Are you ready to go, Tanya?
Let's give it one more minute.
Take your time.
So, Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
Just to clarify, you don't need to do the announcements this week.
We did them for four weeks.
I made a note for myself for that, Hillary. Thank you.
Okay, great. Thank you for doing that.
Okay, cheer. Let's go when you wish.
Good morning, everyone. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this morning's ZBA hearings.
With me is Ishmael Shahid, our board secretary.
Present, Mr. Chair.
Thomas Holliman, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also here is our executive director, Tanya Sunkit, and our board attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Before we begin, here is our virtual format. Be advised the proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, your knowledge, your agreement can be recorded.
A video will be available by contacting Tanya Sunkett, our Executive Director, tanyasunkett
at phillit .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 finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for
testimony or comments. All comments have to be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sun.
So let's look at continuities for this morning. Number two, MI 2021 -004 -590 -1331 North 30th Street.
That case is continued. Number four, MI 2022 -001 -116 -2410 North 90th Street. This case is
continued attorney moving parties. Number 10, MI 2021 -004 -387 -6809 Woodland Avenue. That case is
continued. And number 16, MI, wait a minute, I'm sorry, MI 2021 -004 -368 -2967 Amber Street.
Those four cases are continued. Are there any comments from the virtual audience?
Good morning, Mr. Chair. This is Jason Hand. I do not see any hands raised at this time, sir.
Speak up a little bit, Jason. I can't hear you.
Yes, I do not see any hands at this time.
Thank you so much.
And case number nine, MI -2022 -002 -683 -417 East Worcester Street, Unit 103.
This is a request from the continuances from the RCO and also the councilperson's office.
Is the attorney present, and is there anyone from the council's office or the RCO's present?
Mr. Charles Richardson
has his hand raised. I can allow him to speak
at this time. I'm sorry.
I'm sorry. Ms. Haskins should be
promoted first to speak.
She's the attorney.
Ms. Haskins, please raise your hand
again.
H -A -S -K -I -N -S.
All right.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Counsel, we have a request for a continuance from the RCOs.
I'm going to bring Mr. Richardson on right now.
Mr. Richardson.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Charles Richardson from the Office of Counsel in the Bass Room 312 City Hall.
Mr. Richardson, would you state your relative to the continuance, please?
We received three emails, separate and distinct, from each of them.
You're breaking up, Mr. Richardson.
Mr. Richardson?
Ms. Haskins, are you still on?
Yes, I am.
Ms. Haskins, he wants to continue this at the request of the RCOs.
Are you okay with that?
I really would like to place an objection in the record.
We had an RCO meeting.
This is not a difficult case.
It's a mere subdivision of an affordable housing development lot that the lenders have demanded.
that remove a cloud on Tidal.
Okay, let me see if I can get him on here.
Mr. Richardson, can you get back in?
I am back.
Okay, did I already swear you, Mr. Richardson?
You didn't swear me.
Could you give me your reasons why you want to continue?
The they had an RCO meeting and all three of the chairs are contending that it was confusing.
The people that were there and it was only four people that were involved in the in the meeting
and they and they were confused with regard to what they were voting for and they ended up voting
for it three to one but the all three chairs are concerned and if you read the letter that was
submitted by the RCO, the coordinating RCO, it was very confusing to them as to what was being
done. And they said it didn't address the variance that was being requested. So the
councilwoman feels like there needs to be some more conversation with the community before we
render any type of decision on this case. Ms. Haskins, give me your...
The case has no impact on the neighborhood whatsoever, Mr. Chairman.
This is a case of a mere subdivision because we'll have a non -conforming lot after it's subdivided.
There's no development planned for this lot.
It is merely to subdivide, to remove an encroachment.
The adjoining neighbor is encroaching by parking her car.
This was a vacant lot that the redevelopment owned.
The redevelopment authority is a lender.
