don't recall that
directly now okay um can you can you share with us um these describe these photos and where you
took them and and why they were significant to put into your report yeah i'm not sure i actually
don't believe that that is the same dog walker on the left and uh this was on our site visit and uh
yeah that's two dogs and then uh to the right you see a family with a stroller it's not as easy to
see the stroller i didn't want to be intrusive but they are walking stroll and you see the
conditions of the sidewalk here uh as well uh further down the street this is closer to wayne
avenue um and yeah oh no all right my computer was acting up um yeah
so this is you're saying this is this is down towards wayne avenue yes okay
and you see yeah you see how the the the the wooded areas or or treat trees uh
you know crotch upon any kind of sidewalk or walking area right
you know crouch upon any kind of sidewalk or walking area right
and here we see that you do see the subject property here on the left hand
uh image with uh the curb cuts here and the uh and the the the
of removing or moving one of those a few feet to the right isn't as uh egregious uh you know is not
asking a lot of the developer i think that in and of itself it's a narrow street and not quite five
feet. Sorry, narrow sidewalk. Yes. Okay. And then your last points in this section?
Yeah. As I mentioned earlier, the compound of the circulation impacts and multiple turning
movements um by putting in the uh the landscaping buffer that we discussed earlier uh they you are
cutting off uh through traffic through the site which may or may not be a good thing but also you
are keeping most the virtually all uh of the uh residents from using the topo hawkins street
area and you're pushing um in excess of uh potentially if my count's mistaken i believe
it's 30 vehicles potentially uh on to um on to topo hawkins street that many parking spaces at
least are are counted and when you said toboggan did you mean pastoria i meant pastoria street
yes so you're pushing the traffic onto that street so um so you know despite the issues
that are there already which work currently because of the low level of you know low degree
of uh vehicles a number of vehicles um you know pushing traffic is unsafe for pedestrian pushing
traffic on a posterior street is unsafe for pedestrians and of course uh these all these
issues are amplified when you consider the needs of a person uh with disabilities um and uh
so this is this section going to be addressed by um by nicole um she can touch that touch on
that more directly as she is has experience um working on uh um okay do you want to just touch
on the the basic findings and conclusions here and then we'll hear more yeah absolutely so for
all the reasons stated stated above um we support the original uh per visa um you know uh
uh which is uh but we do uh suggest make the suggestion of adding the following language if
i could just state that uh so i'll uh if you could go up a little bit i believe uh we were just on
that part no no no i'm sorry yes yeah let's go down let's go down and mention that um so no
parking within the required yard on pastoria street uh no vehicle uh no vehicular ingress
or egress from pastoria street is it is it existing curb cut uh to be removed or physical
barrier erected uh vehicular ingress egress from tulpa hawken street and potentially green street
only and sidewalks of five feet minimum with provided along pastoria street frontage where
feasible where obstructions exist provide sidewalks at the maximum where it's possible
all right we did skip a couple of sections that i wanted you to go through so um there was a um we
had in the last hearing we had testimony from susan wright about a pedestrian count and i believe
that you received those that data and that you you incorporated that data into your report so
i i wondered if you could if you could share with the board what the significance of that data was
and how, and then, so we'll start with that.
I don't really dispute the content in terms of the description of the street or the number
of vehicles that pass by, but I would say that that study did not even acknowledge the
presence of pedestrians or have any report or acknowledgement of the absence of safety
and consistent pedestrian accommodations on the block.
I'm sorry, are you referring now to David Horner's report?
Yes, I am.
I'm referring specifically to David Horner's report.
So I would say that that is a significant oversight.
And when referencing the safety of a local street,
you really do need to be concerned about the people who are out and about.
Well, in your view, is the – and Mr. Horner, as we all know,
He conceded in his testimony that he did not take into account any pedestrian issues on the street. Is the absence of pedestrians in his factoring, in his safety analysis, how would you describe the absence of the pedestrian aspect in his study as to the validity of the study?
conceded in his testimony
that he did not take into account
It's a significant oversight. And I would say that to declare the street safe, simply because it's got a wide enough roadway for two -way traffic, among other issues he mentioned, is significantly overstated.
You can question that significantly for the reasons I've already mentioned.
Okay. Have you also looked at the actual curb cut that is on Topolhockin that provides the access to the property from Topolhockin?
and um we know that mr horner characterized the width of that curb cut as 12 feet but have you
seen and evaluated do you have a different number that you believe that the that the curb cut on
on tubal hawken is actually is actually a different width i believe it's a little bit
I'll show you something here.
Oh, yeah.
I believe I'm reviewing my own notes.
So 18 feet.
is the measurement that I have.
Yeah, I think this is a measurement,
this is a video that you reviewed previously.
Yes, yes, you're correct.
And this shows the width of that curb cut.
Yes, it does.
Okay. There is, am I correct that there is some kind of a posts that are in fact 12 feet wide that are inside the curb cut area of the property? Is that your recollection?
