ZBA Hearing - March 13, 2024

good morning again mr chair and members of the board

1238 South Bucknell Street I'm again acting as both architect and attorney for this representation

the property was purchased in 2020 as an existing two-story single-family structure

as an existing two-story single-family structure.

The owners attempted to undertake a single-family rebuild in 2021,

but there were all sorts of difficulties.

Looking back at that time period, I think it was difficult for everyone to successfully complete projects.

There was more damage to the structure in its existing state than was anticipated.

There were violations for an unsafe structure issued in 2022, and as of this month, I believe

the property has been demolished, which caused them to sort of alter their plans for the

project.

The refusal within the RSA 5 district is for multifamily household living.

We are proposing three units within this structure.

there are no dimensional variances requested. Again, here's a list of our exhibits starting

with an aerial. We are on Bucknell, South Bucknell Street between Federal and Oakford off of South

24th. Now we are a RSA 5 block, but the adjacent corner property off the rear side is a vacant

CMX1 and a lot of the corner properties along Oakford do allow for multi-family living.

Here is an exit here was the structure prior to demolition.

These are other kind of corners right in that area which have had taken advantage of the fact

that it is a by-right proposal for three stories within that once you're on the corner or separated

from two-story buildings on both sides. Here is a posting of the zoning poster on both frontages.

Now since it's been demolished those have been relocated to the construction fences.

Here is a copy of the deed from 2020, and here is our zoning plan.

Now, as proposed, it is a, let me zoom in a little bit, three-story structure with an

occupied cellar.

There's a proposed roof deck set back from both frontages accessed by a pilot house.

We are within all of the required dimensional setbacks and height allowance.

Here's our refusal for multifamily use.

Here are the proposed building plans.

Now, the unit one is a bi-level unit, both cellar and first floor.

It enters right off the street.

It's approximately 1,200 square feet, three bedrooms, two bathrooms.

Unit 2 is located on the second floor by a common entry.

It is a one-bedroom, one-bathroom.

It's the tightest one.

It's a little bit under 550 square feet.

And the top floor, which has a private roof deck, is another one-bedroom, one-bathroom.

It's about 820 square feet.

Now, we have been through a little bit of back and forth with the community.

They wanted us to engage in bringing the existing brick.

Now, it's a little grayed out, but this is actually a proposed wood look, like this sort of not actual wood,

but a wood-look decking project that's made for an exterior facade use, as well as a hardy board or ACM panel.

Here's the view of the property along Oakford Street.

Here is an elevation detailing some of the material selection.

Now, of course, there's a little bit of flexibility moving forward with this.

were willing to incorporate further suggestions from the community, but I believe we did address

their concerns during the meeting. Here's a look at the lower unit, which shares two floors. The

two upper units were fitting within the 38 feet height requirement. Now, we did meet with the

community on March 13th. We had a fair amount of engagement. There were a number of concerns

brought by the community and we had a pre-meeting

And we had a pre-meeting with the RCO.

We addressed some of their concerns.

Now, one of the things that we are proposing with this structure, the owner is willing to work with financial assistance.

He already has several buildings in which he accepts it.

the community is seeking to solve an affordability concern, and many members were kind of open to

the fact of additional density here if they're open to financial assistance and housing choice

vouchers. Of course, there were some concerns with the overbill and with it not being a single

family. Our expressed hardship is based on the blighted nature of the neighborhood. The fact

that the existing proposed single family rebuild was not financially viable and that we are seeking

to incorporate affordable housing in a way that is addressing one of the main concerns of this

community. Now, as RSA 5, there is no mixed income density bonus available. If this were a comparable

RM 1 lot, which many lots in this area are, we would be two units by right and three units

with a mixed income bonus. That's sort of the equivalency that we're seeking to draw with

this application. So we did end up with community support. We also have support from Council

Person Johnson, and we have also been in touch with his office. And we're in the process

of engaging with Ms. Lynn Wilkins in the housing department to help identify suitable residents

that are in need of affordable housing so we can coordinate with the district and satisfy

by their concerns for affordability.