And the Redevelopment Authority, the city of Philadelphia is asking us to do this, to remove the encroachment.
hi could you state your name hi could you state your name please in the spell for the court
reporter my name is Cheryl Smith and I was in um I'm sorry C -H -E -R -Y -L Smith S -M -I -T -H
you swear from the tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
I do what case you hear talk about oh I was I'm here for 417 I'm the uh 12th word RCO so since
you put it back in the queue. I'll just wait. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Any other requests for
continuance? Mr. Chair, I have a hand raise for Ms. Rosalind. I will allow her to speak at this
time, sir. Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please? Rosalind
mckelvie r -o -s -a -l -i -n -d mckelvie m as in mary c k -e -l -v as in victor e -y
do you swear do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do what case uh it's just in reference to the same one since it's going to come back
it's going to come back but there's a problem with my internet and uh in case i don't get back in
the person she spoke to that helped her she's referring to me and there needs to be clarification
all right so thank you thank you we're going to get to that case thank you thank you
any other requests for continuance
mr chair i do not say any hands at this time okay case number 11 mi 2021 003 662
3504 Ainsley Street. That case has been previously withdrawn.
We also have a number of cases that we do not have any
documents. Case number one, MI 2021 -004 -390 -7120 Wissahickon Avenue. We have no exhibits. James
Mrs. McLeod is the listed owner.
Last time, Stuart Golden was on the call.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience for this case?
I have a hand raised from a number ending in 2040.
Yes, sir.
Hi, could you state your name, please?
yes i'm i'm i'm yes this is james mccloud from 701 20. do me a favor could you please spell your
name for the court reporter j -a -m -e -s last name n -c -l -e -o -d right do you swear a firm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do we have no exhibits for your case sir
yeah we just want to make we just want to make a statement to this one to the board
um well we we're either going to hear your case we're not going to hear you are you
requesting a continuance no i'm not yeah yeah yeah wait a minute mr mcleod you're the one to
speak i don't know who's behind you talking but you're the one yeah i'm sorry i'm sorry
sure yeah yes i would like to have a continuance okay all right so this is the second listing
this case is going to be continued must be tried the next time okay that's fine yes sir all right
thank you case number 14
mi2022 -002 -917 -7770 dungan road kevin levy or tony forte is the attorney we have no exhibits
this is the first listing if you're in the virtual audience please raise your hand
i don't see any hands that case that case is continued
mark must be tried
number 15 mi 2021 004 526 110 south 20 street no exhibits second listing
we believe there's attorney will be likely needed for this
any hands jason once again once again sir no hands for this that case is continued mark must be tried
once again sir no hands for this that case is continued mark must be tried the next listing
okay we're going to go to our add -on list
mi 2021 000 792 441 west roosevelt boulevard that case has been withdrawn
Case number three, MI 2021 -004 -464 -2035 West Toronto Street. Vern Adestasio is the attorney.
has he been allowed to speak
yes he can be promoted
he has been promoted
good morning mr chair council how are you good could you state your name and spell for the
court reporter please yeah verne anastasio a -n -a -s -t -a -s -i -o 2016 spruce street philadelphia
one nine one zero three right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do could you please identify your client in relationship to the property yes sir
I represent Elin Silber, who is the sole principal of 2417 Silver, LLC.
Ishmael Shaheed has a few questions for you, our secretary.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Hello there.
Do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required, such as proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of refusal or referral, pictures or drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And did you meet with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yes to all of that. I don't have a letter, but I did see some sort of email that was sent from the RCO to the ZBA late yesterday.
okay let me just check with counsel uh hillary do we receive anything um i have not received
anything i will double check but yeah i have not received a letter from the rco in this case
it wasn't a letter it was just like a random email from mr car
okay i will take a look thank you
okay please are we going to proceed chair yes yeah proceed share your screen so please
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We're here for 2035 West Toronto Street. The application is for use as a two -family dwelling. In my packet, I have a plot plan. It's an existing property.
It's at the end of a street right next to a very large vacant lot.
There is side access for all tenants to place their trash and for the property management company to take it out to the curb on a weekly basis.
Here is the interior layout.
there's an existing two doors, two entrance entryways to the property.
This is how my client purchased it. He purchased this property sight unseen and he purchased it
through the sheriff's department, through a sheriff's sale. Upon purchasing it, he found
out that it was full of squatters. Folks in there who have been there prior to his taking title
remained in there. They did hire a property management company with the intent of getting
them out. That property management company had difficulty doing that. They then were able to get
the squatters in a position where they could actually file eviction notices. Mr. Todd Barrett
represents my client in three separate eviction cases currently for the squatters in the property.
And my client would like to rehabilitate it.