Yes. There's a gate. There's a gate there.
but the code code itself is quite a bit larger your test yes okay
the point i'd like to make about that is that they characterize that uh as an unsafe um place to
as egress in the in the horner report right and i i feel like that's wildly overstated i feel like
it's it's you know there's unsafe because there's parking on either side of the street i mean we're
describing the vast majority of the city that there's parking on two sides you know on two
sides of a of an egress um does it doesn't limit visibility uh significantly no not not in any not
any more than any other street on the block and i would say that that is a safe uh place to uh for
ingress and egress although i do believe by right they could expand it to 25 feet uh as mr uh
martinez said yeah right so uh so they have one room to work with um the last thing i wanted to
ask you was about mr montanis's um testimony uh as you know the streets department approved those
the additional curb cuts and the 15 parking spaces um and he claimed in his testimony that they
that they reviewed all of the appropriate uh policies and regulations including vision zero
and and uh and complete streets uh what is your what is your opinion uh as to as to whether that's
actually true uh i feel like they there's nothing documents exactly what they looked like what they
looked at, I would say that it is a, their review would be kind of like how we used to see it a few
years ago while we were still trying to convince people to adopt a Vision Zero standard. It's just
vision zero standard it's just lower standards you know like i said the the obstruction
lower standards, you know, like I said, the abstract.
of the telephone pole the width of the sidewalk and of course all the more importantly all the
curb cuts along that street it's just you know maybe in terms of from narrow engineering
perspectives it meets their criteria for vehicular safety but in terms of vision zero
standards, I feel it falls far short. I mean, as far as you know, Mr. Cromey, is there a way
for the streets department to have evaluated Vision Zero and complete streets without doing
what you and your colleague did, walking that road, looking at pedestrian and traffic counts
and evaluating the full context of what's happening on that street? Neighborhood context
is essential, and looking at the block is essential to understanding whether a particular
development or intervention is going to increase or reduce safety.
And as far as you can tell in your experience with the streets department, not just in this
case, but it appears that you have experience with the streets department on other projects.
Is that true?
I do. And I generally I find the streets department has very, very good high standards and does take into account vision zero safety considerations, but it seems like they fell a little short on this one.
so your your opinion if you wanted to state your opinion to the to the board as to
uh whether how valid or or how or how well um done the streets department review was i think
that would be helpful to the board they could know what it is you feel was was done correctly
and if you have anything that was not done correctly i would say i'm just going to restate
my objection for the record as to um mr cromey testifying as to what streets department did
correctly or incorrectly um it's just for the record i understand the board's position that
they're hearing mr cromey's testimony we're going to list but we will evaluate what he says okay
i would say that the this particular uh evaluation on this site does not take into account
the neighborhood context where this is an effectively a shared street with a lot of
pedestrian users. And so the result of their decision, which increases the number of curb
cuts significantly, is an unsafe recommendation for an unsafe practice. Okay. Finally, I wanted to
look at the interior of the property for a moment.
And so there is a part of your report where you address whether there is space in the interior of the property to place these 15 parking spaces if they're not going to be where it's indicated here, where it's proposed along Castoria Street.
So we're we're in and this is this is what, like a two acre parcel, right?
Yeah. So where do you see sufficient area to add 15 parking spaces into this property?
Well, you know, we all appreciate landscaped areas for their inherent value, but I would say in this instance, you know, there's a large area, the landscape area to the left and north of the Maxwell Mansion, and a little bit closer to the Tulpa Hawkins Street entrance.
is space that can be used with minimum impact
and use that in a way to create a significant buffer
for the historic mansion.
Still have plenty of space left over
and not have the Pastoria Street neighbors
bear the brunt of that parking placement decision.
So your suggestion is that the area
where my cursor is now,
which is close to top of hawkins street um to the uh basically a way from uh towards wayne
avenue um from the from the maximal mansion um this area is looks looks promising to you
yeah they're in the area directly above that i'm saying north but i know it's not north on this
man okay and did you when you evaluated that um did you did you make any kind of
make any kind of evaluation that this area would be actually big enough to accommodate 15 parking
evaluation that this area would be actually big enough to
spaces? Yeah, I think you could see this with the naked eye, but I, in this instance, used a Google
Earth calculate 14 ,000 square feet that still left a 20 -foot buffer to the mansion, which I know was
a priority for the site developers, to be considerate to those neighbors.
okay um i have no further questions at this point mr phillips thank you uh good morning
mr cromey good morning uh are you a uh professional engineer i am not okay uh are you a traffic
operations engineer i am not are you a member of the institute of transportation engineers
no i'm not okay have you ever been recognized as a traffic engineering expert
uh traffic engineer and expert no not both okay and isn't it accurate that ch planning does not
provide traffic uh engineering uh reports we have done in the past and we may in the future but uh
It's not a common part of our practice currently.
And wouldn't it be fair to say that it would be most appropriate for traffic engineers to provide traffic engineering reports?
I'm going to object to that. That's both calls for speculation and it's also argumentative.
I'm going to allow that testimony and that question, please.
Sure. I would not agree with that statement. I think that you cannot have an accurate safety analysis without consideration of the neighborhood context, discussion with the local neighbors, and other larger zoning and land use considerations that planners provide and that engineers, traffic engineers, have no expertise in.
That was not my question.
My question was, as it relates to traffic safety and traffic plans, wouldn't it be more
appropriate for traffic engineers to provide that sort of a report?
Traffic engineers should be involved on a traffic study that looks exclusively at traffic
issues without any broader context.
