Thank you. Good morning. And Tanya, again, I'm going to give you a couple of minutes.
Sure. Yes. Let us know when you're ready.
Bill, quick question for you. Yes. Is in the webinar, can you do breakout rooms?
Is that a capability? I'll have to look it up.
okay if you could it's no rush but it's something we may want to do in the future
have our executive sessions there so i appreciate it thank you so not for today but oh no in the
future because we might be doing this for a minute so we're looking at how we do things
i appreciate that okay no problem yeah i'll look that up
Chair, we're at 96. I think that's good enough for us to start.
Very good. Thank you. Good morning again, everyone. My name is Frank DiCicco. I'm the
Chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. I'll be participating in today's hearing along
with our board secretary Mr. Confessa Plaza and board members Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James
Snell. Board Administrator Ms. Tanya Sunkit and our board attorney Ms. Sharon Suleta are also in
attendance. For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings,
I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect. First, we will be administering oaths
to individual participants prior to their testimony. Second, for the benefit of anyone
participating by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking
or testifying. Third, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded
and that by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. Fourth, for anyone
participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine
and then star six to unmute yourself. I'll repeat, for anyone participating by phone,
if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute
yourself. Finally, to make an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email
address and the address of the property at issue. I'll repeat that. To enter an appearance statement,
call google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue
with that we can begin but before we call our first case we'd like to ask if anyone is requesting
a continuance or withdrawal of an appeal listed for this morning's hearing list if so please raise
your hand chair we have sloan folks good morning mr folks please identify yourself for the record
spell your name and i will swear you in good morning chairman de chico and zba board my name
is Sloan Folks, S-L-O-A-N-E, F-S-A-F-I-R-O-L-K-S, the Office of Counsel in Maria Quinonez Sanchez,
Room 508, City Hall. We're in front of the tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Yes, sir. Thank you. Please proceed. I would like to request a continuance for meeting number
MI-2020-0007393857 North Fairhill Streets.
We do not have a record of the meeting with the RCL.
Okay, just give us a second.
3961 North Fairhill?
No, sorry.
3857 North Fairhill Street.
Oh, I'm sorry.
It's the next one over.
Sharon?
No, I'm sorry.
I was about to ask about the other case 3961 North Fairhill.
Okay, there's a request for a continuance from Councilwoman Sanchez's office MI 2020-000739
3857 North Fairhill. Is there anyone who objects to that request?
And what page is that?
Number nine. If we could ask if anyone representing the applicant is in attendance.
Number nine, if we could ask-
Excuse me, it's number 10.
Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, number 10.
All right. Is there anyone present, the applicant and or an attorney?
Are you in agreement with this request for continuance?
I have Alberto Perez.
you're going to mute yourself and wait to be sworn in speak to this case only good morning
mr perez please identify yourself spell your first and last name and provide us with your
address and then i'll swear you in hi um good morning my name is alberto perez a-l-b-e-r-t-o
p-e-r-e-z um my home address or or the job address i'm sorry home address my home address
is 1233 East Cheltenham Avenue, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19124.
You swear to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Please proceed.
You would like to comment on this request for continuance?
I'm sorry, but I'm honestly not sure what that means.
That means that at the request of the councilwoman, she is asking us not to have a hearing today and to continue it to a later date.
Mr. Folks, is that request based on what is the purpose of the request?
Because there was no meeting with the RCO?
Yes, sir. That's exactly right.
All right. Mr. Perez, did you meet with the RCO?
We did meet with the RCO.
So the problem was that in order for them to send us the approval letter, we have to have a license of renter for the property, which we haven't received.
When we had the meeting, we spoke to them about it.
They told us, I have an email confirming that they approved the change of address, I mean, the change of property, but we needed to have a license of renter for the owner, which we haven't received, but the application was submitted to the city.
Mr. Folks, is that consistent with what you know or not?
Excuse me, Chairman Chico, I want to be sure that he's not speaking about 3961 North Bayer Hill Street.
You have to speak up?
We're talking about 3857 North Fairhill, correct?
Yes, we are, but I also have 3961 in my, and they did meet with the RCO.
I want to be sure that Mr. Perez is not talking about 3961 because there was some issues, not issues, but there were some provisals that the RCO submitted in regards to that.
So I just want to be sure that we're talking about three, not talking about 3961, but 3857 North Fairhill.
And Mr. Perez did submit exhibits for 3961 North Fairhill.
So, Mr. Perez.
Yes, I'm sorry. I am speaking for 3961 North Fairhill Street.
That's not the one that request is on. It's 3857. All right.
MI 2020-000739 3857 North Fairhill is continued.
This is Sharon. If I could also add that we did not receive exhibits for 3857 North Fairhill.
Any other requests for continuances or withdrawals?
Yes, sir. I have one more. I'm sorry. No problem.
Just identify yourself again. Once again, Sloan Folks,
Office of Counsel in Maria Quinones-Fanchez,
room 5A City Hall.
Thank you, sir.
MI-2020-001211, 2546 North 2nd Street.
We haven't heard anything from the RCO.
If the RCO did submit a letter, we'd be happy for them,
for the case to proceed.
But we just haven't heard anything from the RCO.
Byron, do we have any information from the RCO?
on this is 2546 North 2nd. We receive any exhibits.
The attorney is Leo Mulvihill if we could please call him up.
Good morning, Chairman, members of the board.
What was this property address?
Was it Fairhill?
2546 North 2nd Street.
This is my request for a continuance.
My apologies, members of the board.
I'm still reading documents from my client.
i'm still reading documents from my uh okay from my client very good mi 2020-001211
Very good.
2546 north second street is continued thank you sir thank you any other requests
no other hand that's a lot of cases here um okay uh sharon i believe uh we go into the uh
we vote on those cases that were either on the delay list or ask for reconsideration, correct?
Sure, I can read the reconsideration. We have four reconsideration requests.
I think I have those. Correct me if I'm wrong. I think I have them, all right?
Okay. Calendar number 399781720 Master Street and calendar number
4-0-0-0-0-1-7-2-2 master street uh no to reconsideration and no i'm sorry yes to
reconsideration and rehearing and we also are waiting for a letter from council president
clark's office i believe we had a date for the rehearing that was going in the rehearing was
going to be limited to um input from the council's hearing date will be december the second
at 2 p.m? Correct, Chair. Yes to reconsideration and rehearing. Yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Yes to reconsideration and rehearing. Thank you. MI 2020-000013-2321 North Broad Street.
My vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing. No to reconsideration and rehearing.
No to reconsideration and rehearing.
No to reconsideration and rehearing.
UMI 2020, that's 000688-1302 North 28th Street.
My vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing.
No to reconsideration and rehearing.
No to reconsideration and rehearing.
No, excuse me, Chair.
I think that that was the one I mistakenly wrote, 28th, when it was 18th Street.
Oh, that's right.
I made the correction on another sheet.
I messed up.
All right.
Let's go over that again.
Sorry.
MI 2020-000688-1302 North 18th Street.
My vote is no to reconsideration and rehearing.
No to reconsideration and rehearing.
No to reconsideration and rehearing.
No to reconsideration and rehearing.
Okay, MI 2020-000849-5655 Carpenter Street.
No to reconsideration and rehearing.
No to reconsideration and rehearing.
No to reconsideration and rehearing.
No to reconsideration and rehearing.
Thank you.
MI 2020-001305 530-32 Reed Street. My vote is yes with the proviso revised plan two pages
approved today. Yes with proviso. Yes with proviso. Yes with proviso. Okay Sharon I believe now we have
the follow-up we call we'll call up the follow-up hearings that's right thank you okay mi 2020
that's zero zero one zero five five nine one one north 26th street mr notkinson and this i believe
is we're waiting for a report on the results of a follow-up rco meeting
good morning mr chair members of the board good morning mr knockamson please identify yourself
for the record and then i'll swear you in yes alan knockamson of knockamson pc 123 south broad
street 1600 philadelphia pa 19109 and you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth I do please proceed so we did meet with the community at the assistance
of the councilman's office just a little bit of background originally this was a 49 unit building
that we proposed as you can see in our oh wait let me share my screen that would be helpful
let's see full screen mode okay so let's just go to the notice of refusal
Okay, so let's just go to the notice of refusal.
All right, so what we're doing is we're proposing to consolidate a number of lots, which are both CMX2 and RSA5, in the Fairmont section of Philadelphia on North 26th Street.
And as part of that project, we were proposing to put 49 units, dwelling units, as well as 20
parking spaces, as well as additional bicycle spaces in the property. So when we presented to
the Zoning Board at the conclusion of our hearing, the Planning Commission actually recommended the
granting and the variances with the exception of they did indicate that they didn't know where
they stood with regards to the amount of units so that was a concern for the community right as well
as the height of the property so we did meet with the community um and as part of that process we
have um we have agreed to reduce the amount of units from 49 units to 40 units and you know we
did have a height variance so what we're what we're proposing is to um and i'll show you in the
pictures. Probably easier to see. Let's see. So this was what their property originally looked
like, you know, rendering, right? So it was on the same roof line as the church that's on North 26th
Street. So we purposefully try to recreate that roof line. Now we go from North 26th to Banbury
Street. So what we proposed is to set back on North 26th Street. So we're actually, from a
pedestrian point of view, you will only see four stories. And that's where we eliminate on the
fifth story some of the units. And then on the Bainbury Street side, which is more residential
in nature and more RSA 5, we propose to set back so that it's only three, you would see three
stories from the point of view of a pedestrian and we would be set back significantly. So that's
what our proviso plan has. We did note that I have, and I gave this to Ms. Saleta earlier this
morning. I did get an email just from the architect. There is a small typo in one of the
plans. I think here it says still 49 units. So if this board does grant it, I would, you know,
obviously amend, you know, that one drawing that Ms. Saleta would stamp on behalf of the ZBA or
the ZBA would stamp. But ultimately, we're setting back significantly on North 26th Street, as well
as on Bainbury Street, where to an outsider, they wouldn't even know that there is actually a fifth
story. And we decreased the amount of units by 20%. And that's, you know, basically it. I mean,
we did have a certified RCO meeting. And, you know, in the certified RCO meeting, there were,
you know we did receive support from the community uh so there were you know 16 people for it nine
against and four abstained and the nearby neighbors it was one four two against one abstained
so during the certified rco meeting we did have community support i also provided um
as part of my presentation last time as well like my client distributed a petition to uh neighbors
And you can see there's a decent amount of people who are in support of this project.
And then I also provided to the board, there's an online platform, a community platform called Nextdoor, where a thread was started with regards to this project.
And of the 75 people that actually responded in this thread at the time, 60 people were either in non-opposition or in support of this project.
Now, full disclosure, we recently received input from the nearby neighbors who stated that, you know, they're not for this project.
But I would just say they had two options to vote.
They had an option to vote, let them build as of right, or let them build something, which I can read it literally, but basically the vote option was let them build something that makes no sense for us.
So I think it was kind of skewed, and I can read of record what the actual options were, but it wasn't a sterile like either you're for it or you're for this or against this new proposal.
And the reason where we got to 40 units and the way we got to setting things back was we heard from some of the nearby neighbors that were at the meeting, especially the ones on Bainbridge Street.
I remember in particular one who was like, yeah, that makes sense.
Like if you set that back, you know, and you reduce the height so that it looks like from the outside that it's.
And you reduce the height so that it looks like from the outside that it's three stories on a residential block.
I don't see an issue with that.
Never heard back from that individual, but the community in general, they just don't want anything there.
And that's not reasonable under the circumstances.
And given the surrounding circumstances of like our roof line, you know, the height was the only issue that I heard about, as well as the fact that the unit count was an issue, which we addressed.
And the fact that we're providing off-street parking of 20 units for a property which does not require parking, and the fact that we're eliminating one of our variances, we're trying to eliminate the commercial component on a block which is residential in nature.
like all this makes sense that you know and given that at a certified meeting we had you know
community support you know we respectfully request that the zoning board grant this variance
any questions from the board no no
anyone else wish to testify in this matter please raise your hand
um so chair it's your call um i believe this is limited however i have like eight hands up
so how would you like me to proceed i do have mary jones from the council person's office
get miss jones on first please um chair this is sharon saletta i believe at the last hearing
there still had not been an RCO meeting, so if there are members of the community who wish to
testify, they should probably, at least in limited testimony, be permitted to do so.
Well, Ms. Saleta, I would actually respectfully disagree. There was a certified RCO meeting.
That's how we had the letter. I apologize for my misunderstanding.
Okay, good morning, this is Mary Jones, Council President Daryl Clark's office.
Are you swearing to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Ms. Jones.
Please proceed.
Yes, so based on communication from the near neighbors who are concerned about the added
density and the height that remains still quite tall and the lack of hardship for this
project we do uh stand with the community with the near neighbors in their opposition um today
to this project
what was the results of the uh the rco meeting well it was i'm sorry was that directed to me
no no it's mr knockins i'm sorry yeah it was and i had the letter it's exhibit uh nine um it was
16 in favor nine against and four abstain thank you all right anyone else and please we uh limit
your testimony and if you get on please do not repeat what is already being said appreciate that
thank you here and before i call the next name could i please just put um out there to all
attending the q a is not a forum for testimony if you wish to speak in behalf of a case
you have to raise your hand and put it on record. People are providing testimony at the Q&A and
that's not allowed. If you have questions about scheduling or a case that should be heard and
it's not scheduled or something of that nature, you can use that Q&A. Thank you kindly. I'm calling
next Teresa. Teresa, you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in. Okay, can you hear me?
Yes, please identify yourself, first and last name, spell your name, and you give us your address, please.
My name is Teresa Hoberg, T-E-R-E-S-A, Hoberg, H-O-B as in boy, E-R-G as in girl, and I live at 2416 Perot Street.
And you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you. And where do you live in proximity to this application?
Um, well, I guess I'm at the other end of the neighborhood.
um well i guess i'm at the other end of the neighborhood
Perot Street is just a half a block above Fairmount Avenue.
So I guess that, I don't know how many blocks south that would be.
Yeah, Mr. Chair, I actually live in Fairmount myself.
You know, the difference between Fairmount and where Poplar is, it's at least five blocks.
Yeah, six of them.
All right.
Yeah, and you're talking about a number street, a 24th Street.
so you're looking at at least seven blocks away. I am also a board member of the Fairmount Civic
Association so I am also here in connection with that. Mr. Chair I would say that in her capacity
as a board member of the Fairmount Civic Association the board actually has a letter
from the Fairmount Civic Association which describes the meeting in which a majority
a supermajority of the individuals who attended that certified RCO meeting actually vote in
favor of this project great so do you have ma'am no disrespect but is there something that uh you
can add that was not uh already discussed i'm just yeah i'm just confused first of all as to what
this initial are you voting on it now because initially it was brought up as a continuance so
i'm not well this this is the continuance this is the continuance okay no my only my only concern
is just that I attended both the original meeting
and the second meeting held for the near neighbors.
And I'll let them speak for themselves,
but I did not hear that they were not against,
that they were completely against any development.
They were against this development,
not against all development.
Thank you.
Okay, Chair, we have Christine.
Christine, you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Morning, ma'am.
Please identify yourself with the record, name and address, spell your name, and provide
us with your address.
Christine, unmute yourself, or we will move on.
Here we have Andrew Hart.
Andrew, you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Good morning, Mr. Hart.
please identify yourself with the record, spell your name, and give us your address.
Good morning, Chair DiCicco. My name is Andrew Hart, A-N-D-R-E-W, last name H-A-R-T. My address
is 918 North 26th Street, which is within the 200-foot radius of the development.
Thank you. So we're in the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do so. Thank you. Please proceed. Thank you. I attend the meeting today and I was at the meeting that was held on our block. I would like to note this on a few issues relating to zoning.
but first of all i would um just like to to clear the record um and i i thank uh the member of our
rco for her attendance today um i would i would disagree respectfully with council as to the uh
the nature and tenor of the meeting um since there are no meeting minutes that were submitted to us
uh of that meeting um i would say that my my block is in opposition to this development
Well, you have to speak for you, sir. Mr. Hart, you need to speak for myself.
And then I would like to raise objections to the variances. The variance that I'm an
objection to is the height. It is not in the nature and personality of the block or the
neighborhood. I object to the density. I object to the density on the grounds of the current zoning
and that this variance would increase the density unduly in our neighborhood. I object to the
issue of the parking because it is not part of the zoning. There is examples of projects that
have been built by Wright on our block and on Gerrard Avenue, and I would encourage the board
to support the zoning by right, and I would like to object to the, I'm sorry, I'm sorry,
let me just go over my notes here, height, density, variances, and encourage the board
to support a by right development. Thank you. Thank you very much. Lastly, I would like to add
that we were unable to attend the RCO meeting, and several of my neighbors were unable to attend
RCO meeting because we did not receive notification of this this project and the ZBA variance
information has not been posted on the site so we were unaware that this was being considered.
I will leave it to my other neighbors to submit those exhibits that reflect that and to submit
I will leave it to my other neighbors to submit those exhibits that reflect that and to submit our petition in opposition to this development.
Thank you. Mr. Notkinson, how many units are on the top floor? I know you said it back. How many units are up there?
So, you know what, I would have to, is the architect on? Kevin, can you virtually raise your hand? I'm going to go through this.
let's see
the top one
Kevin can unmute
and wait to be sworn in
can you guys
yes Kevin
can you state your full name
and address for the record
yes Kevin Carrico
208 Paul Drive, Morristown, New Jersey
I don't think we got your full name
again, would you spell it, your last name
yes, Kevin Carrico
and my last name is spelled K-O-R-D-J-K-O.
And do you swear to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth?
You heard my question, Mr. Kareko.
How many units are on the top floor?
Four total, and they're all set back far from the street.
We're at least 19 foot 7 on the one side
and 20 foot roughly on the other side.
So the reduction of nine units was all as a result of
removing the nine from the top floor, correct?
And then additionally, on the Bainbury side, we reduced a couple more units on that as well.
Yeah, so, yeah, Mr. Chair, so we were very mindful of the fact that 10% of this humongous lot, it's a huge lot, it's multiple lots, but a part of it was on the RSA 5 portion part.
So my client was very mindful of that.
That's why we dropped essentially two stories on the Bainbury Street side.
side so like we're very mindful of that and setting it back and one of the things that we
thought was actually a good part of this project is that they we would create eyes on the street
on the bainbury street side because the units on the first floor on the bainbury street side
it's almost like having single family because you have a direct entrance from bainbury from the
exterior so we're trying to create it so it would have a sense of community on the bainbury street
side respect the height by lowering it two stories all right i think i got that i just wanted to know
number of units on the top floor okay tanya we have kim you can unmute yourself and wait to be
sworn in hi there good morning uh ma'am please identify yourself with the record spell your
first and last name and provide us with your address yes my name is kim strow s-t-r-a-u-c-h
and I live at 914 North 26th Street.
And you swear and affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
I agree with what my prior neighbor had said.
First, I just want to be clear that those of us who live,
myself included, a stone's throw away from where this project,
the proposed project is, did not receive any communication
for the first RCO meeting for this project. So we, myself included, I was scrambling to find out
about this, which is why we had this additional meeting a couple of weeks ago. I strongly feel
that there is not a hardship that could be articulated as to why this project should be
the height and density which is being proposed. This block is composed of two and three-story
row homes. Anything taller than that would just be out of place and sort of swallow the existing
makeup of the block. So I am in opposition to the proposed redesign of this project.
I just feel that there is no hardship that could be articulated. It is too dense and too tall for the current makeup of this block.
So, Mr. Charitas would like to respond. So, first of all, within our materials is the letter that we sent regarding the certified RCO meeting where we scheduled it.
And I believe that the letter was mailed at least 10 days before the actual meeting.
in terms of like where this property is located right now it's a one-story structure it's a it's
actually a warehouse for a roofing company so in terms of this is not a residential portion
of the neighborhood it's actually sandwiched in between two commercial corridors one is on
gerard avenue and the other one is on poplar street and in terms of the height actually if
you look at it there's a church which is on our side of the street which is you know pretty massive
pretty massive and you know what we tried to do was actually match the roof line so
and you know what we tried to do was actually match the roof line so
it's not simply a residential street and if you look on the back end on Bainbury Street
you'll see that our property backs up to a parking lot which is basically a gas station
so hold on a second oh I don't know where the picture is I'm trying to find a picture
um but yeah so this is yeah you'll see like here where we are there's a sunoco gas station
like i said i personally live a few blocks away so i'm very familiar with this part of the
neighborhood um so this is not a strict residential portion of the neighborhood
um in terms of what we're trying to do we're trying to create parking um where typically
people are actually for it. And what we're asking for is a reasonable increase in the density of
the amount of units to help actually support a commercial corridor on Girard and Poplar Street,
which during a certified RCO meeting, the community was in support of.
Thank you. Anyone else? Something new and different, please.
Here we have Cynthia. Cynthia, you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
hello can you hear me morning good morning ma'am please identify yourself with the record first
and last name and provide us with your address and then i'll swear you in cynthia lombardi c-y-n-t-h-i-a
l-o-m-b-a-r-d-i i'm at 919 north bambray street that's philadelphia pa 19130
we're in the firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes yes i do please proceed okay um i beg to differ that the uh first rco meeting uh it was
the 60 of those votes were from the greater fairmount area it was not from the near neighbors
because the near neighbors were not notified of that meeting when there was the zoom meeting there
were only two owners on the block of Banbury. I am two houses up and on the other side of this
property. He is not backing up to the gas station. That's across the street from this, the back of
the property. And it is being dropped into a residential area on our side. So that's wrong.
there were no zoning signs posted on either side of the building at all to notify the neighbors
so I disagree there was not enough notice there was no clear explanation
and the notice that I got came after the meeting that was on the zoom call so I couldn't attend
that's why we asked for the second meeting where we met at the church and within a two block radius
there will be over 300 new apartments built and we just feel like this is just an an explosion
of population in this very residential area um we didn't feel that they followed the rules
as far as posting the zoning sign on both sides of the building and there were just not enough
of the near neighbors in that first meeting. What he's saying is there was a percentage of the
greater Fairmount area where those people are not even affected by this proposed development.
We were not in favor of the height and because it's just going to you know overpower all of the
residents here, we were not in favor of the density. It's just way too much for this area
and what's happening in the area. And there was clearly no hardship. I mean, to say that a
hardship is because you're getting more money because you're making more apartments is not
a hardship. We would like it built to the code that the ZBA had provided from the very beginning.
that's 23 apartments at 38 feet high we feel that would be best for the neighborhood
thank you and mr chair so and then again as part of as part of the zoning this is cmx2
we would be required to put commercial units as admittedly a resident residential portion of
the north 26th street side that's why we didn't think the commercial component made sense for the
neighborhood. And I would say, again, if you look at the Fairmont Civic Association letter,
there were nearby neighbors. And I'm, you know, there were, at least according to our letter,
there were four nearby neighbors that voted. And they'll make that clear. Yeah. Yeah. Okay,
Chair, we can move on. So
Okay. So what is the height of that building again on the, not the Bambri side, the other side?
to help.
The setback where it is, it's 45 feet.
45 and then the setback is where the other four units are, correct?
It's 45 at the roof line in the front.
In the front.
Yeah. And Kevin, are you still on?
i think it's probably another 10 i don't want to misstate but i believe it's another 10 feet below
on bainbury which is 35 feet kevin you can unmute
alan i was just telling your client he can i mean your witness that he can unmute
i will keep everyone muted but you can unmute yourself yeah kevin can you just answer the
chair's question about the height from the roof line on the north 26th street side as well as the
roof line from the front on the bainbury street side yes so on the 26th street side we're 45 foot
on the streetscape and then on the bainbury side because we dropped the three stories on that side
And we are, give me one second here, I'm pulling that right now, 35-8.
Questions from the board?
Planning commission?
Planning commission?
uh just to clarify i'm trying to find out if we gave a recommendation at the last hearing
but what is the height of the building 45 on the 26th street side and i think he said 35 on
the bainbridge side do we swear her in please oh yeah i'm sorry paula just from below burns
denise knows my name so okay go ahead you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth I do thank you and if I could just state one thing um Paula and chair
um it is our practice to always get the planning commission's recommendation before we schedule
any kind of continuance resumption hearing or the like yeah and and and as an officer of the court
I do remember this one the the planning commission recommended in favor of every variant other than
the unit count and they they kind of punted on that that was that's my recollection we were not
in favor we had no objection to the no objection that's right density be looked at in agreement
the community's position that's right so paula just for my purpose for our board purposes have
has the planning commission looked at the uh revised plan that reduced the number of units
and if so has there been personally have not gotten this but in the recommendation from the
last case on october 14th that our property is indicated for commercial use on the comprehensive
plan we do believe because the property is close to the trolley line and will support the commercial
corridor of gerrard avenue we are okay with commercial not being included so is the support
gerrard avenue um we believe parking is not as necessary because it has access to the trolley
line and we have no objection to the granting of the variances questions from the board
i'm going to recommend that the record be closed and that the board render a decision at the next
tuesday because i think we're off next wednesday is that correct uh tanya yes sure we only hear
the 10th. Yes, Mr. Notkinson. I just would like my client to adopt my testimony. Sure, sure.
Having the client get on. Yeah, Mr. Gravely, can you virtually raise your hand?
no hands mr nokamson all right now and as an officer of court will uh stipulate that your
client would adopt your testimony thank you mr chair thank you so again um
MI 2020-001055-911 North 26th Street.
The record is closed.
The board will render a decision at next Tuesday, is it, Tanya?
Yes, Chair.
November the 10th.
Tuesday, November the 10th at 9.30 a.m.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay, I think we have another one for you, Mr. Notkinson.
Okay, I think we have another one for you, Mr. Notkinson.
All right, hopefully it's not as long as the one we just got off of.
MI2020-001280-260-62 Geiger Road.
And you're still on the oath, Mr. Notkinson, just identify yourself.
Yes, Alan Notkinson of Notkinson, PC, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600,
Philadelphia PA 19109 and I sincerely apologize for the length of my presentations not not your
problem no problem I think it's paid back for yesterday when I sat for over an hour
um anyway so I'm I'm again this one's pretty straightforward we have an I2 property
my clients are looking to purchase it they they what they do is they they sell they lease
excuse me for the interruption
is this a case that we already heard before
that's right
they sell
they lease
they rent
they maintain and repair
first responder vehicles
so all they're trying to do is purchase this property
in I-2
not change anything in the building structure
and we did meet with the community
I have correspondence
which is exhibit 9
We did meet with them. The community voted 3, 4, and 14 against. Again, it's one of these situations where I think the community just doesn't want anything there.
I mean, but like this, these are first responder vehicles we're trying to, you know, you know, for and bring jobs into the city.
But like, ultimately, this is one where, again, the Planning Commission recommended not to oppose this, the granting and the variance.
And the only thing I would say as to this one is that I would just have a little opposition to I would have opposition to the notice refusal because it doesn't reflect.
um a pre-existing use in the building so there's a medical supply company uh in the property so i
would just ask a proviso that you know if the board does grant uh our zoning appeal a proviso
that all remaining uh uses uh you know all you all other uses remain the same so that's you know
basically our presentation you know again my client's looking to first respond to vehicles
in there could you show some of those photographs again oh yeah yeah so like again myself with yeah
um so here's the property again this is an i2 property this is a 20 000 square foot facility
on 125 square foot lot and there's a parking here and you can see this is the facility right now
we're not making any changes to the facility right now there's a medical supply company in
front part of the facility we're taking a portion of it to house our uh the sale rental maintenance
and repair the vehicles maintenance repair the vehicles will be done inside the facility the
the actual vehicles that they'll be selling and leasing will be in the parking lot as well inside
so again there's already a pre-existing parking lot here
okay see this is an i2 so okay um okay uh have you finished i'm sorry yeah i mean i'm just trying
to be like quick because i know i took a long time with the other one i mean this is really
a straightforward project all right uh any questions from the board no no no one would
like to testify in this case, if so, please raise your hand. Chair, I have unmuted Alice
Udovich. Alice, you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in. Good morning, Alice. Please
identify yourself for the record. First and last name. Chairman members of the board, Alice
Udovich, representing Councilman Brian O'Neill's office. We're infirm to tell the truth, the
whole truth and nothing but the truth. I do. And Alice, would you please spell your last
name for the reporter? U-D-O-V-I-C-H. Okay, thank you. Please proceed. Unfortunately, the councilman
will oppose the granting of the variance at this location based on the community
opposing the project. Okay, thank you. Anyone else?
Chair, we have Bernard. Bernard, you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Hello, can you hear me?
Hello, can you hear me?
Yes, we can. Please identify yourself, sir.
Yes, we can.
Please identify yourself, sir.
Name and address.
Spell your name for the reporter.
Bernard Jadak, J-A-D-A-C-H, 706 Pecan Drive, Philadelphia, PA.
I'm the zoning chair for the RCO.
Just wanted to make sure you got on.
You swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
uh uh i'm the um zoning chair for the rco just wanted to make sure you got a copy of our
letter the 14 opposed and 13 for uh posing the uh zoning variants i just want to make
sure you actually got a copy of it because it was only sent this morning uh sharon did we get that
it's in my packet materials okay thank you thank you thank you thank you anyone else
that's it thank you chair you can proceed thank you uh planning commission
they have should have given a recommendation already yes our this is paula brumblow burns
planning commission i believe our recommendation at the last hearing was no objection okay thank
Thank you. MI 2020-001280-260-62 Geiger Road, my vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Have a great day.
I believe that is it.
Am I correct, Tanya?
that's all I hear for the add-ons we should be ready to go with the first case number one Frank
yep yes you got it MI 2020-000770-1226 East Shelton Ave
Chair and board members, I have promoted Meredith for you to swear her in.
Good morning, Meredith. Please identify yourself with the records, spell your first and last name, and then we'll swear you in.
Good morning, Meredith Ferlger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R, 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E.
We're confirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Sure do.
Mr. Plotter, do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate its accuracy?
see? I sure do. Great. Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents,
proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal, photos and plans five days prior
to this hearing? I did, yes. Thank you. Have you met with the RCO and have a letter? We do. Thank
you. Please proceed. Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Before I get
started, Brad Behrens, if you can hit the raise hand button so we can get you sworn in.
hi this is brad can you hear me yes we can identify yourself your first and last name
bradford barons b as in boy e-h-r-i-n-s i reside at 210 east broadway apartment h1008
New York, New York, 1-0-0-0-2. Thank you. We swear to the firm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth. I do. Please proceed, Ms. Thank you. Good morning,
Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Again, my name is Meredith Ferliger of the law firm
Delworth Paxson. I'm here today on behalf of my client, CB Sedara Holdings, represented by Brad
Barron's. Before the board today is a property located at 1226 East Shelton Avenue in the city's
East Germantown neighborhood. The board should have an exhibit packet that I previously submitted with
12 exhibits. This is a very simple request, so I will be brief. I'll start first with the photographs
that I have up on the screen at tab three. As the board can see, this is a charming two-story
attached structure that sits amongst a row of similar two-story residential homes.
And I'll just scroll through briefly so you can get a sense of the residential attached
nature of this particular block.
Here's the complication.
This residential row of homes is zoned CMX2, which as you know requires a ground floor
commercial space.
My client purchased the property about two years ago as a duplex.
my client purchased the property about two years ago as a duplex as he
As he recently discovered, the duplex use is no longer reflected in L&I's system.
It's fairly clear why.
If you refer to the property history that I'm bringing up at tab five, you'll see that
the permit history for this property bounces back and forth between single family and two
family use, dating all the way back to 1948.
So I don't know what the prior owners were doing here, but they pulled a lot of different
permits here going back and forth.
It's unclear why this happened, given structurally the property exists as a duplex.
The two existing units here are 758 square feet and 880 square feet.
It's one unit per floor.
And I have attached some photos of the units also at tab three here.
you can see these are very nice updated units. Now, as you can expect, we did receive one refusal.
The duplex use of the property is permitted. However, because it's zone CMX2, Brad would be
required to put a commercial use somewhere on the ground floor of this structure. As you can see in
the historical permits, there has never been a commercial use here in the last 70 years.
Unfortunately, we're only here due to the lapse in time since L&I last had a permit that reflects
the duplex use. As you could see in the photographs, the block only contains
residential uses here except for a very small church that is right here down the block.
There's a smattering of some commercial uses on the other side of the street,
which you can see does look quite different than the side of the street that this property sits on.
Not only would the character of this residential street make a commercial use not viable,
but it would be a considerable hardship to find a way to convert the ground floor
to commercial use after 70 years of the structure existing as a duplex.