I'd also like to, and this is a recent addition

which I supplied this morning.

This is a letter from a current landlord,

or sorry, from a current tenant of the building owners

actually located in New Jersey,

but it's sort of attesting that they owned

a well-maintained building that accepts housing vouchers

of which she is a recipient.

Here is our notice. We provided certified mailing to 227 houses, quite a big list of properties for this one.

Here is a sort of map. We are in red. The properties in blue have received variances, many of them for multifamily uses.

some of them of a pretty similar nature I think this 2356 Garrett Street is a pretty similar

model to what we're looking at although it has slightly different conditions here's our application

for appeal our project information and there we are having some issues pulling a tax clearance

there's some sort of confusion in the system I think there might have been a mistake with the

social security number that was logged in initially. But we are able to provide a print

out that the balance, current balance on the property is zero. At this time, I would ask that

Mr. Duong is... So, Hillary, my understanding is the husband's name is not on the property. Am I

correct that is correct mr chair so so counsel we will take your testimony you're an officer

of the court you can testify your client for your client okay okay all right questions from the

board no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson

i just wanted to note mr chair um as mr lc is showing um he did provide uh proof of tax

compliance that we can put on this matter today. Thank you. Questions or comments from the virtual

audience? I see no hands. Planning Commission. Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good morning,

David Fecto. With the City Planning Commission, Chairman and Board Members, the comprehensive

plan recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning at this location.

There is no unique physical condition or circumstance of this property that would

prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code. The majority of row homes on

this block face our single family. The City Planning Commission recommends the Board deny

the proposed use variants for three dwelling units. Thank you. MI 2023-005-928-12

MI 2023-005-928-1238 Bucknell Street, I vote yes.

Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.

James Snell, my vote is yes.

Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.

Thank you, counsel.

Thank you.

We will now hear four cases together.

MI 2023-005-970-2216, Nordane Street, number A.

Number 14, MI 2023-005-971-2216, Nordane Street, number B.

MI 2023-005-970-2216, Nordane Street, number C.

and MI 2023-005-973-2216

Nordane Street, number D.

And we have counsel as Adam Laver.

There is a letter of opposition

from the Center City Residence Association.

No explanation.

The applicant provided a letter

from an adjacent neighbor

and the ZBA has received two letters

from individuals who personally

whose family members have used the property.

Mr. Laver.

Good morning, Chairman Bergman, members of the board.

Mr. Laver, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?

Yes, Mr. Chairman. Adam Laver, Blank Rome, 1 Logan Square.

Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Yes, I do.

Could you identify your client, a relationship to the property?

Certainly. Blank Rome represents 2221-2225 South Street Associates LP, which is the owner of each of the four subject properties.

And our Vice Chair has just a few questions for you.

Thank you.

Good morning, Counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?

Good morning, Mr. Vice Chairman. Yes, I do.

Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?

Yes, Mr. Shahid, we have.

Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman and members of the board, as stated, Adam Laver of Blank Rome on behalf of 2221-2225 South Street Associates LP, which owns the subject properties at 2216 Nordane Street.

The special purpose entity that owns these properties is known in the neighborhood as City Living Philly, and its principal, Jason Nussbaum, who's with us today, owns and manages the properties, and he lives with his wife and two daughters within close walking distance of the properties.

He works and lives within yards, essentially.

On the screen before you, you can see just a sampling of City Living Philly's portfolio, and a couple of these photos may look familiar to you.

The one in the top center is 2000 Spruce Street, which was reviewed by this board for conversion of a historic Philadelphia mansion into visitor accommodations.

In the lower right-hand corner, just before most of the current board members were on this board, the zoning board had approved the conversion of a very old garage that had been in the neighborhood into what is now a bustling Goddard school.

City Living Philly has been recognized for its stewardship and award-winning adaptive reuse of neighborhood treasures.

And their reputation is truly stellar, which is why I beg your pardon.

I've taken an extra moment to just put this into context.