Sure, that would be a small piece of the discussion that would be of some value.
okay and and that traffic engineers also uh are concerned with traffic safety isn't that correct
yes okay increasingly less so uh in previous generations but they're getting better at it
um and you walked this property that was your testimony right yes okay i'm just going to share
my screen briefly okay mr chromey can you see my screen it's not it's up now yeah i see it now
okay uh and do you recognize uh the area i am you know for the record we'll note that this is a 2020
view but generally familiar with the area that it's depicted yes okay and is this the area we've
been talking about with west pastoria street and west topahokken street yes okay and you are uh
aware that there are a number of curb cuts uh along pastoria street unrelated to 224 topahokken
right correct wallingford apartment has a curb cut and there are further curb cuts as you
um you know head uh you know head west on pastories isn't that right correct okay
just kind of flip to 2022 and actually and you also see how uh previously the
curb cut along pastoria uh kind of curved around the wing of the building right yes okay
would you agree that uh the photo i just showed or what is on your screen now from 2022 is an
accurate depiction of how the property looks now yes okay um along where my cursor is isn't it
Is it true and correct that sidewalks were installed along 224 West Pastorious's frontage?
Yes. And that sidewalk does not continue as you head down the street, though, correct?
And that sidewalk did not...
It's true.
And those are some of the photos you showed where there is no sidewalk along along the street, right?
Correct.
Okay. Also, do you see how the curb cut no longer curves and provides straight means of ingress and egress, correct?
I do. Correct.
Do you see any landscape buffer on this plan?
um it's top down so it's not easy to see but it looks like it's not the landscape buffer in
question separating the parking area does not appear to have been installed yet okay and you
said that you did review the transcripts from prior hearings correct yes and do you recall
mr bielby saying that no landscape buffer had been installed yes i'm aware i'm aware of that yes
okay uh going back to your uh report i just want to go through a few a few specific comments you
made uh you had spoken uh to the installation of the speed cushions uh september 2023 correct
yes and uh you would agree that speed cushion uh can make a street safer right
uh they contribute they're they're part of the part of the puzzle yeah okay and you said that
it indicates uh department of streets is aware of excessive driving speeds on pastoria street
isn't that correct that's what you said i i said that that the um the speed cushions are indications
of that yeah did you speak to anyone from streets department about the speed cushions i did not
uh so then you're actually not aware of uh how or why the speed cushion were installed
uh no i i'm not aware of any other reason than to reduce speed okay i know you're aware that
uh the owner of topahawken uh supported and encouraged the installation of speed bumps
along west pastoria i was gonna object that it's asked and answered he doesn't have any personal
knowledge and so there's no point to ask him for things that he doesn't know well he can tell me
mr phillips i believe he said before that he doesn't he's not aware of it
and i'm also questioning that that's that that mr phillips you're introducing evidence that's
not in the record, and therefore there's no foundation for your statement, which is an
assertion that your client has done something salutary, which I'm sure he does salutary
things in his life, but it's not proper to enter into evidence something that has no
foundation.
Well, the foundation is based on the record of Mr. BLB's testimony regarding the speed
bumps and Mr. Horner's testimony regarding the speed bumps.
And Mr. Cromey said that he reviewed the prior transcripts, so therefore the question is
related to Mr. B .O .B.'s testimony.
Okay, so why don't we move forward, Mr. B .O .B.
You also noted in your report that you said that due to the narrowness of the street,
an individual with a mobility device or pushing a stroller cannot walk down the street safely
and comfortably with excessive or speeding traffic.
Isn't that correct?
Correct.
Is it customary to assume within reports that individuals are breaking the law?
Is it customary to assume? Well, I have to say with respect to speeding and speed cushions, the purpose of a speed cushion is often to reduce the speed of a vehicle to the speed limit.
So it is the assumption that there is speeding there.
And at the point of the speed cushion, they are coming down to the speed limit and then
likely speeding up, which is why we need three of them here.
But my question wasn't related to the speed cushions.
You had stated in your report that due to the narrowness of the street, an individual
with a mobility device or pushing a stroller cannot walk down the street safely and comfortably
with excessive or speeding traffic.
Correct.
I stand by that.
So without excessive or speeding traffic, can individuals with mobility devices or pushing a stroller walk down the street safely and comfortably?
Actually, no, not comfortably because they're still on the street and it's still subpar and below the standards that we look for.
it's still subpar and below the standards uh that we look for uh when we want somebody to have a
you know uh sidewalk accommodations okay but mr bb did install sidewalks
he did not quite five sidewalks but sidewalks
you aware of any graphic uh fatalities along west pastory street in the past 15 years i'm not
Are you aware of any traffic accidents on West Pastoria Street in the past 15 years?
And with respect to the 15 parking spaces, which is specifically why we're here,
we're seeking approval of these 15 parking spaces.
uh did you uh review in mr horner's uh report where he recommended uh that individual back in
to the parking spaces i did see that you think that would be a uh a prudent idea
i don't think it's sufficient to make up for the uh the curb cuts uh is it prudent for people to
back into their spaces? Yes. Is it easily enforced? Not so much. And you're aware that
motor vehicles are required over the past several years to be equipped with rear view cameras?