We submit this as the least minimum variance as we're not requesting any dimensional variances
here. The request is to confirm a long-standing use as a duplex, which is a permissible use,
without the never-existent commercial on the ground floor. We submit this will not increase
local congestion or endanger the public. The proposal will not impair light and air or negatively
impact surrounding properties. It's already set up as a duplex for the last 70 years, and that will
remain the neighboring properties are also solely residential uses with no commercial
and this will ensure the use of the property remains in harmony with the use of surrounding
properties we submit the variance complies in full with the provisions of section 143038 of the code
as is further detailed in my memo of law submitted at tab 10. we did meet with the community we met
with chew and belfield neighbors club association and their letter of support i'll put up on the
screen is attached at tab two. Brad, have you heard all of my testimony offered before the board today?
I have. And would you agree that testimony was true and accurate and would you adopt that
testimony as if it were your own? I do, yes. And we're happy to answer any questions. Thank you.
Questions from the board? No. No. Anyone else would like to testify in this case? If so,
please raise your hand here i have charles richardson mr richardson you can unmute yourself
and wait to be sworn in morning mr richardson please identify yourself with the record not
swearing good morning mr chair charles richardson from the office of councilwoman cindy bass
room 312 city hall are you firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do uh just uh calling in to let the board know that councilwoman has no objection
to the granting of this variance you did you wish your boss happy birthday today
i did there you go letter all right uh planning commission i'm sorry chair i did have someone
else oh i'm sorry that's okay thank you i'm miss illisane barton you can unmute yourself and wait
to be sworn in good morning ma'am please identify yourself with the record spell your first and
last name and provide us with your address oh i'm sorry i had a question for something else i
not didn't reference this probably no problem thank you here we can move on no thank you
no problem thank you here we can move on no thank you thank you planning commission
thank you planning commission
chairman members of the board this is paula brumblow burns with the city planning commission
just lost it uh this property is indicated for commercial use on the comprehensive plan
this property was built as a residential structure without first floor commercial
accordingly we have no objection to the commercial not being included this location thank you
MI 2020-000770-1226 East, Chelten Avenue. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Next one up is MI 2020-001209-1519 West Benangelo Street.
this is Sharon I have no record of having received exhibits in this case
thank you is there anyone here for 1519 West Venango street
uh chair I have uh Lijan are you the applicant or hi good morning hi Lijan Liu I am the applicant
and the owner. Okay, if you wait one minute, I will promote you to panelists. Thank you.
Chair, he's promoted for the swearing name. Thank you, sir. Please identify yourself. Spell your
first and last name. Hi, yes. First name Lijion, L-I-J-I-O-N. Last name is Lou, L-I-U.
You swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
According to our council, we did not receive any exhibits.
I believe my architect emailed it, all the information and exhibits to the zoning board.
When he emailed it, sir.
If I, let me just go back to my email, maybe.
This is Sharon.
Could we, Tanya, would it be possible to check if the RCO mailbox received exhibits for this case?
Not totally at the moment, but Mr. Lijon, did you, did your architect send it to the required email boxes, which is the attorney Sharon Saleta and the RCO?
That's the requirement.
If not, we will continue the case.
uh can you please give me uh just a few seconds let me look she did
i'm sorry chair my suggestion is we push this aside and move forward and mr lijan you can um
contact me in the q a and let us know if that was done sure you can move on yep okay thank you
Next one up is MI 2020-001-205-209 Delmar Street.
Chair, I'm promoting Sean Welling to panelists.
Welling, please identify yourself for the record, spell your first and last name.
yeah sean whalen here i'll start my video sean whalen s-e-a-n last name w-h-a-l-e-n
i'm sorry you can finish i'm sorry no go go ahead we're in a firm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing about the truth yes i do thank you please proceed all right thank you chairman and members
of the board uh i am here on behalf of the world and you agreed to waive the reading of its refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet
with the required documents,
proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance,
copy of the refusal,
referral, photos and plans
five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I did.
Also, have you met with the RCO
and have a letter?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you, Chairman and members of the Board.
This is actually a complex matter,
but I will do my best to truncate it for everyone.
This is a proposed project for 209 and 211 Delmar Street.
These are both exceptionally large, deep lots
in the Roxborough neighborhood.
I'm trying to share my screen right now.
So, here's a copy of the refusal, which we can walk through.
So here's a copy of the refusal, which we can walk.
Here's a copy of the letter from the Ridge Park Civic Association.
I will explain, but not try to get away from the fact that we got quite literally slaughtered
at the Ridge Park Civic Association meeting that we attended and continued only under
the belief that we thought there was an extremely viable option here.
So here's a picture of the original zoning plan.
The original project was for 23 townhouse units.
This had a solid rear wall of units, a small green space, there was supposed to be traffic
circulation around that way and then two packs of three with uh density on the front um we are
presenting today and what i will focus on is a dramatically revised uh package um so we've you
know we sent in a proviso form and proviso uh plans we have reduced the number of units by more than
a third and this was in short we met with early on we presented the original plan to a few members
of the RCO head we had good and productive long conversations with them about what would be the
the difficulties that we would face and some of the issues that they would you know we would hear
about our project, but they asked specifically if we would be willing to work with them because
that's how they did things, that they worked with, you know, project owners and tried, you know,
informally and then formally in front of the RCO to try to reach a resolution. We agreed that we
could certainly meet with them in an ongoing basis because we had actually a solid two months
before, you know, from basically when our RCO meeting was to today's date, so we thought we
had the plan, and we thought we had a good plan. Unfortunately, at the time that we went to the
RCO meeting, as I said, we quite literally got slaughtered. The ultimate vote basically came down
to density and traffic. I'm sure the RCO will expound upon that, but those were essentially
the concerns and it was 70 to 6. So again no way to sugarcoat that but more
surprisingly we you know the RCO voted despite what had been told to us and
what we anticipated up front the RCO voted you know to oppose our project but
also to disallow the RCO from communicating with us in any way shape
or form going forward.
We have reached out time and again to the RCO, including through the CDR process and
even through their council last week with regard to the revised plans to try to keep
them in the loop as to what our revisions would be.
And we have been flatly told that they would not speak with us and not communicate with
us about any revisions, nor would there be any more informal or formal meetings with
the RCO.
again we were we believed in this project and so we pushed forward we met i spoke with
mr josh cohen from the councilman's office to keep him up to date as to what our revision
our proposed revisions were we went through the cdr process and i had several meetings with
members of the planning commission staff here in the neighborhood planner to try to get to where
we could go. What I'm showing right now is the CDR letter. CDR actually, to my surprise,
we only went once. I thought we would end up going twice. They came up with a slew of
comments. You can see here, I won't walk through each one individually, but I will represent
and you will hear my experts opine. We adopted every single, adopted and incorporated every
single item of advice and comment that we received from CDR. We told them that's actually
in the letter that we would. We worked through, we said at that time that we would continue
to meet with the RCO. The RCO again said at CDR that it was not interested in meeting
with us. So unfortunately, we've not been able to work with the RCO, even though they
have seen the revised plans through their attorney and told us that they would no longer
be meeting with us. So to provide some context, this is the Schuylkill River down here. Here's
This is the Schuylkill River down here. Here's the Ivy Ridge train station where there's been
the Ivy Ridge train station.
a huge new development going in here. Our properties are right up here at 209 and 211 Delmar Street.
You can see a large park is Germany Hill. It is my understanding that this portion of Germany Hill,
the northern portion, is actually about 12 acres that is owned by a private developer.
we have no there's been some concerns raised by the RCO in the beginning of this process
that we like many other developers are attempting to try to open up that parcel for development
we have no combination or association with that parcel we're not trying to be we're not trying
to open it up in any way rather this section of Germany Hill is a very nice large wooded area as
can see it has some trails in here we have reached out to some local members of the neighborhood and
the councilman's office to find out we fully intend to help which CDR strongly recommended
to help revitalize some of these walking trails you know some of them are especially at this end
are a little overgrown and we would also like to assist in making a walking path and only a walking
path not a not a driving or vehicular path from mansion street here down through germany hill
to the ivy ridge train station that would obviously be a huge benefit to our own homeowners
that we are providing for but also to the community at large
this is the existing house i'm actually cribbing from some of the photos the rco provided in their
opposition package. Unfortunately, a few of my photos got corrupted and I was unable to use
them. So this is one of the two houses. We currently have two single family houses listed
on our project. This is the, you know, the properties as they are looking directly at
them. So the zoning, here's an aerial view that I think is quite telling. These are our two
properties right here. This is Delmar Street going up this way. As you can see, the entire block on
both sides are lined with row houses, twins, but extensive and dense development.
Everything this way on Delmar Street is zoned RSA 5.
Just this corner and our houses right here are zoned RSD 3.
So RSD3 is single-family detached houses with 5,000 square foot lots, basically large single-family houses with detached lots, sort of not indicative of obviously anything that you would find in this neighborhood, but there has been a dramatic increase that you will hear about today.
Most of these houses that you see up and down Delmar Street have been erected in the last 8 to 10 years and did not previously exist.
And so the neighborhood got together and downzoned this to RSD3 to try to stop all development.
Obviously, that change in the neighborhood creates a hardship for us.
Also, what you will see is these properties have no rear yard. Essentially, all through here is extremely steep slope, much greater than 25%. These houses have no rear yards. The rear yards go from these houses down here up to, you can see actually the line right about there.
um we because of where we sit we have property that goes all the way back uh our two properties
together will be approximately uh 200 feet linear feet along delmar street with 220 foot depth
that huge size which also cuts out here um is you know creates a hardship for us
because we have this gigantic lot which requires you know massive single-family
homes similar to what you would find in like a chestnut hill not you know Delmar
Street in Roxborough these projects down here as you can see are currently under
construction this photo was just taken less than a week ago these are all brand
new row homes that are being put in on Fountain Street just below where we are
just below where we are. So again, here's an aerial view. This is what Del Mar Street looks
So again, here's an aerial.
like. Our house is just outside. Basically, we're standing in front of our house looking down the
street. You can see the setback, the front-loading parking, all row homes, twins. As the RCO states
in its letter most of these houses again did not exist eight to ten years ago especially on this
side of the street the northern side these were all rear yards for uh lamont street houses that
go this way and then they would back up with their rear yards to delmar street that has been a
significant change in the neighborhood and here are some of the photos of the brand new housing
stock that's literally on Del Mar right up the block from us. So again, our house is right down
here to the left. You can just see time and again, brand new development, row home style.
There are narrow driveways, narrow sidewalks here. Our sidewalk, so one of the major complaints of
neighborhood of the RCO rather not the adjacent immediately adjacent neighbors is just the
increased traffic in the neighborhood and density over the last eight to ten years.
While we understand that Delmar Street is a standard 16-foot cartway with right-of-way on
either side so it's not a uniquely narrow street by any means we've all dealt with much more narrow
streets throughout the city and especially south philly and areas even in maniunk
so again i'll just finish off through these houses now at our end um you know the property
does open up significantly so there's the first house of ours obviously dilapidated um in very
extreme disrepair uh you go down this block this is the turn around mansion street that delmar
street into. This is also a 16 foot wide cartway and this is actually one of the adjacent houses.
So this is our property and this is one of the adjacent houses right next to us.
And then just a final site. So I think most telling again you can see
from the aerial zoning view, how dramatically we changed this plan, reducing from 23 units down to
15 units. We also pulled back the frontage. Again, essentially everything we did was
recommended by CDR. CDR's general position was that they were overall approving of the idea of
townhouse development but that we had designed it improperly for this location so a good swing but
a swing and a miss and therefore we you know completely reconfigured it and I think what we
can do here these are the renderings and I think these are most telling so here's the rendering of
was originally proposed um you know with the the single block in the back um and everybody was
opposed to this i'm not going to lie and the middle period uh this is what our new proposal is
so you can see again you know we go from a large massive development with a small green space in
middle to row homes that meet the height and dimensional requirements of RSA 5 match in line
with everything else that's on our block and then we put two rows in back or a row in back
that's actually broken up and leaves most of the area open. We also maintain most of the vegetation
behind us pull away significantly from the rear lot line. Again, here is the original plan. You
can see a lot of internal parking. The CDR in particular didn't like that we had kids on bikes
traversing the same location with the vehicles. And so this is what our new open area looks like.
huge expansive essentially yard space we are going to be planting dozens of trees and actually have
a net positive of more than 20 trees at the conclusion as you'll hear from the owner most
of the trees on the property at present are diseased or damaged the as you could tell from
the state of the house pictures that you could see the properties just not well
The property is just not well kept and has not been for years.
kept and has not been for years
So, again, here's the original plan that we looked at, and there's the revised plan.
We're actually pulling it back.
CDR recommended that we pull back 10 feet for a widened sidewalk.
We're actually pulling back more than 12 feet from the cartway to create.
There is no sidewalk on our side of the street at this time.
So we are increasing the sidewalk here.
You will see that we have one curb cut.
Currently at the site, this is one of our refusals.
We have a 24-foot curb cut.
Currently at the site, there are two separate driveways, one for each of the houses.
Each of those driveways is slightly over 20 feet wide.
So we are actually significantly improving the pedestrian and bicycle walk pathway here
because we are taking away 40 plus feet of curb cut and only putting in one single curb cut for everything.
Again, because of the traffic, the reason why we wanted to do that was this way we will have private trash collection
and all deliveries and trash and whatnot will be done internally.
I know there's a lot of issues in the neighborhood with the breaking up of Delmar Street,
and the last thing we wanted to do was having deliveries on the front avenue of Delmar.
Again, here's kind of a side cut, and these are all images that were taken directly from
the CDR presentation.
You know, here's our middle building, and then you can see we are taking out a significant
portion of the rear property and again we've now removed this location. What you can see up here
and what we attempted to do with the this large green space in here is that
up and down Delmar as you saw all of those row houses right here while it's not their backyards
there is no development in behind them. So what we did was we tried to maintain that open
that open line where we've pulled away significantly from the steep slopes
here again obviously not necessarily that important for this board the materiality was an
issue and the coloring was an issue so we changed dramatically in in favor of what cdr wanted
and then here just a few renderings of of what we had so mr will i'm just interrupt for a moment
What you're showing us now, the revisions, the RCO has not seen them?
Chairman, the RCO is represented by Ms. Sarah Alderfer.
She was presented with the revised plans.
She has seen them.
The head of the RCO, it was represented to me, has, she communicated, well, Ms. Alderfer
is on.
She can obviously speak for herself.
I understand that she spoke with her client and that her client reviewed the revised plans
and determined that they were still not interested in having any further communications with us or
meetings, either informally or formally. We have offered every which way, you know, informal,
formal, however they wanted to do it. You know, we obviously, it was a big swing and a miss,
and that's on us on our first project um here and what happened was you know we made you know
obviously you know this was our first presentation and the RCO hated it um and that's why we you
know dramatically reduced uh everything about what we were doing um so with that and the revised
plans either get rid of or make us make our plan um significantly more in compliance with
the uh the requirements in fact our new plan this plan um comes even just shy of meeting
the open space requirement for an rsd3 project there's currently no stormwater management
on the property so i understand that these homes down here have complained to the neighborhood
about getting water in their basement because again this is extremely steep slope
we have a you know preliminary approval for a pwd approved stormwater management which we will do
for the entire parcel and you know feel like we've we've greatly enhanced and this is a situation
where quite honestly even though the rco refused to participate that the project or the process
worked you know cdr really uh put us through the ringer um so did planning commission staff
and we bent over backwards to try to meet and did meet every single issue that they raised
and did meet every single uh issue that they raised um so again obviously it's a it's a
meaty project i know there's going to be some opposition here um i'm happy to uh to kind of
stop here and call my witnesses quickly so i don't belabor any issues unless uh the board has any
questions for me any questions uh as of now for the from the board no no all right no let's get
your witnesses sworn in and then we'll move on all right thank you chairman um miss sunkett
you should see a david di rienzo i would like to call him yes he can unmute himself and wait to be
sworn in oh good morning can you hear me yes please identify yourself sir first and last name
spell your last name for the record and i'll swear you in david di rienzo last name d-e-r-i-e-n
N-Z-O.
We're in a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And your interest in this property is?
I am one of the developers on the project.
I'm a partner.
I also live on Delmar Street, and I'm also a member of the Civic Association.
Thank you.
Please proceed, Mr. Whalen.
All right.
Thank you, Mr. DiCicco.
So, Mr. DiRienzo, you said it already, but you're here on behalf of the equitable owner
and the developers of the project, correct? Correct. Okay. And I think you said you also,
you are in the real estate business. You're a broker as well, correct? Yes, I am. Okay. And
I think you mentioned it already, but you're extremely familiar with not only this neighborhood,
but with Delmar Street, correct? Yes, correct. I've been on Delmar Street for close to 13 years
now. And by Benon, you mean you've lived on Delmar Street, correct? Yes. And you have
developed other properties on Delmar Street as well? I have. And how would you describe
the immediate nature of, or immediate neighborhood in Delmar Street as far as
characteristics and development? Yeah. What happened was when I first moved here 13 years ago,
It was not as dense as is now on the 200 block of Delmar Street.
It's basically a hodgepodge of row homes, twins, back to row homes, twins, row homes, twins, with these few single families at the end of the block.
But it's predominant. It's almost predominantly row homes at this point.
All right. Now, would you, do you think that the existing nature of the row home, sorry, of the existing homes, even if redeveloped into, you know, obviously large stately homes on 5,000 square foot lots, would be characteristic of the neighborhood at this time?
uh absolutely not uh it would it would be completely out of character to have those
houses now it's just it would be it would be a 180 from the row homes that are on the 200 block
right and i think you said that basically all of those homes on the 200 block have been built
since you moved to um delmar street correct correct yes when i first moved on to delmar
Street, it looked nothing like what it does today. If you had told me Delmar Street would look like
this 13 years ago, I would have laughed and called you crazy. I appreciate that. Now, obviously with
you living on the block, I have our rendering up. This is your house, correct? Correct, it is.
So you live personally immediately across from this property?
Yes, I live across the property.
That's still under construction, but I do live across from the property.
And I know there's been a lot of discussion about traffic and issues raised about traffic
throughout this process.
Could you describe what you find the traffic to be since you've lived there?
It is very, very minimal.
There's a couple cars pass by each day.
It's mostly Amazon, UPS, delivery trucks.
A couple of the adjacent neighbors, you know, go to work in the morning and come home.
And you might get a couple cars a day that swing around from Lamont.
But by and large, there's very, very minimal traffic.
And now, Mr. DiRienzo, you mentioned the delivery trucks, UPS, Amazon.
on um do those snarl the the Delmar uh driving path while they uh when they stop and make their
deliveries no no I mean generally uh they're they're really good about it they'll pull off to
No, no. I mean, generally, they're really good about it. They'll pull off to the side. And, you know, there's plenty of space to go up and down Delmar Street. It is 16 feet wide. But the reality is there's not much on-street parking because everybody has front-facing garages and front-loaded driveways.
the side
I'll see you then.
So you really have a full width on the majority of Delmar Street.
Okay. I will offer Mr. DiRienzo for any questions that the board may have.
Any questions from the board?
Thank you. I'd like to move on if we could with the...
Of course. I'm just going to... I neglected to have Mr. DiRienzo adopt my testimony.
Adopt your testimony. Yep.
Mr. DiRienzo, you heard all of the testimony and representations I made in this application?
Yes, I did.
And do you believe them to be true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
And would you adopt them as your own?
Thank you very much.
Mr. DiRienzo, did I hear you say initially you're a member of the RCO?
Yes, I'm a member of the Ridge Park Civic Association.
Are you a board member or just a member because you reside here?
Yeah, just a member because I reside there and paid my $20 due fee.
So I have a couple other witnesses that I will move through very quickly.
Are they going to give us anything new and different than you've presented in your testimony?
Yes, they will.
I understand, Chairman.
I know it's not your fault we may have to I'm not sure how we're going to get through this we
have about 15 cases still to go on the morning list uh Tanya were you going to say something
yes chair um on that note um if at any time you wish to continue a case I could work with the
date with the applicant slash attorney uh or continue a case I also have the attorney
for the RCO, Sarah Aldefer, I'm here waiting, who also has to put a case on regarding this,
just as a FYI. We're going to just, I think we're going to, we're almost forced into having
to continue this, but so Mr. Whalen, just wrap up on your end, and then we'll figure out what
we're going to, we're going to have to continue this, so let's wrap up your side. Okay, happy to.
Thank you. Ms. Sunket, you should see an Alex Trunk.
Well, actually, it's over 100 people, so I won't see anyone unless they raise their
hands.
I'm sorry.
Mr. Trunk, please raise your hand by clicking in the bottom center of the Zoom meeting.
He has been unmuted here and ready to be sworn in.
you're on mute good morning sir please identify yourself for the record name and address
alexander trunk a-l-e-x-a-n-d-e-r-t-r-u-n-k that's 919 north 19th street philadelphia pa
thank you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes please proceed all right mr trunk you're here from uh ruggiero plant and you're associated with
this project, correct? Yes. And you helped prepare the plans? Correct. And did you also hear all of
the testimony and representations that I made in this matter? I did. Okay. And did you understand
them to be true and correct to the best of your knowledge and belief? Yes. And would you adopt
them as your own? I would. Okay. And just very quickly, since this was not information that I
presented uh what was the original square foot of green space in the plan 1057 square feet
okay and what what was the uh green space in the in the revised plan square five thousand eight
hundred and fifty six okay so you know we we multiplied it by a factor of five correct
Yes, it's a 554% increase.
All right.
And Mr. Trunk, we obviously didn't receive any refusals with regard to steep slopes,
but we have no issues with steep slopes of greater than 25% in this matter, correct?
Correct.
We have over a five-foot overdig around every single thing that is being proposed,
whether it be a building or a retaining wall.
And then finally, are you aware of any stormwater management on the property as it currently exists?
And then finally, are you aware of any stormwater management on the property as it
There is none on record.
All right.
And however, we have prepared and received preliminary approval for a full site stormwater management plan with PWD, correct?
Yes, for 100% capturing of all impervious surfaces that are being proposed.
All right.
Thank you very much, Mr. Trunk.
Chairman, I offer Mr. Trunk for any questions that the board may have.
Questions from the board? No.
Do you have anyone else, Mr. Whelan? Yes, I do. Two more and I will be very brief in both.
Ms. Sunket, Matt Huffman should have raised his hand. Matt, if you haven't raised your hand,
please raise your hand. He's available. Good morning, sir. Please identify yourself
Now for the record, spell your first and last name, and I'll swear you in.
Matthew Huffman, M-A-T-H-E-W, H-U-F-F-M-A-N.
You're in the term to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
And you're interested in this case?
I'm the architect.
Okay, Mr. Whelan.
All right, Mr. Huffman, did you hear all of the representations and testimony that I presented in this matter?
I did.
And do you believe them to be true and correct to the best of your knowledge and belief?
And would you adopt them as your own?
I would.
Okay. So just one quick set of questions then, Mr. Huffman.
Did you perform an analysis of the neighborhood and housing types along Delmar Street in the neighborhood?
All right. And how would you describe the neighborhood and Delmar Street?
As you previously described it, you know, row houses, you know, twins.
I mean, obviously you can see it on the image you're presenting right now.
All right.
Thank you very much.
And just one final question.
You know, the question hasn't been raised yet, but may come up.
What would a buy-write project with single-family homes on these properties yield?
well if we were to do rsa3 we would uh you know eight units seven to eight units i'm sorry you
you believe rsd3 right which is what it currently i'm sorry yes okay so that would be seven or eight
units with uh meeting all the dimensional requirements and and whatnot correct correct
Okay. Thank you very much. And finally, in your professional opinion, does the redesigned project
meet all the criteria for the variance grant? You mean for the CDR or for the...
Sorry, under the Philadelphia Zoning Code, do we meet all the criteria for the grant of a variance
here to have our project approved as revised? Yes. Thank you very much. Chairman, I offer
up Mr. Huffman for any questions that the board may have any questions from the board no no okay
okay you have all your witnesses uh last witness uh Ms. Sunket if you could
Ms. Nancy Templeton should be raising her hand
she's available
all right thank you miss templeton uh sorry chair i'm jumping the gun
no problem miss templeton please identify yourself spell your first and last name and i'll
swear you in uh thank you nancy templeton ch planning uh that's t-e-m-p-l-e-t-o-n
we're in a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do mr whalen all right
uh if it pleased the board i'm happy to forego uh confirming miss templeton as a as an expert
she's testified numerous times if i would relate to that thank you thank you uh miss templeton
uh did you hear all of the testimony that i presented in this matter i did and is it true
and correct to the best of your knowledge and belief? It is. And would you adopt it as your own?
I would. All right. And obviously, Ms. Templeton, we've got time constraints today. So if you would,
you prevent, you, sorry, presented an in-depth planning report as part of this project, correct?
I did. Thank you. And that's incorporated in my exhibit package. So if you could,
could you just provide the conclusion that you made or came to uh at your report for the board
uh yes um i i do agree that the um the proposal
I do agree that the proposed project meets the criteria for zoning variance.
The Delmar Street block and the surrounding neighborhood have undergone significant change over the last 10 to 15 years.
Rowhouse and single-family attached development have become the dominant development pattern despite the downzoning of the subject property and other surrounding properties to RSD3.
the proposed development plan is consistent with the development pattern on the same and surrounding
blocks the plan has been designed to protect sleep steep slopes on the property provide
additional central green space introduce new pedestrian connections and provide a consistent
and complementary streetscape design along delmar street and uh miss templeton just for
clarification this was all your opinion is not with regard to the original plan but uh is specific
to the revised plan we presented today yes okay thank you very much um mr chairman i present uh
miss templeton for any questions or comments that the board may have thank you any questions from
the board for miss templeton no thank you tanya i'm going to need a date all right um just one
last thing that i realized i neglected to state for the board's benefit i'll show it on the screen
here. While the RCO was wildly opposed, the only adjacent neighbor that is opposed lives right
here. I believe he submitted a letter yesterday. We have support from all other neighbors,
all other adjacent properties that I'm circling right now. So those letters of support have been
there. And I believe that one of those members is actually, or one of those neighbors is actually
holding on the line so let me ask you this you said that the near neighbors except for the one
are in support they're in support of the revised plan correct uh the revised plan yes and how did
they come about to see that is that through a meeting or just conversation so i apologize i
was moving too fast um i can have mr di rienzo testify to this very quickly um mr di rienzo
spent extensive time going door-to-door. He lives there. He's gone door-to-door formally.
All right. We don't need his testimony yet. I just was curious how that came about. Okay.
Okay. All right. We have a date, Tanya? I can get a date. I have promoted Sarah Alderfer,
who represents the RCO. If you want to turn it, just put a record. But I can work at a date in
the meantime okay uh good morning mr chair members of the board sarah aldifer s-a-r-a-h-a-l-d-e-r-f-e-r
1500 jfk boulevard suite 800 philadelphia um i'm here today representing the coordinating rco rich
park civic organization um do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth i do please proceed um so mr chair um i understand that there's been discussion of the
continuance um so that the list can move on and um i can then present a full presentation
um i just wanted to note for the record that i have several objections to mr whalen's presentation
um and i was not able to participate until this time when i was promoted to panelists so i'd like
to preserve those objections for the record at this time, or if you like, I can discuss them at
the continued hearing date. I think it might be better at the continued hearing date. I wanted
to get Mr. Whaling's stuff all in, and the only thing I would encourage is I don't have the
authority, but I would suggest that your client, you discuss with your clients, at least have a
meeting uh with the applicant they can always still be against it but I don't I can't understand
why they refuse to meet that just doesn't add up in my mind so uh again I can't Mr. Chair if I may
um I would just like to add that this revised plan creates an additional refusal under table 14701-1
of the code so our you know in addition to you know the practical issues of the meeting there's
or procedural issue here of the applicant needing to obtain an amended refusal in order to proceed.
So that's part of the calculus as well regarding a new meeting.
Okay. All right. Mr. Chairman, I would simply just, you know, strongly object the revised plan,
which was presented to zoning council and walked through and accepted as a proviso plan,
does nothing to change any refusals that were granted. And in every way, shape, and form
brings the plan more into compliance with any and all requirements of the zoning code it is it is a
dramatic lessening and reduction of what we are seeking and asking all right and we'll
and reduction of what we are seeking and asking all right and we'll we'll we'll we'll let you
folks argue that at the continued hearing excuse me this is sharon slutt i would have one question
for miss aldifer um are you requesting that mr whalen bring his witnesses back for cross-examination
yes i am okay thank you okay tanya do we have a date
or do you want to so we can actually do next tuesday let me just make sure
i have a feeling it may be a little bit lengthy uh let's uh take that into consideration
next tuesday at 2 p.m okay mi2020-001205209 delmar street is
continued to chairman if i if i may um miss alder for i'm not sure if this affects you as well
uh maybe the planning commission can confirm since i don't have it up in front of me i believe that
november 10th is um uh whatchamacallit the next cdr date and i believe i have three projects going
before cdr starting at one o'clock on that day yes november 10th is a civic design review meeting
the planning commission meeting is november 17th okay um so if i may be so bold and rude as to ask
could we push our meeting to the following week uh the 16th through the 20th that will also give
us the opportunity if the rco changes its mind uh to meet with us next week um either informally or
i guess not formally but informally
do we have a date for that week
if not we'll have to do it a week later we'll do december 15th at 3 30
okay so mi2020-001205209 delmar street is continued to december the 15th at 9 30 a.m
no 3 30 i'm sorry 3 30 p.m
okay okay next case thank you um chair before you move on to the next case um we have had
we've had a request on one of the add-ons that you heard earlier um mi 2020 001280 260 to 262
Giger Street. Mr. Notkinson contacted me to request that the board revote this with a proviso
clarifying that the existing previously approved uses are to remain. This would be consistent with
the plans that were submitted and I believe what was submitted to the RCO. It would simply
clarify what was approved when he attempts to get permits at L&I.
why don't you since you have that information why don't you put that out there for the record
and then uh do we need to revote it yes please all right mr mr chair and uh miss saleta i i thought
that that uh might need me but i think that we are completely done and yes yes you and sarah thank
you okay thank you very much for your time today and good luck with this long list
thank you i apologize if i interrupted you no no you're you're you're right sarah thank you
so geiger street right geiger geiger geiger i should also say that i had this on the add-on
it is also on your regular hearing list i saw that yeah but i put that aside so we don't have
we already heard that right right so it is do you want me to read please please do sure it's
MI 2020-001280, 260-262, Geiger Road.
All right, and what was the language?
The requested proviso is
existing previously approved uses to remain.
So that would be the proviso for MI 2020-001280,
260-62, Geiger Road.
my vote is yes with the proviso
that's just been read into the record by Ms. Saleta.
Yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
Address it?
Is that the way
we're okay with that, Sharon?
Yes, thank you for re-voting it.
Okay, thank you.
Hold on,
Professor, hold on one second, I'm sorry.
How's our stenographer doing?
You need a break?
We have quite a few cases.
i'm okay sure just give me a signal when you're ready all right thank you okay all right sorry
I'm okay.
Just give me a signal when you're ready.
All right.
Thank you.
All right.
confessor please proceed i'm sorry could i um ask about the case that we moved aside
all right say that again the case that we moved aside
yes okay i was want me to call that one in yes yep that's the one we were looking to see if we
got the exhibits, correct? Correct, correct. As I believe it was. Okay. MI 2020-001209 1519 West
Benango Street. Okay, and Lajon, is that? Yes. Is that how you pronounce your name? Yes, Lajon, yes.
Okay. So unfortunately, the requested documents were not submitted timely. Therefore, this case
will have to be continued. Okay. And we do apologize for that. No worries. But if you
look at the documentation that was sent to you, there's a number of different emails that those
documents should go to. Planning Commission, Sharon Saleta, the attorney of record for the
zoning board and to the RCO ZBA. And when you're continued, those exhibits have to go to those
boxes in order to go forward with your hearing, you will be notified of your new hearing.
Okay, thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. So MI 2020-0012091519 West Venango is continued.
Next one up, MI 2020-00193, 214 West Oxford Street.
This is Sharon Saleta, the attorney is Sean Ward and Mr. Ward has submitted revised plans, two pages.
did i miss frankfurt
frankfurt avenue's uh number eight on our list 39 45
maybe i got lost where are we at confessor we're number four okay thank you 214 west oxford
mr ward
i am here good morning to all please identify yourself sir good morning
good morning mr ward please identify yourself for the record
okay good morning mr chairman john ward on behalf of the applicant joseph mcafree mr mcafree should
be on the line too. I would ask it this time that he raise his hands so Tanya can at least
identify his location on her board. My name is again Sean Ward, S-H-A-W-N-W-A-R-D, attorney
for the applicant. My address is 331 East. You're kind of, something's wrong with your
kind of freeze and we can't
hear you and then you're back in. You're fading in
and out.
So this
could be, Mr. Ward, a problem
because of the
video. So if it's okay
with you, I'm going to stop your video.
It might allow your
connectivity to work better
or internet service and let's try to
go that way.
Mr. Ward?
Am I back?
It's still happening.
You're fading in and out.
I stopped my video.