Now moving to the subject properties.

The addresses, as Chairman Bergman stated, are 2216 Naudane Street, A, B, C, and D.

What's quite unique, however, about the existing configurations and what poses a hardship is the existing configuration.

Although each of the properties has an address of Nordane Street, none of the properties actually fronts on Nordane Street, which is where my cursor is or the hand.

One has to walk along a easement to get to each of the four properties.

And I'll show you that more closely in a moment.

Each of the four properties contains one visitor accommodations unit each.

contains one visitor accommodations unit each, and I should say that Jason asked that we

document and confirm these uses due to the L&I records not being complete.

There have not been any violations issued or anything like that.

On the screen now, you can see a site plan, and the four properties are here towards the bottom of the site plan.

Noa Dane Street is at the top, and once again, you'll recall there's no actual frontage of those properties on Noa Dane.

But one coming in off of Noa Dane into this gray area would access one garage parking space for each of the units.

And if one is walking in, there is a concrete walkway, which you'll see in a moment, that takes one back.

There's a uniqueness to these parcels in that the access to each of the units is solely from that easement, not from the public right-of-way.

The zoning map exemplifies the situation in the hardship post. The underlying zoning is CMX2

neighborhood commercial mixed use, not residential. As the board is aware, CMX2

promotes ground floor business use, which certainly is not practicable due to the constraints of the

site being removed from the public right of way fronting on an easement.

The notices of refusal for each of the four are the same aside from the addresses, so

I'm only going to bring one up onto the screen.

There's one use refusal per property, which I've taken the liberty of highlighting.

Visitor accommodations is prohibited within the zoning district.

The documentation and confirmation of the existing visitor accommodations at this location

requires variance relief, which would represent the minimum variance to afford relief due to the

unique characteristics of these properties with access only through an easement. And it truly is

the minimum necessary in that only one visitor accommodations unit is being thought as to be

confirmed per property. I'd like to run through seven pages of photos rather quickly. Here's the

view from Nordane Street. Through the larger entrance is that access to the garage parking

that I had shown at the outset, and the pedestrian-scaled entrance, which would be to the east, is that

walkway that I had mentioned. The lower photograph is showing similar conditions. Here's another

photograph that gives you the same sense, one curb cut in. Each of these residential-scaled

garages would accommodate one parking space each for A, B, C, D. Pedestrians entering the visitor

accommodations would walk along this walkway or get out of their cars which are parked off of the

street out of the public way to walk into the units. Here is A, this is the closest one to

Audain Street followed by BCD as you progress south towards South Street. That's the walkway.

You get a sense of how difficult it would be to have the normal commercial mixed use contemplated

by CMX2. B, C, D. The Center City Residents Association issued a policy regarding limited

lodging variants in January 1st of, effective January 1st of 2023. And as a matter of policy,

it opposes all variants requests for visitor accommodations. In this instance, the unique

circumstances of the layout and the structures that exist warrant the granting of variants

relief. And that's attested to by the nearest near neighbor, for example, Cindy Edinger,

and I believe Ms. Edinger is with us today, who writes to support this. She recognizes and notes

that the units are somewhat secluded, that many neighbors don't even know they are there.

She further goes on to state that as visitor accommodations, the owner has on hand a maintenance

crew that manages all the properties, she is the most affected neighbor. Another member of Center

City Residents Association who lives on Delancey Place calls it a needed amenity in the neighborhood

And there is additional support as well that's been submitted.

and there is additional support as well that's been submitted.

Here's a typical floor plan.

Once again, one unit for each entire structure showing on, we'll start with the actual living spaces,

being living area on the first floor and bedrooms on the second floor and third floor.

here uh are the exterior photos this photo in the left hand corner is looking um in this case

towards naudaine street along that walkway from the b unit and you can see just uh what nice

outdoor space that uh you have and how city living philly keeps it up uh interior photos

for each property, A, B, C, and D. City Living has been headquartered in the neighborhood since

1990, with the management offices close by. There are touch points with City Living staff