Yes. Okay. And so isn't it fair to say that a prudent, average, ordinary driver who is getting
into their vehicle would check their surroundings before backing out or pulling out of a spot yes
okay um and if individuals uh uh actually let me strike that you reviewed
and walked around uh the neighborhood correct correct okay uh and and did you observe uh
uh the availability of on -street parking uh i i did not focus on that no
wouldn't you agree there is on -street parking along tulba hawkins street yes
it is but did you uh review and uh to ascertain whether there's adequate on -street parking or
inadequate on -street parking to support the demands of the neighborhood i did not
And you would agree that it is of a public benefit that individuals have places to park their vehicle?
um not without qualifications i think uh i think we have uh we encourage too much
parking in the city quite frankly but um uh i i take i take what you're saying in the context
that it is a benefit to the property owner and to the tenants to have parking spaces on site
Okay. And I know that your report had focused on school children or disabled individuals. If there were disabled individuals who reside at 224 West Topahawken, wouldn't it be advantageous and beneficial for them to have parking closer to their home and their apartment?
I'm going to object that that calls for speculation and evidence that there's no foundation. In fact, there are no units that are certified as ADA compliant, and there is no testimony in the record to say that there is any disabled people who currently live at the property, so it just calls for speculation.
Mr. Masters, I'm going to allow the question if Mr. Cromey can answer.
Could you repeat the question, please?
Would you agree that it would be advantageous for any disabled individuals living or residing in 224 West Top of Hawkins to have parking closer to their apartment as opposed to farther away?
It would be advantageous for that individual, assuming that, you know, they had other accommodations as well.
Okay, just review, see if I have anything further.
I believe my remaining questions can be directed towards, can I just ask, just as a matter
of process, it will be Ms. Fincham -Sheehan who's testifying next, Steve?
I believe my remaining questions can be addressed by Ms. Fincham -Sheehan.
I have no further questions for Mr. Cromie.
Okay, sure. Just one really brief one. So, Ben, you testified that in Cross that there are sidewalks that were installed by the property owner at this location. Can you share with the board how big, how wide those sidewalks are and whether they actually comply with the minimum size that the city requires for sidewalks?
Well, the Complete Streets recommendation is five feet, and it is short of five feet, although I can't tell you a precise measurement. The one image that we looked at earlier before shows the service pole, the telephone pole in the middle of the sidewalk, which is a complete obstacle.
And that's on Mr. Ability's property, that pole exists?
Correct.
So, is your testimony that, do these sidewalks comply with the Complete Streets ordinance, as far as you can tell?
As far as I can tell, they do not.
All right, I'd like to call my next witness, Nicole.
So, Steve, not to put any pressure on you, I'm going to mention that I think in Hillary's communication with both of you, we talked about, I guess, 90 minutes.
Yes, I think, listen to me, and I think we've decided to stretch it to two hours.
So 12 o 'clock is our dead break time, and I would appreciate your next witness tries to concentrate on things that Mr. Cromey has not covered.
Yes, she is. She's focusing on the ADA aspects.
Please bring her one.
And this is Hillary. I just wanted to, Mr. Phillips, you didn't have any recross. Is that correct?
I had no recross. Thank you for asking that.
Okay. Thank you.
All right. And Mr. Chair, I want to just appreciate the board for extending the time on this.
We very much appreciate your commitment to letting this hearing have the time it needs.
We want to have this done today and then move on to the next stage of it, okay?
All right.
So I'd like to call Nicole Fincham -Sheehan.
They have been promoted to panelists.
Can we also put their video on?
Good afternoon.
Can you hear me?
We can.
Could you put your video on, too?
here you go good morning good morning good morning could you state your name and spell
please for the court stenographer it's nicole fincham sheehan nicole n -i -c -o -l -e
Fincham, F as in Frank
I -N -C -H -A -M
hyphen Sheehan
S -H -E -H -A -N
like Nancy.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
Please proceed.
Alright, thank you. I'm going to show my screen.
Good morning, Nicole. We're going to just go through your qualifications and background first to present you with your expertise. Can you share with the board where you're currently employed and what your scope of responsibilities are?
I'm currently employed at CH Planning Limited as a senior managing associate. While at CH Planning, I oversee ADA compliance, ADA sensitivity training, diversity, equity, inclusion, transit planning, and transit development.
And what is your educational background?
I possess two bachelor's degrees in health administration, public policy, and sociology with a concentration on health disparities in epidemiology.
What type of training and education do you have concerning ADA and disability issues?
What type of training and education do you have concerning...
I've been certified through the Easter Seals in various ADA regulations.
And I've been working in this industry for over 20 years providing ADA compliance and training.
Do you personally have any disabilities?
I'm currently considered to be legally blind.
and um how does that how are you what kind of accommodations are you do you require in order to
to do the the work that you do uh it depends upon the environment that i am i do use a long white
cane when traveling and navigating both indoors and outdoors when it comes to technology i use
adaptive software, both on the computer as well as my phone. And I use public transportation
and walk a lot of places, my feet or my car. Okay. I'm just going to go through a couple of
your, before you were at CH Planning, you worked in various other employers. You were a disability
accessibility specialist in Florida? Yes. I worked for Palm Trend as that position. And
one of the things I was tasked with was making the entire fixed route, which are the big city
buses, ADA compliant, as well as the bus stops. Okay. And then you also had a position in
Baltimore? Yes. I worked in Baltimore for the city council president's office, the mayor's
office and state delegate overseeing ADA issues and compliance, making sure that all city buildings
were ADA compliant and brought up to standards since the act was developed in July of 1990.