And that's why he's currently involved in getting the squatters out of the property so that he can, in fact, do that.
I also have proof of the sheriff's sale.
We have proof of meeting with the community more than once.
and i also have in my exhibit packet uh the landlord tenant complaints for
um three the the remaining three squatters in the property i believe the concern was
the history of the property being distressed and neglected and my client of course stipulates to
all of that because he came to this property under distress and would like to be able to,
in fact, rehabilitate it. So with that, we ask, because of the history of the property being a
two -family dwelling, because my client has found it in a distressed state with squatters that he's
now engaged a law firm to, in fact, evict, and because there's lots of disinvestment on this
block as you can see here um by the uh aerial photo for all those reasons we respectfully
request that this be granted and with that i'd like to have mr eli silver raise his hand
mr silver if you're in the virtual audience please raise your hand
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Counselor, you're an officer of the court.
We will take your testimony.
I thank you for that.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Mr. Charles Richardson with his hand up.
Mr. Richardson, can you please...
Mr. Richardson, you've already been sworn.
Just state your name, please.
i'm sorry chair this is tanya if i could mention i don't think he was sworn in earlier
okay he said he was but i'll i will do it again
mr richardson
okay now you can hear me yeah state your name please and spell for the court reporter
Yes, Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 312 City Hall.
Right.
Do you swear to affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, sir.
Yes, I just forwarded, there was a letter that was produced by Allegheny West in support of the project back in September, sometime in early September.
I just forwarded that to Hillary, Tanya, and to the board.
Thank you, Mr. Richardson.
No problem.
Also, you're included on that also, Vern.
And the councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance.
Thank you very much.
Anyone else in the virtual audience have a comment?
Planning commission.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair.
This is Jason and I have them back.
I thought there was a hand raised from a number ending in three, five.
Okay, sure.
no hands all right thank you uh mr chair ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning
commission that's spelled h -e -g -a -r -t -y right you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes sir i do appreciate thank you good morning board members uh the
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing industrial zoning at this site however
the proposed use conforms to the documented existing configuration of the structure as shown in the
photos city planning commission recommends that the board grant this variance thank you mi 2021
004464 2035 west toronto street i vote yes thomas tallman my vote is yes
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes thank you council thank you all right number five mi 2021
221 -002 -632, 1444 South 52nd Street. Steve Masters is the attorney. Letter of support from
the 51st Ward, Democrats, RCO. Mr. Chair, Mr. Steve Masters has been promoted to panelists, sir.
Good morning, Mr. Masters. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
good morning mr chair members of the board my name is steve masters s -t -e -v -e m -a -s -t -e -r -s with
the law firm of just laws right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the truth i do could you identify your client and relationship to the property um sure we
represent the property owner michael um negoro thank you our uh our board secretary has a few
questions okay good morning mr masters how are you good morning you agree to weigh the reading
of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy um i do did you email all the exhibits and documents
as required such as the proof of ownership tax clearance copy of refusal or referral pictures or
drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing yes did you meet with the rto
do you have a letter yes we did submit all of our exhibits um in a timely way and we had
a a productive meeting with the rco and a letter of support from them okay thank you uh please
proceed and share your screen yes uh mr chair can you see my screen at this point it's fine yep okay
wonderful all right so uh this property is currently a vacant lot on the 1400 block of
south 52nd street it's surrounded by many triplex and duplex apartment buildings on that block in
fact as we'll show you shortly there are nine properties on this block all but two of them
are multi -family or mixed use we are proposing to construct a three -story residential building
with three apartments and one roof deck on the lot and the only refusal that we received is
a use refusal because this is a single -family zoned RSA -5 and we are proposing a triplex.
When we met with the RCO, we received a letter of support from them. They reported that
all of the members of attendance were in support of this project and
all of the RCOs that were present were also in support. We also have petitions signed by 20,
I believe it's 25 near residents in support of the project. The plans, here we go,
So, this is the site plan here.
So, we have the street here, South 52nd Street, and we are taking up most of the lot, but we do
have um the required rear yard and side yards um that that the code requires
and these are our floor plans
second floor plan we have two bedrooms living room kitchen and bath and the
third floor we have two bedrooms similar to the second floor and then the roof
deck and a pilothouse to top it off. This is our elevations.
this is the front elevation and to the right is the saw as the rear elevation
and then we have photos this is the lot itself
The structure to the left here is a triplex and the only two single families are located
right to the right there.