Can you at least hear me?
I can hear you now.
try that again all right um my client my my client advised me to stop my video he said that
might might help it so uh you'll have to go my headshot today um but you can hear me now
yes you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing about the truth
yes i do mr chairman good morning sean ward s-h-a-w-n-w-a-r-d on behalf of the applicant
Joseph McCaffrey. I believe Mr. McCaffrey is on the call. He should raise his hand at this time.
So do you agree to wait to read in a bit of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do, confessor.
Yes, I do, confessor. Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copied the refusal, folders, and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I did.
Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Please proceed.
Yes, I do.
frank we're ready to go am i good yes please proceed okay great uh mr chairman i've included
in my exhibit my typical exhibit packet a1 through a5 are the housekeeping items a1 being the notice
of refusal this is a permit for the erection of a single family dwelling with two accessory
off-street parking spaces resulted in a refusal because the parking spaces are not accessed from
a shared driveway, alley, or rear street. Accordingly, we seek a variance today. A2 is the
A1, there's the refusal. A2 is the application of appeal. A3 would be the project information form
followed by the deed and of course our proof of tax compliance you can see taxes are paid through
2020. The next exhibit is the site plan
as you can see this is a corner property at the corner of
period this is at the corner of west oxford street and phillips street uh one block in
off of north american uh currently the site is the subject of an existing depressed curb cut
approved by streets and zoning back in 2001 the applicant proposes
and by the way it's a it's a vacant lot used for off street parking presently the applicant proposes
the erection of a single family dwelling and seeks to relocate the curb cut from oxford street
to the rear of the property on the phillips street side the original plans filed with
the department continued to use the Oxford Street curb cut upon discussions with the
streets department. And it just made more sense to move the curb cut to the side.
It does a couple of things for us. It eliminates this curb cut on Oxford Street,
thus eliminating a no parking zone on oxford street so it adds one more uh off on street
parking space and it adds to off street parking spaces that would be accessed through the rear
curb cut into the uh first floor garage so uh that being said um we again here's
You see the front of the structure is here.
You have your typical pedestrian entryway into the property with windows on the front of the property.
At the rear of the property, you would have the garage door for access to the garage.
It would be a tandem-spaced parking lot.
Did we lose him?
Frank?
Frank, I think we lost your volume.
Confessor?
Yes, Tonya?
It looks like we lost Frank's volume.
Sean Ward looked like he phased out.
So it's up to you all if you wanted to move forward and resume his once he returns.
So it's up to you all if you wanted to move forward and resume his once he returns.
Yeah, that'll work.
Okay, so we're going to set this one aside.
And Frank, I'm sorry, you may have to go out and come back in because we can't hear you.
Thanks, confessor, unless you want to pause for a moment.
Okay, let's see if Frank gets, he usually gets back up quick.
Let's see.
He is fast.
Here we go.
Got you back, Frank.
We may have the results of the presidential election before we get done with this list.
I know.
So, Frank, Sean Ward phased out.
It looks like we have to wait from the return.
So, if it's okay with you, we'll move forward.
We'll go to the next case and we'll come back to Sean. Thank you. Number five.
Next one up. It's M.I. That's number six, right? M.I.
Number five.
Twenty seconds. 2204 North Second.
Number five was continued, wasn't it?
No, that was not continued.
we have and just to let you know we received a letter of non-opposition from councilwoman
sanchez that she said was based on the rco letter in support okay mi 2020-001-203-2204 north
2nd street anyone in attendance for 2204 north 2nd street uh yes chair i promoted theodore
zellers thank you good morning please identify yourself for the record spell your first and last
name. I think we're having technical difficulties with this one as well. All right, let's go
to number six. I'm sorry, number eight, right? Mr. Zellers, it might be a good idea for you
to log in again to see if it works. If not, then you could just use audio by phone.
Give me one second to clean up, let me get rid of him.
David Solomon are you here for the next case that we call I'm here can you hear me yes
I'm here with Ted for 22 North 2nd Street, 2204 North 2nd Street.
Are you the owner?
I am not the owner.
I'm the architect.
All right.
We still can't get, was it Mr. Zeller, I believe it was?
I'm going to try one more time to promote him and see if that works.
Mr. Zeller can you do a test
Of your audio
No it's not working
Okay let's go to
Number eight
I'm sorry
May I present on Ted's behalf
Unfortunately no
You can add to his testimony if he need you
But he has to make the presentation
Okay number eight
uh mi 2020-001213 3945 frankfurt avenue before we begin in case sean if you can hear us we'll
come back to you after this case thank you mr chairman i am back on all right we'll get back
to you. Thank you. Anyone here for 3945 Frankfurt Avenue? David, are you here for this case?
Yes, I am. Can you hear me? Yes. Are you the attorney? Yes, I am. Okay, I will promote you
the panelists thank you and good morning david uh please identify yourself with a record spell
your full name and i'll swear you in
And I'll swear you in.
Can you hear me?
Okay, great.
David Schutte here on behalf of the applicant, Lyft, Inc.
please spell your name for the record please uh first name david d-a-v-i-d last name
shuddy t-s-h-u-d-y with the law firm of troutman pepper hamilton sanders llp my my office is at 100
market street suite 200 harrisburg pennsylvania 17108
you sign a firm to tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but the truth
Do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copied the refusal, photos and planes five days prior to this
hearing?
Last Wednesday, I submitted the entire package to the ZBA.
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, we met with the Harrow Gate Civic Organization and the letters within our exhibit booklet at Exhibit 13, I believe.
And what is the result of that meeting with the RCO?
The RCO supported the application.
Okay, so I'm asking that, of course, in the interest of time, if you could give us a brief overview of your application.
excuse me this is sharon saletta we also have a letter in non-opposition from councilman squilla
thank you please proceed sir sure thank you uh lyft inc is a ride-sharing service who uh
leases the property at 3945 frankfort avenue the property is about 1.8 acres
and is improved at the 7500 square foot building that has historically been used for automobile
service, as well as automobile sales and other automobile uses over the last 30, 40 years.
However, the property is located in the CMX 2 zoning district.
Lyft desires to use the property for automobile sales and rental as part of its rental program
and wishes to use the property for automobile repair and maintenance as part of its car maintenance program.
We received a refusal because the property was no longer legally non-conforming as an automobile use.
As indicated already, we met with the Harrogate Civic Association on October 15th of this year,
and the RCO voted nearly unanimously to approve the application.
And as was indicated also, Council Member Sequilla has, as I indicated, his non-opposition.
And that letter was sent to the Zoning Hearing Board, I believe, yesterday.
And we also supplemented our application with that information as well.
The variance is warranted because the property really cannot be used for any other use other than an automobile use, given the shape, size, and existing improvements on the property.
And the use of the property for the proposed uses does not in any way harm the health, safety, and welfare of the community.
If I could now ask Lily Lim of Lyft to raise her hand so she can jump in here quickly.
She or she can unmute herself and be sworn in.
Morning, Ms. Lim.
Please identify yourself, spell your first and last name.
yes my name is lily lim l-i-l-y-l-i-m uh you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes thank you david and lily are you the planning and development manager
for lifting yes and did everything i just say to the uh board was that true and correct
Board, was that true and correct?
yes and would you adopt that as your own
And would you adopt that as your own testimony?
We have nothing further, Chairman, and we're open for questions.
Thank you.
Any questions from the Board?
Planning Commission?
Chairman and members of the Board, this is Paula Brumblow-Burns with the City Planning Commission.
we have no objection to the granting of the variance at this location.
Thank you. MI 2020-001213 3945 Frankfurt Avenue. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes. My vote is yes.
Excuse me. This is Sharon Saletter. Mr. Chesutti, can we request that you merge your exhibits and
resubmit them so that we have them as a single record please certainly I believe my assistant
I tried to do that uh last week but we can make sure that that happens thank you very much sure
confessor my vote is yes okay good let's go back to number four I believe Mr. Ward might be able
to communicate with us okay we'll give it a try Mr. Ward I am back can you hear me can hear you
now confessor okay i i don't i don't know what happened there i was listening to every other case
all morning and then of course the russian when it's when it's my turn when it's my turn to go to
bat uh we lost uh all communications that's crazy i am let me just read that in again mi 2020
dash zero zero one one nine three two one four west oxford street
I believe we did this on the record prior to but yes I do I did submit my exhibits five days in
advance and I do have an RCO letter of support for this application and so with with that if
you can be summarized give us all the key points that you need we'd appreciate that
Mr. Chairman, I'm going to be as brief as possible at this point.
Basically, we have an existing curb cut on Oxford Street.
My client wants to develop a single-family dwelling on the site.
We look to relocate the parking curb cut from the front to the side of the property
for access to a two-car garage with the South Kensington Community Partners
on two separate occasions, one before their zoning committee review meeting.
and then once at a publicly advertised and held community meeting, whereby they supported the application.
The letter of support is attest and submitted to the board.
I would point out that there is no parking on Phillips Street, either side of the street.
So we are not taking any parking off of Phillips Street, but yet we are adding one space back to Oxford
by eliminating the existing curb cut that was approved by zoning and streets department back in 2001
if if the board needs any additional information i'm here to give it
my client is on the line and he can verify and adopt if the board is you want to get your client
to adopt your testimony yes uh mr mccaffrey are you on the line if not could you please
raise your hand so tanya can unmute you good morning yes i'm on the line good morning sir
joe please please identify yourself with the record spell your last name and i'll swear you in
yes my name is joseph mccaffrey j-o-s-e-p-h-m-c-c-a-f-f-e-r-y and i'm the owner and applicant
thank you swearing a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed joe you've heard my representations to the board are they true
correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief? Yes, they are. And would you adopt
them as your own testimony? Yes, I do. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Do you have
revised plans, Sean? Yes, I will. Yeah, revised plans. I'm going to just out of the abundance
of caution, I'm going to send fresh copies to Sharon right now. That's not necessary. I have
them revised plans two pages okay thank you questions from the board no no anyone else
like to testify in this case if so raise your hand
no hand thank you planning commission chairman and members of the board i'm paula burblah burns
with the city planning commission this property is indicated for residential use on the comprehensive
The curb cut is going to now be located on the side of the property where it will not impact street parking.
The curb cut is going to now be located on the side of the property where it will not impact street parking.
Accordingly, we have no objection.
Thank you. MI 2020-001193214 West Oxford Street.
My vote is yes with the proviso revised plan. Two pages adopted today.
Yes, the proviso.
Yes, the proviso.
Okay, good luck.
Do we want to try to go back to 2204 North 2nd?
That was Mr. Zellers, I believe.
You were having technical difficulties.
If not, we'll keep that on the side and go to number nine.
And Tanya, continue that one.
Remember, he didn't send his packet.
is that um no i thought he was technical difficulty yeah he was having technical
problems and he's still not available at the moment so all right so we'll move on we'll go to
number nine confessor okay number nine mi 2020-001-197-3961 north fairhill street
this is sharon saletta we have a letter of non-opposition from councilwoman sanchez
that is based on the rco letter in support thank you anyone here on 3961 north fairhill
i should tell you that the gentleman who presented who submitted the plans and who
spoke earlier in this hearing is alberto perez yes he's available um mr perez if you can unmute
yourself i believe he might want a continuance but okay he's available i'm sorry hi um good
morning again mr perez good morning are you are you requesting a continuance i'm sorry uh if the
The councilwoman's office will approve and will allow us to make the change.
We will still submit the paper that they are expecting from us.
We haven't received it from the city.
All right.
We're waiting for, was it the rental license or something?
Correct.
Excuse me.
This is Sharon Saleta.
I'm not sure how he could provide a rental license until he has his own permit.
But also, Mr. Paris, are you the property owner?
No, the owner was not able to get here today.
I worked on the drawings and I have been doing all the paperwork.
Okay, thank you.
We're going to have to continue this then, right?
The owner needs to testify or an attorney representing the owner.
Okay. Okay. All right. Yes. Thank you. MI 2020-001197-3961 North Fairhill is continued.
MI 20, number 11. MI 2020-001194-3211-19, Chatham Street.
The attorney is Leo Mulvihill.
Good morning, Mr. Mulvihill.
Good morning.
You're still under oath from earlier this morning.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Good morning, members of the board.
Leo Mulvihill, M-U-L, V as in Victor, I-H-I-L-L.
2424 East York Street, Suite 111, Philadelphia 19125, here today on behalf of the applicant,
Arsons Construction, LLC.
I agree to waive the refusal and I stipulate to its accuracy.
Great.
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof
of tax compliance, copy of the refusal, or refer voters and plans five days prior to
this hearing?
I have emailed the materials, they were submitted slightly late in that we were waiting for
the letter of support from PROPAC, but they have all been emailed to the required email addresses,
I believe on Monday. Are we okay to go? Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Please proceed.
Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Please proceed and I understand there's is there the letter from the
RCO is that a letter in non-opposition? Correct. All right there okay so if you could summarize
as best you can obviously put on the record whatever you've deemed is the most important
thing. Yes incorporating my entire packet for the record members of the board. Today what we're
seeking to do is take a large parcel indicated on page nine of my packet. It is both this blue
area indicating with my cursor and the larger yellow parcel directly next to it. Taking these
parcels, which are currently occupied by one-story garages that do not allow for all-street parking,
I'm going to be showing you a photo in one moment. For purpose of the record, page 21 shows a photo
of the property as it exists today. What my client seeks to do is take this parcel, which is
approximately 7,660 feet, subdivide it into six parcels, each about 17 feet wide. Each will then
be about 1,276 square feet large. Of course, the refusal that we've received as a result is that
these lots are undersized. They are not 1,440 square feet. However, members of the board,
looking now to page 33 of my packet, we can see the proposed subdivision plan, the adjacent
parcels, and these parcels are actually larger than the surrounding existing single-family homes
directly adjacent. Moving back a little bit, members of the board, just to page 27, you can
see here that this is a residential block for the most part. We're just above Allegheny Avenue,
which is a commercial block. To the right, the green garages are the subject parcel. To the left
of this photograph is a two or three-story commercial building. I am currently unsure
of its use. However, we're seeking to build single-family homes. For purposes of the record,
now moving to page 36. Here's the elevation that's been prepared by our architects, Harman Deutsch
Oler, three-story brick homes not to exceed 38 feet, roof decks, brick facades. The rear yards
members of the board, if we looked at the site plans once again, are rather large.
And that's simply because, moving back to page 33 for purposes of the record and zooming in,
we wanted to essentially keep our building massing relatively similar to what was already
on the property or already on the adjacent structures rather than going significantly larger.
Someone has a phone on would you please mute it? Yes that's somebody trying to call me chairman,
my apologies. Okay no problem. Okay so as you can see we have large open areas we only take up about
50 percent of the yacht of the lots themselves of the buildings. If we went any larger these would
be huge mansions on a relatively small block, which just doesn't make any sense. So the houses
themselves are going to be priced around $399, but they're around 2,500 square feet, so not
anything too large, but relatively decently sized. With our meeting with ProPAC, which we held last
week, we sent out our well-timed notifications, and I have proof of mailings in my packet.
It was attended by one person, Ken Paul, who is the chair, and he did not voice any opposition to this project.
My client, Arson, may be on the line.
Arson, if you are, please raise your hand and then introduce yourself by spelling your first and last name and giving your mailing address for purposes of the court reporter.
Arson, you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Can you hear me?
Arson, will you please state your name, spell your last name,
and give your mailing address for the record?
My name is Arson Ustayev.
That's A-R-S-E-N, last name, U-S-T-A-Y-E-V, as in Victor.
Mailing address, 1265 Grenoble Road, Ivyland, PA, 18974.
You're swearing to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed, Mr. Mark.
Arson, now you've heard my testimony today?
And you're the principal of Arson's Construction LLC, the owner for this project?
Has my testimony been true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Do you adopt my testimony as your own?
Thank you, Arson. I don't have any other questions for you.
Members of the board, in closing, we're proposing six modest single-family homes
in a single-family district are subdivided lots while under the 1,440 square foot minimum
lot size requirement for RSA 5 districts are larger than the surrounding lots.
are larger than the surrounding lots. So our hardship is simply we're trying to match the
So our hardship is simply we're trying to
community in size and shape on dimensions of these lots. We can't make more land when there isn't,
and the other option would be to make extremely wide homes that do not fit the character of the
block. So we request that because this proposal will not cause any problems to the city or to
neighbors, and because there is a hardship in developing this lot by right, that you respectfully
grant a request for a variance in this instance thank you questions from the board no
no anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no no hands thank you planning commission members of the board
yes i've just received a notification from my architect that there was a proviso and a
revision to the plans that i have submitted to you so what i will do is respectfully ask to
be taken off the record and ensure that i get those materials over to you if i hadn't already
i'll have to double check my email i will go forward to vote how many pages
I believe it's just the one page that was submitted um chair we can't vote them until
I've had a chance to review them and ensure that it doesn't um generate any additional refusals
yeah so I'll verify that and I'll go off the record at this point members of the
board my apologies for that oversight no problem so Sharon we can uh move this to uh close the
record or no um Mr Mulvihill will you be able to have them to meet by the end of this session
I should.
I'm just going to double check it in my email box
to make sure that I did it.
All right, so we'll put this aside.
Perhaps announce that it will be voted
at the two o'clock session.
Well, just let me double check.
Well, we have to wait for the revised plan
and get the Planning Commission to weigh in, right?
The Planning Commission's ready.
Planning Commission.
Chairman and members of the board, this is Paula Brumbelow-Burns with the City Planning Commission.
This property is indicated for residential use on the comprehensive plan. The proposed
lots are in character with the remainder of the residential properties on the block.
Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the variance.
Thank you. So, I just lost my spot. How about, Mr. Mulvihill, if you're able to get it to us by
the end of the session, the board can vote it in this session. If not, let me know and they can
announce when they were going to vote it certainly it's just a matter of double checking my email to
make sure i did send you the correct ones thank you okay thank you all right so we'll set aside
3211-19 chatham street waiting for a revised plan set that aside uh number 12 12 mi 2020-001232
4550 Wayne Avenue chair I'm promoting attorney Darlene three good afternoon miss three please
identify yourself with the record and I'll swear you in
good afternoon commissioners darlene three for the applicant wayne commons llc 2101 pine street
philadelphia pa 19103 uh chair we're going to swear her and when you get a moment
you're trying to tell the truth the whole truth for nothing but the truth
yes i do and do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
Yes, I do.
Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copied the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you.
Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, actually, there are two letters from two different RCOs.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
May, can you see my screen?
Yes, we can.
Commissioners, we applied to the ZVA to convert this property into a three-family dwelling.
I submitted a presentation package which contains the required documents, the refusal, the appeal,
the property information form, the deed.
I really was not able to print a tax clearance form off of the web.
I really was not able to print a tax clearance form off of the website, but I did print a form
off of the Department of Revenue's website, which shows that the taxes for these property,
trying to find it here.
Give me a second here.
We have a zero balance as of October 28th, 22, on the Department of Revenue website.
Commissioners, I'm just going to skip to our plans right here.
Here is the elevation of the building.
We don't plan to do any modifications, expansions.
The footprint of the building will remain the same to this building.
We just plan to clean up the outside of the building.
Pardon the interruption, Ms. Three, but all we have is your RCO summary form still up.
So if you wish, you can unshare that particular document and then share the ones that you might be looking at.
so i'm going to take this one down so that's unshared and now if you can proceed with what
you're looking at hit the share button and then click on the documents you wish to show
does that work miss sunket not yet hit the share screen button first
and then click on your documents.
They're coming up now.
Thank you very much, Tanya.
So I'll just skin right back down to the information from the Department of Revenue,
which shows that our tax balance, according to the Department of Revenue,
on page nine of these exhibits are clear. Here we go right here. I'm then going to
scan down to the plans to explain what we plan to do with this property.
This is the elevation of the property. We don't plan to change the footprint of the building at
all. All we plan to do is renovate the interior of the property. We would like to renovate the
interior of this property to a nice size three-family dwelling. You can see that we have no
plans for the use of the basement. The first floor you come in from Wayne Avenue and we have a good
size living room, two bedrooms, a kitchen, and a bathroom. You can go up the steps here in the
second floor apartment is basically the same designation as the first floor apartment.
The third floor apartment is also a two-bedroom apartment with one bathroom, a kitchen area here,
and some living space. These apartments are approximately 750 square feet, which would be
the third floor apartment, to 1,000 square feet, which would be the first floor and the second
floor apartments. It is our intention to offer what we would call affordable housing to the
residents of this community. Currently, I'm just going to scan down to the pictures.
This property is an abandoned property. It's been abandoned for many, many years. To the left of
the property is a vacant lot which we have maintained, cleaned, and cleared. You can see
the postings of the zoning hearing as well as the posting on the right of the community meeting
showing the people of the community when the meeting would be. The property to the right of
this property is listed as a single-family dwelling. I had an opportunity to speak to some
of the residents of this property. I would submit to you it's really not used as a single-family
dwelling it's a rooming house of some sort i uh spoke to the gentleman pardon the interruption
could you rotate that those exhibits
i wanted to show you the character of the neighborhood where we propose to develop
this three-family dwelling directly across the street is a big large multi-family dwelling that's
Directly across the street is a big, large multifamily dwelling that's coming up.
coming up.
To the left of that building, I think I have another shot here, is another warehouse type building, which I understand is going to be developed into another multifamily dwelling.
I took a picture of the actual block that our property is on.
I would like the board to note that there are, with the exception of this property that I spoke of, and I spoke to the residents of, there are no single family dwellings on this block.
This block is just filled with commercial uses, not the best well-kept block on the top of all of these properties here.
They're pretty much abandoned, and if they were in use, I suspect that they would be apartment or apartment type dwellings there.
Let me just rotate this again for you, I apologize.
I also canvassed both sides of the block up and down Wayne Avenue.
It consists of a few multifamily dwellings.
I took a picture of one.
You can see the three mailboxes or whatever there.
there are many multifamily dwellings on either side of Wayne Avenue. Commissioners, we did have
an opportunity. This is the corner of that block. It's another commercial development. On the top
here, you can see there's no development here, but if it were, it would be a multifamily development
of several apartments if, in fact, it were to be developed. Commissioners, we did have the
opportunity to meet with the silo community organization. I believe they sent a letter to
your attention, which I really would like to address, and if necessary, have my client give
some testimony in regard to the meeting. Commissioners, there were approximately
eight community members in attendance at the meeting who were there specifically for
4550 Wayne Avenue. There was another development there giving a presentation that night on Mannheim
Street. At the end of the meeting when the vote was taken is my recollection and my clients and
also the faith CDC's recollection that there was no one in opposition period to the project there
that we were trying to develop. We presented that we were trying to make housing that people
from the neighborhood could afford. The new development in the neighborhood is very, very
high priced. We represented to the community that our price point for these apartments would be
between $750 and $1,000. This would enable residents that already live in that area to be
able to still live in the area. Each apartment would be suitable for a small family or a single
person with one or two children. I understand that Solo sent in a letter indicating that the
community didn't come to a decision. I would highly disagree with that. There was no opposition
when the vote was taken. I was on the line for the entire time, so was my client. I believe you
also had a letter from the faith CDC who also attended the meeting that evening. Their recollection
of the vote and the concerns of the people at the meeting are consistent with mine. They did
offer a letter indicating that the community supported the development of this property as
requested uh excuse me this is sharon saletta we did receive a letter from solo and i believe that
their representative allison wise is also um in attendance to testify uh miss saletta i also
forwarded to your attention um the letter from the cdc faith community organization i did receive
that thank you okay so if you can uh summarize miss three uh in summary the development that
we're proposing is very, very consistent with the established development in the area. It's very
consistent with the new development across the street. It's one block from a transportation
center where it can be easily accessed and persons that are not, that do not have a car can
get back and forth to this development. That's something that might be attractive if in fact
a parking problem in the future develops we're not asking to expand the property we're not asking
for additional height the footprint of the property will remain the same it's consistent with
The footprint of the property will remain the same.
It's consistent with all the new development in the area.
The neighbors next door had no objection to the development of this property.
The community supported the development.
And I would respectfully request that the zoning board grant our variance request.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
if so please raise your hand here i have charles richardson from the council person's office
who's available at least one name thank you mr richardson please identify yourself with the
record i believe you're still on the road thank you mr chair charles richardson from the office
of councilwoman cindy bass room 312 city hall uh i am in possession of two documents one from solo
and one from Faith. They both pretty much list the same number of people that were
supportive of the project. And then on Solos, it has four individuals that were opposed that
or on the committee of the CDC.
Looking at the raw numbers,
the Councilwoman has no opposition
to granting this variance
because of the fact that the majority of the people
that were there were in support
of granting the variance.
Thank you.
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
i have allison weiss you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in good afternoon miss weiss
please identify yourself spell your full name for the record and give us your address yes good
afternoon allison weiss a-l-l-i-s-o-n weiss w-e-i-s-s solo germantown civic association
4908 wayne avenue philadelphia 19144 thank you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes please proceed yes um there is um no disagreement that the community
did not oppose the variance the solo germantown civic association board members
support single family home ownership that is where the disagreement came also what was not presented
clearly is the that property is next to the corner of Wayne Avenue and Zeralda Street
Zorolda Street going up to Pulaski Avenue is all single-family zoned.
So it's not unreasonable that the area is designated single-family, RSA 5, I believe it is, or 3.
um there will be a serious congestion problem and the applicant did not present any hardship
at the meeting there was no hardship presented so for this reason we feel the property should
remain single family it was never the zoning that that property uh was lived in up until
maybe two years ago when there was a fire and the zoning was never changed from single
family to multi nor was the remaining building that's attached those homes were built as a row
of 12 single family homes and the corner yes was a commercial property the going north
on the corner where it's presently a grocery store. But there was no hardship presented
and for that reason we prefer the property remain single family. We have an abundance of
multi-family at this point. There's another apartment, a building, a historic building
that's being converted into 26 units, half a block away. And the large property across the street
which was a by right property cmx3 zoning 40 units so there's an abundance of one and two bedroom
um units just explain to me again hello the rco was in favor did i hear you say that yes i'm here
what please explain again no we favor single family home ownership but there was there was some
single family home ownership but there was a there was some confusion that that we couldn't
reach an agreement the the confusion was the rco did not reach an agreement with the community
the community supported the variance the rco did not support the variance okay okay thank you the
RCO board. Okay, understood. Anyone else wish to testify? Hello, RCO board does not want the variance.
Hello, anyone else would like to testify in this case? Commissioner, I do have my client on the
line. Mr. Taliff, are you on the line? Yes, I am on the line. Good afternoon, sir. Please identify
yourself for the record spell your first and last name uh mark talliff m-a-r-k-t-o-l-i-f
i'm the property manager and i work hand-in-hand with the developer
mr talliff did you attend the uh community excuse me excuse me excuse me excuse me you're not the
owner no uh miss three i don't think it's appropriate for us to uh very well commissioner
May I ask Ms. Weiss one or two questions, please?
Quickly.
Ms. Weiss, you would agree that currently there aren't 12 single-family houses on that block?
You have to unmute yourself.
I was on the RCO call, and I can attest to no one from the community.
I'm muted, Tim. You weren't sworn in, Mr. Tolloff, so you can't speak.
Was that Mr. I don't know. Was that Richardson?
No, Mark Tolloff.
Okay, thank you.
So Ms. Weiss is available for the questions. She's unmuted.
Ms. Weiss, would you agree that currently there aren't 12 single-family residences on that block?
I didn't do an inventory of all of the properties.
I did research on the attached property, which is zoned presently, single family.
There's no variance against that property.
I would say that I know there's one across the street that is not, and I know there are several on the 4600 block of Wayne.
and um there's okay so we're having issues having technical i would ask that we move on
yeah let's put this aside for the moment um i need to ask you tanya what how are we standing
with time on uh for your staff um so i would um ask that if we can wrap up about 12 45 one o'clock
longer so we have at least an hour for all staff involved. Okay all right and we could uh we're
going to move on on this one and we're going to go back to confessor. Like I said there's no shortage
of multi-unit. We're having technical difficulties Mr. Miss uh excuse me Miss Three. We're going to
get back to you thank you all right in the meantime it's confessor we're going to go back
to number 11 i understand the uh documents that we were waiting for from mr mulverhill arrived
okay so uh mi 2020-001194 3211-19 katham street
uh my vote is yes with the proviso revised plan one page approved today yes proviso
Is Tom there
Thank you
All right
Confessor
Let's see what we have
We got number 12 coming up
No that's one we just said
We'll put it on the side
tanya we have number five on our list 2204 north second mr zellers that we are we able to
get through with him oh yes we have um he did um say that he was prepared to go forward
okay so let's do that one confessor i'll read it in mi 2020-001203 2204 north
That's 001203-2204 North 2nd Street.
Good afternoon, Mr. Zellers.
Good afternoon.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Spell your first and last name and I'll swear you in.
My name is Theodore Zellers, T-H-E-O-D-O-R-E-Z-E-L-L-E-R-S.
You're swearing for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I didn't mean to interrupt your address.
My address is 2255 Waterloo Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19133.
Thank you.
Please proceed, sir.
Thank you.
Sorry about the difficulties before.
We'll have a problem today.
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, quotas and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Yes, I have a presentation here.
um you can share your some of your exhibits that would be helpful and then while you're doing that
uh what was the position of the rco they supported my project
um let's see
this is sharon saleta we also had a letter of non-opposition from councilwoman sanchez
uh anyone from uh is mr falks available mr folks
excuse the interruption mr zellers i'm just try to i don't see him okay all right so we do have
a letter from the councilwoman in non-opposition so mr zellers if you could give us a brief
description that would be helpful yes um are you able to see my screen yes okay excellent um
so yes um i am asking for a um essentially we would like to do um
ground floor um on residential use instead of commercial use which is what the zoning code
says right now. So my property is located in CMX2, which says that the ground floor must be commercial
and that the upper floors may be residential. The lot size is 1,241 square feet. The zoning code
says that two upstairs apartments are allowed on lots below 1,400 square feet, and then above 1,400
square feet you're allowed to have three upstairs apartments so we're very close to that number
so there are but essentially i want to maintain three total units and i just want to change the
use of the ground floor from commercial to residential technically this has triggered two
refusals one for the ground floor use and then one for having three residential units
Could you give us any of the diagrams of what the interior will look like?
Yes, absolutely.
So I'm proposing something that I think will fit in character-wise, kind of a traditional brick facade.
Here you can see the front.
These are the floor plans that I'm looking at.
The one unit that I would be living in
would be on the ground floor and the basement.
Could you enlarge that a little bit, please?
Yes, absolutely.
Maybe shrink it a little bit now.
I'm going to just be able to...
the rear bedroom in the first in the basement you have a staircase access out of there
was that um was that a doorway out i'm trying to figure it yeah we're actually in the plans
that i submitted we had a staircase um actually to to answer this um i'd like to have my architect
david salomon um be sworn in if that's acceptable please um david if you could raise your hand
salomon please identify yourself spell your name and for the record and i'll swear you in
Yes. Hi, Mr. Chairman. My name is David Solomon. It's spelled D-A-V-I-D-S-A-L-A-M-O-N.
yes hi mr chairman uh my name is david salomon it's spelled d-a-v-i-d
You swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir. I do.
My question was, what is the means of ingress and egress for the basement unit?
So from the base, there's two bedrooms in the basement unit.
They are currently on the plans.
did you get that exhibit up mr zellers yes i can show that sorry for the interruption
no problem uh the front bedroom has an uh egress well and the rear bedroom is um
uh has a staircase out of it okay that's what i needed to know all right
all right um i'm gonna move along quickly here um
questions from the board no no anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise
your hand i have sloan folks thank you mr folks you're still under oath please identify yourself
for the record good afternoon chairman de chico uh zba board sloan folks sloane efforts of fire
or lks office of councilwoman maria quinones sanchez uh room 508 city hall uh you have uh we
our office as i've heard uh mr letter say that we you have received a uh letter of a non-opposition
from our office i'm just reaffirming that the councilman has no uh opposition to this uh various
request thank you thank you thank you um anyone else would like to testify in this case if please
raise your hand no hand thank you planning commission
can't hear you paula you're muted i got the camera on paula brumblow burns planning commission
well we have no objection to the requested variances in looking at the site plan i think
there are some issues that when they get to building permit may have to be revised
It looks like the stairs from the first floor rear going down to the ground, A, may not be permitted, and it also looks like they are wider than the property and cross the property line.
Also, it looks like the front stairs landing at the sidewalk is going to be where the exit well is.
So we just want the applicant to know that that site plan as presented here today may have problems at the building permit stage.
So noted, I guess, to both the owner and the architect, but other than that, there's no
opposition on the plan, and that should at least be noted, and the fact that I'm not
how they have the stairs coming down to the sidewalk, the window well looks to be at the
base of that.
Okay, thank you.
MI 2020-001203 2204 North 2nd Street my vote is yes my vote is yes
Thank you. Number 13, MI 2020-0011967424 Revere Street.
