in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan and with support of the
community the applicant's hardship plan claim is not supported with the evidence of unique
physical circumstances or conditions on the property the city planning commission recommends
that the board deny the variance thank you any uh we don't have any correspondence from
Councilwoman, I believe it's Gautier's office, or it might be Kenyatta Johnson, but I think it's Councilwoman Gautier.
Is there any letters from the Councilwoman?
is there any uh any uh letters from the councilwoman's office
chair we have mr uh goodman with his hand raised thank you mr goodman please identify yourself
you're still under oath yes apologies andrew goodman representing third district council
member jamie gaudier's office members of the board we'd ask that the board um grant the variance as
as outlined this morning, given that it enables kind of multi-generational wealth transfer and
the ability to remain in the community. So thank you. Thank you. MI 2021-001-434-1132 South 56th
My vote is yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is no.
Professor Plaza, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
I believe that concludes the 930 list.
Is there anyone who feels that they have not yet been recognized for any of the cases that were heard on the 930 list?
If so, please raise your hand.
no answer this time sir thank you is any unfinished business
seeing none uh we'll all be back here at two o'clock thank you okay great all right see you
See you then.
Bye, everybody.
Jason, we're ready.
We need a few minutes.
Just a second.
Take your time.
okay sir we are ready to go now good afternoon everyone my name is frank de chico 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 ternary board secretary confessor plaza and board members mr thomas
Holloman and Mr. James Snow. Board Administrator Mr. Jason Han and our attorney Ms. Melissa Freeman
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 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, 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, or whatever should be directed
to Mr. Han, our board administrator for today. With that, I will begin our two o'clock list
with the following requests for continuance number 14 number 14 on our list MI 2021-002200
4801 Fairmont Avenue and I believe as of right now that is the only request for continuance
on the two o'clock list.
Anyone object to that continuance?
Please raise your hand.
I'll answer this time, sir.
Thank you.
I will now ask if anyone would like to request
a continuance or withdrawal
on the two o'clock list to raise your hand.
Only if you're requesting a continuance or withdrawal, please raise your hand.
Only if you're requesting a continuance or withdrawal,
please raise your hand.
Once again, no hands, sir.
It's the two o'clock list.
Okay, thank you.
So with that, we'll begin by hearing case number one, MI 2021-002283, 1021 St. Bernard Street.
Sean Whelan is the attorney of record.
Councilwoman Gauthier sent a letter of non-opposition.
And I understand there may be revision, two-page revision to this application.
Mr. Whalen will be joining back as a panelist, sir.
Whalen, please do identify yourselves by your name, and I'll swear you in.
Sean Whalen, W-H-A-L-E-N, Vintage Law, 6 Coulter Avenue, Suite 1000, Ardmore, PA, 19003.
Thank you. Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Ms. Tenere has some questions for you.
Good afternoon, Sean. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet consisting of proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, referral, photos, and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
yes yes and yes okay you may proceed thank you very much uh i have hopefully a nice easy one
for the board this morning or this afternoon uh to be first on the list it is 1021 south
saint bernard street let me give you a quick um overview down here by king sessing
recreation center 49th and springfield is the neighborhood
The train tracks go right there. This is a corner property. The issue is simply that this looks like a rear property of the existing house fronting on South 49th Street. However, it is an existing lot. There's no subdivision or anything at play here.
this is a single-family neighborhood. We are intending on putting a single-family house
into this lot. And what you'll see is, again, here's a good indication of what the lot looks
like. It's almost triangular. If you put a, here's our refusal. There are no use refusals.
The refusals that we received are all dimensional because of the odd shape of the lot.
Essentially, as we worked out with the RCO, who I believe is on here to represent their
own considerations, is that if you followed on this lot, all of the setbacks required
for an RSA 3 compliant single family house, you would have a tiny little triangle of 238
square feet to build upon.
um so we actually met uh back in june or july for the first time with the cedar park neighbors
they raised a couple of uh very valid concerns and things that they wanted to see so we actually
i believe the board has this but i'm not sure um our second meeting actually ended up being last
night so uh i know like i said cedar park neighbors i believe is on the call to represent
this themselves but they did send in this letter um which i did forward and they have a position
of non-opposition so we have no opposition from the cedar park neighbors and we have no opposition
from the councilwoman either so with that i'll just show you here's that's south 49th street
the property would be right here on the left uh here's the property again this is i'm a terrible
photographer, but this is just a big bend in the road right there down the street, across the
street. So we're not impacting anybody. That's the train tracks right there. So again, and maybe
I'll zoom in on this. This is really the issue. You see this bend right here. The property
is kind of this almost triangular trapezoidal shape. Again, we pulled back in line with the
primary concern was our side yard setback here with the RCO, although we addressed a number of
other issues and have no opposition from anyone for just a single family house on this.
and have no opposition from anyone for just a single family house on this very awkwardly shaped
lot. So with that, happy to answer any questions the board may have. Before we get into that,
do you have a client to adopt your testimony? Yes, thank you. Board may find David Whipple, please.
Mr. Whipple, if you are in the virtual audience, please raise your hand so you may be sworn
He is the project architect for this matter.
Whipple is on.
Mr. Whipple, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
David Whipple, D-A-V-I-D-W-H-I-P-P-L-E.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Mr. Whipple.
All right.
And Mr. Whipple, you are the project architect for this home, correct?
All right.