Did you also have a position or role with the Biden -Harris campaign?
Yes, I worked on the Biden -Harris campaign on health care pertaining to making sure that individuals with disabilities had equal and equitable access to being able to obtain adequate health care as well as transportation.
Have you ever testified in court or before any administrative agencies around disability and ADA issues?
Could you share with the board what your experience is with that testimony?
I've testified in several legislative hearings when it comes to ADA compliance, especially pertaining to higher education and web accessibility for individuals who are disabled, but especially blind or visually impaired, as many things are made to be ADA compliant.
But the blind community is unfortunately the forgotten community.
I've also testified as a witness for custody cases when one parent is sighted, one parent is blind, stating that the individual is disabled just because they're blind.
It doesn't mean that they cannot care for a child. And I helped to get legislation passed in the state of Maryland for that as well.
WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE BOARD CERTIFY MS. FINCHIN AS THE AS A EXPERT IN ADA COMPLIANCE AND ADA ISSUES.
OPPOSING COUNCIL, ANY COMMENTS?
NO OBJECTION.
OKAY, FINE.
THANK YOU, STEVE.
All right. Thank you. All right. We're going to go to the report that you wrote in conjunction with Mr. Cromey. And I think we're going to be focusing on the safety and accessibility concerns.
But first, Nicole, can you can you share with the board whether whether what kind of a in -person visit you had to the property and and describe what your experience was as you were as you were walking along Pastore Street and in the neighborhood?
So I performed an on -site visit to the property with Mr. Cromey and him and I walked the property several different times, different angles, just for me to get a full sense of how the property was created and the formation of the property and how individuals navigate the community, both if they are walking as well as using vehicles.
Were you there on multiple occasions?
Were you there on multiple occasions?
And did you, as you were walking on Pastoria Street, did you notice any issues that concerned you in your travels?
Yes, Pastoria Street concerned me greatly because of the lack of sidewalks where they break off.
You have a sidewalk and then it will break off.
and then you have another sidewalk. In addition, there was a lot of landscaping that came over
certain portions of the sidewalk. So even if I could have walked on the sidewalk, I wasn't able
to due to the landscaping covering the walkable path. Then getting off of the curb where the
sidewalk ended, there was no curb cut or ramp in order for me to step down. I had to step off of
the curb. So for myself, that would be fine. But for someone who is using a wheelchair or walker
or other mobility device, they would not be able to do that. That would be hazardous to them.
And then on the one side of the street, there are a lot of woods and grass. So it's hard to
even get in that area without getting stuck, especially if you're using a mobility device.
Did you have any encounters with vehicles during the time that you were walking in on Pastoria
Street? Yes, I did. There was traffic. The last time I was there was prior to them adding the
speed cushion. So they were not there when I was there. But there was traffic that came past me.
What concerned me deeply was the hybrid vehicles. Because I am blind or visually impaired,
scared I cannot hear those vehicles and especially if they're approaching me from behind so I have
no idea that I need to get out of the way so you can't see them and you can't hear them because
they're electric vehicles and they don't make a lot of noise that's what you're saying yes sir
okay um did in fact one of those vehicles come upon you yes sir um can you tell the board what
that was like? So the vehicle came up behind me. Ben was with me, so he didn't hear it at first.
And, you know, when we realized that it was there, we kind of tried to move over. Luckily for us,
we were walking, so we were able to move to the side. But if we would have been in a wheelchair,
the wheelchair and that vehicle would not have fit side by side together on that street because
it is so narrow. So the individual in the mobility device essentially would have nowhere to go.
Did you also notice other pedestrians while you were there with strollers or other kinds of
mobility impaired people? Yes. As previously discussed by my colleague, there was someone
walking their dogs. There was someone that was, you know, using the stroller walking through the
neighborhood um because it was a beautiful day and that's what you know we do on a beautiful day
um and so it was you know it was very concerning to me um there's a gentleman that lives in the
community that has an oxygen tank that he kind of pulls on a kind of like a little cart um
and it's too heavy for him he's an elderly gentleman to lift up on the curb as the current
curbs are in the community for the sidewalk. And then again, you know, getting off the curb when
the sidewalk ends and having to walk in the street and navigate his cart with the car coming next to
him is a safety barrier. So how do you, in your approach to working on this project,
How do you evaluate the safety and the wisdom of adding 15 vehicles and parking spaces to Pastoria Street? And how do you evaluate that in terms of the ADA and other safety issues that you looked at?
So with adding the 15 parking spots, that was one of the things Mr. Cromwell and I discussed in the area that he had pointed out earlier.
The landscape area would be an area that's perfect for those parking spots.
In addition, it's not too far for someone to walk from their home to that that general parking area in order to get into their vehicles.
In addition, it would make the community, the street, Pastoria Street, safer for all residents.
those with disabilities, seniors, children, everyone who is accessing that street.
In your experience in these different jurisdictions that you've worked on with ADA,
are you aware of other streets that are shared pedestrian and vehicle streets?
Is that something that you've seen before or that you've encountered?
No, I have not encountered, nor have I seen that before.
No, I have not encountered, nor have I seen that before.
In your view, is this project, is this proposal for the 15 parking spaces, does it comply with the ADA?
In my opinion, no.
I would say it does not because it's an individual, it's going to be a hazard.