This is Sharon Saleta to let you know that I have no record of having received exhibits
for this appeal or number 14. Thank you. Is there anyone here for
Rivera Street
I have the zing
are you here for this property
as the owner yes
okay I will promote you to panelists
good afternoon sir
please identify yourself for the record
spell your full name
sir hello yes please identify yourself and spell your full name
my name is ding zhang e-i-n-g that's named z-h-e-n-g
we're in a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes did you hear our city our solicitor tell you uh acknowledge that we've not yet
Did you hear our solicitor acknowledge that we've not yet received any of the exhibits?
That really.
I was not aware of sending any exhibits.
All right. Well, you'll see on the application. So this case will have to be continued.
MI 2020-0011967424 Revere Street is continued.
number 14 yeah hold on one minute confessor uh 826 south voig's v-o-g-d-e-s street voig's
anyone here on this case
no hands at this time by 2020 dash 000 368
826 South
VOGDES
Street is continued.
Viges. Thank you.
20-001
816 South 10th Street.
i have promoted steve bertill to bet i apologize i was going to say that mr bertill is the attorney
and we have a letter of non-opposition from the rco good afternoon members of the board
good afternoon mr bertill please identify yourself for the record spell your last name
Steve Bertil, B-E-R-T-I-L
Claire Harrison Harvey in Brandsburg
Address is 1835 Market Street, Suite 1400-19103
You want to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do
And you agree to wait for the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do
Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents
to prove of ownership, prove of tax compliance,
copy of the refusal or referral,
photos and plans five days prior to this evening?
Yes to all.
Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, we do.
I want to share my screen.
I'll try to be as brief as possible,
members of the board, as this is.
You're breaking up a little bit.
I'm sorry, can you hear me now?
you're still breaking up slightly uh let me see here
is that better not the same give it a show let's try it see what happens
okay i'll be uh quick this is fairly straightforward let me share my screen
This is an application for a lot line relocation at 816 South Tufts Street.
We've generated some dimensional refusals due to just the unique nature of the existing
improvements in the building. Just to get through there quickly for the sake of time.
I'm going to interrupt you for a second. I need to know, is the sonographer able to get this?
She's shaking her hair yet.
Okay, I didn't see. Thank you. Please proceed, Mr. Britson.
Okay, thank you. I'll jump straight to the property. I'll incorporate the entire exhibit
packet at the end and have my witness, one of the owners, adopt and affirm my testimony.
As I stated, we're here for 816 South Temp Street, just highlighted here. It is zoned as RM1.
This property, the property has an improvement that sits on a two existing, a three-story structure
with two existing single-family condominium units, each fronting on opposite streets,
one fronting on 10th Street, and one fronting on Warnock Street here, and they are attached
only in the rear by a firewall. As such, we're requesting the frontage of the property
on Warnock Street, which is what we'll call this condominium unit A, and here's the front
edge of the property on 10th Street, and we'll call this condominium unit B. It's a zoning
area, so you can see that they're actually in physically two separate residential single
residential single-family units and they're just attached here by a firewall as such what we're
family units and they're just attached.
proposing let me zoom out so you can see that better is the relocations of the lot lines from
a one single parcel to two parcels that are divided along the firewall that divides the
residential units physically. We're not proposing any renovations, any constructions of any kind,
no change to the footprint of any physical structure or improvement
or a property. We're literally just relocating the lot lines. So why are we here? Because due to the
nature of the building we regenerated a few dimensional variances first of which is the
setback of the um the front edge on warnock street is the existing building as it stands
is already set back further than this adjacent building and therefore once we subdivide
the uh property it created this um dimensional variance not dissimilar to that uh refusal we
We also receive a refusal for the rear yard, death, and the rear yard area of both properties.
As you can see from the area, there is no rear yard.
This is an existing condition.
We're not making any changes, and therefore, it's creating that refusal because we're subdividing
the lot.
And lastly, we received a refusal for the open area of the unit facing on 10th Street.
And as you can see, there is an open area space there, except it's not the percentage that would be required on that code.
So, in short, we're literally just changing the documentation of this lot to subdivide
and therefore have it be reflective of what the actual use is, which is really just two
single family homes and not an attached structure with multiple condominium units within it.
We did meet with the RCO and received no opposition.
as was stated earlier here's a copy of the letter not a post um and i have a representative of one
of the owners of miss rebecca mazar who can adopt an affirm on testimony if she raises
her hand to be recognized
is that miss chilla birdie no miss uh rebecca mazar
hello hi this is good afternoon please identify yourself with a record spell your first and last
name my first name is rebecca r-e-b-e-c-c-a my last name is mazar m-a-z-a-r and do you swear
and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Please proceed,
Mr. Patel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Mazar, did you hear the testimony that I provided to
the board this morning? I did. And do you confirm the truth from my testimony and
I do? I do. Thank you. Questions from the board? No.
nope anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no hands thank you planning commission we have no objection to the granting of the variance
are you muted sorry about that mi 2020 that's 001208 816 south 10th street my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes before we go any further tanya we have two cases left
and then the wayne avenue uh i don't know if we're going to get we're going to be able to
get this done by one o'clock um no problem i would um ask that um if it's okay we can complete wayne
avenue then go forward with the other two and my staff um and all that's on the line can leave at
one o'clock and i will stay on to complete okay thank you um this is sharon saletta the there's
actually i think only one left number 16 was um voted on the add-on list oh okay thank you
you're welcome so we don't have to do that one that's off all right so we have wayne avenue and
then number 17 all right i forgot where we left off uh there was some discussion going back and
All right, I forgot where we left off.
There was some discussion going back and forth about the RCO.
Question was posed about are there any other multifamilies on the 4500 block of Wayne Avenue, I believe.
And I think Ms. Weiss was in the process of responding to that question from Ms. 3, I think.
Is Ms. Weiss still available?
Ms. Weiss, you must unmute yourself.
Yes, I'm here.
Okay, again, I don't know if you heard my statement just then, my comments, rather.
You were in the process, I think, of being asked a question and answering.
are there any other multi-families on the 4500 block of Wayne Avenue yes I believe on the
across the street across the relative street is a multi-family and
And there are, I really didn't do an inventory of the houses, except for the adjacent one, which was zoned single family.
Yeah, we know that.
And then all of the streets, all of these streets that are perpendicular to Wayne, Berkeley, Zeralda, absolutely, they're all zoned single family up to Pulaski Avenue and on Newhall Street.
That's a whole cluster of single family homes.
Okay, thank you.
I just want to go back.
I don't know if the councilwoman's representative is still on.
If you are, please raise your hand.
If not, we'll move on, Ms. Threatt, with your testimony.
No hands up.
Okay, Ms. Threatt.
Commissioners, we followed the guidelines of the ZBA and we met with the community.
the solo community organization actually supported our request for a variance I don't believe it's
proper for the board to substitute their opinion for the community's opinion the letter states that
there was no consensus there was a consensus the community voted in favor of our development
additionally in that letter it indicates that there were four community board members present
That is incorrect. There were only two community board members from SOLO at the meeting. I don't
know where the other two community members came in at. They weren't present, nor did they
participate in the meeting. Additionally, there is one vote on that letter in opposition to our
project. There were no votes in opposition to our project at the meeting, in that the community
supported our project, in that the Faith CDC supported our project, in that the Councilwoman
Bass representative indicated that they had no opposition to the granting of the variance in
that this project will provide affordable housing to actual individuals that live in that community.
I would respectfully request that the board grant our request. Thank you. Any questions from the board?
Commission?
We have no objection to the granting of the variances.
Thank you. MI 2020-001232, 4550 Wayne Avenue. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you very much, Commissioners.
Thank you. Number 17.
Okay. MI 2020-001195, 9616 Decatur Street.
anyone here for 9616 yes i promoted um attorney johnson thank you good afternoon mr johnson
excuse me this is sharon saletta is mr johnson an attorney or the architect for the project
oh i'm i'm sorry you know why we have an attorney kenneth and i keep getting them mixed up
Mr. Johnson, are you the architect for this project?
Yes, I'm the architect.
The owner is on the line, though.
All right.
So I'm going to meet you and then promote you.
Will the owner please raise his or her hand so we can recognize you?
I'm sorry Rosangela as I believe the attorney I'm sorry the owner or
Rosangela okay are you the owner yes okay good afternoon sir please identify yourself spell your
first and last name for the record? Edson Santos. Could you speak up a little bit louder? Edson
Santos. E-D-S-O-N-S-A-N-T-O-S. Did you get that, stenographer? Yep, okay. You swear and affirm to
tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Please proceed. Sir, have you
emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax
compliance, copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes. Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
My architect got it. Pardon me? I think my architect got it, Mr. Ken Johnson.
Do you have a letter? You have a letter from the RCO.
yes i think my architect has one um mr johnson the architect submitted the exhibits i can go
through his packet or he can let us know if he submitted it johnson yes i submitted the package
we did not meet with the rco because they said they couldn't meet before um this meeting we have
to continue this yep unfortunately sir we have to continue must have a meeting with the rco
So MI 2020-001195-9616 Diederker Street, D-E-D-A-K-E-R Street is continued.
Any, I think that completes the list finally.
Is that correct?
That's what I have.
I know we're scheduled at two o'clock, but we may start a little bit later.
maybe 2 15 um i i'm actually okay for 2 p.m i would request that we started to because we have
a couple um cases that might be a little lengthy and my request would be for those two cases that
could be lengthy to be heard last on the list sounds like a plan to me thank you i appreciate
it thank you chair thank you court reporter i'll see you guys at two you too
you're welcome
we are ready
are we live already
yes chair we're ready
oh okay I'm sorry
good afternoon everyone my name is
Frank DiCicco I'm the chair of the zoning
Board of Adjustment. Pardon me. I'll be participating in today's hearing along with
our Board Secretary Mr. Confessor Plaza and Board Members Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James Snell.
For those of you and also our Board Administrator Ms. Tanya Sunkit and Board Attorney Sharon Saletta
are also in attendance. For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual
hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect. First, we will be administering
oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony. Second, for the benefit of anyone
participating by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking
or testifying. Third, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by
participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. Fourth, for anyone participating by
phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to
unmute yourself. I'll repeat, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify,
you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
finally to enter an appearance statement call google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address
and the address of the property at issue i will repeat to enter an appearance statement call google
Call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
267-270
With that said, we can begin, but before we call our first case, our first cases,
we'd like to ask if anyone is requesting a continuance or withdrawal of an appeal for the two o'clock session this afternoon.
If so, please raise your hand.
Also, if anyone here presenting a case today hasn't met with the RCO, please come forward now and explain to the board.
Thank you.
Thank you, confessor, and please raise your hand.
We have Leo Mulvihill.
Good afternoon, Mr. Mulvihill.
Please identify yourself with a record.
You're still under oath from earlier.
Yes, good afternoon, Chairman, members of the board, Leo Mulvihill, M-U-L-V-I-H-I-L-L, 2424 East York Street, Suite 111, Philadelphia 1915.
Here today on calendar number 2020-002949, 3818 Aspen Street.
Okay, and you're requesting a further continuance?
This is perhaps a point of order, members of the board.
This case had previously been heard in the last week of October.
At that point, I had received notice from, I believe, Andrew Goodman that while the RCL was not opposed to having two units at this location as proposed, there were concerns about the fact that this property was three stories, which was a matter allowed by Wright.
There was a request made that we begin some time for there to be some sort of communication between concerned neighbors in my office, so we could discuss that further.
I'm aware that this today there's at least one if not two people who do have concerns or letters
or something that they'd like to address with the board so as a point of order if the board would
like to proceed with that today that's fine considering the length of the list I would also
suggest if the board so is inclined that anybody with these concerns reach out to me directly so
we can have this continuing conversation rather than doing so on the record and taking up a
significant portion of this board's afternoon docket for matters that could probably be dealt
with off the record. Appreciate your offer. Thank you. I don't see any problem with that. Do we have
any concerns, Sharon and or Tanya, with doing it that way? No, I know that Mr. Goodman has
contacted us saying that there are a number of nearby residents who wanted to submit written
statements. We can ask that they submit them, that they copy Mr. Mulvihill as well. Yes,
That's totally fine. I would just like to have copies of these statements in advance.
Again, I'd like to note for the record that while I've never received a formal RCO letter,
there's an email I received Wednesday, October 28th, 12.25 p.m. from Mr. Goodman's office where I was copied.
It was submitted to both Ms. Sunkit and Ms. Souletta.
And again, I quote what that letter says.
Neither the council member nor the Mantua community is against density or against development.
That's essentially what the issue is here. The only refusal was for two units
versus one unit if this were an RSA 5 district. So I'm happy to continue to entertain a conversation
between the affected neighbors and I'm happy to put my information in the chat or perhaps if
Ms. Sunkit would do that for the edification of the folks or I could put it on the record here so
that everybody who's listening can take it down and send me whatever information they might have
so I can properly address their concerns individually
and then with the council office as well.
So, Tanya and or Sharon,
we handle this as a,
put it on a delayed list or is this,
how is it best for us to handle it?
Sharon, I'd request we just relist it for a date certain,
perhaps the first week of December,
if there's not time next week even.
but what do we have
next week we're available at 2 p.m
november the 10th if we could relist this for november 10 at 2 p.m
time certain that'd be fantastic but wasn't this heard is this a resumption
yeah it's a resumption i'm sorry i missed so we're not going to list it
it's not going to be listed we're just going to give the date november the 10th
Okay, perfect.
At 2 p.m. because it's a resumption and no actual posting is required.
If I could, Chair, I just wanted to state on the record in respects to Corinne Sapp,
who was waiting this morning for the case.
Mr. Movahill, if you could be in touch with her, that would be great.
So Ms. Corinne Sapp, he's going to give out his email address, and I apologize for the
So, Ms. Corinne Sapp, he's going to give out his email address.
And I...
inconvenience of you being here this morning.
Ms. Sunke, could I get you to repeat the time they will be coming back?
Sure, that would be November the 10th, Tuesday at 2 p.m.
Thank you.
So we'll resume the hearing on that day, is that correct?
Yes, if that's okay with the board.
All right, any objections?
Seeing none.
MI 2020-00107 3818 Aspen Street. This hearing will be resumed on November the 10th at 2 p.m.
at which time the board will consider any feedback related to the RCO. And chair may I just for the
purposes of allowing everybody who's on the line who wish to submit statements to the board
provide my email address and phone number please proceed certainly so to anybody who is here for
the project at 3818 aspen street my email address is leo l-e-o at fishtown law.com
that's l-e-o leo at fishtownlaw.com my phone number is 215-385-5291 again that's 215-385-5291
thank you thank you mr mulvihill and i would just ask that anybody who has information to submit
please do so by the end of this week only so i have appropriate time to respond and submit any
responses as well to the zoning board keeping in mind the five-day in advance requirement for
materials that get submitted to the zoning board thank you thank you very much for your cooperation
of course everybody have a good afternoon you do likewise thank you thank you chair before you
announce i know there are two additional um add-ons the second one is for 3602 brandywine street
um the attorney in that case meredith ferlinger is in is attempting to sign on but getting a
message telling her that we have exceeded the maximum 100 participants permitted i i don't know
miss so we can hold that we'll see if we can move that to later well you can call the um
call the next case that you were going to call carlisle street and then maybe in the meantime
ms sunken and i could work on okay but i want to go to spark street first because that's just a
vote yes thank you okay mi2020-000015 106 sparks street my vote is yes my vote is yes
of the board members jim or tom
my vote is yes thank you
okay um we're going to hold carlisle
no you're going to call carlisle carlisle we're going to hold brandy one
well mr chairman mr chairman jim snell here i was a yes on that last vote i'm i'm sorry my
screen went blank i was trying to get back no problem we're all having problems today no problem
thank you okay calendar number 39608 3248 north carlisle street
the original hearing was september the 30th and we were waiting to hear uh any comments regard from
the RCO okay I'm sorry I'm just maybe a wee bit confused and I don't know how you wish to proceed
but did we want to are we going to do this before we continue the continuances or no
oh yeah I'm sorry I got ahead of myself okay if I could I wasn't firing on all soldiers today
um so mr orphanetes um you can unmute yourself are you speaking to a continuance today
uh yes i am mr orphanetes good afternoon please identify yourself for the records by your name
sure good afternoon mr chairman members of the board david orphanetes from orphanetes and toner
two penn center 1500 john f kennedy boulevard suite 800 philadelphia pennsylvania 19102
my last name is spelled
O-R-P-H-A-N-I-D-E-S
thank you
swearing firm to tell the truth
the whole truth
and nothing but the truth
and you are here on
I'm here on
6954 Keystone Street
number three on our list
Number three on our Lish Confession.
confession
in honor of the
In honor of the property, 6954 Keystone, LLC.
This matter was scheduled for a hearing back in August, August 19th.
I had met with the coordinating RCO just prior to that.
As in the letter that I submitted requesting a continuance of that proceeding,
I had indicated that there were a number of matters that were raised during that community
group meeting that I needed to investigate, explore, address with my client, and that
continuance request was granted due to COVID-related scheduling issues, people not calling my client
back, calling me back, being able to get a hold of people.
we weren't able to finish going through what we needed to go through in order to be properly
prepared to either proceed with this case or not so i'd like to this is the second scheduled hearing
i'd like to request one additional hearing one additional continuance so that we continue
can continue to prepare and address the community's concerns and go back to them for another meeting
if they'd have us. In connection with that continuance request, I'd like to be designated
as attorney moving party. I made that request with my correspondence after the last proceeding,
but this matter had been scheduled for today. If the continuance is not to be granted, I would like
to withdraw the appeal, and then we would just start all over again at some point after we have
the information and we've been able to do the work, complete the due diligence that I think
is necessary uh we would rather not we rather you know not have to pay to refile again and appeal
again and everything um and just come back to the board for the same thing so i respectfully request
one additional continuance and again that i'd be designated as attorney moving party
and we'll get this back in front of you as soon as we can okay thank you uh any objections out
there to Attorney Moving Party? MI-2020-000093 6954 Keystone Street, Attorney Moving Party.
Any other requests for continuances or withdrawals?
Here I have Richard DeMarco, Attorney, available to request a
Okay, good afternoon, Mr. DeMarco. Please identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon. Can you hear me?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. It's Richard DeMarco here. I'm on the 418 South 20th Street
appeal against L&I case. I represent the appellants against the permit. I did send an email to Sharon
an alert, trying to alert her as soon as I could of my continuance request. The request is based
on the fact that the, and it's the applicant's turn. We rested our case prior, but the applicant
on the permit is submitting additional evidence and testimony. What happened was inadvertently
Mike Phillips, who's the attorney for the applicant, did not forward me his exhibits
until yesterday at 1.45 p.m. Mr. DeMarco, if I could interrupt for one minute, if we could also
promote Mr. Phillips since he will want to respond. I'm sure. Thank you. Sorry to interrupt. Sorry.
I'm sure he will. So let me explain this to you. So this board knows I had a hearing with you,
another contested hearing with you yesterday. It was election day. I got the exhibits that
were submitted by the applicant that I received yesterday. I received for the first time
yesterday. And there are a number of technical exhibits in the submission that my expert has
not had time to review. So I am woefully unprepared to address those technical exhibits. One being
an opinion letter from their engineer, David Plant. And there are additional drawings,
technical drawings in the submission that I'm seeing for the first time. And it was yesterday
at 1.45 p.m. that I received these. So my request is as follows. The board does require
that any party, whether it be an appellant, an applicant, submit exhibits to the board
five days in advance. There are emails in the submission that are dated over the weekend.
So there are exhibits that the board has not received five days in advance. I submitted my
five days in advance. I submitted my exhibits five days in advance. I copied opposing counsel
exhibits five days in advance.
whenever I know that there is opposing counsel involved. Anytime I submit
documents to this board, I copy opposing counsel. That was not done. I'm not saying that Mike is a
bad guy in any way, shape, or form. That's not the case. What I am asking is a short, as short as
possible continuance to allow me to be prepared to address the exhibits that i have had less than 24
hours to prepare for including very technical documents this board can reschedule to as early
a date as it sees fit next week if i have to i mean i have three hearings next week but if
the board wants i'll be ready if the board could give me a date on this next week i'll be prepared
my expert will have have time to review the documents and and examine them and again i'm not
i'm not trying to unreasonably delay this matter i know it's been a long time this is sorry i hate
to interrupt here but we do have michael phillips and the law department's mr leonard reuter available
to speak in his behalf just to make sure we keep a manage of time thank you chair all right well
I'm finished.
I think we get the point, Mr. DeMarco.
Thank you.
So let's hear from Mr. Phillips.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Chairman DiCicco, members of the board.
Michael Phillips, 1500 Market Street, Suite 3400.
Spell your last name and I'll swear you in, please.
P-H-I-L-L-I-P-S.
We're going to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Please proceed.
So I'll make this very brief. Mr. DeMarco is correct. I sent the exhibits in on Friday. My paralegal actually sent them in and inadvertently did not copy either Mr. DeMarco or Mr. Reuter on that.
As I went to supplement my exhibits yesterday to add an email and two other documents, I realized that Mr. DeMarco had not been copied the first time around and sent him the documents.
A continuance is not warranted by any means for the simple reason that this is an appeal against L&I.
And Mr. DeMarco and his clients have the burden of submitting affirmative evidence that the permit was issued improperly or that there was some irregularity in L&I's issuance of the permit.
They have rested their case and they've failed to show that.
The report that is being referenced is a one-page report from Jerry O'Plant Land Design, and just briefly to refresh your recollection of this, there was an argument at the last hearing, which was October 15, 2019, that the driveway ramp that leads to the accessory commercial parking in the basement of the property was not feasible as designed.
And Mr. Plant's report is a rebuttal to that.
Rebuttal evidence is actually an exception to the five-day rule.
And furthermore, all his report simply says is, this is, one, not a zoning issue, two,
the ramp's feasible, and three, streets departments signed off on it.
And the exhibits or streets departments sign off on it, the technical specifications of
the ramp, and a letter where what I just stated is set forth.
If Mr. DeMarco believes that this is a zoning issue, he could have put that in his case in chief, and it was his burden to show that this somehow violated the zoning code.
He did not do that. There is no reason to continue this and belabor this any longer.
We've gone on 18 months now, and this is really a simple issue.
All of the other documents that were either submitted way back in August and October of 2019, or they're emails from Mr. DeMarco's client herself, or matters of public records such as deeds that have been filed with respect to the property.
So we would encourage the board to hear this case, and at the end, I'm confident that you'll agree that the appellants have not satisfied their burden of proof to show that this permit was issued improperly.
Mr. Reuter?
Thank you, Leonard F. Reuter, R-E-U-T-E-R
for the City of Philadelphia.
Do we need to be sworn to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Do we need to be sworn in?
We're in a firm, Leonard.
We're in a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth.
Yes, thank you. I do.
The city's position on the continuance request is that we don't really have a position on that.
You know, we the city doesn't have an interest in particular in how quickly this is resolved.
So we'll we'll stay out of this particular question.
Thank you.
um i'm sure that was helpful oh yeah absolutely um all right
i would just may i mr chairman very briefly very briefly i know you have a long list um
i'll take a date next week uh there's clearly an admission that the documents were not given to me
it is a contested matter they are technical documents I mean I'll come back I'll be ready
when you list this thing go ahead we heard you oh we heard you all right Tanya do we have a date
for next week excuse me this is Sharon Saleta Mr. DeMarco are there parts of the hearing today that
you can go forward with and then maybe schedule a follow-up hearing limited to the documents that
you did not have in advance? I mean, you know, in full fairness, I have had Nancy Templeton's
expert report prior. There is cross-examination prepared for her. You know, I guess I don't think
that any of the 19 exhibits that I saw for the first time relate to additional documents that
she had submitted. So, you know, I could move forward with her testimony, but the other documents
clearly relate to the other witnesses. So in all fairness, I would be, I'm not unfairly surprised by
Ms. Templeton's report. If I could just interject and say one thing, I have no, I cannot fathom how
Mr. DeMarco could be surprised that we have an expert who was actually at the October 15th
hearing ready to testify as to the same exact point that this is not a zoning code issue and
that the ramp and curb cut are feasible. If Mr. DeMarco has evidence to show that that is not
accurate, it was his burden to submit that evidence and put that on in his case in chief.
Mr. Phillips, with all due respect, everybody calm down because we'll keep going back and forth
on whether or not we should do a continuance and it'll be next week before we get to that point.
So do we have a date, Tanya?
No, I'm keeping in mind that if this is continued,
if the entire hearing is continued,
it's likely to be lengthy.
And Ms. Sunkit can confirm that there will be no,
it will not be able to be scheduled for next week.
Is that correct?
Correct, it would be in my suggestion, a special listing.
And we would have to work together with the board
to figure that out. And because there's an appeal against LNI and notice is not required to the
public, we can come up with a date and I can notify the party. I want to ask you if we could
do a special. That would be helpful. So if we don't have a date, that means you'll speak to
both parties, Mr. Phillips and Mr. DeMarco? Yes, Chair. Once I speak to you all to determine a
date okay so uh mr phillips mr demarco uh tanya will get back to you after the board makes a
decision on selecting a date to hear your case and i think even though i know mr phillips you
would rather not have this continued it's going to be rather lengthy i think it's important that
we get as much information from both sides uh because we have a list this afternoon uh and i
don't want to shortcut that and have to come back again anyway so let's set aside one day and there
will be no interference about other cases you can proceed both of you can proceed with your arguments
and we'll resolve it hopefully on that day and if i could just say one thing just because i want to
clarify mr de marco i mean we have had two days of hearings he did rest his case in chief so this
is just for the city and uh the property owner to um make legal arguments in defense of um the
understood understood but he may have some uh you know we you know we may want to comment on what
your testimony is and it's going to go back and forth so let's just pick a date a special date
there will be no interference with other cases on that day thank you mr chairman i will certainly
uh make myself available whenever as quickly as possible so as not to unduly delay this matter
Tanya, we'll get back to both of you. Thank you.
All right. Do I need to read anything back into the record on this one?
If you could, Chair, just state that it was going to be continued and the date
If you could, Chair, just state that it was going to be continued and the date to be determined.
Okay. MI 2020-001433, 414 South 20th Street is continued to a date to still be selected.
I think. Okay, Chair, so I have Ryan Bolin who wishes to speak to a continuing.
it okay mr poland yes good afternoon ryan boland 1801 market street suite 2300
last name please um b as in boy o l a n d you swearing the firm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes i do are you hearing limits livingston street
correct mr chairman you're requesting a continuance i am can i just give you a 30
seconds of background. So this was scheduled as an expedited hearing, but unfortunately
due to inadvertence, we were not assigned an RCO until October 19th, which is just over two weeks
ago. The RCO bent over backwards, scheduled an RCO meeting with us last Thursday. We completed
the meeting. Unfortunately, we just don't have enough time. We want to work out a community
benefits agreement. So we're hoping to have just a very short continuance, if possible,
two weeks so that we can get this community benefits agreement in advance. So I would be
here as attorney moving party requesting a very short continuance. And if I could state, Chair,
it was an error on the administration part. And I explained to Mr. Bolin that I could work with
him and give him whatever date is necessary to move forward with this we'll do an attorney
moving party is that right yes that's fine okay thank you mi2020-001514-2657 livingston street
attorney moving party that was number eight uh confessor on our sheet
that was number eight okay um we have miss meredith ferlinger um who wants to speak to a
continuance mr chairman good afternoon please identify yourself meredith ferlinger f-e-r-l-e-g-e-r
1500 market street suite 3500 e and you're still under oath from earlier today i sure am i do not
of a continuance request i just want to know i am here and ready for 3602 brandywine since zoom
apparently did not feel like letting me in today um okay all right anyone else continuance or
withdrawal i have a fair levy um you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in this is sharon
letter miss mr levy is here for the carlisle street case that is on the add-on list
okay it's also listed as number 10 on your hearing list yeah mr levy are you uh requesting a
continuance no not continuous okay so stand by we'll get to your case and then i have stephanie
boggs good afternoon i'm stephanie boggs 1835 market street suite 1400 philadelphia pennsylvania
stephanie i believe we swore you in earlier today not today that was yesterday yesterday i'm sorry
okay uh you're swearing a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
Yes, I do. I am not here on a continuance, but I am here for 144501 Woodhaven, MI2020-001384.
We were not able to meet with the coordinating RCO in this matter because they did not schedule a meeting with us.
Our correspondence with them is included within our exhibit packet detailing those efforts.
But we did meet with another community group, the Franklin Mills Advisory Council, at the request of the councilman.
And their letter of support, along with the letter of support from the councilman, is included within our packets as well.
So I would just request that we would be allowed to present this case on the merits.
And we did receive a letter of non-opposition from Councilman O'Neill.
We'll hear that case. Thank you.
Thank you.
All right.
That's it, right?
Which case should we go on with first? Is it Carlisle?
i believe number two right um carlisle is a follow-up hearing so if you would like to go
with that first yeah let's do that one first that's uh am i i'm sorry calendar number three nine six
Calendar number 39608-3248-North Carlisle.
zero eight three two four
And this case was continued, I believe, at the request of the RCO.
That's why we're hearing it today.
Anyone here on 39-3248-North Carlisle?
That's Mr. Levy, who just spoke.
I have promoted him to panelists.
Thank you.
Mr. Levy?
Yeah, that's me.
Okay, please spell your first and last name.
My first name is Ophir, O-F-I-R.
My last name is Levy, L-E-V-Y.
You swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I am.
Okay, sir.
Please proceed.
Confessor?
Okay, last time we was here.
Is this a follow-up hearing?
It is a follow-up hearing, yes.
Okay, all right.
I'm sorry.
Thank you.
Please proceed, Mr. Levy.
Okay, last time we was here and then we didn't have no approval or whatever from the RCO and then we had a meeting with them on the date and I don't really know what's happened there. I showed them whatever they asked last time, the drawing and everything, like they do have everything now and that's why we are here again.
Did we get a letter from the RCO?
Uh, no.
Sharon, do we have anything in our file?
I'm checking.
One moment, sir. One moment.
Surely we do know the name of the RCO?
We do know the name of the RCO.
No, we don't.
I believe it is Swamp Poodle.
we have um we have old correspondence from them on this case back from january so
when did you meet with the rco sir on october 20th if i believe that's correct
over 20th they give you any indication whether they were supporting your project or not there
was a vote and honestly there was only two people on the block out of six and they weren't able to
give me the results at the moment and what was the application for um the property um is we bought
it as three but it was zoned as one we purchased it and then we just got to legal stuff and then
they just told us we have to rezone it for three again and this is what we did okay
i'm sorry i'm the manager i'm just here with him his english is not the best so
Okay, your name, sir?
Ziv Noah.
Please spell it front and first and left.
Yes, Z-I-V, last name Noah, N-O-A-H.
And you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Chair, if I could just mention that I did receive at 1.53 p.m. correspondence requesting a continuance from Swampoona.
Can I ask, is the representative, I believe Adrienne Fernandez is the representative, is she?
Signed on as a participant.
He hasn't raised her hand.
We're going to go, I want to go through the vote on this.
It's already been continued.
I'd like to vote this.
Any objections?
Here, I do see Charles Richardson here.
I believe it's for this case, if he can speak.
Mr. Richardson?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Let me clear up some things.
Before you begin, just identify yourself with the record.
Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 312 City Hall.
I just sent over to Sharon, and it looks like it went through on October the 21st,
a letter from Nicetown Improvement Team, a letter of non-support for that property.
They were asking for, and I'm trying to pull up the letter.
They were asking for what?
They were asking to, oh, here we go.
They were asking to find, oh, here we go. The following requests were not fulfilled. They met with, okay, to the RCO ZPA zoning board. We, the members of Nicetown Tayoga Improvement Team, RCO, met with the applicant's representative, Mr. Nowell, on Tuesday, October the 20th, 2020, regarding zoning variances for the address listed below, 3248 Carlisle.
The following requests were not fulfilled.
They met with.
The following requests were not fulfilled. Produce multifamily rental license.
Excuse me, Mr. Richardson, I have the letter in front of me now. Do they understand that he cannot get a multifamily rental license unless he has the zoning approval first?
And that is something that was a little confusing here to me as well.
and the things that they're asking for
aren't necessarily things that can be
can be regulated
by the zoning board
one thing I do want to ask
the applicant
do you currently have tenants in that
building at this point in time?
Mr. Levy?
You can unmute yourself
Are there people living in your building now?
How many units?
All three are occupied?
Thank you.
Mr. Richardson?
Excuse me, Chair.
This is Sharon Saleta.
You could add as a proviso that he obtain a rental license within a specific amount of time.
Right, right.
Is that Mr. Richardson?
As far as that goes, the Councilwoman doesn't like to approve things that are already functioning illegally.
But in the instance such as this, we will have no objection with the proviso included.