And did you hear all of the testimony that I presented already?
and is it true and correct to the best of your knowledge and belief uh yes and would you adopt
it as your own i would thank you um question what i offer i'm sorry oh go ahead that's what i was
just offering to do question from the board no mr chair no mr chair no anyone else uh would like
to testify in this case please raise your hand. Miss Kathy Dowdell has her hand raised so I will
allow her to speak at this time sir. Ms. Dowdell please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Sure it's Katherine K-A-T-H-E-R-I-N-E last name Dowdell D-O-W-D-E-L-L. You swear if I'm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do thank you ma'am please proceed um i'm here
representing cedar park neighbors we were the coordinating rco for this project um it was a
little bit of a tough one it is a very awkwardly shaped lot and there was no way to make this a
buildable lot without variances we very much appreciated the fact that when the applicant
presented the project in the summer we had some concerns they responded to those concerns um
They didn't have to come back, and they did, which, again, we appreciated.
I think with all due respect to the development team, the only reason we're saying no objection instead of supporting is that, you know, this is a neighborhood of big Victorian houses with front lawns and front porches, and there was just no way to do that on this lot, which we understand.
And nevertheless, we sort of felt there were maybe some misdesign opportunities, but that's not a zoning issue.
From a zoning standpoint, there was no opposition to this project.
And again, we thank the developer for listening to us and coming back with some important changes.
Thank you. Anyone else to testify in this case?
Please raise your hand.
I see no other hands, Mr. Chair.
thank you planning commission thank you mr chair ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning
commission that's i-a-n-h-e-g-a-r-t-y you swear if i'm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
but the truth yes sir i do all right thank you members of the board comprehensive plan recommends
no change to the existing residential single family zoning at this location however this is
shallow trapezoidal lot and the proposed dimensional variances offer reasonable relief
from physical hardship city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variances
mr whalen is there a revised plan two pages uh yes chair two pages
mi 2021 that's zero zero two two eight three one oh two one south saint bernard street my vote is
yes with the proviso revised plans two pages approved today carol canary my vote is yes with
proviso professor plaza yes with proviso james snell yes with proviso thomas halliman yes with
Supervisor. Number two on our list. Thank you. MI 2021-002281. 1226 South 50th Street. Rachel Pritzker is the attorney of record. I believe there's some notation about one second meeting was denied.
submitted exhibits refer to revised plans but none submitted yet although we just received
we just received revised plans within the last hour. Ms. Pritzker, please identify yourself for
revised plans within the last hour. Ms. Pritzker.
the record. You are under oath from earlier today. Are you out there? There you go.
good afternoon
r-a-c-h-a-e-l pr-r-i-t-z-k-e-r 1635 market street suite 1600 philadelphia pa 19103
as i reminded you you're still under oath ms tenere has some questions for you
hi do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, refusal referral, photos, and or plans of the property five days in advance of this meeting?
And have you met with an RCO?
And do you have a letter?
Yes, we met with the RCO.
As the chairman read aloud, I don't know if we have a letter.
We had asked for some revisions, if we could meet with them again to go over our revisions.
and I included an email in the packet where the RCO stated that they spoke with the community
and they would not meet with us again. Okay, you may proceed. Thank you. I'm just going to share
my screen. This is 1226 South 50th Street. This is the refusal. This is a RSA 5 property. It's
long-standing vacant lot and between 50th and concessing and we are proposing new construction,
three dwelling units. The only refusal we have is for multi-family in RSA 5. This is the application.
It's just worth noting that although the block is zoned RSA 5, it's directly adjacent to RM1
which I have up here on the screen, the zoning map. So not only are there properties in the
immediate vicinity that are RSA 5 that are non-conforming uses, mostly on the 5000 block
of King Sessing, which is right here, but also directly adjacent as well. Most of this, all of
this block is RM1. So what we're providing is not out of character. Additionally, it's worth noting
that this is identified by the city's 2035 comprehensive plan as basically the Woodland
And in the University Southwest District plan, in the Woodland Avenue focus area, where the
plan states that 49th Street, which is directly adjacent to this, has the ability to link
neighborhood parks, recreation centers, commercial corridors, trails, and Schuylkill River in
a direct and meaningful way.
This street is one of the few that bridge across the railroad tracks and has public
transit um specifically related uh to the woodland avenue focus area which is two blocks away from
this property um and which is really centered around woodland avenue 49th and grays ferry it's
recommended for higher density the woodland uh avenue area focus area is recommended for higher
density mixed use development that's on page 36 and 40 of the plan which i have included in our
appeal. Again, our property is on 50th and King Sessing and is a longstanding vacant lot
that has some other, like I mentioned, other adjacent multifamily nearby. So we do believe
that what we're providing kind of helps support the plan, helps support the revitalization of
50th Street and in addition to King Sessing and Woodland Avenue. We had met with the
The other thing that was worth mentioning that we had originally proposed these to be three condo units for homeownership opportunities, but we are open to doing rentals as well.
We just were not given an opportunity to meet with RCO again.
Here's the zoning posters for the property, which is all contained in the packet.
The lot is obviously this vacant one in between these two existing structures.
We met with the King Sessing Area Civic Association on the 12th of August, and mostly was people from the block who basically just didn't want to see anything but a single family home.
We tried to talk through the cost considerations as low-income and moderate-income housing.
talk through the cost considerations as low income and moderate income
housing opportunities were mentioned on the call. However, you know, we're trying to explain we were
trying to provide three, you know, homeownership opportunities that would be less than putting up a