And if the individual, you know, again, has to unload a mobility device out of their car, they're going to have difficulties doing so with oncoming traffic.
Are you aware if any of the units that were built on this property are actually ADA compliant units and that if there are any disabled people who are living on the property at this moment?
To my knowledge, no, there are no ADA compliant specified units.
Again, there are individuals who live in the area who do have disabilities and use, like I said, the gentleman uses the oxygen tank and other mobility devices, but the units themselves are not ADA compliant.
From your knowledge of the ADA, are there specific guidelines for how close an accessible parking space should be for people who are qualified as disabled under the ADA?
Yes, it is.
What? I believe it's roughly within a 10 feet radius. I don't have the number in front of me and I apologize.
From but your understanding is at this moment, there are no there are no disabled units that are ADA compliant on the property.
That is correct. And in most areas, the community itself would be required to have ADA parking spots, but they don't have to be in correlation with the home. So if they have 25 parking spots, one of those parking spots has to be labeled as an ADA accessible parking spot. So for every 25, you have one. And for every 100 parking spots, you would have four. So one of those four would have to be labeled as an ADA van parking spot.
Okay, let me just look at, show you the part of the report that is concerning the ADA issues.
I don't know, are you able to see the screen at all or not really?
I am not.
Okay, all right, so let me just read it to you.
As the Philadelphia Complete Streets Design Handbook 2017 says, all modifications to the public right -of -way and applications of the design guidance in this handbook should consider accessibility for disabled Philadelphia residents, workers, and visitors.
All of the pedestrian safety issues mentioned above are compounded for people with disabilities. When you add an individual who uses a mobility device, is blind, visually impaired, or deaf, hearing impaired, the conditions on West Pastoral Street are unsafe and can lead to injury or even death.
Even something as simple as the quiet motor of a new hybrid or EV vehicle presents a significant danger to an impaired person when they cannot see or hear it approaching in time.
The most problematic issues with the proposal are lack of continuous five -foot -wide, unobstructed sidewalk, which forces people with mobility devices into the street, multiple curb cuts, multiple turning movements, the lack of vehicular access to the Topahawken Street curb cut for ingress and egress, increases traffic on Pastoria Street.
So were those your conclusions and findings that you added into the report?
Yes, sir.
Okay. And is there anything else that you want to share with the board as to why you believe that they should not grant this variance and have the parking places put inside the interior of the property?
I just think for the safety of all individuals, again, not just your individuals that have disabilities and your seniors, but for all individuals, Pistorius Street, you know, needs to be a safe haven.
And even adding the speed cushions, they were added because it's assumed, again, that people are speeding down the street.
So you're putting people's lives in danger by having them share a street with moving vehicles.
And someone who has a disability, you know, this could be death for them if they don't know that the vehicle is coming towards them and the vehicle is speeding.
So in my conclusion, I believe Pestoria Street should be pedestrian only and that the five parking spot or excuse me, 15 parking spots need to be moved over to the landscaping area to ensure a safe and equitable and accessible community for all who live and visit that area.
an equitable and accessible community for all who live and visit that area.
All right. I have no further questions at this point.
Mr. Phillips.
Thank you. And good morning, Ms. Vincent Sheehan.
I just have a few questions to go over with you.
First of all, you are not a professional engineer, correct?
Correct.
And you are not a transportation engineer, correct?
Correct.
And you're not a member of the Institute of Traffic Studies?
And you're not here testifying as a traffic engineering or transportation engineering expert, correct?
Correct.
You said that you went to the property.
And due to your vision impairment, does that affect your ability to...
Can you just explain for the board the extent of your vision impairment?
Because I don't want to ask questions about, you know, did you see this or that?
And, you know, you weren't able to view.
So I have a very rare eye condition.
I'm extremely photophobic or light sensitive.
So when I am in the sun, I wear sunglasses.
Upon visiting the community, it was actually a cloudy day.
So it was a pretty good day for me to be able to see.
And then I also have good night vision or evening and night when the sun is behind the clouds.
So essentially, I have most of my difficulties seeing outside when it's extremely sunny.
And then if there's snow with the sun reflecting off of the snow.
So it was a cloudy day when you visited and you were able to view the conditions at the property and on the street.
Yes, sir.
Is that fair?
OK, I'm going to share my screen briefly.
Now, when I share my screen, are you able to see what I'm pulling up?
Just give me one moment.
I am not, probably.
All right.
So then it's futile for me to share my screen and ask you questions, so I will just ask
based on your memory, I guess.
uh did you were you able to see the uh ada ramp leading to the 15 parking spaces
from the west side of the building over off the of the top and hawking street area
no uh towards the uh western edge of the uh of the property opposite the side where there's the
curb cut off of pastorius yes i did see that okay and so you saw the ada ramp that led down to these
parking spaces, right? Yes. Okay. And did you view the other, you know, three ADA ramps located on
the property? Yes. Okay. You claim that there are no ADA compliant accessible units in the building.
How did you reach that conclusion? With doing research, generally speaking, if there are ADA
units within a particular development, it has to be listed. Okay. And so you're not aware that
there are actually four ADA compliant units in the building? No. Okay. Now you said that you walked
down Pastorius and you saw other, yeah, and you had concerns due to the lack of sidewalks along
Pastorius, right? Correct. Okay. And you did note that there was a newly installed sidewalk in front
of 224 West Tulpahawken. Isn't that right? Yes. Okay. Did you walk down Tulpahawken? Yes.