Okay, thank you.
Okay, calendar number 39608-3248 North Carlisle.
My vote is yes with the proviso.
Rental license must be obtained within 60 days beginning today.
Yes, we're proviso.
Yes, we're proviso.
Yes, we're proviso.
You understand, Mr. Levy?
Yeah, I do understand.
Okay, we're approving it, but you must get a rental license within 60 days.
Take care of it tomorrow.
Better yet, thank you.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Is that everything on the add-on list?
i believe meredith is next with other than yeah meredith is the next one right
so mi 2020-360 no hold on i don't have the right i don't have all the numbers
shall i read it in chair yeah because all i have is a 2020
Oh, okay. I'm sorry. It's MI 2020-001180-3602, Brandywine Street.
Thank you. And again, this is also number four on your list.
Move that away. That's what happened. Okay. Okay, Meredith.
Hello Mr. Chairman. Okay, please proceed. You've already been sworn in, correct? I sure have.
All right, so I guess before I get started, Rami, do you want to hit the raise hand button now,
we can get you sworn in. Also Harrison Haas if you want to also hit that raise
hand button.
Tanya did either of them raise their hand
um yes Haas is available but um typically the chair will swear to amend so you can adopt later
so it's up to the chair yeah let's move on we at the end of your testimony we'll thank you
No problem. All right, so to refresh your memory, the board first heard this case concerning 3602-04 Brandywine Street, which is in Mantua, on September 30th.
Now, during the hearing, few members of the community, some immediate neighbors, in fact, expressed some concerns about the proposal.
Accordingly, the board suggested that we continue the hearing to have some further discussions.
Accordingly, the board suggested that we continue the hearing to have some further discussions.
We're back before the board today having come to an understanding with the immediate neighbors,
all of them in fact, some who I believe do intend to speak when I conclude.
Now to briefly summarize the original proposal, the application requested the consolidation of two lots
and for the erection of a new structure that was originally intended to be a four-family dwelling.
The original zoning plan is reflected at tab 5 and is up on your screen.
Now, as a result of our discussions with the immediate neighbors, the plans have now been revised.
The height of the proposed structure has been reduced from four stories to three stories.
Furthermore, the number of units has now been reduced to three.
The revised plans are reflected at tab six and I have also submitted five days in advance a revised
plan with the revised plan proviso form. Now I did present our full argument concerning the hardships
facing this lot to a single family development during the last hearing. Now unless the board
desires I will not repeat those arguments in detail. However just to briefly refresh your
memory, the only refusal we do have here is for the proposed multifamily use. The property is
surrounded by a variety of different zoning classifications, including CMX2 across the street,
RM1 to the rear, and RM1 along North 36th Street. Furthermore, pre-consolidation, these two lots are
extremely small, each just over 700 square feet and 12 feet wide, which would make the by-right
development here quite challenging as the lots are half the size required by the RSA 5 zoning
district. They're also more narrow than any lot on this block. After consolidation, the newly formed
lot will be 1,500 square feet. The former RM1 zoning would have permitted four units by right,
but as I mentioned in response to our discussions with the community, we have agreed to reduce that
to three units. Now of course I can certainly elaborate further if it becomes necessary,
but the record made during the September 30th hearing should have sufficiently established
the hardship to buy-right development. Now to refresh your memory as far as the community is
concerned, we did meet with Mantua Civic Association that did support the proposal,
and I do actually believe there are a few representatives from Mantua Civic on the
line today in case additional input is needed directly from them, but their original letter
of support is still reflected at tab 14. Rami, my client, also worked with the immediate neighbors
here and reached an understanding. The only aspects of that understanding that are specifically
before the board today are the plan modifications that I did describe before. So at this point,
if we can get Rami sworn in just so he can adopt my testimony
before we turn it over to Mr. Haas from the community.
Rami Shreem.
I don't have anyone with that name with their hand up.
Is it, do you possibly have under Sam from Mantua RCO? I believe they are sharing a computer.
Okay, they can unmute. Thank you.
Hello, this is Rami Shraim. I'm here with Sam and Gwen from Manchua Civic Association as well.
Rami, name and address for the record, please.
Rami, R-A-M-Y, last name Shraim, S-H-R-A-I-M, as in Mary, 433 North 32nd Street, 19104.
Mr. Chairman, do you need to swear him?
Frank, did you lose audio?
Okay, we can pause until you come back.
Well, we need to swear somebody in, Altonia.
Yes, confessor Rami.
Okay, I'm back.
Rami, you swear?
Can you hear me now?
Yeah, we hear you.
Okay, finish, confessor, yeah.
You swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Rami have you heard all my testimony offered before the board today yes and would you adopt
that testimony as if it were your own yes okay thank you that's all I have for Rami I know
Harrison Haas would also like to speak
good afternoon chairman and members of the zba
sir you're going to have to speak up good afternoon can you hear me now a little bit
better get closer to the mic or increase your volume i think this is probably the best i can
do that's pretty that's okay please give us your full name and spell it certainly my full name
is Harrison Hawes. That's H-A-R-R-I-S-O-N. And my last name is Hawes, H-A-A-S. And my address
is 516 North 36th Street. We're going to affirm to tell the truth, all truth, nothing but the truth.
I do. Thank you. Please proceed. Thank you. I'm here to state that Meredith,
Rami and I, and the other adjacent neighbors met together, discussed the proposed plans
that you see before you, and reached an agreement for the aforementioned reduction in height
and the reduction in density to three units.
And as a result, we collectively support the proposed plans.
Thank you.
Thank you for your testimony.
do you have anyone else meredith i do not know okay uh do you i'm sorry do you need to have
anyone adopt your testimony i already did okay that's probably when i lost everybody all right
uh questions from the board no no uh anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please
raise your hand no hands thank you meredith uh revised plans yeah i did submit the revised plans
and the revised plan provides a form to uh to tanya and sharing how many pages oh i'm sorry
just one one page and that reflects the number of units being reduced it certainly does yeah i can
zoom in so that you can see it i just want to we're good i just want to make sure i want that
on the record thank you okay uh planning commission
good afternoon chairman members of the board ian litwin planning commission staff i need to be
sworn in please spell your last name ian it's ian ian litwin l-i-t-w-i-n you swear and affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do please proceed okay so this
property zoning was recently changed as part of the 2017
Manchula zoning remapping. Planning Commission staff worked with the
community through multiple community meetings to address growth
that did not match the goals of the community. With the revised plans
and the community's approval, we do not have any opposition to granting the
variance for multiple units. Thank you very much.
MI-2020-001180
3602-04 Brandywine Street. My vote is yes with a proviso. Revised plans. One page stamped today.
Yes with proviso. Approved today.
Yes with proviso. Yes with proviso. Yes with proviso. Thank you. Thank you. Have a good day.
uh i think that's it on the uh add-on list is that correct we complete that's correct thank you
now we go to uh oakland we're going to hold to the end
oakland oakland oakland oakland and
And which case do we start with, Sharon?
Number one?
Number two should be next, Preston Street.
Number two.
I know you told me earlier, Tanya.
I apologize.
I moved all my paperwork around.
No worries.
847 North Preston Street, number two on your list.
Professor, let's see.
MI 2020-001375, 847 North Preston.
P-R-E-S-T-O-N Street.
Chair, I've promoted Attorney David Guest for this case.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
That's David Guest with Valorant Spar.
Mr. Guest, please spell your last name for the record.
Yes, it's G-E-S-T.
Thank you.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
Thank you.
Ms. Sunke, if we could please have the following people promoted.
my colleague Dina Bleckman from Ballard Spar, applicant and property owner Ken Weinstein,
and tenant David Rosencrans.
and tenant David Rosenkranz.
So who's gonna present?
So Dina Bleckman will be doing the slides
and the others will be speaking.
So I will promote Ms. Bleckman and the others,
if they raise their hand,
I can allow them to have audio testimony.
Great, thank you.
So hopefully I don't see Ken and David,
but hopefully you're out there and you can raise your hands
and we can get going.
Thank you. So, Dina, hopefully, if you can share your screen and put up the first slide
so we can have some context before we get started, that would be great.
Can you see the presentation?
Yes. Mr. Chair and others, you can see the presentation?
Yes, we can.
Great. Thank you. So, good afternoon again. As I mentioned, my name is David Guest.
I'm with Ballard Sparr here on behalf of property owner Preston Street Development Associates
and Philly Office Retail.
And as I mentioned, Ken Weinstein with Philly Office Retail and David Rosenkrantz, the proposed
tenant, are here with us as well.
And you'll hear from them shortly.
I just wanted to put on the record to refer to the exhibits that we submitted earlier,
which include various required documents, such as the tax clearance certificate, the
deed, various photographs, neighbor notice letters.
and we do have a letter of unanimous support from the RCO.
We held our RCO meeting on October 22nd,
went very well and received the support of everyone.
And that's the Belmont Alliance Civic Association CDC.
And I believe Ms. Betty Ferguson
may be in attendance this afternoon.
We may hear from her later.
I'm gonna give you a brief overview
and then I'll turn it over to Ken and David
to go through a few of the details,
but we can be relatively brief here for you. This is a request for a variance to reuse
an existing building in the Belmont neighborhood of West Philadelphia, as you can see here.
The building actually has been around since approximately the 1950s and has been used
for manufacturing and industrial purposes since that time. We have some documentation
of that in our exhibits. And really the proposal here is simply to rehabilitate the building
and reuse it for what's currently categorized as limited industrial and office use in a very
similar nature to what has been used there historically. Although it has been historically
used for that use, the building has actually been vacant for several years, so a variance is
technically required for the reuse because the property is located in an RSA3 zoning district,
and it's actually been located in a residential zoning district for many years as well. So it's
kind of a a building that's just been around for a long time in this spot and we're and we're reusing
it that's kind of the simplest way to put it and putting it back into productive use um as you'll
hear shortly uh from mr weinstein and mr rosencrans um the proposal includes the rehabilitation of the
building a lot of cleanup of the surrounding area things uh quality of life issues like
installation of security cameras uh proper loading unloading and trash pickup facilities
As you'll see in some photographs, the building already includes loading facilities because it
was used for these purposes in the past. There will be minimal impacts of any kind to the
surrounding area. In fact, there will be an improvement to the surrounding area because
of the cleanup that will occur due to the new use and the fact that the building has been vacant
for several years. And you'll hear that we have had some discussions that have been productive
with RCO about the details of that cleanup things like installing planters on the surrounding
sidewalks and things like that and as I said the RCO is unanimously in support
so briefly to wrap up my portion of this I'll you know just to confirm that denial of the
application would in fact cause an unnecessary hardship for the applicant as the building has
historically been and remains currently suited for industrial and office use and it's not suited at
all for any sort of residential use due to its layout and configuration you'll see in the
photographs that as I mentioned there already are the loading dock facilities you'll see in the
interior there's already an open floor plan there are thick walls and minimal windows to
keep any sounds within the building and it would be a hardship not to allow the reuse of the
existing facility in the manner that it has been used historically and has been approved of
historically. There will be no adverse effects on nearby properties and in fact, as I said,
the proposal will put a vacant building into productive use to benefit the neighborhood
and really improve the surrounding area. So with that, I will turn it over to Mr. Weinstein
who can go through a little more detail about the proposal and the discussions he's had with the
uh can go through a little more detail about the proposal and the discussions he's had
with the community and dina just asked you to flip through the photos so the
board can see them as mr weinstein is presenting thank you great thank you david um do i need to
be sworn in yes you do please identify yourself name name spell your first and last name for the
record? Ken Weinstein, K-E-N-W-E-I-N-S-T-E-I-N. And your involvement with this project? I am the
president of Philly Office Retail. We are the owners of the property. Thank you. You swear and
affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. So I have obviously appeared
before the zoning board several times. Philly Office Retail is a mission-oriented real estate
developer based in northwest philly we have owned this property for several years
preston street is a 28 000 square foot uh building uh currently vacant uh looks like
warehouse and office space we purchased philly office retail purchased this property in february
of 2018. It was originally built in the 1950s as a pump and valve manufacturing facility.
And as David said, it's zoned RSA3. The pump and valve company, CPV, sold it in 2014,
and it's been mostly vacant since that time. So we're seeking a zoning variance to once again
use it as an industrial building, in this case for the manufacturing of Pilates equipment.
So after listening to Belmont neighbors and seeking their input, we did make a number of promises to the community.
And in return at the RCO meeting, they did unanimously support this project 14-0.
In terms of lighting and security, we agreed to carefully place exterior lighting security cameras around the perimeter of the building.
The tenant agreed to, in terms of hiring, Gratz Industries agreed to seek employees from the neighborhood when possible by contacting the Civic Association every time there's a job opening to interview qualified local residents.
Gratz Industries, while they're not a Pilates instructor, they welcome the opportunity to explore partnerships with the local community to provide Pilates training and encourage participation.
In terms of beautification, Gratz Industries will be a good and responsible neighbor by keeping its sidewalks clean and green on a daily basis.
In terms of parking and traffic, the existing building is designed to accommodate off-street loading, and there's adequate parking available for employees.
And finally, in terms of trash and recycling, it'll be stored inside the building and picked up at the loading dock area on a weekly basis.
So let me turn it over.
We leased this building a couple months ago, but obviously the tenant cannot make the necessary improvements or occupy it for light industrial use without the zoning.
So let me turn this over to David Rosencrantz.
He will testify to what would be the nature of his testimony?
David Rosencrantz is the CEO of Gratz Industries and who will be the tenant occupying the building.
So, Mr. Chair, I'll just say, as Mr. Weinstein just said, it's the proposed tenant, but if you, you know, he can go into more detail as needed.
I don't know if you have a concern about that or anything.
I think we get the gist of everything here, and if you have one of the tenants, whoever it may be, or the owners that adopt your testimony, we can move on from there.
If there's anyone from the community, I'll ask if they have any.
Sure. I think that works for us. Mr. Rosencrantz, if you're there, if you could just do, would you agree to adopt the testimony of myself and Mr. Weinstein as your own?
I'm sorry, but...
I need to swear him in.
There's no one with their hand raised.
All right, no problem. So being an officer of the court, we'll stipulate that your client would be adopting your testimony.
Okay, thank you.
all right so i'll move on uh questions from the board no no anyone else would like to
testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no hands at this time thank you planning commission
No hands at this time.
Thank you.
Planning Commission?
Good afternoon, Chairman, members of the Board.
Ian Litwin, Planning Commission staff.
Although zoned for single-family residential use, this is an existing warehouse building.
The building could not be easily converted for residential use.
Therefore, we do not oppose granting the variance.
Thank you.
MI 2020
that's 001375
North Preston Street
my vote is yes
my vote is yes
my vote is yes
didn't mean to rush you
but I think we got we understood
where you were going
thanks very much understood we appreciate your time
thank you
take care
is the next case going to be Woodhaven
tanya am i am i calling woodhaven yep that's what i see
okay i'm going to double check thank you mi 2020-001384 4501 woodhaven road
i have promoted attorney stephanie boggs and chair before ms boggs starts we have a letter
of non-opposition from councilman o'neill and if this is approved it is with revised plans three
pages thank you thank you good afternoon again miss boggs i understand you're as you know you're
already sworn in but please just identify yourself for the record yeah sure stephanie boggs bo ggs
1835 market street suite 1400 um i have with me today um hardy trolla who is a representative
of sam properties the owner of this center um christopher vernon from mercer management who's
the tenant and operator representative,
and Justin Giannetti from Dynamic Engineering,
who is our project engineer, should there be any questions.
But as you said, this project is at 4501 Woodhaven.
It is specifically for a condo unit two.
I can turn my screen.
The site is, this is condo unit two on the right.
This site is an existing shopping center
that's been in need of refurbishment
since our client purchased the property a couple years ago, and he has been working to do that
and to bring new tenants to the site. So we are proposing, we are requesting a use variance for
an interior car wash facility to be put at the existing building that's located at unit two
to create an addition to that building and refab it for an interior car wash. The car wash that
we're proposing is all going to be interior. So the mechanical equipment that will be there,
the vacuums, the parking spaces for the customers internally will be located within the site.
You can go into that in more detail. And there is also ample accessory parking in the parking lot.
This is in the CA1 zone. And car washes are specifically defined as a personal vehicle
repair and maintenance use. We are requesting a variance for that approval. As mentioned earlier
this afternoon, we did not have an opportunity to meet with the coordinating RCO on this project,
which is the Northeast Community Civic Alliance. We did reach out to them numerous times to try to
schedule a meeting with them and were unsuccessful in doing so. And our correspondence with them is
included in tab two at the exhibits we submitted. But at the request of the councilman, we were able
to meet with the Franklin Mills Advisory Council. Their letter of non-opposition or support of the
project is also included at tab 15 of your packet. They are giving their support to the proposed
project with proviso that will use be limited to an interior car wash only which is acceptable
that's all we are proposing um we have a letter of support from the councilman o'neill in the packet
as well and a letter of support from the adjacent property owner who is the developer of a cds
facility at unit 3 on this site um we are you know i can turn it over to christopher vernon
to answer any questions you have about the operations of the facility and the sustainability
measures that are taken there as well as the layout of the proposed car wash. But just in
summation, the existing building that's on this Unit 2 site has been vacant for some time. Its
location, its context in the neighborhood and the location of the shopping center in general
make it particularly suited for this use as well as the layout of this building. What we are asking
for as far as the car wash use is rather limited, especially since everything will be interior to
the site. So I do feel it represents the least minimum variance and the least deviation from
the code that is here and certainly in keeping with it. Our letter of support from our near
neighbor, the CVS that's going to be here, demonstrates as well as our support from the
councilman and Franklin Mills Advisory Council that we don't anticipate any negative impacts
to our near neighbors or to the general welfare or traffic circulation of the site.
And at this point, I'll turn it over to Christopher Vernon to adopt my testimony and to speak about
to adopt my testimony and to speak about the operations of the facility if there are any
the operations of the facility if there are any questions.
questions okay thank you can you please raise your hand
okay christopher you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in thank you dark good afternoon
please identify yourself with the record spell your first and last name hey good evening good
afternoon my name is christopher vernon v-e-r-n-o-n and i'm the principal on the project
thank you uh swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do thank you miss boggs yes christopher have you heard my testimony this afternoon
yes i am you believe it to be true and accurate yes do you adopt it as your own yes thank you
um i do have the slides that we submitted here christopher's if you wanted to go over any
particular ones um i can scroll to those i think i think we're okay i think we're okay i just have
one question regarding the interior car wash limited to the interior that is that reflective
in your application yes it is okay and it's reflected in our revised plans as well that the
parking spaces and all the equipment is inside of the building that's being got you and that's
three pages correct that is correct okay questions from the board no no anyone else would like to
testify in this case if so please raise your hand no hands at this time thank you um planning
commission good afternoon chairman members of the board ian litwin planning commission staff
this site zoning is overly restrictive for the design location of the shopping center and
closed car wash is a reasonable use at this location. Therefore, we have no opposition to
granting the variance. Thank you. MI 2020-001384-4501, excuse me, 4501 Woodhaven Road,
unit number two. My vote is yes with the proviso revised plan. Three pages approved today.
yes with proviso yes with proviso thank you uh west gerard avenue is next
that's right and um we have a letter in support from the brewery town sharswood rco
Thank you. MI 2020-001366, 3101 West Gerrard Avenue.
I've promoted Attorney Steve Bertil.
Good afternoon, Mr. Bertil. Please identify yourself for the record. You're still under oath from earlier today.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. My name is Steve Bertil. Last name spelled B-E-R-T-I-L.
of Claire Harrison Harvey in Brandsburg.
Address is 1835 Market Street, Suite 1400, Philadelphia, PA, 19103.
Mr. Bertil, do you agree to waive and stip?
Yes, I do.
Have you mailed an exhibit packet with the required documents,
including proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance,
a copy of the refusal or referral,
and photographs and or plans of the property
five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, to all of the above.
And have you met with the RCO?
And do you have a letter?
That's already been put in by Sharon.
Okay, please proceed with your testimony.
Thank you.
I'll start sharing at this moment.
As stated, we're here for 3101 West Jerome.
Avenue, the corner of 31st and Girard. Mr. Bertil, I apologize for the interruption. I
know we had earlier some technical problems. You're very garbled. I'm sorry, can you hear me now?
Still the same way. We can hear, but you break up every so often.
My apologies. I don't know what is causing that. Any other instruments on nearby?
I don't believe so. Not that I'm aware of.
Are you using earphones?
Let me see. Let me disconnect this.
Sometimes wireless earphones might be affecting it.
Okay, it might be my microphone. Let me stop sharing so I can disconnect my microphone and just use the left.
Thank you.
hello yes that's perfect i think we got it okay great i'll start sharing again
my apologies for that
As I was stating, we are here to represent or to present our variance request for 3101 West Gerrard Avenue.
This application is a request for variance for relief for the erection of a detached canopy ATM machine and for the reduction of two parking spaces,
bringing the total amount of parking spaces at the proposed parcel to 90 spaces, including 6 ADA
compliant spaces. This property, as I stated, is zoned as RMX2 residential mixed use, as you can
see here. The property is situated on the corner of 31st and Girard Avenue, 31st Street and Girard
avenue this is the aerial so you can get a better shot of the property in question
um with thompson street to the north and gerard avenue to the west gerard avenue to the south
we are proposing the erection of the atm canopy structure within the parking lot
of the lot um currently um as you can see from this aerial shot there's a shopping center
here, the shops at Brewery Town. The two main tenants are Aldi and Wine and Spirits State Store.
As you can see, there's no residential use for this property. It's completely commercial.
In fact, this property is probably in property zone and more accurately reflects an auto-oriented
commercial zoning such as CA1 or CA2, which would allow the proposed use that we are trying to
install here by right which i'll get to in a second just so you get a sense of where uh among
the parking lot we plan on uh having the installation oh let's take a time i'll
skip the street views and go directly to the parking lot this is the corner of the parking
lot that's uh closest to the intersection of 31st street and gerrard avenue where the mouse is
circling when we plan an installation and the removal of the two parking spaces that are there
next is green space it's just another angle to see the area with your back towards the commercial
spaces of the uh plaza in terms of the refusal that we we obtained um we received a use refusal
for the use of financial services, because as in most residential districts, the use of financial
services is prohibited. As I stated, although this lot is zoned as RMX2, which is intended for
residential mixed use, it's a completely commercial-oriented parcel, and as such,
for any commercial auto-oriented uses, financial services would be allowable by right. We don't
have any dimensional refusals, all the setbacks and things of that nature are approved under
the code. As such, we're here only for the use refusal because an automatic teller machine
is classified as financial services, although it's not tied to a branch.
We did meet with the RCO and I was stated earlier, we obtained a letter of support.
There was a, the RCO meeting was held on October 15th, there was a zoning committee meeting
held earlier on October 6th.
We receive unanimous support from the Zoning Committee and in the RCO for a community meeting.
We receive 10 votes for support or non-opposition and 4 votes in opposition.
As such, we receive the letter of support, as you can see here, from the RCO.
Here is just so you get a sense of what this would look like.
Here's a rendering of the proposed kiosk here in the corner of the parking lot.
As you can see, it's installed where the two spaces that will be removed would normally be.
And it's also as far away from the main parking as possible as to not impact the parking that are currently being utilized by the two anchor tenants that are on the property.
that are currently being utilized by the two anchor tenants that are on the property.
At this time, for the sake of time, I'll conclude and see if there's any questions regarding the
design. But I do have with me Mr. Barry Glassman from Security Vault Works, which is an authorized
representative of both the potential tenant for this location, Chase Bank, and the owners per the
authorization letter to adopt and affirm my testimony. So Mr. Glassman can raise his hand
to be recognized by Ms. Sunkit. I can get him to do that.
No hands at this time.
Okay. Mr. Bertil, as an officer of court, we'll stipulate that your client would have adopted your testimony as presented. Any questions from the board?
Okay. Anyone else would like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
no hands at this time thank you planning commission
good afternoon chairman members of the board ian litwin planning commission staff
um this site is owned rmx2 as part of a master plan the proposed use is appropriate for the site
Therefore, we have no opposition to granting the vanes.
Thank you very much.
MI 2020-001366, 3101 West Girard Avenue.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you, Mr. Bertil.
Thank you very much.
That concludes my business.
Have a good day.
Is Oak Lane next, Tanya?
I believe it is oh so Earl Street was continued no it's 3 30 oh I'm so sorry yeah I think we're
ready for Oak Lane and that'll be number one and seven yep MI 2020-000737-1122 Oak Lane
and MI 2020-001835-1100 Oak Lane.
I have promoted Attorney William Kerr,
and I believe Paul Bonney is involved with this case as well.
I will promote him.
Thank you, Mr. Kerr.
I believe you were sworn in earlier today,
but please identify yourself for the record.
no I don't think he was I think it might have been yesterday
might be right I remember a card yesterday was so long I think it was today right
Mr. Kerr are you okay with audio Mr. Kerr
let's get mr bonnie to swear mr bonnie in and then we'll go back to mr carl mr bonnie please
identify yourself for the record spell your last name good afternoon mr chairman uh my name is paul
bonnie my last name is spelled b-o-n-i uh my office address is 325 chestnut street suite 1109
19106.
Affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Mr. Kerr?
Yeah, we have an audio issues with you, Mr. Kerr.
Do you have speakers outside?
Okay, here it comes now.
still unable to hear you mr carr it's connecting to his audio so now it is it's fine he should be
able to speak now unmute unmute yourself okay how's that hey i got it okay please identify
for the records by your name sorry about that um william kerr k k-e-r-r
um i'm with high schwartz 40 east airy street in norristown
one nine four zero four um we're in a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth i do you you represent the applicant i represent the applicant today and the applicant
Applicant is a joint venture between the Refuge Evangelical Baptist Church and BCM Affordable Housing.
and BCM Affordable Housing. The Refuge Church owns the properties that are the subject today.
The Refuge Church owns.
Its main church building is on 1100 Oak Lane, and it also owns a vacant lot that's adjacent
to the main church at 1122 Oak Lane. Do you have exhibits you can be sharing with us?
I do. I'm going to go through just a brief introduction, then I'll get the exhibits up,
Okay, thank you.
But I just put on the record quickly, Chair,
that I request that we keep ourselves muted
unless the Chair ask a question
and not to talk over each other,
just to make sure this goes smoothly.
Thank you kindly, Chair.
Thank you.
So this is a continuation of a hearing
that commenced on February 12th.
And that hearing was for the 1122 property.
At that hearing, we were sort of constrained for time
given the length of the list that day but we did have some testimony from my client Bruce Morgan
who's a principal in BCM affordable housing. We had some testimony from Nancy Bastian who's our
architect. There was also a lengthy statement in support by Hillary Emerson of Councilwoman
Parker's office and then there were some also some statements of opposition made by certain
area residents. Subsequent to that hearing we actually made some changes to the plan
which Mr. Morgan will get into in a minute. Those changes actually involved addition of some parking
which actually brought into the picture the church's parcel on 1100 Oak Lane. So since that
time we resubmitted the modified 1122 parcel to L&I. They've given us a revised refusal.
We also submitted an application for the 1100 parcel of L&I, and we have a refusal for that.
So today we're proceeding with both as a joint appeal.
So now I'll get into my exhibits.
There's actually a pretty extensive list of exhibits.
Can you see that screen that I'm sharing now?
Let me see if I can.
How do I share it?
Hang that back up.
Okay, here we go.
Okay, now are you seeing that?
Sorry about that.
I'm technically challenged.
And I even have help here today.
You're talking to the right guy.
So you'll have mercy on me.
So this is the exhibit pack that we had actually submitted back on February 12th.
So it has a lot of information, our application refusal, the plans at the time.
So that's part of the deal today as well.
Okay, our second exhibit pack is actually an exhibit binder that we've prepared specifically for the 1122 Oak Lane parcel for today's hearing.
Okay, this lists our witnesses.
We have the amended refusal I mentioned a minute ago.
We have the ZBA's revised proviso plans form, the RCO notice letter that we sent out, some posting photos.
The revised plan is at tab six.
We have a revised facade rendering.
also a key piece is that we did a traffic and parking study um so i have a witness who will
testify to the results of that traffic and and parking study and the last thing that i wanted to
point out in addition to the tax clearance certificate is that we now have a that we added
the uh hearing transcript from the february 12th 2020 hearing to the packet so you'll have that
at your convenience. The third exhibit pack looks like this, and Ms. Saletta I think should have
this one as well. And this is basically a packet of exhibits that Mr. Morgan pulled together. There
was an effort by the church and by Mr. Morgan to obtain support, indications of support from the
community. So this has a whole lot of, there's letters, there's emails, there's petitions in
here all of which support the property and then our last exhibit packet is is our zoning hearing
binder number four and this relates to the 1100 oak lane property again our same witnesses we have
the review refusal for that property we had a notice letter that went out to the rco we had a
meeting with the RCO. There are some posting photos and the plan for 1100, which is essentially
The plan for 1100, which is essentially the same, it's just focused on that property,
the same. It's just focused on that property.
except instead of the 1122 property, is there.
And again, our tax clearance certificate for that parcel.
So those are our exhibits that we have today.
And we're going to sort of jump back and forth between some of them as we go.
Just some additional key facts before I call Mr. Morgan as my first witness.
Or excuse me, the pastor, I'm going to call the pastor first.
Again, the church is located at 1100 Oak Lane.
It's at 11th and Oak Lane, right at the corner.
The development parcel is immediately adjacent, and that's at the corner of 12th and Oak Lane.
So they take up that whole block there.
From February, you may recall that we're proposing on the 1122 parcel to construct a 40-unit affordable housing complex for seniors.
Do you have visuals for us?
I do. I'll get to those in a minute.
I'm just giving you background, and I'm going to have the pastor testify, and then Mr. Morgan, and that's when we'll get your visuals.
It's to be constructed with financing from the Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program.
The deadline for that application is early 2021, so we're anxious to move this forward today, if at all possible.
The city has indicated support for the project in addition to the support from the Councilwoman's Office.
The city last year committed $2 million in home funds for the project.
That has expired because we didn't get the approval, but we do intend to reapply for those home funds.
This will be a total of total project costs will be about $15 million.
We'll create two to three hundred temporary jobs.
So we believe it'll be a significant financial benefit to this neighborhood and to the city.
OK, so my first witness, I'd like to call Pastor Richardson, and he will just give you a brief background on his time in the neighborhood and his vision for this property.
Because this application, this effort really did flow out of his long-time vision for the property.
So could we admit or promote Pastor Richardson?
You should see him on the screen there somewhere.
He would have to raise his hand.
Pastor Richardson, could you raise your hand, please?
I have Janine.
Okay. That should be it. Promote Janine. I think the pastor is with Janine.
They can unmute themselves.
And pastor, are you under Janine Owens?
I'm sure you can swear him in.
Good afternoon, pastor. Please identify yourself with the record. Spell your first and last name.
Wilbert Richardson, W-I-L-B-E-R-T-R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you, sir.
Okay, good afternoon, Pastor.
This is Bill Kerr.
Were you on the call, and did you hear my statements over the past few minutes regarding this project?
Yes, I did.
And were they accurate to your knowledge?
And do you adopt them as your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
What we'd like you to do is just give the board a little bit of background on your time in this neighborhood and your genesis of this project.
Yes, thank you very much.
Chairman Frank DiCicco, and if it please, the members of the ZBA board, I covered just a few moments of your time, as stated, and I firmly rest on the letter.
we did send a letter, I did send a letter of my statement of my commitment to our program.
As I said, my name is Wilbert Richardson, pastor of the Refugee Evangelical Baptist Church
located at 1100 Oak Lane Avenue. I have lived and ministered in our neighborhood for the past 40
years. Seniors in East Oak Lane are in need of housing in this community. It is my goal and our
goal of the ministry to ensure that we can provide this community with safe quality and affordable
housing what have driven us and what have been our passion is 38 words of our mission statement
and i'll just quote them very quickly commit to service the tribe clans and families of refugee
evangelical baptist church through its internal and outreach ministries meeting needs and achieving
reconciliation i'll repeat that meeting needs and achieving reconciliation in our community
by loving god loving our neighbors and making disciples along the way we have since the very
beginning of our church existed to encourage and engage our community in cross-cultural
ministry, socially, economically, and spiritually.
We have moved our ministry.
We have started our ministry in 12th, 641 North 12th Street.
Started our ministry in 12th, 641 North 12th Street.
We later moved to 1220 Oak Lane Avenue across from Elwood School, which is east of the property that we're speaking of.
And right next to our 1220 Oak Lane rental property that we had there was a firehouse.
And right next to the firehouse was a library.
And when we purchased the Ronald Roof Nippon building, we were able to move our services currently, our ministry, to that location, 1100 Oak Lane Avenue.
After a dreadful fire that burned down the existing Ukrainian church in 2013, we were able to purchase a lot at 1100 Oak Lane, 1122 Oak Lane.
