Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
As you wish, Chair.
Chair, you're muted.
Ready to start.
you can begin as you wish sir my name is bill bergman and i will be chairing this
3 30 meeting of the zoning board of adjustment with me is ismail shaheed
thomas hollman our board member present mr chairman james snell our board member
present mr chairman also our executive director tanya sunkett and our board attorney rebecca kohl
Before we begin, here is our virtual format. Be advised these proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. A video will be available by
contacting tonyasunkett at phila.gov. For the benefit of our court stenographer,
we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And lastly, please note the question and answer box on the screen is not for testimony or comments.
Any comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunker.
Continuances for this afternoon. MI 2021-005-020-1714 Washington Avenue B. That case will be continued. Does anyone have any comments relative to that case?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Are there any other requests for continuances withdrawal for the 330 list?
Chair, we have Charles Richardson with his hand up. Mr. Richardson, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair, please.
Good afternoon again, Mr. Chair.
Hi, Mr. Richardson. What was that case? I remember you said earlier this morning. What was that case?
It is 4234 Germantown Avenue, MI 2021-005014.
right and we have heard nothing from the applicant since we got the notification from
city planning let me let me let me see if he's in the audience clennon greg clennon c-l-e-n-n-o-n
there's no one with their hand up by their name chair so so we we we have no documents from him
either so this will be continued and must be tried next time thank you mr chair okay
any other caress for continuances
there are no other hands at this time chair okay
i have one add-on 5928 walnuts street mi 2021 002443 i vote yes
Thomas Alleman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Number two on our list for today, MI 2021-005019, 1750 South 60th Street.
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Um, we also did not receive the paperwork on this case.
This case will be continued.
Mark must be tried.
And by 2021-005-011.
2021-005-011, 2018 East Ontario Street.
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
We have no paperwork on this case submitted.
This will be marked, must be tried.
I'm sorry, Chair, this is Sonia.
May I just respectfully request you say continue? Thank you.
Continued.
MI 2021-005-009-2433 North 10th Street.
Chair, we have Zin Jin. He'll be coming back in as a panelist.
good afternoon how are you sir good state your name and spell for the court reporter please
yes zenjin z h e n last name j i n 1617 john f kennedy boulevard suite 1838 filled lppa
19103 on behalf of the applicant you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth? I do. Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is Golden Realty. They're the owner of the property and Mr. Shagai Bader should be
available today to testify. Mr. Holloman has several questions for you. Good afternoon,
Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
i do did you email all of the exhibits as required such as proof of ownership tax clearance
copy of the refusal pictures or drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing
did you meet with the rco and do you have an rco letter yes to all questions please proceed
and share your screen thank you
i will go ahead and share with the board the information relating to this case
this should be coming up on the board's screen at this time we have uh can the board see my exhibit
yes thank you uh we have submitted the refusal support letter from the 37th ward executive
Democratic Committee, photos, plans, and related documentation. The application itself,
based on the refusal, this is a RM1 district, residential multifamily. It actually is across
the street from a RM2 district, which the backside of which of that development is actually facing
our street. Because this is in the overlay area of the NCP North Central Philadelphia overlay
district what would have been a by right three unit is no longer permitted and we're asking the
board to permit the three units despite the normal allowed being two under the overlay in addition
we're asking for a coverage extension of about 10 percent from 744 square foot to 844 square foot
This request is actually supported by the RCO. We met with the RCO and at the meeting, we received unanimous support from the community, partly because the portion of 10th Street this is on is currently underdeveloped in some sense.
And also across the street is actually the back of a multifamily development, RM2 development, but they don't really impact this particular block.
So the one additional unit from a density standpoint would actually have no real negative impact to this particular RM1 area.
And as such, with the smaller unit sizes, which I would show during the plan presentation, the value of the additional unit to the community is that it may actually be more accessible to those who are interested in renting the space.
As such, we received support from the community.
The neighbors and the members of the community support the proposal.
Now, from the standpoint of the design of the property, this is going to be a three-story structure.
uh it is actually going to be built in a way so that it closely resembles and matches in height
and sizing to um what what else is there on as far as new construction is concerned however
it is um within the height limits we are asking for a little bit of additional coverage overall
but even with that um there is a substantial uh rear yard available part of the
There is a substantial rear yard available.
Part of the reason we ran into an issue with the coverage isn't that we're building the building deeper, but rather that we're proposing a second floor outdoor deck.
And that is designed for the purpose of allowing each unit, each residential unit to have their own outdoor trash store space pending actual pickup.
So the way we are managing this is first floor would have the full rear yard, second floor has the rear deck, and then the third floor has a roof deck that they can access.
This gives each unit some outdoor space, which allows them to store potentially some trash that they don't want inside the unit outdoors, although we are making as much effort as possible inside the unit as well by providing a trash room for drier trash or trash that doesn't smell as much so that we minimize any possibility of trash ending up outside prior to pickup.
So the actual building depth, if we don't consider the coverage by the deck, is in fact 75%.
So we're not really taking away the light and air of any neighboring properties with our request for the slight additional space.
So the design is pretty straightforward with each unit taking up one floor, but the first floor unit also having access to the basement area.