And was there adequate sidewalks along Tulpahawken to walk east west? Yes.
Did you walk down West Walnut Lane? I believe so. Yes. Same question. Were there adequate
sidewalks to walk in an east or west direction along west walnut lane yes okay and both generally
get you to the same place they run parallel with pastoria street isn't that right yes okay um there
are numerous other curb cuts along west pastoria street correct yes okay i believe uh you know
Mr. Ramos and other individuals who had testified noted that they have curb cuts that provide for vehicular ingress and egress on Pastoria Street.
Is that right?
Now, you had just testified that Pastoria Street should be pedestrian only.
Is that correct?
In my opinion, yes.
so that in your opinion you would eliminate all of the uh curb cut along past aria street
along pastoria street if that is going to be used as a pedestrian area then yes yes okay and so then
if that is going to be used as a
you would uh seek to have all ingress and egress to the properties along either via
at Topahawkins or West Walnut Lane? Correct. Okay.
And did you participate or were you at all involved in the preparation of Ms. Templeton's report?
I was not involved in that report. I have read the report, but I was not a part of it
as I was not at the company at that time.
And were you,
at the time you walked it,
you said that the speed bumps
had not yet been installed?
Correct.
Do you think the speed bump improved the condition on West Astoria Street?
I would say no, because you're still left with the initial problem of not having adequate sidewalks.
And in certain areas, there are no sidewalks, correct?
Correct.
Would you agree that generally drivers should be aware of their surroundings?
They should be, yes.
and uh that the driver's looking in front of them and there is an individual walking in front of
them that generally the driver would see the individual they should yes okay
and did you see any or i know that you said there was a one uh electric vehicle that pulled up
behind you did that vehicle to your knowledge slow down as it approached you i i can't answer
that because again it was behind me so i don't know and again i couldn't hear it so i could not
specify to how fast it was going prior to coming up on me okay um but it didn't strike you right
Didn't strike Mr. Cromey?
And you're not aware of any vehicular accidents along West Pastoria Street in the past 15 years?
Not aware of any vehicular contact made with any pedestrians along Pastoria Street in the past 15 years?
how many individuals did you view what was the day you were there walking up and down past
street roughly um maybe six or so give or take i mean it was midday when i was there so
and it was middle of the week um so you know it was prime time that you know kids were in school
people where it worked, things of that nature.
And you didn't see a landscape buffer
on site, did you?
I do not recall.
I actually do not have any.
Oh, actually, I do have one further question.
You had stated that the addition of the 15 parking spaces would not comply with the ADA. Is that correct?
I did not say that. I said with the 15 parking spaces, if they were moved over in the landscape area that we had suggested, they would be in compliance.
I also specified that when you're having parking spots in a development for every 25 parking spots, you're required to have an ADA parking spot.
And for every 100 parking spots, one of those four ADA accessible parking spots needs to be for a van accessible parking spot, meaning that particular parking spot is a little wider than the traditional ADA parking spots.
And you reviewed the plans that accompanied this application?
And did the plan show and establish an ADA compliant parking spaces?
I will be honest, I do not recall.
Would you agree that reviewing plans to ensure that there are adequate and sufficient ADA
plans to ensure that there are adequate and sufficient ADA parking spaces is part of the
zoning code? Yes, it should be. And so then if there were not adequate ADA parking spaces,
that would have resulted in a refusal, correct? More than likely, but not necessarily.
Okay. Is it your position as you're sitting here today that the proposed plan
does not have the requisite number
of ADA -compliant parking spaces?
How many, and you base that,
even though you can't recall
how many ADA parking spaces are on the plan?
That's correct.
Okay, so then how do you form your opinion
if you don't recall what the plan shows?
Can you repeat the question?
I asked whether it is your opinion
that the plan as shown and applied to
does not contain the requisite number
of ADA parking spaces?
Again, I can't remember the amount that's on there,
so I can't say if it has the required amount or not.
Okay, so you just can't say one way or another.
Correct.
Whether it happened, okay.
um and um you had noted that the plan again your testimony was that the plan does not comply with
the ada i'm trying to get a sense of of of how you form that opinion and upon what is it based
it's it's not it's based upon that you know again you're looking at safety it's not
solely an ada issue it's a hazard issue you know we want to we don't want people to get killed and
you know for the vision zero program and the safe streets you know having sharing a walking space
with vehicles is is unsafe and it's a hazard not to mention for those who use mobility devices the
sidewalk that is currently on pastorius where there is not a curb cut someone cannot get up
on that sidewalk if a vehicle is coming and that is not that that's what i'm saying is not ada
compliant if i'm walking down the street and i have to get on the sidewalk because the sidewalk
has now appeared on pastoria street where i can step up on the sidewalk but i'm in a wheelchair
i cannot step up on that sidewalk therefore i'm required to still maintain walking in the street
and so that in itself it makes it not ada compliance because there's not equal access for all
specifically what aspect of the proposed plan does not comply with the americans with disabilities act
I'm going to object that it's asked an answer.
I'll ask it in a different way.
Can you cite to the provision or a section of the Americans with Disabilities Act that is violated by the addition of 15 parking spaces on site?