The initial use was turning the lot into a parking lot, which we did, and used for other church events.
And five years later, we were to erect a new building of housing complex.
Refugee Evangelical further engaged the help of Corniff Realty and LLC and BCM Affordable Housing.
We had initially had four different developers to come and to vet for the program that we had
in our vision. And we, after five to six weeks, we unanimously voted Cornish Realty LLC and BCM
Affordable Housing and found them to be credible in our way of stating a five-star developer.
We later had one of my close friends who had formerly used LLC and BCM, affordable housing in Jersey, and they came to a meeting and they referenced BCM and Cornish Realty as well.
And so we went into partnership with them.
We gave a brief presentation of our vision to our councilperson, Sherelle, the Honorable Sherelle Parker and her staff, who organized several community meetings, which included residents of East Oak Lane and the RCO.
We listened to them and heard their concerns and responded appropriately.
In closing, the 2,000 seniors in East Oak Lane are in need of seniors housing.
We would like to give them a choice.
When downsizing, we have large homes and large, wonderful, beautiful homes in East Oak Lane.
And the senior citizens there now, number 2,000.
And we would like to have given them a choice when they downsize and to stay in their community rather than having to move or live in some of the joining communities around.
And our commitment is to give them safe, quality, affordable housing in our own community.
Thank you.
Thank you, Pastor.
Okay, that's all I have for the pastor.
if the uh the board has any questions uh i don't believe we do unless uh i don't know tom john uh
anyone no we're good mr chairman your bonnie yes thank you uh just again my name is paul bonnie
i'm an attorney and i represent the oak lane community action association who is a protestant
this matter and I also represent Yvette Young who is the next door neighbor to 1122 Oak Lane
in this matter and she's also a protestant. Before you begin Paul and let me interrupt
Mr. Kerr is there a way you can give us some visuals so because Mr. Bonney just raised an
issue about a adjoining neighbor and aerial shots or anything like that you can help us with.
This is where we'll have a better perspective.
Well, if you have any plan view, I'm happy to point out where McYoung lives.
Somebody, just give us some, the board.
Thank you very much.
Yeah, thank you.
So my second client is Yvette Young, and she lives in this house indicated at the bottom right-hand corner of this drawing that says single-family residential three-story.
Next to that to the left is the proposed senior apartment house. And above that is Pastor Richardson's existing church, the Refuge Evangelical Baptist Church.
uh existing church the refuge evangelical baptist church i believe i have the name correctly so
thank you i i appreciate it i just have a couple of questions for the pastor
um uh the first is that i think you mentioned this generally that um you your church moved to
1100 Oak Lane many years ago and I wanted to ask you if you were involved with that move.
1984-1985 we moved to 1220 Oak Lane Avenue that's right across the street from Elwood School
right next to the firehouse, which is right next to the library. We moved in 1985, and then
the building at 1100 became available. Ronald Bruce Nippon became available in 1992.
We moved from 1220 Oak Lane Avenue, which is east of the building, the lot that we're
speaking of now. We moved to 1100 Oak Lane Avenue. Thank you. Yes.
Let me understand the question.
Mr. Bonney, are you asking that the pastor, was he involved in the transaction of that or was it just his church?
Was he affiliated with the church at that time?
Yes, of course.
Thank you.
And do you recall, Pastor Richardson, that at the time of 1992, when the church moved into 1100 Oak Lane, came to the Zoning Board of Adjustment to seek variances for the church and also for the seven parking spots?
Okay. Do you remember how many parking spots were required by code as compared to the seven
that you were allowed to have by variance?
No, I wasn't aware at the particular time because it was grandfathered in when we moved
to 1100 Oak Lane Avenue. So at the time that you're speaking of, we had seven parking spaces
that were, we have purchased along with the building.
Okay, that's your recollection?
Okay, thank you.
I guess it's safe to say that you were affiliated with the church,
you know, that you were the pastor there four years ago
when now we're talking about the subject property,
which is on the corner, which would be 1122 Oak Lane.
that the church came to this zoning board
and obtained a variance to use it as a parking lot.
I think you mentioned that generally.
So do you recall that generally?
And also that we said at that same time
that within the next three to five years,
we would be building on the property.
You're saying you told the zoning board that?
Yes, we did.
Were you at the zoning board hearing or did someone else from the church go there?
Both Ken Staley and I, who was representing us at this particular time as a PE,
we were both there at the time that they made the statement.
But he did the talking, not you. Is that correct?
Both he and I did the talking, but he initially stated that we would be,
and within three to five years, building a building on the lot after three to five years.
Okay. Well,
Mr. Chair, I'm wondering if I can share my screen.
There are some people talking in the background. I'm not sure if it's Mr. Kerr.
If you're talking, just put yourself on mute.
Okay, I apologize. I think I was not mute.
Yeah, no problem.
Mr. Bonney, you can now share your screen.
Okay, thank you. Thank you.
Okay, I'm getting the hang of this here. Share.
Okay. I have three documents here, but the first is just to refresh your recollection is, this is the 19th
The first is, just to refresh your recollection, is this is the 1992 variants.
And as you can see in the middle of the screen, let me see if I can make this a little bit bigger.
There is the Nippon uses as prior uses.
they called it, I'll refer to it as mentally challenged, to assist the mentally challenged
citizens. Could I jump in here for a minute, Mr. Chairman? Mr. Bonney, were these submitted to the
Zoning Board five days before the hearing? No, I understand. No, it's not a requirement for
the protestants.
Well, I think it is a requirement
that you provide them prior to the hearing.
Otherwise, it's up to the board
whether or not they're going to admit them.
I think, is that
accurate, Sharon?
No, it is not.
We do allow protestants, they are not
held to the same five-day requirement
that applicants are,
that appellants are.
Okay, I misread those
instructions.
I mean we we prefer it but um especially if they are just as if you're the appellant and you have
rebuttal materials you can submit those okay and mr bonnie did you provide me a copy with these
of these documents uh no but i can okay all right i would appreciate that absolutely absolutely i'm
Sorry, gentlemen, I hate to interrupt. But chair, I would like to request that all participants
here understand that they should not use the q&a for testimony. We're getting a lot of testimony
in the q&a. If you wish to speak on behalf of any project, you have to raise your hand when
the chair allows. Thank you all. Okay, so this is just prior treatment of these properties
here at the zoning board this is you know these are matter of matters of record here at the zoning
board this is a zoning board document as you can see at the bottom the variances were granted
and as I've indicated in the yellow highlighting that the application was to convert the existing
structure into a church with seven off-street accessory parking spots whereas what was required
i'm paraphrasing here was 74 off street accessory parking spots um
and and it was granted as you can see at the bottom um a church with seven accessory parking
spots um so i just wanted to sort of put you know this is sort of already in the zoning board's
files. This is from the city's atlas website. And here we have the transcript of the zoning
board hearing from March 30, 2016, when the church came to the zoning board to get a variance
for 1122 which is the corner property which is where the project is proposed to be built
and it's a vacant lot and at that time the church was acquiring it and wanted to get
um as the pastor said a variance to use it as a parking spot um the parking lot the pastor
testified and his recollection is is that at the zoning board hearing that he or and or his
colleague mentioned to the zoning board that within three to five years um i'm going to object
to this statement um if the pastor said it i'd like you to point to the the portion of the
transcript where the statement was made rather than assert what the pastor said that's fine
my point mr kerr is that um this is a very short transcript and nowhere here did the pastor or mr
Staley say anything of that sort. In fact, the community members were concerned that that might
be happening. And neither the church nor the zoning board said anything of that nature and
said, don't worry, the underlying zoning is not going to change. And of course, what the purpose
of this variance was, as I'm reading from page 18, it says, okay, we've been here for about 30
years. That's what Mr. Staley says. And the chairman said, and if this goes, and prior to
utilizing this parking lot, if it goes through, your congregants would come to the area and have
would come to the area and have to park on the street.
to park on the street. Yes, sir.
Yes, sir. And the chairman says, so now we're going to take all of those off the street.
And Mr. Staley says, yes, sir. So I'm just establishing for the record that, and this,
you know, this is not a, that the church came, that the church was parking all,
that the parishioners of the congregants were parking in the area on the streets for decades
and then obtained a use variance for a parking lot for a levy to oak lane to use it as a parking
lot to get all those cars off the street and that there was no mention at this hearing of
the church intending to use the property for anything else in the future the community was
concerned that it was going to be a slippery slope, that this variance would somehow make it
easier to use the property as commercial or something like that. And the chairman said,
don't worry that this is just for a parking lot. Nothing's going to change other than the parking
lot. And I just want to mention that the rest of this is just to show that the variance for the
parking lot was in fact granted but I think the pastor admitted that so as you can see on April
5 2016 the city website is indicating that that variance for the parking lot was granted so
I'll wrap all this up in in my closing argument but I just wanted to establish those facts
you know whether whether the pastor thinks that they mentioned the intended future use or not
You know, maybe memories can be faulty, but I think this transcript is pretty clear.
That's all I have for the pastor at this time.
Thank you.
I'd like to reserve the right to review these documents and potentially redirect Pastor Richardson on some of the points that were made.
So noted.
Okay, thank you.
So I think that's it for Pastor Richardson.
My next witness, I'd like to call Mr. Bruce Morgan.
Bruce, could you raise your hand?
Mr. Morgan has raised his hand.
If you could admit him to the room.
hello can you hear me yes good afternoon mr morgan please identify yourself for the record
first and last name my name is bruce morgan if you can speak a little bit more into the microphone
or increase the volume that would be helpful
can you hear me now yes my name is bruce morgan
uh this and your interest in this application um i'm the developer along with conifer realty
okay you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed mr carl okay mr morgan um you heard you've been on this call for the
entire length is that correct yes and you heard the statements i made uh as as we were opening
up the hearing yes and were those statements accurate yes and you adopt those as your own
testimony? I do. Okay. And just some additional background. Did you testify at the February 12th
hearing in this matter? I did. Okay. And since the February 12th hearing, have we made some
modifications to the property? We have. And talk a little bit before you get into your testimony
about your experience developing these affordable housing properties
in conjunction with religious facilities,
churches and similar types of religious facilities?
A large part of my affordable housing development practice
involves partnering with churches,
typically in urban areas which have aging congregations
that can no longer help in a healthy way live in their homes.
The homes typically have stairs and they can't navigate those stairs
or they live in apartments which are not well maintained.
The most recent project I did was in West Oak Lane with the Mount Airy Baptist.
I did was in West Oak Lane with the Mount Airy Baptist Church at the corner of Haynes and
I'm drawing a blank on Haynes Street and we built 50 units of affordable housing. It's about a mile
away for seniors. This project is 40 units, correct? This one is 40, yes. And that property
and other properties that you've built in conjunction with the churches,
are they typically on the menu?
Mr. Kerr, I think we can stipulate that Mr. Morgan is familiar with
developing this type of, I'm calling it senior for a lack of a better description.
I think we can stipulate to that.
Okay, I just wanted to get to one point that.
Yeah, let's do that. Thank you.
The developments are just, Mr. Morgan,
are typically on or adjacent to the church property, correct?
Okay. So, Mr. Morgan, if you could just. Sure. I lost that. You said Mr. Morgan and then we
couldn't hear you. I'm sorry. Mr. Morgan will now present his testimony. Thank you. Okay. Good
afternoon. My name is Bruce Morgan and my firm BCM Affordable Housing has joined with Conifer
Realty to bring Pastor Richardson's vision of new, safe, affordable senior housing to the East
Oak Lane community. The pastor and his church have provided a petition of support for this project
that has been signed by 95 community residents, the vast majority of which live within a half a
mile of the property, many of which live within a quarter mile of the property. Additionally,
we have provided 13 email letters of support for the project, along with 44 traditional letters
via the United States Post Office of support for the project.
All three of these documents have been submitted to the ZBA in my package.
To further the pastor's vision, we informally met with our neighbors
at the Refuge Evangelical Baptist Church.
We then formally met with the RCO at the Oak Lane Presbyterian Church,
which is across the street from Refuge.
We then met with the RCO a second time on a Zoom call two weeks ago.
And finally, we toured a group of RCO members through our similar project gala that we did with the Mount Airy Baptist Church in West Oak Lane last week to answer their questions and show them examples of our work.
At each of these meetings, we have heard the community's feedback, and to the greatest extent possible, we have amended our project to incorporate the community's feedback into the development.
Specifically, the project's density was deemed to be too high by the community, so we reduced the project's size from the initial conception of 60 units down to 50 units and subsequently down to the present 40 units, a 33% reduction of units.
Parking. Initially, this project offered no on-site parking, which was unacceptable to the community.
To solve this problem, we repositioned the building so that we can now provide for nine parking spaces to the rear of our project, including two handicapped spaces, while not changing the building's front or side yard setbacks.
Additionally, we have hired a parking engineer to study the availability of on-street parking.
David Horner of Horner and Cantor's findings are that there is sufficient on-street parking to go
along with the off-street parking that we will now be providing. David will go over his findings in
detail later in the presentation. Traffic. The neighbors contend that the project will cause
traffic congestion in their neighborhood. David Horner studied the traffic patterns in the
neighborhood at various times of the day during various days of the week. His findings indicate
that we will not create traffic problems for the neighborhood. And once again, David will go over
his findings shortly. We added higher income units at 80% of area median income to ensure that the
largest swath of the community could qualify within the project's income limits. The neighbors
claimed the facade of the building did not meet the standards of the other structures in the
neighborhood. As such, we eliminated the siding previously slated for the building and replaced
it with an all-brick facade along with simulated limestone on the first floor which mimics the
limestone found at the library across the street. This change added $75,000 to
the project's costs. The neighbors were concerned that the building's entrance
initially was too close to Oak Lane Avenue, so we moved the entrance further
so we moved the entrance further down 12th Street away from Oak Lane.
down 12th Street away from Oak Lane.
The neighbors were concerned that we did not properly account for handicap access,
so we added a dedicated handicap entry off of the parking lot to the rear of the building.
Finally, the neighbors were concerned that we did not properly account for trash pickup,
so we added a dedicated trash room with direct access to the rear of the building
for refuse removal. Finally, our submission includes several photographs of the neighborhood
taken on May 19th of this year at 9 30 a.m. and then again on Wednesday, May 20th at 6 30 p.m.
These photos were taken in the heart of the pandemic when residents were sheltering in place
and the neighborhood arguably was full of residents. The photos which are included as part
my package indicate that there is ample on-street parking all around the proposed site. Once again
these photos were included within my package. Now I would like to introduce David Horner
of Horner and Cantor. David graduated from the University of Delaware with a degree in civil
engineering in 1987. He has a license to practice engineering in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and
florida david is also certified as a professional traffic operations engineer with over 30 years of
experience in traffic i would stipulate that mr warner is an expert thank you okay um now i'd like
to introduce yeah before we bring him on uh mr bonnie you have any questions uh for mr morgan
I do have a couple questions. Yes, thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Morgan. How are you?
Good afternoon.
Thank you. I just want to clarify something that I think was mentioned earlier, that the application that you made for the tax credit was not granted this year. Is that correct?
this past year, correct. Okay, so you'll have to apply, reapply for that? In February of 2021.
Okay, thank you. I want to give you an opportunity to I think correct something
that you said incorrectly in February, which I see from the transcript that says that
you say the remainder of the neighborhood is single family homes but along oak lane avenue
they are all institutional commercial uses and if if we could put the site plan up again i just
want to ask you to agree with me if you if you would that across oak lane on the left hand side
of this photo you can see essentially three. We don't see any photo. All I see is the site
plan. The site plan. The site plan, okay. Yes, I'm sorry. Thank you. The drawing has
green areas on the left-hand side on the other side of Oak Lane, just on the left-hand side
of the page. And would you agree with me, sir, that that block on Oak Lane across the
street from you is single family homes and is not commercial. Can you see the pointer that I'm
pointing at? Yeah, exactly. Mr. Bonney is accurate. This side of Oak Lane where my pointer is are
single family homes, but on this side, and this is my reference point, here's our project. On this
side of the street is a library. On this side, right below the homes is the school. I would agree
with you, sir. I would agree with you. My point that I was making, though, sir, is on the side
that the building is, in the line, is our building, the church, a second church, and then a
rehabilitation center all in a row going one direction, and a library and a firehouse going
the other direction. Well, I don't think we disagree with each other. So all I'm pointing
out is that across the street on oak lane there are single family homes and you're correct that
and i agree with your characterization of the other properties in the area although i'm not
sure you i don't i don't know where drug rehabilitation center is but i'll take your
word for that it's not i didn't say drug i said rehabilitation i'm sorry thank you and that and
that's one that's on the far side of the presbyterian church the
That's on the far side of the Presbyterian Church.
I understand that.
Yes, yes, yes, yes.
Over near 10th Street.
Is that a question?
I see it here.
Yeah, I was just waiting for this photo to come up.
So I agree with you.
Down here at the bottom, it says Laurel Square.
rehabilitation correct and the and the single family homes that i'm talking about are opposite
oak lane from the asterisk so you're talking about this area right here mr yes yes yes thank you i
can move on now thank you um uh i want to talk about uh the the this sort of sharing arrangement
you're adding some parking spots to the if you could put the plan on if Mr. Kerr you're adding
some parking spaces really on the property line between you and the church and then there's sort
of a you know I guess a reorientation of the parking in that area can you explain which of
the spot, there are some spots I see from your materials are going to be shared with the two
uses and others that are going to be dedicated just to the apartment house. Correct. We have
staff at our building. We have a manager and a maintenance person. We have entered into an
agreement with the church that during the week when they're going to always be at the site,
They will be able to use two of these five parking spaces that the church has, but only during the week when they're at work.
These seven parking spaces are for the use of our residents.
So during the week, the church will have dedicated access to three parking spaces?
Correct.
Okay. And in addition to, you know, manager and a maintenance person, you have services
for your tenants, right? Like social events, you know, bingo or exercises, things like that. I'm
I'm just not familiar with the types of it.
So I don't mean to say bingo in any sort of disparaging way.
I like the game myself.
But in other words, you're going to have people come in to help with various social activities.
There will be a social worker that will be at the site for 20 hours a week
on a to-be-determined time frame that will be employed by center in the park.
and they will conduct some services at the site and then we will be providing transportation
from this site to center in the park in Germantown for an extended menu of services
to be provided at their site in Germantown. Okay and when we and when we speak about 40 units
um are they all one bedroom units or are some of them two bedroom units these will all be bedrooms
i'm sorry can you say that again these will all be one bedrooms okay so the residents will also
have i assume uh family members that are visiting them uh family members can visit sure well we
We hope they do, right?
So that's a rhetorical question.
Family members do visit the residents, yes.
Right.
Finally, let me move to just to clarify the uses.
Other than some of the parking spaces being shared,
um the the church and the facility that you'd be building are are separate and is that correct
the i don't understand the question they're two separate buildings yes
yes two separate operations two separate you know sets of employees to two separate
you know correct i mean i don't know what else to say i'm saying what else is shared
other than the parking spots it's they're separate correct okay that's all i have um thank you very
much okay before we go any further gentlemen uh we're going to interrupt this hearing for a few
minutes uh we're going to go to the 3 30 list to see if there's anyone who's going to be
uh we're going to go to the 330 list to see if there's anyone who's going to be requesting a
continuance rather than keep those folks just waiting around so i'm going to call off cases
for 330 list uh if anyone is here to testify on any of the cases that are listed for 330 and i'll
read them off. 1122 Earl Street, 2534 East Somerset, 1504 Wharton, 1723 Memorial Avenue,
1725 Monument Street, 1732 North Gratz Street, and 679 North Broad. If there's anyone who's
requesting a continuance. On any of those cases, please raise your hand at this time.
So Chair, if I could state that we have a request for continuance for number 7th on your list by
the Attorney of Records Engine. So MI 2020-001102, 679 North Broad Street, there's a request for
continuance and anyone present who would disagree with that no hands at all okay that case is
continued any other requests no hands are up for continuance okay so we'll go back to this
the hearing we're just um sorry again gentlemen for the interruption we don't want people
hanging around if they were going to continue their cases. So please proceed. I have a question
before we go. Oak Lane Avenue, is there on-street parking on Oak Lane? Is it permitted parking on
Oak Lane? I mean, perhaps, I think up next is the traffic consultant, so maybe. Yeah, I was
I was going to suggest we let Mr.
Horner testify. He did a study of the
parking and where there is parking.
Okay, again, it was a simple question, though.
Is there parking permitted on
Oak Lane Avenue?
The question is, the answer
is no, between 11th and 12th Street.
Mr. Morgan believes that the answer to that is
no, not between 11th and 12th Street.
Okay, thank you.
But Mr. Horner will have more
in-depth information on that. Okay, a little bit hard hearing, difficult to hear
you. Okay, Mr. Morgan
indicates he does not believe that parking is permitted between 11th and
12th Street, but Mr. Horner will actually study that, so he'll have
more detailed information and accurate information on it. Well, I mean
somebody there, the pastor, somebody who's familiar with Oak Lane
should know whether there's parking. There's no
parking on that block of oak lane on okay all right that's what the signs say from the city
okay and it's a two is it two lane is it a two lane highway one in each direction correct
and does anybody know the width of oak lane avenue i think you'll see in the in in the
traffic report uh maybe i think you might be see that i okay all right i'll ask that thank you
I don't have that.
You're going to have to get David done.
All right.
I'd like to call Mr. David Warner.
Sir, please identify yourself.
Name, spell your name.
hello is he there with you or no he's he's on separately david could you raise your hand
so i don't have i don't have anyone with that name i have another device maybe with your name
No, that's me
No, that's not us
He may have dropped off
I thought I just heard him speaking a couple of minutes ago
He wouldn't be able to speak
unless I gave him authority
That's a good point
But I'm not sure
We're texting him right now
But he was on because he contacted us by text
but he was on because he contacted us by text about a half hour ago and what's the name
about it.
david horner h-o-r-n-e-r no i don't have anyone listed with that name how is there a horner
h-o-r-n-e-r and canter c-a-n-t-e-r well i don't go through the list to look for them
if they're here to be represented it's over 80 something people so if they wish to testify they
just have to raise their hand but the only thing i have is a william kerr with this hand up okay
is there another witness you can bring on while we're waiting for mr horner
uh yes i think what i'd like to do um nancy bastian b-a-s-t-i-a-n nancy could you raise your hand
okay so um i'm not sure if they're under you i have now two william f kerr with their hands up
so i'm going to open their mic and allow them to speak and maybe i don't know they're the right
people. Hello, can you hear me? This is Dave Horner. Yes, we can, sir, if you speak up a
little bit. Yes, let me turn my volume up. All right, please identify yourselves by your last
name for the record. My name is Dave Horner, H-O-R-N-E-R. And your involvement with this
application? I prepared a traffic and parking study for the applicant. Thank you. Swear and
firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do thank you please proceed
mr horner have you been on the uh the call uh since the since it was initiated earlier this
afternoon i have and you've heard all the testimony so far yes okay and you did prepare a uh a traffic
and parking study correct i did and i'm displaying that on the screen can everyone see that
yes okay uh mr horner is this is this first page dated march 16 2020 is this the first page of the
of the traffic and parking study that you prepared it is okay could you just walk the board through
um what you did and what your conclusions were and if you need me to scroll through this document
you just let me know okay uh yes absolutely uh so there were two parts to our study one dealt
with traffic, one dealt with parking. So I'll start with traffic first. Senior housing development
is not a big traffic generator. What we do is we project the traffic and then superimpose that onto
the existing traffic conditions, which we documented in the morning and the afternoon
and the school peak hours. Bottom line is they would generate roughly 10 vehicles in the morning
peak and 10 in the afternoon, and that would have virtually no impact on the roadways and
intersections. In particular, we looked at the adjacent intersection of Oak Lane and 12th Street,
which has a traffic signal, and our finding was that the traffic impact is basically negligible.
It doesn't cause any issues.
So then I can go on to parking unless you have another question, Bill, regarding the traffic.
So you didn't see any negative traffic impacts on 12th Street, 11th Street, or Oak Lane, correct?
That is correct.
Mr. Morgan, I had asked a question.
You may have heard me.
I know they said there's no parking permitted on Oak Lane.
Is there on-street parking permitted on 11th and or 12th as it relates to in close proximity to this project?
There is.
And I think the reason there was hesitancy on answering the Oak Lane question, there is no parking allowed on Oak Lane between 11th and 12th.
But there is parking allowed on Oak Lane between 12th and 13th.
And there is parking on street allowed on 12th and on 11th in proximity to this site.
Let me ask a question, if you can answer. If there was parallel parking on Oak Lane, so one side of the street, we'll say on the side where this application is, would that still provide for two-way traffic on Oak Lane?
Is it wide enough to handle curbside parking and vehicular traffic in both directions?
I'm going to say I don't believe it is in that segment.
I believe we're a little bit short.
I believe we're a little bit short.
I don't have a documented measurement of Oak Lane there.
I don't have a documented measurement of Oak Lane there.
But if you allow eight foot for parking on one side,
I don't think you quite have enough for an appropriate two-way width.
Fair enough.
Thank you.
Okay, Mr. Horner, I'm focused on your parking assessment portion of the report.
Can you see that on the screen?
I can.
In fact, I think the best thing would be to scroll down to the next, I guess,
two more pages where table two is at the top of the page. Maybe it was just one more page.
So we documented the existing parking in and around the site. As you heard, there's going to be nine
parking spaces off street, so on site, that will be available during the weekdays, all of them
during the weekdays. We documented the conditions on 12th Street, on Oak Lane, on 11th Street
in proximity to this site and that's what's summarized in table two. So just very quickly
what we found is there's a total parking supply meaning available spaces that may or may not be
occupied but where you could park and those are in those specific segments which are listed in
that table. North 12th Street between Oak Lane and 66th, Oak Lane between 12th and 13th, and 12th
Street between Oak Lane and 68th. There's 85 available parking spaces during the, what would
be the during the day periods or the evening periods when the parking demand for our site for
this proposed development would be at its highest. Approximately half of those spaces are available.
There's about 43 available during those periods.
On a Sunday, we also looked at, given the presence of the church, there's a few more occupied spaces on Sunday because of the church, I would say, and there's 39 available.
We know that this use requires approximately 26 spaces, of which nine can be handled on site.
So the additional 17, we believe the on-street parking is ample to accommodate that.
And I will say, in this kind of use in an urban setting, generally the residents don't drive.
But with regard to the code requirements and the parking demand in general for a site like this, 26 spaces, we would have ample parking.
I will also add that this chart does not show 11th Street.
We did document 11th Street, and there's additional on-street parking available on 11th Street.
We just didn't include it because you're starting to get a little further away from the building,
and we felt that there was ample parking within these segments that we looked at and documented on Table 2.
All right, Mr. Horner, just so that the board is clear, I want to focus on this chart, Chart 2.
So this segment of the road, North 12th Street, Oak Lane to 66th, you indicate there's a supply of 44.
Does that mean that that's the total number of parking spaces in that segment?
And then the next column, weekday, midday, 1230.
So does this mean that you did a survey on a midday weekday at 1230, and you found that 22 of those 44 spaces were occupied?
Is that what we're talking about here?
That is correct, yes.
And then the weekday evening at 9 p.m., there were 21 spaces, correct?
Occupied, yes.
And likewise, Sunday at 1030, correct?
Correct, yep.
Why did you select those three timeframes?
Well, we actually studied a wider spread of times.
Those were the periods where the parking was at its maximum.
That's why we specifically documented 12.30 p.m. on a weekday, 9 p.m. in the evening, and 10.30 on a Sunday.
We actually studied a wider range of time slots than that.
Okay, so these time frames are where you observed the maximum number of cars parked on that segment, correct?
Correct.
and likewise um so anyway let me just step back so on the weekday midday 12 30 there were 22
spaces occupied so that means there's 22 that were still available to be parked in correct
correct and that's that's true for throughout this this chart correct that's correct okay
um so of the total 85 spaces um in each of these segments at a weekday midday 12 30 there were 43
parking spaces available correct that's which and likewise for the 9 30 in the evening
And then on a Sunday, 39 spaces were available, correct?
and then on the sunday 39 spaces were available correct that's correct
That's correct.
That's all that I have on that.
So in your opinion, as a professional traffic and parking engineer, is there sufficient, or let me just step back.
Will this project have any negative impacts on the traffic in the neighborhood?
It will not.
And in your opinion as a professional traffic engineer, is there adequate on-street parking combined with the off-street parking we're providing to accommodate the projected need for parking from this facility?
There is.
Okay. That's all that I have for Mr. Horner?
I have one quick question for Mr. Horner. When you did this, table two, when you did your survey, were there services going on on Sunday at the church?
I'm assuming there's services on Sunday. I maybe shouldn't assume. Whatever day they have services, either Friday, weekday, or Sunday.
Yes, there were.
And those spots were still available, even though there were services going on, correct?
That's correct.
Okay, thank you.
Mr. Bonney?
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Horner.
First of all, just a small item here.
You said that the proposed project would require by the city 26 spaces.
I think the refusal says 27.
Can we agree that whatever the refusal says is probably more accurate than your recollection?
I would agree, yes.
Okay, thank you.
You mentioned that in your experience that not a lot of people have cars in what you're calling this an urban environment, but this is East Oak Lane.
This is not, you know, Rittenhouse Square or anything like that.
I mean, this is, but would you, you would still call this an urban environment for those purposes?
For those purposes, yes. Meaning if this was a standalone site in an area where it really was only accessible by car with no pedestrian access to anything of meaning, that would be, we'll call it a suburban or rural location.
So, yeah, I mean, this is not downtown urban, I understand that, but for the purpose of the point being that there would be likely less car use than if this development was in a less urban environment.
So for the 40 residents who would live here, how many would have cars, in your opinion?
Yeah, I would defer to Bruce Morgan to that question. And I just will add that I did not take any, I didn't make any reductions for that assumption. In other words, with the trip projections, I projected it as if it was in any environment. And the same with the parking assumptions. I just wanted to point out that I think that we get the added benefit of even less car use than typical.
So you're assuming that all 40 each have a car?
Well, that's not the assumption.
I'm assuming that this has typical characteristics of senior housing that could be located anywhere.
And even in other locations, not all of them have cars.
I'm going to move on.
Thank you.
But you mentioned that other times were studied but not included in this chart.
are those other times uh that parking was studied um included yes exactly thank you for
finishing my thought uh is it in the appendices it's the very last page uh of that document
you're getting there too far yes
i apologize i'm showing my lack of dexterity with a mouse well we're all in the same boat it's no fun
i mean i can i can answer your question even without the chart being up okay
In terms of times, we looked at weekday from 10 a.m. to 1 p.m., weekday evening from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m., and Sunday from 9 a.m. to noon.
Okay, thank you.
So what I hear not studied in that is, and I did view the video of the RCO meeting that was held, I don't know, a week or 10 days ago, give or take, where you were.
a week or 10 days ago, give or take, where you were speaking during the RCO meeting.
And would you agree with me that you were not on site for the opening of school when all the kids
are dropped off? And I'm talking about the Elwood School. And when school closes and all the kids
are picked up and that you did not observe that activity. Is that correct? That's correct. Okay,
thank you. Are you aware of what grades are involved at Elwood? You know, do you know if
it's high school or elementary school or do you know? I don't know. Okay, thank you.
would you agree with me that oak lane narrows at the 1100 block which is the
which is the block that the proposed facility is would be located uh you're talking about between
11th and 12th street uh yes it does that that that oak lane is wider in the 1200 block uh
than it is in the 1100 block i would agree with that yes okay thank you um
uh that's all i have for you thank you sir i have two questions for you mr mr horner
How close is this application to public transportation?
Would you happen to know?
I believe that the nearest public transportation is along 66th Avenue and along 11th.
I don't believe there's any that traditionally goes down 12th Street, and that's my recollection.
and the other question i don't may not be for you maybe for the bishop or someone or mr ker
uh will the housing development uh senior housing be providing any shuttle service yes
mr morgan can answer that i'll call him or i can have him answer right now if you like you can
answer it yeah just just yes or no there will be yes yes okay thank you all right uh before we go
any further gentlemen i you know we're getting it's 4 35 we don't like the rush but we do have
to get to the 330 list so if we can get to the meat of this issue on both sides it would be helpful
okay okay mr horner um i guess just a couple of follow-up for mr horner mr horner your um your
traffic your parking chart that we're showing on the screen um you did these um studies prior to
the covid shutdown correct that's correct yes and the weekday midday that was also during the school
was opened uh when you did that weekday midday survey correct it was yes okay that's all i have
for mr horner i just have a couple quick questions for the architect nancy bastion
Can I ask one follow-up to Mr. Horner?
Mr. Horner, were you the one that personally made these observations, or was it a colleague of yours?
Well, both.
The observations that made up this parking table was a colleague of mine,
although I also observed conditions on different days in similar times.
