this application yes when when we weren't aware of it you've been a couple of meetings no no just
one meeting sir the same the same meeting one meeting that none of us knew about until the
meeting was actually going on I apologize when you said a couple of months ago I thought you
were referring to a different meeting no okay the same meeting all right Mr. Mockinson do you have
a list of the mailings yeah actually i put that on my screen uh so on july 12 2021 we mailed out
notice for a meeting that was july 22 2021 as you can see on your screen and then we're given 91
addresses by the city planning commission and here's a copy of these addresses um i
so I don't know where it's and then here's our certificate of mailing as well
showing that we mailed that um in terms so that's the first thing so we did send
the proper notice as required under the law uh and in terms of photographs
these are the four you know these are the vacant lots we're we're right here and as indicated
it before, we are not allowed to build on someone else's land. We have a survey. We're going to build
not allowed to build on someone else's land we have a survey we're going to build within the
within the context.
confines of our land and again we're more than happy to work with the individuals who do own
next door to us to make sure that they feel comfortable in all respects and act in terms of
the porches and this is probably not the best picture this is union this is where we are you
can't see it but these this is what we're trying to mimic the porches that are in this community
In terms of the parking situation, West Girard is public transportation. In terms of the commercial aspect, these are all CMX properties. None of them are commercial. 40th Street is a commercial corridor, but Girard here is not commercial.
So I hope that answers the pastor's concerns about our project.
And ultimately, we did get community support after making a full presentation to the community at a well-attended meeting.
Okay, I disagree with that.
I wasn't informed of the meeting, and several people have stated they were not informed at the first meeting that you all had, nor this meeting.
And there are commercial properties on our portion of the street.
it is not just on Gerard Avenue. It's a restaurant, soon to be a Popeye's, and something else with a
drop-through. That's all on Gerard Avenue, so we're going to give information. We have to give the
correct information. There are no porches on our half of the block. And I know you don't have that
picture, but we have to give correct information. No, what I'm saying is... Mr. Markinson did
identify that it was on the other side
of, was that
Noble Street? Union. Union
Street, I'm sorry. Yeah, yeah.
Pastor, your church is on there. The
rest of it, my understanding from memory, because we
had the meeting on the lot,
they were all vacant otherwise.
The lots are vacant,
but not the buildings
are being, they are commercial
buildings that are on the other
end of our property.
All right, thank you. Anyone else
to testify?
chair we can keep going thank you planning commission
um from bednar city planning the comprehensive plan recommends no changes to existing commercial
mixed use zoning at this location and includes a specific recommendation to strengthen commercial
activity near the intersection of 40th and Girard Avenue, including this block.
The lack of the commercial ground floor on this application conflicts with the specific
comprehensive plan recommendations. The Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the
variance. I'm totally confused on this one. I'd like to close the record and have a discussion.
Well, Mr. Chairman, before you close the record, and I didn't think this was going to be a
contentious matter because it was pretty straightforward, but Mr. Wise, I would like
to have his testimony. In addition to being a representative of the owner, he is a licensed
realtor who handles both commercial and residential aspects. And again, I would have
Mr. Wise testify that you know in this part of town he he doesn't honestly believe that commercial
would thrive. 40th Street around the corner there is a significant amount of commercial. Further
down in Girard there is commercial but in this part of the area it's mostly residential other
than the church structure. So if I could just have Mr. Wise briefly testify just so it's before the
record closes and so the board gets to consider that as well. We'll get him on we'll get him on
I reckon. Yeah. Mr. Wise, can you say in your professional opinion whether or not commercial
usage on this lot would be successful? I didn't think so based on the complexity
and the fabric of the residential that's across the union and being as though they're all vacant
lots right there next to the church and the pastor is correct there is commercial going towards
further down towards 40th street and off of I'm sorry further down 40th and Gerard and on 40th
street which has a lot of commercial blight as is so I didn't see to put another commercial space
especially right there with that fabric of residential all along that side of Gerard
avenue yeah exactly so so you again that that point about 40th street 40th street is the
commercial corridor around there right correct and would you say there's a high vacancy rate
around 40th in that on that commercial corridor yes i would okay i have no further questions
yes I would okay I have no further questions just I'll just ask again does the board have
We'll be right back.
any questions no Mr. Chair no so MI 2021-002316 3934 West Gerard Avenue the record is closed
the board will discuss this matter and make a decision at next week's executive session
i think that concludes the two o'clock list that does any any unfinished business on the
two o'clock list and so anyone uh anyone believe that they have not had an opportunity to be heard
on any of the cases on the two o'clock list um hi chair this is tanya uh were you going to do
the add-on on the 3 30 or two o'clock list i was going to do it on the 3 30 is that all right or
i mean i can do it now it sounds good whatever works for you cheer all right let's do it now
and get that out of the way there's an add-on um it's for case number was listed on number five
on add-ons for this morning's list. MI 2020-002708635 West Olney Avenue.
This case was originally heard on June the 30th. It was held because I was not present at that
hearing. I read the transcript and I viewed the video at that hearing. There were two no votes.
Mr. Plaza and Mr. Snell were voting no. Mr. Holloman and Ms. Tenere voted yes. There was
another hearing held on August the 11th. All board members were not present. We are all present now.