As such, while we understand the NCP overlay's purpose is to keep density down from what is normally the RM1 district normally permitted, given the nature of the block, given the area is one of the areas closer to Germantown Avenue where the community is looking for more residents to potentially support those possible future commercial activity,
we ask the board's favorable consideration for this variance to permit three-family dwelling at this location.
I am happy to redirect the board to any portion of the exhibits or any other exhibits the board would like to see.
Is your client here?
Yes, Mr. Shagai Bader should be available. Shagai, could you raise your hand virtually to be identified?
Mr. Bader, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
hi could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter
yeah my name is chagai bader c-h-a-g-a-i my last name is bader b-a-d-e-r
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes proceed thank you mr bader um you did you see my presentation and hear my testimony before
the zoning board? Yes. Can you verify what I represented is true and correct and adopt my
testimony as your own? Yes, correct. Thank you. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman. Counsel, one question. What's the rest of the block look like?
The rest of the block is currently half of the block on our side is currently vacant
with some existing buildings on the other half of the block,
which are also zone RM1 multifamily.
Across the street is actually what looks like a closed development.
Their rear yards face our side of the block.
So we have the rear yards of their properties.
Thank you.
Questions from the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Sharon.
Planning Commission.
Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
First name Ron, R-O-N, last name Bednar, B-E-D-N-A-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Property is indicated for residential use on the city plan.
Our adopted district plan recommends no change to the existing zoning at this location, which permits two units by right only.
based on the overlay no three as proposed uh the the applicant's uh hardship is not supported with
evidence of unique physical circumstances or conditions of the property that would prevent
it from being used in conformity with the code therefore we recommend the request advantage not
I'll be glad.
MI 2021-005-009-2433 North Tenths, I vote no.
Thomas Solomon, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
MI 2021-004-992, 559 North 63rd Street.
Chair, Mr. Ward is coming back in as a panelist now.
Thank you.
good afternoon Mr. Chairman how are you on this fine sunny afternoon I'm wonderful could you just
state your name and spell for the court reporter. Absolutely. Sean Ward, S-H-A-W-N-W-A-R-D,
attorney for the applicant, Keith Yantes, Y-A-N-T-E-S. All right. Do you swear or firm
to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. Could you talk about your
client's relationship to this property? My client, let me share my screen real quick here.
uh my client is uh keith yansky is doing business lc they are the record owner of the subject
property at 559 north 63rd street mr hallman has a few questions for you good afternoon council do
you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy thank you mr hallman yes
i do did you email all of the exhibits are required such as proof of ownership tax clearance
copy of the refusal picture or drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing
did you meet with the rco and do you have rco letter yes my exhibit packet had been submitted
to the board we did meet with the rco and i do have a letter thank you please proceed
thank you very much uh mr chairman i've submitted my typical exhibit packet
again i represent keith yantes doing business at free co properties that's f r a ceo for the
reporter uh llc uh with regard to 559 north 63rd street uh in my packet a1 is the notice of refusal
this is an application to legalize your document a permit for a three-family dwelling with an
existing permitted grocery store at the first floor there was one refusal for lot area under
the code 1440 square feet is required versus the 1224 square feet existing accordingly we're
seeking a dimensional variance today um a2 is the zba application of appeal a3 project information
form A4 proof of ownership. A5 is tax clearance. I would note to the board that the 2022 taxes
were paid by check number 10894 on March 25th, 2022. As an officer of the court, I can represent
that I confirmed that with Fracio Properties LLC's controller, but the system has not caught up
to that payment but uh as an officer of the court again i represent that that check has been
submitted uh and we're just waiting for uh the city system to catch up to that a6 are floor plans
a7 are photographs a8 is the rco letter from hmc squared uh a9 if submitted would be the district
council letter and i would ask that it would be marked as a9 uh with a10 is the relevant zoning
history. In 2019, from what we can determine, a zoning permit was filed for a retail grocery
convenience store at the first floor and inadvertently failed to include the three
existing apartments at the second and third floor. It only indicated two. Again, the grocery store
tenant was probably not aware how many apartments were above. 2001 through 19, it was used as check
cashing and three apartments prior to that check cashing one shop and two apartments in 2001 1991
1980 check cashing and two apartments 79 and in pre-79 it was some sort of a store uh and two
apartments uh a11 is proof of zoning of similar properties uh one being 554 north 63rd which is
directly across the street that is a grocery store and three family and the photographic
evidence and permits will will show that it's basically the sibling building uh just a mirror
image of our building located directly across the street another corner property
of our building located directly across the street, another corner property.
And then across Haverford Avenue at 561 North 63rd Street is a takeout restaurant and a two-family.
A12 is the zoning map and A13 already aerial photographs.
So I would point out for the board's information that this is a mixed zone block.
It's mostly RM1 multifamily residential at the far end.
It's some CMX2 commercial residential mixed use and at our end of the block, it is also CMX2.
Multifamily is specifically permitted in the district.
However, there are square footage requirements for the multifamily use.
CMX2 requires 480 square feet per dwelling as opposed to RM1, which is right next door, for all intents and purposes, requires 360 square feet per dwelling.
The CMX2 as owned requires 1,440 square feet for three families.
The existing lot area of 1,224 square feet is 216 feet shy of the required 1,440.
However, I would submit that if it was zoned RM1, we would be compliant for three dwelling units.
So we have the refusal.
Again, it's simply a lot size.
We can't create any more lot size.