Thank you.
I didn't document my findings that are in this chart.
Thank you.
Okay, if we can move along, it would be helpful.
Nancy Bastian, could you raise your hand?
Yeah, I think I've already been admitted.
Okay, just a couple questions for you, Nancy, two or three.
You're the architect on this project, correct?
That's correct.
Did I swear her?
I forget.
You did swear her in the last time, yes?
Okay, well, thank you.
And this is your design, correct?
This is your rendering?
I'm sorry.
I hate to interrupt but she was sworn in today not today yeah that's why I didn't think so that's
why you meant last time okay been under oath since February all right okay
uh miss ma'am please identify yourself with the record yes my name is Nancy Bastian that's b-a-s-t-i-a-n
I'm an architect with Cecil Baker and Partners,
1107 Walnut Street, 19107.
You're swearing firm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
All right, Ms. Bastian, so you are the architect on this property, correct?
All right, Ms. Bastion.
So you are the architect on this property, correct?
Correct.
Correct.
And this is your rendering?
And this is your render?
Yes, it is.
Have you been involved in developing architectural plans for similar projects like this in the past?
Yes, I've been involved with designing affordable housing for about 25 years.
Okay, and some of those projects, or some or most of those projects, have been constructed?
yes uh and several are under construction right now one for the archdiocese on south broad street
at ellsworth street saint rita's place i would stipulate to her expertise okay and based on your
experience in designing these other projects which have been built um do you have an opinion as to
whether this is an appropriate uh development for this property um yes i do think it's an
appropriate development. And I think we've worked hard to try to create a design that
is very responsive to the community. I love East Oak Lane. I think it's beautiful. And I think we
have an opportunity to do a really beautiful building there. In addition, we really worked
hard to create that outdoor space at the corner. That's a real courtyard space there. And it plays
off the library's outdoor space right across the street. I think when we first envisioned this
project we really saw it as an opportunity to create some real positive activity at this corner
have some very beautiful outdoor green space at this corner that would not only be for the seniors
who live here but for the whole neighborhood to be able to enjoy and share and i really picture
them people coming out of the library and coming over here and sitting and reading a book and
so i do feel that it's an appropriate building along oak lane avenue given the other civic
buildings that are along this street. Okay, so you believe this will be a positive
addition to the neighborhood, correct? Yes. And do you believe there'll be any negative
impacts from this project? No. Okay, that's all I have for Ms. Bastian.
Have you done any other senior housing projects? Yes. I know you're working on St. Rita's,
but do you have any others you've done
in South Philadelphia by any chance?
Not in South Philadelphia.
We did St. Francis Villa for the Archdiocese in Kensington.
We did Newman Senior Housing in Fishtown.
All right.
You haven't done anything for...
That's good.
Thank you.
I have a question.
If it's my turn, Mr. Kerr,
could you put the site plan back on the screen?
Certainly.
Hold on.
And I don't, forgive me if, I don't know if this is more for the architect or if the engineer is going to testify. I don't know if you're going to ever testify, but I'm struck that, well, first of all, I can't see 12th Street at the bottom. I'm not sure if I can, maybe you can move the diagram up a little bit.
Brian, hold on.
okay that's fine thanks so the entry there's an entry on 12th street it looks sort of like
a front door and there's all this courtyard and the patio and but there the cars um have
no way of entering from 12th street so the cars would have to go up oak lane avenue um
well i don't know if you can scroll up but past the church right and then take a right on 12th
street and then come down um i mean a right on 11th street correct i'm sorry make a right on 11th
street and then come behind the church uh sort of where parking spot number uh six is right where
yeah uh it's hard for me to describe this because i can't see no direct
ingress egress off of 12th for vehicular traffic right that it's coming in mid-block
you gotta come you have to go in off 11th mid-block off of 11th and i'm i'm wondering how
that's supposed to work with you know people who are making deliveries uh and who are not familiar
and things like that.
And certainly wouldn't you think
that plenty of people would drop off
and pick up right here on 12th Street?
Or is that okay?
Yeah, I think my,
what I would envision is that on 12th Street,
we would have a loading space
directly in front of our entry
so that if somebody inside was calling,
you know, for someone to pick them up,
a taxi or paratransit,
that they would come on 12th Street
and pick them up there.
They could come directly out there.
I picture that the UPS truck
would probably park out there
and go directly in those front doors.
The parking space.
This answer, I'm sorry to interrupt.
What is the width of that sidewalk
on 12th Street?
Well, let me ask it a different way.
Well, let me ask you in a different way. Is the sidewalk wide enough to create a lay-by?
No, it's maybe 12 plus feet wide, but I don't know.
Okay, not enough, not wide enough.
No, but I think, again, there's not going to be a ton of traffic here, as was pointed out earlier.
So I'm thinking if there's one loading space in front of this building, that would really serve it quite well.
Thank you. Okay, so you would remove a parking spot to put in a loading spot?
That would have to get approved by Streets Department. Yeah, we would have to work.
It's potential. Okay. We typically do that in a project like this at the front
entry. We typically, in every multi-family project we do, we'd get at least one loading space.
But here I think one would be adequate and appropriate. Well, one loading space the length
of a car or yeah yeah or longer than that no i'm whatever a typical loading space is and it
probably would be the last space before you got to the stop sign um but that is what i picture that
that we'd have to work with the city on that but that would be a loading space for drop-offs and
pickups okay you wouldn't want to put it in front of the entry well maybe maybe she would but that
again is something I think no disrespect that the streets department will make a recommendation
okay and that would have to go through city council anyway so that they have to create a
loading zone uh can you speak to what this um pathway is on the right hand side um right
near my client's property um so that's a an egress stair that that goes all four stories
um and that's just a pathway for in a case of emergency if people have come down that egress
there to get over to 12th street that that will not be used in any regular basis it's really just
emergency okay um uh i don't have any further questions and thank you i apologize for the
interruption of frank it looked like you were going where i'm going yeah that we do have a
full docket for 3 30 and we're almost at the five o'clock mark well mr mr chairman i would i would
very much like the applicant to finish their case in chief maybe they have already um i have just
one additional witness it'll take three to five minutes at the most and what is the witness going
to testify to she's the engineer she'll testify to the engineering aspects and uh and her her
her experience with these types of projects and that she doesn't believe that they will uh there
will be any negative impact that looks like it's going to take more than five longer than five
minutes yeah i mean no disrespect again is it is an engineer that no disrespect to the engineer
is it really that important to the to the uh testimony that we for the record
well i have i have opposition so i know you have opposition but i'm just wondering
that's why i'm gonna get to get to the opposition maybe we can sort this okay all right let's go to
the opposition and then we'll uh see what time we need it we can come back thank you okay that's
No, I wanted to speak because I think it's proper for the engineer.
Mr. Chairman, this is our, you know, I don't know if to say fortunately or unfortunately, but I have five witnesses.
Now, we're pretty tight with our testimony.
We've, you know, gone over it, but I think it's going to be, you know, up to a half an hour with the direct.
ever going to be no disrespect to any of you we're not going to be able to accommodate that
it's after five and we haven't begun the 3 30 list i understand that mr chairman at the end of
the february hearing i think i think mr chairman suggested that it should be a special but
i what i would like is that well the covid messed the covid screwed a lot of things up as you all
i i don't i i mr car you need to mute yourself mr car i would say mr car you're talking over
mute yourself you keep we're hearing your conversation okay and chair if i could interject
a thought this is a special listing um it would have had allowed for at least an hour or more
testimony and if necessary chair we can move this to another time for continuance for more testimony
Moni, as you wish. Could we just have the applicant finish up with their engineer and
then we could have a clean break between their presentation and ours? When you say clean break,
come back? Yes. Okay. All right, let's do that.
Do we have any sense of how long the engineer's testimony will be? I'll try not to ask any
Any questions?
just a couple just two to three minutes hopefully uh if we could have sarah sarah poindexter raise
Just a couple, just two to three minutes, hopefully.
your hand and be admitted poindexter please identify yourself with the record spell your
first and last name and i'll swear you in
Are you seeing anything, Tanya?
I'm not sure.
What would be the name?
Sarah Poindexter.
Her hand is raised.
I have another device with your name on it.
that's not it
I have a T. Michael
Poxton
no that's not it
I don't see anything else
about that little guy in the left hand corner
Janine Owens
that's the pastor
that's the pastor
alright
maybe she dropped off she was on
so why don't we just put her
if we're going to move this to another date we'll start with her
and then
I don't want to delay this
And again, the only question I want to ask is, is there anyone from Councilwoman Parker's office on the line?
And Jess, who flew in, Hillary Emerson from the Council of Persons.
I figured that.
With, I'm sure, her kids in tow.
Hillary, you can unmute yourself.
We'll get Hillary's testimony and then we can schedule for another date.
um good afternoon mr chair members of the board hillary emerson on behalf of councilwoman sherelle
parker hillary h-i-l-a-r-y emerson e-m-e-r-s-o-n thank you and you're swearing for him to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do thank you please proceed sure so the um
councilwoman as mr kerr noted in his opening remarks um gave um an extensive testimony back
in February. The Councilwoman has no changes or addendums to her testimony at this time.
She indicated her support for this project based on need in the area and looking at the
data for the number of seniors and knowing also that the amount of requests and lack
of availability um of senior housing um for this area so the the councilwoman um has continued to
to work with the applicant and be present for community meetings to hear feedback
from the neighbors and advocate for um changes to address their concerns um the councilwoman
and is supportive of the project um as as she was back in february thank you thank you very much
uh okay we can move on uh tanya um uh chair as you wish and i don't want to overstep but we do
have a prepared letter from planning commission if you wish now or later your call yeah let's get
that in the record on the record now i believe ian are you prepared to read the letter into record
yes i am again this is ian litwin planning commission staff uh good evening um chairman
members of the board pursuant to section 14303 of the philadelphia code the philadelphia city
planning commission has reviewed the zoning appeals for 1122 and 1100 oak lane for their
consistency with the variance criteria the commission's recommendation is that the
variances be granted the proposal is supported by the city's comprehensive plan which includes a
specific recommendation to create affordable senior housing in the upper north district
the proposal is generally consistent with nearby uses adjacent corners include institutional uses
and an adjacent block is developed with senior housing apartment building similar in scale and
density to the proposed building we believe that the proposed development will not create unusual
burden on the local street network the automobile traffic pedestrian activity and on-street parking
demand generated by the proposed development can be accommodated by the existing network.
We further believe that the appellant has demonstrated a good faith effort to mitigate
potential impacts identified by near neighbors. Thank you. Okay. MI-2020-001835
1100 Oakland through 1122 and MI 2020-000737-1122 Oakland is continued until
well we wouldn't have a date on prepare chair until that okay you'll notify the attorneys
and they could notify all appropriate RCOs um so once we discuss with the chair and the board
So once we discuss with the Chair and the Board, we'll come up with a special listing
We'll come up with a special listing for at least one.
for at least one hour testimony.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you, gentlemen.
Okay, thank you.
And if we could do that in November sometime or early December, that would be great.
Thank you.
Appreciate it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Thanks everyone for your patience.
Okay, we're going to go to the 3.30 list.
the uh denise the stenographer you need a break
hello anybody hear me yes we hear you okay uh looking for a record reporter denise i'm about
to bring her back sorry denise i kicked you out i apologize like what happened i didn't do it
I know. I'm trying to move everybody around. Did you need a break, did you ask?
Just need to change my paper real quick.
Sure, because we got several cases. Why don't we take a 10-minute break?
All right. All right, folks, let's take a 10-minute break, and we'll come back. Thank you.
All righty.
Yes, sir.
Okay. Good evening, everyone. My name is Frank DiCicco. I'm the chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. I'll be participating in today's hearing along with our board secretary, Confessor Plaza, and board members, Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James Snell.
Board Administrator, Ms. Tanya Sunkett, and board attorney, Ms. Sharon Saleta, are also in attendance.
For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect.
First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
Second, for the benefit of anyone participating by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses
identify themselves prior to speaking or testifying.
Third, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by
participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
Fourth, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your
hand by hitting star 9 and then star 6 to unmute yourself. I'll repeat. For anyone participating
by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star 9 and then star 6 to
unmute yourself. Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave
your email address and the address of the property at issue. I'll repeat, to enter an appearance
statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at
issue. With that said, we can begin, but before Mr. Plaza calls our first case, we'd like to ask
if anyone is requesting a continuance or withdrawal for this evening's hearing, this afternoon's
hearing? If so, please raise your hand. No hand. Thank you. With that, we'll begin with
MI 2020-001103, 1122 Earl Street, EARL Street.
Chair, I have promoted Attorney Steve Pollack.
Good evening, Mr. Pollack. Please identify yourself for the record, spell your name, and I'll swear you in.
Good evening, Chairman DiCicco and members of the board.
Stephen Pollack, P-O-L-L-O-C-K, attorney for the owner-applicant 1133 Columbia, LLC.
I'll raise my hand.
We're infirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
And do you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to attack her?
person? I do, Mr. Plaza. Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required document,
proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal, photos, and plans five days prior
to this hearing? Yes, we have. Thank you. Have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Yes, we have
and do. Please proceed. Okay. Mr. Chairman, members of the board, if I may, can I have my
associate natalie young be given privileges also because she's going to assist me in helping us
through the technical difficulties that we always all in all right let's get her on the record
naming her name full name natalie i'm here uh natalie hi just get yourself identify yourself
identify yourself for the record please uh my name is natalie young i'm co-counsel for
for the record please uh my name's natalie young i'm co-counting
swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes thank you mr pollack
uh mr chairman members of the board i will have uh two witnesses i have uh miss uh carol carolina
pena who is our architect and mr meet azule who is the principal with 1133 uh columbia llc i'm
I'm going to ask if we could.
We'll hold off on them until we need them, okay?
No, no problem.
Mr. Chairman, I know in the interest of time,
could we just find out if there's anyone
who is going to be interested in testifying
with regard to this matter,
just so we can find out how we can handle
our witnesses and presentation today?
Is there anyone here who wishes to testify,
would like to testify in this matter?
If so, please raise your hand.
i have no hands at this time okay so again in the interest of time uh appreciate that and also
uh you have a letter from the rco uh we do we sent it supplementally because we just got it
late yesterday from the fishtown neighbors association and their position the position
is that they are um against this proposal although they if you look at and we did provide it
they are appreciative that we have given them a single-family home and that's what I want to
stress to the board this is an application for a standalone fully detached single-family home
on Earl Street just east of Girard Avenue in the Fishtown neighborhood and they had certain
concerns that we're going to address and one of the things that we've done Mr. Chairman is we have
a pre-marked exhibit list. And Natalie, if you could share your screen and then just put it up
there. Just so we'll go through it. We have our A1 through A20. Now, so I'm going to ask and say
that for the interest of time, I've read all these into the record. They're part of our packet. Plus
we've come up with a revised plans and proviso. After receiving the concerns of Fishtown just
late yesterday, we did something. The refusal says that we have a rear deck and that the rear deck
has supports that are within 18 inches of the lot line. What we have done is we have come up with a
new plan that eliminates the rear deck totally. Share those exhibits with us, please. Yes.
we are if i can natalie if you could show the board our original uh packet of uh of documentation
with the plans showed you uh the site the original site plan the original renderings
and that showed a rear deck in the back that was running all the way from the rear of the
prop the building to the rear of the property line what we have done natalie can you show that
One second, I'm pulling it up.
original plan and if you see the gray that this is the original site plan which is at
I believe a five of our original packet we don't have that in front of us so we're only able to
see what's on the screen so could you make that a little bit there you go okay thank you so here
Mr. Chair on the left hand side there was a proposed rear deck Natalie keep going to the next
so we can show the rendering again if you look in the on the right hand side Mr. Chair of this
next exhibit you'll see the grayish building that's the rear and you can see there's a deck
that comes all the way out to the to the rear wall property line we are totally eliminating that
so that we are no longer taking up 100% of the rear yard at all or nor are we
having the vertical supports. Now, Natalie, if you could go to that last A20 slide now
that shows the revised plans, we'll give the board a feeling for what we're doing to eliminate
anything regarding the rear yard. So as I said, Mr. Chair, our position is going to be
that in the RSA 5, you need nine feet of rear yard space. Here's the revised. This is the
building the proposed building uh if you go if you can see it i guess it's a little flipped
Uh, if you go, if you can see it, I guess it's a little flipped, but I don't know if you can see that brownish, uh, there it is.
but i don't know if you can see
The spiral, instead of a deck that's going to go all the way to the back now, we've replaced it with just this little landing off the sliding glass door from their dining area, uh, with a spiral staircase down to the rear.
So by doing that, and if you look at our revised site plan, Natalie, maybe you can get that one up and we can zero in on it.
That's just the review. There it is, I guess.
Rotate the view clockwise. Here we go. Go over to the left-hand side of it. Go over.
Okay. And then focus in. If you can see, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, what we've done is there's a bubble, a little violet bubble that shows like a two-foot-six landing.
And you can see the dimension is from that edge of the landing to the rear yard.
It's rear wall. It's nine feet, six inches.
We're only required to show it's nine feet. I'm sorry, nine feet.
So we're only required to have a nine foot rear yard.
There is an exception in the code in for decks,
because we think that the landing may be technically a deck,
even though it's two feet, six and not that very big.
It's a square two feet, six by two feet, six,
that even if that's the case,
staircases aren't included in taking up space.
However, we still are meeting the nine foot,
the rear yard opening area,
which will prevent us from impairing any light and air
to the adjacent neighbor behind us.
And I'll have Carolina Pena identify herself
when the time comes to architect just to confirm,
you know, because I do have an ESQ after my name,
but I'm certainly not an AIA or an RA.
And so with that change, that's the change we're making after having received the concerns of the Fishtown neighbors.
Now, the other thing that we'll raise is this.
They're concerned about a large apron in front of the garage.
So if you go to the front, go down, we have a front yard.
We're set back seven feet, five inches.
Now, the interesting thing about this is that under the Philadelphia zoning code, when you're in the RSA 5 residential district, you are required, if there is a building, a principal building on a lot next to you, you are required to match the setback on the closest building to the subject property that is on the same block face.
If there is no minimum, then the front setback is zero. And that's at 14701B of the Philadelphia Code. And Natalie, if you would go to our pictures, we'll now show the board.
This is the front of the property as it is along Earl Street.
Now, just go down, scroll down to the next ones.
Mr. Chairman, hold on, go back a little bit.
Go back one, two, there's the zonius.
If you see just above our building, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, that stucco building in the back,
that's the candy factory condominiums that are front on Columbia Avenue behind us.
The gray building to the right is the 1133 Columbia multifamily dwelling also.
The interesting thing about that is by pulling back and creating the nine feet of open area for the rear yard,
we are pulling ourselves legally away from blocking any light and air to this stucco area of the condominium homes that are there at the candy factory.
Now, Natalie, go to the next picture.
Next picture.
Now, here's the interesting thing. In between us, because we're where those dumpsters are, Natalie, yeah, those dumpsters and the ones in the front, you'll see that there's like an off ramp, right, where Natalie has next to the car, to the left of the car.
there's a ramp that goes down for 1133 columbia that runs all the way
the service the underground parking lot for 1133 columbia so the closest building to us
is this house at 1126 earl that is already set back and we're matching their setback and has
an off-street parking garage and we have that at a19 in your packet
we show that the prior approval was granted through a variance for that that garage way back
when so keep going with the next pictures through five and and you'll see it again in six go to seven
there's the ramp going down at 1133 uh go to the next picture
And there's that home that we're matching up our setback. So that has a front apron. And if you look at the concern of Fishtown neighbors, was that we were creating this large apron in the front.
now there's that home that we're matching up our setback so that has a front apron
Thank you.
Well, the reason why we're creating the large apron in the front is we're compelled to have a large apron in the front because of the provision of the zoning code at 14701B that says that if there's a principal building in an adjacent lot or the next lot after that, you have to match up to that.
So we didn't get a refusal for setting back so far, and that's why because we're matching up to this.
Now, the interesting thing is to our left, and Natalie, you'll just cycle through number nine, number 10.
That shows you the ramp going down next to us that leads back to 1133.
It goes through 12th.
That goes up to Girard Avenue.
And then you see the garage again at 13 and then 14.
What I need us to go to now would be to go to our photos 49 through 63 at A14, 49 through 63, because what we're going to show you, and I'm going to get this, is you're starting to see at 49, just to the left of all the dumpsters, there's like a black iron wrought fence, and you can see the parking space.
Now go to the next one, 40, 50. That is the parking lot, the surface parking lot for the Candy Factory condominiums, which are where Natalie is highlighting again, the stucco, two-story stucco right behind our lot.
That lot runs directly from Columbia Avenue back to Earl Street.
So, go through the next couple of photos just so we'll give the board a flavor for this parking lot that's next to us, 53.
Go through through 63.
Just again, you can see the house.
You can see our lot.
Keep going.
You keep going to 57 and 58 and 59 and 60, 61, 62, and 63.
And that way, so you have a flavor for what we're next to.
So we are wedged between the surface parking lot with the curb cut for the candy factory
that runs from Columbia Avenue and a ramp curb cut that goes up and down and provides ingress
and egress for another property at 1133 Columbia. And then right next to us is another setback for
with a parking garage for a single family home. So what we're trying to say is, and I'm going to
have Mr. Azoulay confirm all this because I don't want to be too much of a talking head,
but I want to condense it because I know the board's spent a lot of time today.
So that what we're saying is this neighborhood has a lot of curb cuts on it. Now, directly across
the street from us, Natalie, if you were to show us pictures 45 through 57, I think we would be
able to show there's a curb cut that allows 10 houses. Keep going. Keep going. That's
That's just that down again, the ramp and the difference between the ramp down into 1133 Columbia that's next to us to show you.
That's the property that's next to the parking lot for Candy Factory.
Keep going.
That's our property again.
Go up to 53.
And I guess I have other pictures that show right across the street.
We also have at A19, I did a little map that I call the East Earl Curb Cuts.
It's A29, rather.
I'm sorry.
It's A29.
I want our bait stamp, Natalie, if you could get to that.
And that would show that right across the street from us, it's entitled 1124 East Palmer.
there's a curb cut directly across the street from us that services 10 single-family homes
that are built on a perpendicular to Earl Street running over to East Palmer Street.
Now, keep going.
This is a – keep going.
Keep going.
You see the houses are – keep going.
The houses are right across the street from us, those gray and white.
And you can see maybe where you see the – there it is.
That's directly across the street from us.
That is 1124 East Palmer. There are 10 single family attached homes that have garages that access off of that.
But that's curb cut directly across the street. So what our our position is that and parking.
I know, Mr. Chairman, you asked about parking at another 1122, which was the East Oak Lane property.
There is parking allowed on the opposite side or the north side of Earl Street, but there is no parking allowed on our side on our block face so that any curb cuts.
on our side on our block face so that any curb cuts the new proposed curb cut that we're putting
in would not take away any street parking also with having set back the building
it gives us a little extra added turn to get into the into the garage so we won't block traffic
entering and exiting the property as you can see possibly from the site plan that we've shown
We do have the street breakdown, and Earl Street is a 8-foot sidewalk, 16-foot cartway, and another 8-foot sidewalk for 32 feet.
So that's where we're headed with that.
So really, basically, we feel that by addressing the rear yard and taking away that deck and just putting that spiral and creating the open area and the rear yard that is needed to give light and air to the property behind us.
And because of the requirement of the code that we already have to set back seven feet, six inches and create an apron, that we're down to two issues for Fishtown neighbors.
One is no viable living space on the ground floor, reducing eyes on the street.
If we go back, Natalie, to 20 and show our rendering, you'll see that, yes, we have a garage on them.
if you go to the rendering uh we have a garage
on the on that'll be facing it we're going to put cameras in the front and cameras
are probably a better deterrent or better way of finding out what's going on on the street
especially when you're stuck between a surface parking lot and a ramp that goes down to a
multi-family dwelling building on another another lot the other thing that's interesting about this
property is we have an easement along that sidewalk to the if you see the fence there's
right where natalie is there's a sidewalk and we put it in your packet is we have an easement
agreement to allow us to use that so that there's going to be a side entrance way to the house when
you come in you'll come in off the side rather than to the rather than off the front so that
that is our you know that's where we're at so that it really comes down to fna's comment that
they are generally opposed to off street parking lacking a demonstrated hardship we're going to
maintain that this is a unique property because of how we're situated with curb cuts as I said
curb cuts to the left of us curb cuts curb cuts to the right of us we're just surrounded by curb
cuts and that would impinge on our ability to enjoy the you know to even use the property
because of all these different curb cuts in and out so with that Mr. Chairman we're left with just
the general opposition we feel to whether or not we should be allowed to have parking in a situation
like this. As I said, with all these different curb cuts and access issues, by having the apron
and having this garage, we will, instead of maybe giving somebody a reason to just park on the
sidewalk and block the pedestrian right away, we'll give people a reason to pull their car inside
and not block the pedestrian right-of-way.
So it's a long-winded way to say
we're trying to address what we got
from the Fistown neighbors,
but given the uniqueness of this property,
we believe that we have a real hardship.
So with that, I would like to call up Amit Azouay,
who is the owner of and the developer
and builder of this property.
Amit, will you unmute yourself
and let the chairman swear you in.
hello hi this is a good evening uh please identify yourself spell your first and last name
good evening my name is amit that's a m as in max i t as in tom azulay a z o u l a y
thank you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do thank you mr pollack yes amit can you uh you've heard what i've stated on the record
do you adopt that as your testimony yes yes i do okay now can you just briefly tell us tell the
board what went into your thinking about trying to put up a put in a an accessory to two car garage
interior totally for this property given the location next to these curb cuts no disrespect
i think we get we get it okay i'll leave it up to my board my fellow board members if they have
any questions all right okay we would just ask the board that if they're if you're so inclined
to vote yes on this give us based on the proviso so that we can you know a limb we've with that
chose the revised plan we've submitted that to miss saletta i think we may have to make a little
adjustment to our uh explanation but if the board is so inclined we would appreciate with how many
how many pages it's it's the the uh it's two pages plus the plan the uh the application form
two to revise play uh pages two revisions two pages yes thank you thank you so with that mr
Thank you. So with that, Mr. Chair, I would call on Carolina Pena real quick, the architect, just to hopefully just to affirm what I said, but Mr. Chairman, we'll let it go.
and i i would call on carolina
We'll let it go. Thank you. Questions from the board?
No, sir.
Anyone else would like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
No hands at this time.
Thank you. I only want one question, Steve.
The revised plan, was that made available to Fishtown?
No, they just made their letter available to us yesterday on Election Day at about 2 o'clock.
All right, okay.
We didn't have time.
Thank you.
Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
Ron, please spell your name for the stenographer.
uh r-o-n-a-l-d last name bednar b-e-d-n-a-r
so uh the property is indicated for residential use ron i'm sorry my fault do you swear and
affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do thank you please proceed
property is indicated for residential use on a city plan given the severe kite site constraints
and based on the proposed plan revisions we have no objection to grounding or variance
Thank you. MI 2020-001103, 1122 Earl Street. My vote is yes with the proviso. Revised plan, two pages approved today.
Yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. The only good thing about this hour is Michigan is now in Biden's camp.
I heard, I heard, I heard. He'll be at 270 for sure.
Okay. MI 2020-001191, 2534 East Somerset Street.
Anyone here for a chance?
Is there an attorney? I'm sorry, Chair.
Go ahead.
Is there an attorney or owner for this property? I see that we have
the architect with his hand up. However, we would request an attorney or the actual owner.
Excuse me, this is Sharon. Mr. Brutonini did submit the exhibits. The owner's name is Theodore
Cox, and we have a letter of non-opposition from Councilman Squilla on this one, and an RCO letter
in support. Okay, I've promoted Mr. Cox. Good evening, Mr. Cox. Please identify yourself with
the record. Well, my name is Theodore Cox, or Ted Cox, and I'm the owner of 2534 East Somerset.
Thank you. Swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
Sir, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal, photos, and plans five days prior to this hearing?
I believe my architect has done that, yes.
Okay. Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Thank you.
We did a Zoom meeting a few months ago.
And what was the result of the RCO meeting?
From my understanding, it was unanimous approval.
Okay, thank you.
We have a copy of that, right, Sharon?
We do, and a letter of non-opposition from Councilman Squilla.
Okay, Mr. Cox, please proceed.
And if you can summarize, we'd be very thankful for that.
oh um and this is my first time ever doing this i mean what should i be uh just doing just give
it tell us a little bit about what you're what you're intending to do with your property
oh um i would like to add an addition to um the back portion of my property which would
was on on the garage portion which would be um in the back will be on seltzer street
put an addition there for a bedroom and then have a deck on top of that so I could have a view of
the bridge and the city skyline. Do you have any exhibits you can just
share with us just quickly? I was understanding my architect would have that and I don't know
if he's there or not. Excuse me, this is Sharon. Can Mr. Brutonini share the screen just to present the exhibits?
share the screen just to present the exhibits.
He's been promoted to a panelist.
Thank you, Ms. Sunke.
okay can can you all hear me yes in your name yes uh anthony brutiniti
spell your name spell your last name sir b as in boy r-u-t-t-a-n-i-t-i and you're
swearing for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do just
please give us a brief overview of what your client is uh proposing to do with his property
okay um the existing property is a legal two-family dwelling on the first floor which is this floor
plan right here is the existing uh residence of ted cox who you spoke with earlier on the second
floor is their daughter lives upstairs in this unit here what we're looking to do is to take
this portion, and I'll show you a photograph. This portion is a one-story former garage,
and we're looking to add a second story to that for the first floor dwelling, for the owner.
And then on top of this addition is to put a roof deck. Let me show you some photographs that would
give you a better view of the neighborhood. I'm sorry. Okay, so here is the house.
Does anyone see these photos?
can you see all i see is there yes we can see it okay because something i'm going to leave and
come back so go ahead continue please okay uh so the first floor this is this this is uh the belgrade
street view um is the uh owners of residence right here upstairs is their daughter where they live
um i wish you down further to the back
There. So this is the two story existing structure and then this is the one story garage where we're looking to put on a second story addition with the roof deck.
Now, if you notice from some of the other photographs, behind on Bellgrade here, we
have a vacant property across the street, and then we have the train trestles on the
other side.
So really, there is no impact with other neighbors on this back corner.
In addition, let me go to the elevations.
So this is the existing elevation with the one-story garage, I'm sorry, it shows the
two-story addition with the addition on here and the roof deck.
So even with the addition, it is still below the existing two-story structure because the
land really drops coming down so it actually makes the addition uh even lower than the existing two
story um we have i'm trying to move this along very quickly for you behind the structure again
there's the trains and then we have seltzer street uh which is behind the property so the deck and
and the new addition really doesn't impact any other neighbors or blocking their air or light.
I think we get the gist of it. Thank you.
I was going to say, I'll open it up to any questions you have.
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
no hand thank you planning commission this is uh ron bednar city planning
the property is indicated for residential use uh in the city plan given the existing site context
we have no objection to granting advance thank you very much mi 2020-001191
2534 East
Somerset Street. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you.
Confessor, would you mind reading the next one?
I just somehow
screwed up all my paperwork.
Dash 001187.
I'm sorry. Pardon me. Could we just pause for one second, please?
I'm sorry. Pardon me.
Could we just...
I have to get the court reporter back.
I'm sorry.
No problem.
These names keep moving.
Okay, we got the court.
We put it back.
We can continue.
Confessor.
MI 2020-001-187-1504, Wanton Street.
i have promoted attorney roger perry good evening mr perry please identify yourself
for the record spell your first and last name and i'll swear you in
can't hear you you have to unmute yourself okay can you hear me there you go mr perry please
identify yourself with a record? Roger Perry, attorney for the applicant
in this matter, 734 South 4th Street, Philadelphia, PA
19147. P-E-R-R-Y, correct?
P-E-R-R-Y. Do you swear in the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing
but the truth? I do. Thank you. Confessor? Do you agree to wait the reading of
its refusal and stipulate to attackers? Yes, I do. And I should be
here with the owner, David Lowe, if he's available.
have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents proof of ownership proof of
tax compliance copies of refusal photos and plans five days prior to this hearing yes we did and i
can put it up excuse me can i interrupt for one minute mr perry did you copy me on that email i'm
not finding your basic exhibit packet yeah that would have been over a month ago probably okay
i'll check again but if if i don't find it would you mind resending it after the hearing
Absolutely, and I'll put it up right now.
Thank you.
Did you meet with the RCO and have a letter, sir?
Pardon me?
Where am I?
Okay, the...
Mr. Seppery, I'm sorry.
Before we proceed, Secretary Confessor has questions that he read.
Did you meet with the RCO?
Yes, we did.
Thank you.
We met with...
Thank you.
Yes, East Point Breeze. There's a letter in the package, which you may not have, but I can, if I, can you see the exhibit?
No, not yet.