There is none with the addition of the spots in the location.
okay can you cite to this section of the americans with disabilities act that would be violated
no okay and uh it is true is it not that uh there are depressed areas in the curb
for vehicles to both enter and exit the 15 proposed parking spaces are there not
it is and wouldn't it be fair to say that any individual with a wheelchair or mobility device
would be able to also utilize those curb cuts to both get on the sidewalk
or get off the sidewalk as needed not necessarily because if there's a car parked there they're not
going to be able to get on the curb if there's a vehicle parked in that area
okay but isn't it fair to say that the vehicle cannot be so mr phillips just for mr phillips
just for point of information i guess eight questions ago you said you had one more question
and that let that opened it up we probably have to start moving the closure here understood
um there was just an an allegation made that didn't comply with the ada i was looking for
specific i think we got to the point where we needed to be with that okay um
let me just clean up that last question i asked again i was not speaking to uh
speaking to uh i should strike that the length and width of the proposed parking spaces
I'll extract that.
The...
comply with the philadelphia zoning code do they not yes okay and the sidewalk
that was uh constructed is not part of the parking space isn't that correct that's correct
okay so a vehicle that would be parked legally in the parking space would not block access
to the sidewalk is that correct if parked correctly correct okay i have no further questions
do you have any follow -up um really briefly so um nicole your um your testimony is both around
the ada and around more broad um safety issues would that be fair to say yes um in your view
does the ada cover every possible area that you wanted to cover or or are there some gaps in the
ada that you wish that there weren't no there are some gaps within the ada uh some gray areas
of the ada is a standard um of what should be done um but it doesn't require you know you can
go above and beyond those standards. It's more so a guideline and things are changing within the ADA
every day. And when you came up with your safety recommendations, were you factoring in that
vehicles are going to be driving down the length of Pastorius and not just right in front of this
property that's correct okay so um your testimony about uh what the the lack of sidewalks in certain
areas um do you feel that that's relevant to to evaluating this project because because the
vehicles can drive different locations i'm sorry can you repeat the question your testimony was
that in many places there weren't any sidewalks or or very or very um very inadequate sidewalks
right correct yeah um what's that connect what's the connection between the sidewalks that are not
directly on this property with your evaluation of whether the additional parking spaces at this
property would be safe or not um because you're adding traffic onto pistorian street for those
who are parking in those four 15 spots i'm sorry um having that alternate parking area you would
limit all traffic to custodius therefore being able to make that more of a pedestrian friendly
area i have no further questions mr phillips you are you through no recross okay thank you
Thank you for your testimony. So for both councils, we'd like to have one more meeting.
We're going to take public testimony and also the city planning commission.
Also, there'll be written summations that we that we would take from both of you after that.
Is there anything else where we need to get to?
Mr. Chair, I would have some very brief, I do not believe much at all, but I would have just some very brief rebuttal exhibits that I would like to authenticate for Mr. Beelby, the owner, at the next hearing.
However, it is solely to introduce and to submit them into the record.
We have to figure out some time, Chair. How long would that take you?
i do not believe it would take more than 10 minutes steve we well i don't know what these
exhibits are but if it but if um if it involves new new um new material that was created after
after mr bilby's case was was rested then we we do object to it because what what's basically
happening is the applicant is continuing to create more and more uh arguments and more and
more studies which which is which is counter to how we organize this whole procedure so so so let
me say this much we would rule on that that particular day if you can mr phillips if you
can get that to 10 minutes and you tell us beforehand where you're going to be we'll make
a ruling that day okay what we want to do is have one more meeting and and have this through
so mr char are you are you saying that after the last after the next hearing we then will
have a period of time where we're going to be submitting like proposed findings of fact and
conclusions absolutely absolutely absolutely and and i think if we talked to hillary about that
that we we'd give you several weeks or a few weeks anyway am i right hillary
we'd give you several weeks or a few weeks anyway. Am I right, Hillary?
Yes, and I don't think they'd be proposed findings and conclusions.
It would be basically, you know, your closing statements in written form, summarizing your arguments.
Okay, because in the past, you had asked us to stipulate to certain, if we had, if we could stipulate to certain facts that we would agree with.
I mean, if you could, if you're able to do that as well, that would be great. But we would like a summary of the arguments in writing instead of closing statements, just in the interest of time and of the complication of this case.
Sure. And the last thing I would just like to clarify, I know that we are speaking about members of the public testifying. I know both Mr. Masters and I did include certain members of the public on our respective witness list.
I have no objection to the order in which these individuals appear as members of the public, but would just, you know, ask and confirm that members who are listed on our witness list would just be called as members of the public and be open to both direct and cross -examination by both counsel.
Hillary, I think we can do that, right?
we can but we're going to have to be mindful of the time because first of all there were a number
of people on both lists um that met that criteria as well as i'm sure there are a number of other
people in the community that would like to speak as well so just being mindful mindful of the time
and and duplicative absolutely next next we want to get through this we really will
okay truly yes don't laugh please don't laugh okay all right no thank you everybody thank you
for your 90 minute presentation and then what no i mean two hour presentation but uh i do think we
got a lot accomplished today and and hopefully the next time we we end this okay is there anyone
in the 930 list
whose case has not been pulled?
I see no hands.
Thanks, everyone.
I appreciate it.
Thank you.
Thank you.