So my vote on MI 2020-002708635 West Olney Avenue is no.
and i think that can is that sufficient tanya
do the other board members need to vote as well um chair if it's all possible i would ask that
all board members vote just to have a clear record understood okay carol tennari my vote is yes
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Jim Snell.
uh chair for the record you already mentioned that mr snell i'm previously voted so that's
sufficient okay thank you thank you very kindly chair thank you all right uh before we begin the
330 list um does everyone want to take a five or ten minute break yes yes that was the that was the
All right.
We'll be back here at 6.15.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right, good afternoon again.
or good evening let's see jim is here pauline tom confessor
and carol i think carol's here
ah there you go all right we all ready the court reporter ready i am chair thank you
you and pauline we're ready to go live okay we are already recording sir so you can go when ready
Thank you. And Mr. Hand, are we ready to go? Well, you need a few minutes.
Please proceed. Okay, thank you. Good afternoon, 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 Vice Chair, Ms. Carol Tenere, Board Secretary, Confessor Plaza, and Board Members, Mr. Thomas
Holloman and Mr. James Snell. Board Administrator, Mr. Jason Hand, and our Board Attorney, Ms.
Melissa Freeman, are also in attendance, as is our Zoning Board Administrator, Ms. Tanya
Sunken. 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, we'd like to advise
everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating you acknowledge your
agreement to be recorded and that the recording will be made available to the public on the web
or otherwise. Third, 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 that. 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 that. To enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email
address and the address of the property at issue. And I'd like to remind everyone, please do not
attempt to testify in the chat. Any comments, concerns, questions?
to testify in the chat. Any comments, concerns, or questions should be directed to our Board
Administrator, Mr. Jason Hand. With that, I will read off one of the first add-on, MI 2021-001866.
1820 West Venango Street. The request for reconsideration has been made by Councilwoman
Cindy Bass. My vote is yes to re-hearing and reconsideration.
Carol, you muted. You muted, Carol.
My name is Carol Tenere. My vote is yes to reconsideration and re-hearing.
Confessor Plaza, yes to reconsideration and re-hearing.
James Snell, yes to reconsideration and re-hearing.
Thomas Holloman, yes to reconsideration and rehearing.
Thank you. And the second item on our add-on is MI 2020-003259, 250 by Berry Road.
Mr. Ward is the attorney of record. My understanding this is just a resumption hearing.
planning commission supports there's a letter from the somerton civic which we need to hear
from now and have read into the record so this is a resumption hearing to read the rco letter
into the record do we have that letter am i supposed to have that or is that going to be
read in by Mr. Ward. I don't have that letter. Let's see. Melissa, you need it, Melissa?
I don't have the letter either. I'll see if it was sent to me.
Okay, we can ask Mr. Ward to come forward to see if he has the letter, Chair.
Yes, please. Mr. Ward, if you're there, please identify yourself and I'll swear you in.
Now unmute yourself.
Mr. Chairman, I am here.
Please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
All right. Sean Ward, SHAWN, WARD. Address is 331 East Street Road, Trevos,
T-R-E-V-O-S-E, Pennsylvania
1-9-0-5-3
Attorney for Applicant.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
I most certainly don't.
You froze up. Okay.
I do have a copy of the RCO letter.
Yeah, I will share my screen.
Do you agree with reading it?
I submitted it to the board.
John, can you hear me?
Carol, excuse me.
i don't think we need to do that because this is a resumption hearing
oh okay yeah and the only thing we need is to have the letter read into the record
yeah real briefly i would submit yes this is a resumption hearing uh as an officer of the court
i was sworn in at the prior hearing i would submit that i am still under oath and i provided to uh
The board solicitor today, the RCO meeting, notice number two, certificate of mailing,
the applicant's summary of relief presented to the RCO, a copy of their first RCO letter,
which was submitted to the board at the last hearing, indicating that we were going to meet again, basically,
and a copy of their second letter, which resulted in opposition,
that I believe the record will extend and the board can take judicial notice that
the second meeting of the RCO, however, the RCO letter of opposition fails to address the first
meeting at which approximately 120 persons attended with the vote delayed pending the second
meeting. 239 RCO notices were sent out via first class mail. At the first meeting, 120 total persons
attended while only 25 attended the second meeting of which one was a nearby neighbor
on the notify address list from the planning commission
uh very quickly mr pointed out four things the appearance of the building
uh and i submit these four things are not zoning related uh this building was on record
well reflect as presented at the original hearing for approximately 78 years uh it was it was a
millwork fabrication and distribution facility. It has not changed. They talked about the timing
of traffic, which was addressed at the meeting. They brought up the standard code violations,
which were a result of routine L&I inspections, which were complied immediately, but for the
which were complied immediately but for the zoning violation which is the subject of this hearing
zoning violation, which is the...
and then of course the retributory or you know penalizing a comment about failure to seek a
permit prior to use it was used for 78 years as a millwork fabrication distribution facility and
they were under the stake in belief that moving a storage company would be permitted uh it's it's a
non-conforming structure in an RM2 district. It's been zoned multifamily since, you know,