Okay, share under S.
Where?
Oh, how do we share it? I have it up on my computer.
So you click the green button below in Zoom, hit that, and then click on your document.
There they go, coming up now.
And here's the East Point Green Neighbors Association.
We met with them.
They issued a letter September 22nd.
The zoning committee supported us five to nothing.
There were three people in the neighborhood who were opposed, primarily on the issue of parking.
Let me give a little background, try to summarize it as quickly as possible.
1504 Wharton Street is a block off of Broad Street.
This is a property approximately 16 by 64 feet.
The application here is to put in three newly renovated single-family apartments, one per floor with a roof deck.
Because this is a single-family area, it got a refusal for multifamily use.
The refusal is attached, the deed's attached.
And I'll scroll down to the photographs, which will give you a little better idea of what we're talking about.
the deed is in my client's name, which is Rock Realty Group. David Lowe is the owner. This is
the posting. This is the property in front. The intent is to completely rehab this property
with one single family, one single bedroom apartment on each floor. This is in a
on each floor. This is in a sort of a mixed-use neighborhood. I've taken pictures of across the
sort of a mixed-use neighborhood. I've taken
street and down towards Broad Street. The corner properties tend to be the traditional
mixed-use commercial on the first floor with multifamily apartments up above. Same on the
corner here, commercial on the first floor with mixed apartments upstairs. This is across the
Street, another multifamily apartment. Across the street on Wharton Street is a school and a parking
lot and garages. Here is a brief look at the plans with, I don't know how to blow that up.
Okay, the deck and three one-family apartments with separate entrances for each apartment
once you enter the newly renovated property and so forth.
They're going to be about 800 square feet.
It's got a backyard and has a basement for storage and so forth.
what Mr. Lowe who's the representative for the group that wants to do this renovation and
owners of the property has indicated at the RCO meeting and they were happy to discuss this
is that he wants to provide affordable essentially one-bedroom apartments most of the people that he
is involved with in terms of rentals are commuters they take public transportation
down at Broad Street. They work in Center City. They may work at the hospitals or at Temple
University, for example. And this just provides an access for affordable housing in this area that is,
you know, relatively in demand. But this particular block has a very much of a mixed
youth with, you know, schools and other commercial properties. So the East Point Breeze Zoning
committee felt that this was a very nice opportunity to get the building completely
rehabilitated and provide affordable housing in the neighborhood. These are not condos. These
are going to be rental apartments. Mr. Parry, on the second floor, third floor, are they rear decks?
I don't believe so. I believe that the only deck is a roof deck.
where do where do uh the tenants on the second and well third floor can use the upper deck i
guess where does i don't know that they would the only i think the only access is going to be for
the upper floor and a rear yard for the uh first floor i don't believe the second floor unit
has access but i don't know are you david are you on the zoom
I've lost David, so I don't know. But my understanding is that the access would be for
the upper floor for the deck and the rear yard for the first floor. The second floor I don't
believe has exterior use for the deck or the yard. David is available. He just needs to
unmute himself. David, can you unmute yourself or click on the video where it says open video at
bottom well no actually all you have to do is click on your mic david you put your hand down
so don't use the hand feature click on okay okay i got it thank you here we go uh thank you thank
you very much did you hear the question about hold on hold on roger yes sir i need for you
to identify yourself spell your first and last name yes my name is david d-a-v-i-d last name
L-O. I'm in management for this
road building. I'm sorry, what's the spelling
of your last name? L-O.
L-O, okay. Do you swear and affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, Chairman. Please proceed.
Thank you.
David, have you heard my
presentation today? Yes, I'm
listening. Okay, and
is it true and correct, and you can adopt
it as a statement of the
facts that I presented today?
Yes. And there's a
question presented as to does anybody other than the upper floor have access to the deck?
No, only the third floor. I'm sorry? Only the third floor have access to root there like a
like a single family. There's one bedroom. And there's a small rear yard I think for the first
floor? Yes, please. Okay, so only the second floor doesn't have access directly to either the yard
or the deck? Yes, correct. We have all the fire springer system, all everything,
being complied by the code.
Question counselor, do you have a commitment for affordable housing?
No, I mean with the city, no, there's no, no, no, I didn't, I didn't, I know realtor
and we, we, well, let me ask you this.
Well, let me answer this. What is the AMI? What percentage?
What is the AMI?
What percentage?
Çeviri ve Altyazı M.K.
What's the AMI? What's the mean? Estimate price for this one?
No, average means income.
Average income for this one? This one we rent like 850 per month to rent one bedroom.
700 to 800. Right now it may be $700. Depends. We plan to announce market crash.
Thank you.
Okay, I don't have any other information to provide. If there's any questions by the board,
David or I can answer them. Yeah, I just do. I guess I do. Just curious as to
where's there a hardship because i'm very familiar with this neighborhood mr perry with all due
respect i mean there are tons of apartments in these neighborhoods yeah i understand but there's
also single family and prices on the west side abroad what people are getting for single family
residential houses is is beyond even what i thought they can get i'm just curious where
hardship. Well, that's my understanding, too. It's not an economic issue. It's a practical issue
that this particular block from, let's say, from Broad Street to 16th Street in this particular
area has a lot of mixed uses, not only apartments, but it has commercial uses. It has a school,
has a parking lot, has some garages. And in this case, you know, people have built single family
houses, but not that many people are going to afford a $600,000 or $700,000 single family
house.
And Mr. Lowe as a realtor has worked with people who essentially want a place to be
able to rent as commuters or, you know, individuals who are commuting into the city.
And this is a very good commute area from Broad Street without having to pay center
city prices.
I think it's just valuable to make a mixed income type of neighborhood and it gets a
property completely rehabbed without going for another single family purchase.
I understand and you're doing a good job on behalf of your clients, so I don't need to
be disrespectful.
No, that's fine.
There are many apartments that are affordable in that neighborhood.
That's why I'm asking.
And actually, there was a remapping done, I think, a while not too long ago.
because of the overflow of apartments.
But anyway, I just wanted to make sure
you got that on there.
Yes, I understand.
And apparently Mr. Lowe has done his homework.
He indicates that there is still a demand
for renovated apartments here,
probably more so than somebody
just building another single family home.
And because it's close to Broad Street,
he thinks that it's readily marketable
and provides alternative housing.
All right.
Questions from the board?
I think there are more single family and duplexes in that area.
Yes, there are a number of duplexes in this area. One of the photographs just indicates one across
the street. All right. Anyone else would like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
no hands at this time thank you planning commission
property is indicated for
ron you have to identify yourself i'm sorry ron bednar city planning this property is indicated
for single family residential use on a city plan please the applicant has not demonstrated
necessary hardship regarding the requirements of the code the application is not consistent
with our adopted district plan
or enacted citywide
dimensional
standards. Recommend
and request variance.
Thank you. Has there been a recent
remapping of this area?
I believe so.
I don't have the actual dates
but that's correct.
I think
they made everything back to single
family if I'm not mistaken.
MI 2020
2020-001187-1504 Wharton Street. My vote is no. My vote is no. My vote is no. My vote is no.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Perry. Is Memorial Avenue next? Okay. Yes.
20 mi 2020 that's 000063 1723 memorial avenue the attorney is michael maglioni
i'm promoting him to panelists
I'm promoting him to panelists.
Hello.
Danny, please identify yourself with the record, spell your full name.
I'm Michael Mattione, that's M-A-T-T-I-O-N-I, Federal Reserve Bank Building, 100 North Independence
Mall, Suite 5A Northwest, Philadelphia, 19106.
we're in a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do i'm sorry we lost a good friend today i understand yes we did yes we did right
yep sorry okay um anyway mr maylonia you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy yes also have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents
proof of ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal photos and plans five days prior
of this area? Yes. Have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Yes. Thank you. Please proceed.
I'd like to know if there's anybody out there who wants to testify in this case.
Is there anyone who would like to testify in this in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
1723 Memorial Avenue. I do have my client German Yakubov who I'd like to have promoted as well.
no hands at this time and they the letter from the rco what was their position
their letter is a position of support okay so we can do uh if you don't mind give us the you know
the most important things you need in your testimony and we can summarize
yes uh this property is at 17 and we do have a revised plan and i did submit that as well
It's a one-page revised plan, and the change was to increase.
When originally submitted, we had about 8% open area, and we increased it to 14.8% open area.
So we still need a variance, but it's a lesser variance.
They revised the plan slightly.
So we're requesting a six-unit property.
This area is over by Parkside Avenue, and Memorial Avenue and Marlton Street both have these gorgeous old homes on them.
My client has recently built new homes at 1728 Marlton and 1728 Memorial, both of them.
One was seven units, the other was six units.
All of the properties in this area are multifamily.
They're all very large properties, at least about 3,400-3,500 square feet.
It's a historic district.
As you can see, we are an infill project right here between a row.
There's one other infill that needs to be done on this side of Memorial Avenue.
And we're doing the same exact facade that's already there.
I'll pull down with some better photos.
everybody there is multi-family that that that's the floor plans we're proposing six
units again because this is around a 4 000 square foot building um but let me just show you some
photos well oh let me rotate those would be helpful yeah i will in a second sorry with that mr chairman
And as you can see, and the photos are better, but you can see we're going to have all brick
facade that matches the exact, you won't know that this is a new construction, it's
going to match the properties on either side and across the street and also on Marlton
Street, which is one block off of this.
three stories. That's what everybody has. It's 36 feet, five inches tall,
exactly the same as everything that's already there. Okay, these renderings really help
show what we're doing. This, this, and this are existing. This is what we're building. As you can
see, we're building it, and it's going to match the other, that's a vacant lot, but it's going
to match the other properties that are here on both this side of the street and the other side of
um um memorial uh avenue the shaven is this house uh they put white siding on but hopefully
that'll change but we're going to match the uh the old copper siding that everybody else has
um exact same facades there are five and six units in each of these properties
and again this is in a historic district as well so we're going to to meet the requirements of the
historical commission. Since this is a vacant property review and comment only, let me show
you the photos as well. This is the site itself as you can see.
This is the site itself, as you can see, it's in between the properties.
Again the site, and so we're going to have the same exact facade, same porch, same everything,
just going to match everything the best that we can, same height, slightly larger footprint
than some of the properties but not all of the properties
again looking towards uh the fairmount park parkside avenue uh these houses and on the
corners there's bigger properties but also multi-family um and there's one extra vacant
lot there hopefully somebody will fill in soon but it's it's a gorgeous part of town
really really nice area some additional photos showing what's there you can see
this is the opposite side of the street and this one is a brand new unit six
units this board approved this about a year and a half ago same developer
matching the white there, I guess,
but the historical commission approved that as well.
Okay, Mr. Medellin, if you could summarize.
Yes, again, we're seeking to put these six units in.
We have the support of the community,
the letters further down.
We believe that because this is, even though it's a single-family zoned area, because every property around it is a large multifamily structure, at least about 35, 3600 square feet, that for us to build a single-family home would be out of character with this community and would really make it difficult to build because we, again, have to meet and come up with the historic facade.
As you can see there, there's four mailboxes on that property.
We're seeking to build the same thing that's already in this neighborhood in conformity
with the surrounding properties.
We'll benefit the public health, safety, and welfare, we'll remove a vacant property
from the area, we'll reduce the likelihood of illegal dumping, and it will allow the
completion of this side of the block of these unique multifamily structures.
We want to increase congestion, we're going to use it similarly to the other property
the area and the variances are the minimum requested to allow us to build this property
and i do have a german yakubov i believe on the line to client i just would like to have
him confirm these statements if he's available is german available yes he can unmute and he can be
sworn in. German? Yes. Good evening, sir. Please identify yourself for the record. Spell your first
and last name. German Yakubov, German like the language, G-E-R-M-A-N, and last name's Y-A-K-U-B-O-V,
the owner of 1213 North 41st LLC. Thank you. You swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole
truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Please proceed, Mr. Mattione. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. German,
did you did you hear my statements i did and are they true and correct they are and do you adopt
them as your testimony i do i have nothing further mr chairman uh if there's any questions from the
board any questions from the board no no no i'll ask you again is there anyone who would like to
testify in this matter if so please raise your hand no hand thank you again planning commission
this is ron bednar city planning this property is indicated for residential use on a city plan
given the existing historic context of the block we have no objection to the granting the variance
provided lower total unit count thank you mi2020-000063 1723 memorial avenue my vote is yes
My vote is yes, Mr. Chairman.
My vote is yes.
I'm sorry.
We do have slightly revised plans, Mr. Chairman.
Oh, I apologize.
How many pages?
One page.
Okay, we'll go.
MI 2020-000063.
Oh, excuse me.
Everybody okay?
There's some water, Tom.
I'll read that again.
MI 2020-000063 1723 Memorial Avenue.
My vote is yes with the proviso revised plan.
with the proviso revised plan one page approved today. Yes for proviso. Yes for proviso. Yes for proviso.
One page approved today.
Yes with proviso.
I'm sorry. Chair I don't know if it's appropriate but I just wanted to ask if
Mr. Mattione could offer our condolences for the zoning board administration offers
to Donatucci's family. I would do that. Thank you so much. Very appropriate. Thank you. Thank you.
Yeah, off the record for a moment, court reporter, I don't know if the board members know, but we're talking about Mr. Donatucci.
Ron Donatucci passed away late last evening or early this morning.
Wow, sorry to hear that.
And Matt Mattione could attest that I've known Ronnie since I was six, seven years old.
And he has been suffering over the last several years, not only at the loss of his son, but he's had some major physical challenges.
uh i last saw him about two weeks ago and there is a saying he's in a better place and i think
he is unfortunately he died at a very young age yes thank you so sharon can i add that mr matty
only was kind enough to call earlier in the day to let me know so that i could let the board know
yeah we appreciate it yeah and i've been i've known him i've seen him for quite a few years so
i just would like to make sure he knows his family knows how we appreciated him
Ron and I would like to add that also
Ron Bednar
Ron Donatucci was a special man
I would too thank you
I just want to say I was lucky enough to practice law
with him for about 25 years
so it's been a wonderful
he's been a wonderful friend to me
so thank you Mr. Chairman
thank you
take care everybody
MI 2020
that's 001198
1725 Monument Street
Mr. Anastasio
I have promoted him to panelists
Good evening Mr. Anastasio
Please identify yourself with a record
Spell your full name
Good evening Mr. Chairman
Members of the board
Vern Anastasio
It's A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O
1315 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, representing the owner of 1725 Monument Street.
Thank you. Swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
And do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Also, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal referral photos and plans five days prior to
this hearing i do i did i have okay also have you met with the rco and have a letter yes i do
i'm going to share it first please proceed thank you thank you
can you see the letter that i'm sharing here not yet say it again no how's that
Now we have, yes.
Okay, I just wanted to get this out of the way quickly.
We have met with the 32nd Ward RCO.
We entered into a partnership with them pretty early on, and I'll get into the details on that.
We met with them on 19th of October virtually, and they offer a letter of non-opposition,
signed by Judith Robinson, the coordinating RCO representative.
And with that, I will now share my exhibit packet.
Excuse me.
Bear with me for a moment.
Trust you can see that now, right?
Okay, good.
This is a special exception referral. This property at 1725 Monument Street is zoned RM1.
The entire block is RM1. Most of the block are either multi-family dwellings or very large homes
that are rented out to multiple individuals what we're looking to do is instead of chopping the
property up my client would like to maintain the integrity of this old property in addition
the community group would prefer that we not chop it up either even though we could do that as a
matter of right accordingly we are seeking a single room residence for six people six bedrooms
it's a very large property and i'll show you here here's a basement with utilities
here's a basement with utilities we have a front door with a living room
we have a front door with a living room a kitchen
a kitchen a door off the kitchen that takes you to the rear yard for trash
and a bedroom in the rear
we've got the second and third floors with
five additional bedrooms and baths as well
there's proof of posting
there's the property in question
and the interior photos of the property as you can see it's about 100 and some odd years old but
in very good condition with very unique features and my client would just prefer not to divide this
into a triplex and the community would prefer that it not be either there's a rear
we have our proof of mailing our certificate of tax clearance our deed here's the flyer that went
out as again this is a special exception and as such i'd like to go over the provisions of the
partnership that we have with the rco my client has agreed to insert a noise and nuisance clause
and all the leases to install safety lighting and video surveillance for safety place management
contact information on the property's facade my client actually is from the city and this is what
she does for a living she uh she's an investor and she manages her own properties this is this
is all she does this is her full-time job this won't be left to somebody else and we've also
are contributing to the immediate area has a litter removal program for sidewalk litter removal
and we're partnering with the RCO in fully funding that on an annual basis.
And with that, I do believe my client is here.
Elise, could you please raise your hand so you could be promoted?
yeah this is elise carroll hi elise did you hear my rep oh sorry good evening man
good evening man please identify yourself your first and last name my name is elise carroll
e-l-y-s-e-k-a-r-o-l you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes thank you please proceed burn thank you mr chairman uh elise did you hear my presentation
to the board today yes was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge yes and would you
adopt it as your own testimony if need be yes thank you very much thank you any questions from the
board no no anyone else like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no hands thank you planning commission bednar city planning this property is
indicated for residential use on the city plan given the overall neighborhood context we have
no objection to the special exception thank you ron mi 2020 that's 001198 1725 monument street my
vote is yes sorry vote uh my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you all have a good
evening stay safe same to you mi 2020-001101 1732 north gratz street
i'm promoting attorney fairlinger
good evening meredith uh good evening please identify yourself with a record and uh you're
still on the oath from earlier look at that i'll let your husband see that you're in trouble
yeah i'm a hungry four and a half year old so if he's a little loud i'm sorry
Meredith Ferlinger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R, 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E.
You said I'm already still under oath from earlier.
Do you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to the accuracy?
I agree to waive the reading.
I do not stipulate to the accuracy.
It says the request is for a single room residence.
I would submit it should be for group living and I can go into that a little bit more during the
presentation. Okay have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents proof of
ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days
prior to this hearing? I sure did. Also have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Met with the
I sure did. Also, have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Met with the RCO. We do have a letter which I will discuss.
Thank you. Please proceed. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
My name is Meredith Ferliger of Dilworth Paxson. I'm here with a familiar but somewhat different
request for a special exception for student residents at the edge of Temple's campus.
The property before you is located at 1732 North Grash Street and is zoned RM1.
The owners of this particular property are my clients, She Yu Gao and his wife, Ying Wu, who I believe are also on the Zoom today, and I can call on them in a little bit.
Now, the board knows these group living requests well.
However, the request before you today is slightly different.
So let me first start with that before moving into the meat of the argument.
Now, most of the group living cases that I've brought before the board in the past,
we've asked for group living for the entire structure,
much like the case that you just heard immediately before this one.
Typically, we've asked for somewhere between 8 and 12 occupants.
Now, what's different about the request before you today
is that our request only applies to one of the two duplex units.
and I just realized I'm not sharing my screen with you yet. So this request only applies to
one of the two duplex units that are in this existing structure. Now as I'll show you in
the permit history at tab 11a, this structure was built in 2010 as a duplex. Unit 1, which is on the
first floor is not technically before the board today as that unit has three bedrooms with three
occupants. So it is a code compliant unit which you can see in the way that the examiner wrote
the referral here. She notes that the unit contains a quote single family use since there are only
three occupants. Now what is before the board is unit two which occupies the second and third floor
of this structure. Now, unlike unit one, unit two has five bedrooms and five occupants. So the basis
of the request before the board today essentially concerns the two extra occupants of that unit two.
Now, if you refer to some photographs that I will bring up on the screen,
I had my client take some photographs of these bedrooms just so you can get a sense of the scale
of just how large these bedrooms are. So you can see that these bedrooms are
more than capable of supporting one occupant per bedroom. Just to scroll through, you can see these
bedrooms are all very, very large. Now, Sheyu and his wife purchased this property several years ago,
unfortunately unaware that two of the five tenants were not technically permitted.
They contacted me after learning of this through other area landlords.
Now with respect to the application, we received one referral for the proposed group living use.
As has become common, the examiner wrote the referrals for the use as a rooming house or
single room residence. Now if the board refers to Exhibit 10, which contains some sections of the
zoning code, you'll see the differing definitions here. You'll see the definition of a single room
residence, which is defined as a building containing rooms rented as living quarters
without private bathrooms, such as dormitories or rooming houses. Now, alternatively, a general
group living use provides communal kitchen and dining facilities, such as fraternities or group
poems. Now I do just have a quick question for my client um Sheyu if you can hit that raise hand
button. Yes I'm here. Name and address for the record please and please spell it. Yeah uh my name
is Sheyu Guo. It's S-H-E-Y-U. Last name is G-U-O. I'm the owner of that address, 1730.
Excuse me, sir. Sir, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth? Yes. Thank you. Now, Sheyu, just a very quick question at this point.
Can you confirm that unit two, that you have one lease for all of these occupants? Is that correct?
Yes, it's correct.
Okay, so you don't have five separate leases for five separate bedrooms.
Okay, so you don't have five separate leases for five.
Right.
Okay, thank you.
Just sit tight for a moment.
Now, once again, I did dispute the characterization with the zoning examiner,
but because both of these categories would require a special exception,
the distinction is not necessarily critical.
Now, as is required by Section 303.7E1 of the Zoning Code, 0.1 through 0.3 of the Zoning Code, the proposed group living use meets the definition of a use permitted by special exception in the RM1 Zoning District.
Furthermore, we submit the proposed use will not cause specific detrimental impacts to the neighborhood, beyond that which might normally be expected from the proposed use.
This proposed use has not and will not cause congestion. As mentioned, this property is
located at the edge of Temple's campus just west of the Lyacora Center and is located within walking
distance to several public transit spots. And you can see a sense of the the zoning map here
up on the screen. The existing occupants here travel primarily via foot or bicycle.
Now, continuation of this low-density group living use has not and will not cause overcrowding.
The existing structure is 2,340 square feet and is broken up into two independent living units,
only one of which is before the board. Now, as you can see in the photographs, which I did show
you earlier, unit two, the bedrooms in unit two are extremely large, with the five occupants
sharing two bathrooms. Now furthermore as you can see in your exhibit packet at tab 11b which I'll
bring up the exhibit list so you can get a sense of how many permits are included here. This block
of North Grad Street is made up of other similar uses including two and three family uses. If you
notice nearly every single property on this block is multifamily. Given that six occupants would be
permitted here by right based on the current structural makeup and we are only asking for
eight, the proposed density is well in line with the density of the surrounding neighborhood
and these two additional occupants will not cause overcrowding. Now also given the lot size of 1,102
square feet three units would actually be permitted here by right and I have brought up the section of
the code showing you that calculation. So the by right number of occupants for this lot if broken
up into three units instead of two would be nine people. Now as is often the case we're only here
because the two extra occupants are within the one unit instead of in their own unit. We do assert
the proposed and existing density is well in line with the permissible number of units
under the zoning code and the character of the neighborhood and will therefore not cause
overcrowding. The use will not impair light and air to adjacent properties as no physical
changes are proposed here. Structure is three stories, attached building that is uniform
to the surrounding properties. This particular residence does not have a roof deck. Further
limiting its impact. Now please keep this fact in mind as I will mention it again when I discuss
the RCO meeting. The use will not burden any public facilities as the use is existing
and the existing facilities are capable of supporting the continued use.
The use will not impair or injure adjacent properties which have similar densities to
that proposed. The proposed use will not endanger the public health or safety, nor is it inconsistent
with the comprehensive plan, given the area is zoned RM1 and is specifically contemplated
for multifamily residential use. The use is in keeping with impacts that are normally expected
from the proposed use and is specifically contemplated as an allowed use in the RM1
zoning district. We therefore assert we've met the requirements of section 3037E.1 through
.3 of the code concerning entitlement to a special exception, as is detailed in my memo
of law attached at tab 9. Now, with respects to the community, I know it has been a long
day, but I do need a few minutes to talk about the meeting. We met with Beach Community Services
for this proposal, which is quite frankly the first time they've been assigned for any of these
requests that I've previously brought before the board. And I will bring up their letter as I
discuss it. Their letter of opposition is in my packet at tab 13. Now a few things about this
Now a few things about this letter and the meeting. First, I'd like to just note that the letter incorrectly states that we're asking for a variance and asks the developers to, quote, comply with the present city of Philadelphia L&I zoning code classifications.
letter and the meeting. First, I just
Now, as the board has heard, this is a request for a special exception, not a variance.
The request before the board today does expressly comply with the provisions of the zoning code.
I did attempt to explain that during the meeting.
Now, furthermore, the letter describes issues related to trash and, quote, behavior of its occupants.
Now, here's where the meeting took an unfortunate turn that we have unsuccessfully attempted to
correct prior to today's hearing. Now, during the meeting, and I'll bring up the vote here,
that had 14 attendees, apparently only eight voted. There was one near neighbor who lives on
the opposing North 19th Street. Now, let me bring up this aerial at Exhibit 7 here,
just so you can clearly get an understanding here.
If the board refers to the aerial I have up on the screen currently,
which is reflecting the eastern view,
the gentleman that had some very strong opinions at the meeting
lives in this property here, which is at 1715 North 19th Street.
So if you actually go to his rear yard and then count over, he is 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 properties away from my client's property.
So that is relatively far, at least as it relates to the issues that I'm about to raise.
Now, during the meeting, this gentleman was extremely vocal about alleged behavior of tenants on the roof,
including an allegation that a tenant fell off the roof of my client's property.
We were quite shocked by these allegations but were unfortunately not in a position that evening
to dispute them with facts other than to say that he must have been mistaken given that Sheu had
no knowledge of anyone falling off his roof. As you can imagine the other folks in the room who
were not near neighbors were naturally going to take this gentleman's work as the only near
neighbor that attended the meeting. Now, if the board refers to the aerial, you'll see the issue.
My client's property at 1732 North Grath Street is marked with the Google pin here. His property
does not have a roof deck or balconies. Now, a few doors down, you will see where the issue is.
1728 North Grath Street, which is much closer to this gentleman's property, does have a roof deck
and exterior gathering areas and is much closer to his home. Now, after the meeting,
Shayu contacted this gentleman, and he would be very happy to explain in more detail his
discussions, but I will briefly summarize. Shayu's had now at least five phone conversations with him
and didn't even meet with him in person. The gentleman acknowledged his mistake and has
apparently been attempting to contact the RCO to let them know that he was mistaken and that his
allegations about tenant behavior were misdirected and were not intended for Mr. Cheu's property.
I also attempted to contact the RCO given the nature of the allegations and the effect we
suspect they had on the outcome of this meeting. Now on a positive note, in Cheu's discussions with
the neighbor. Despite the fact that the neighbor lives fairly far from Sheyu's property, Sheyu has
also made additional commitments to further attempt to address the sanitation concerns
on this particular block of Northgrass Street, even though he only owns one of the 43 properties
on this street. Now, Sheyu, since you purchased the property, is it correct that you have employed
the services of a local management company to manage the property?
Yes, we have MK Management helping me manage that.
Great. Now, and as a result of your discussions with the neighbor that lives at 1715 North 19th
Street, what additional steps are you committing to take as it relates to area sanitation?
oh yes uh this uh gentleman uh also uh recommend uh people just nearby uh to me so i can hire him
to clean this uh street and the type of trash from uh in front of my property so okay so so basically
in front of my property so okay so so basically what you're saying excuse me
what you're saying.
no disrespect to mr low uh some of it hit what he said i couldn't understand so if you can read
yes it'd be helpful thank you sure so so mr shay you um is it correct then that you're now
not only employing a professional management company but you've also now agreed to hire
an area resident to also address some additional trash? Right. Okay.
Now, I'm not sure why of the 14 people in the room that evening, why only eight voted,
but as I've described, there was a very unfortunate series of serious misinformation
that was given that assuredly affected the outcome of this meeting, especially given the nature of
the request. Now, accordingly, in light of the testimony we've offered today, we are respectfully
asking that the board grant this comparatively low-density special exception, which really only
concerns two additional people. Shayu, have you heard all of my testimony here today before the
board? Yes. And would you agree that testimony is true and accurate, and would you adopt it as if
were your own yes mr chairman we'd be happy to answer any questions you have thank you
questions from the board no no what else like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
chair i have mary jones from the council president's office
who can be unmuted and sworn in good evening miss jones i believe you're still under oath
from earlier today please identify yourself for the record um good evening board my name
is mary jones i am speaking on behalf of council president daryl clark
and yes um based on communication with the rco and just the community um with these types
of variances the community did vote unanimously to oppose this variance with concerns about trash
and the saturation of student housing in their neighborhood often we see these buildings having
too many units and later trying to come back and try to legalize additional people and that is
despite the single incident that was missing that's been a concern generally
by the community as of late and therefore we oppose the granting of this variance.
Mr. Chairman if I may just not variance two things,
granting of the special exception sorry it's just habit.
Thank you that that was that was one of the two things I was I was going to note that this is a
request for special exception. The other thing I would point out that though we certainly respect
the community's concerns for saturation of student housing, that that particular concern is not
relevant to whether or not we are entitled to a special exception for this property, which as I
did note, if these were broken up into three units, they would technically be entitled to one more
person than we're asking for today. So, you know, this is not unlike some requests in the past
where we were asking for far more occupants than were allowed by Wright. In this case,
if they added the third unit, they could have three additional people, not only the two that
are requested today. Where does your client, where do the tenants store their trash?
And I asked that question because, full disclosure, I am very familiar with the
situation up there i was doing some work for temple university not too long ago we created a
uh community a uh i'm sorry community benefits agreement we have some people working up there
well i shouldn't say we i'm no longer with the temple board but the one problem is and you can
see just looking at this photo right and this is not my client's property well i know i know that
i'm not saying it is i'm not i'm not suggesting that he doesn't do his best but it is i i can't
describe what i've seen during my travels up in that neighborhood uh what happens um because
there's no place for trash there's just no place but but to leave it out on the front stoop or
under the steps which really doesn't work right so this i'm not again i'm not faulting your client
And it's just it's a mess. Of course. No, completely understood. As I mentioned, this was built back in 2010.
Of course. No, completely understood. As I mentioned, this was built back in 2010.
Sheyu and his wife only bought it a couple years ago. So unfortunately, they were not involved with the construction of this particular property.
But as the chairman noted, there is an area for trash storage under the step, which, you know, understood is not all that effective.
But, you know, as we described, Mr. Chew now not only has a professional management company that is going to continue their efforts, but he now has a neighborhood person who is a whole lot more invested in resolving the issue than a professional management company is.
So, you know, Mr. Chew is quite hopeful that with that addition, that at least his property should not be, you know, creating any impact to the area.
But again, Mr. Chairman, as you know, this is a hard issue when, you know, these properties are under so many different forms of ownership.
You know, there's not a real common effort here.
So, but at least as it relates to our request and Mr. Shayu's property, he now has two people that have eyes on this property to make sure that they're doing their part.
I have a question.
Hello?
Can I ask a question?
Sure, sure.
um you earlier in the testimony i believe council said that there was only there is only two leases
one for each unit so that means that you have essentially are these are these five people that
you're moving are two additional however many it is are they accountable to anyone are they all on
the same lease that that's correct they are all on the same lease and they are as accountable
as anybody else okay that's all i have anyone else have any questions no more hands okay
i'm going to ask that we close the record be closed on this and the board will render
the decision at next tuesday which is november the 10th at 9 30 a.m
and in the meantime uh meredith uh i can't remember i should i worked up there for a couple
years but uh we created a neighborhood improvement district i believe you're within the boundaries of
that i can't think of the name maybe miss jones knows it your your client may want to have a
conversation with them sure because what it's all about maintenance and they hire people from
the community which creates obviously employment opportunities and they be able to they're much
better able to uh police the area when it comes to trash sure i'll reach out to mary for that
information okay thank you this is uh ron bednar we'd like to put a ron just going to ask you okay
City Planning. This property is indicated for single-family residential use on a city plan.
We believe the applicant has not sufficiently addressed proposed development impacts
related to this particular property. We recommend the request for special exception not be granted.
Mr. Chairman, I have to correct a major inaccuracy. He said it's indicated for single-family use.
it is zoned RM1, it is indicated for multifamily use, and it is specifically contemplated in the
comprehensive plan, given that this is a special exception as an allowed use within RM1. This is
not zoned single family. Okay, thank you. So noted. All right, Ron, relax. Okay, folks,
i think that completes the list yep that's it any unfinished business not for me just a reminder
it's just executive session next tuesday and we have no listing to be heard on wednesday
okay thank you again stay safe everyone tell the babies we said hi meredith
i just like that the baby kept walking by
i want to just say good night to all and all be safe it's a pleasure working with you all
thank you all thank you everybody have a good night
paula you be careful and stay in the house you know what there i can see the helicopters but
nothing's going on down here yeah so stay in your backyard okay be safe not leaving for any reason
all right all right thank you all good night everyone
all right all right thank you all good night everyone