Those are legacy single families from constructed quite a long time ago.
our zoning poster photos this chart is we prepared a chart that basically compares
whoops the status of all of the of the buildings on this block in yellow are the triplexes in blue
is the duplex. So the first property and the last property are the corner lots, and those are
zone CMX2. All of the other lots in between are zone single -family RSA5, but you'll see that
in 2020, 1436 South 52nd was approved for a triplex. In 1950, 1438 was approved for a duplex.
These two in 1440 and 1442 are originally and remain single family.
This is our property, 1444, as the proposed triplex.
And then next to it are two triplexes.
One was granted by this board in 2021 and one was granted in 2022.
And then finally at the end, the other corner, there's another mixed use of a takeout restaurant and an apartment on the first floor.
we also included in our exhibit binder the proof of all of these multi -family
permits that were granted by the zoning board over the years
this is our tax clearance
And the application for the appeal, project information form, and our RCO letter, proof of mailing, and the addresses that we sent the mailing to.
So at this point, I'm happy to answer any questions.
Do you want to have your testimony adopted?
Can we have my client be – our client is an LLC, Pearl Holdings, LLC.
So, Michael, can you raise your hand so you can be acknowledged?
Mr. Garano has been allowed to speak.
Thank you.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
My name is Michael Garano, M -I -C -H -A -E -L.
Last name is N -G -O -R -O -R -A -N -O.
All right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Michael, you've heard my testimony before the board today.
Do you agree with it, and do you adopt it as your own?
Yes, I do.
Questions from the board.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Masters, I'm not sure if you went out, but is there a basement in this apartment?
Yes, there is a basement.
I'll come back up to the plans.
All right.
this is the basement plan over to the left okay and there will be a rear exit right yes you can
see um there are um there's an egress in the in the rear of that bedroom and there's also an
an egress in the front correct so i guess my only question is because the property will not be
buttoned up against the property to the right um will you have a uh at least walkway between
properties. I believe I do have an architect here that can answer that question. Michael,
who is here for us as a architect today? Yeah, actually, I believe the architect had to go and
he went out of the country, had an emergency. Oh, but yeah, I'd sent an email, but I can answer
questions in reference to there are actually two egresses in the back if you notice near the the
other bedroom there's another egress so there's a window well and then that where the steps are is
Proof of ownership and tax clearance, copy of refusal or referral, pictures of or drones of the property five days in advance of this hearing.
And did you meet with the RCO? Do you have a letter?
Thank you so much. Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay. Can we maybe promote my paralegal, please? Christine Schlosser. She should be on here.
you're going to work the screens for you yes okay sure
mr chair she's been promoted all right thank you and counsel you'll be the one testifying
from the screens right yes okay thank you yes please thank you uh okay uh can you uh share the
screen, please, Christine. Thank you. I'm sorry. I'm not that good with this. But anyway, the property
is 4331 Lancaster Avenue, and it's parcel C because the properties were, there were two
properties, 4331 and 4333, and they were consolidated into one property. The properties
were used for commercial use many years ago. They've been vacant for at least 10 years.
And the proposal that my client has, can we move forward a little bit here? And I'll just
go through the documents quickly.
We do have the deed of consolidation
that we have given you.
There's the notice of refusal, which
is the application for appeal and project information
form, the tax clearance certificates,
And then we have the site and floor plans with the elevation.
So initially you'll see the site plan for the properties and then the floor plans for the residential spaces within the building.
The first two floors, not the first two floors, the basement floor and the first floor will be for commercial use.
And then there will be a total of five two -bedroom units, nine one -bedroom units, and between floors two through six.
and the there will be a roof deck and that will be accessed by two roof deck access structures
there'll be an elevator for the commercial use on the basement and first floors
and currently the spaces the commercial spaces are vacant and we left it to the community of
course, to decide what kind of commercial uses that they may want and what may be, but we have
enough space to offer to commercial, possible commercial tenants in a, what is a commercial
corridor here. We did meet with the community group. We had two meetings, actually. We had
one on June the 6th. We had one on July the 18th. And in the end, there was a vote of
non -opposition for our proposal. The plan is to help to rebuild this particular corridor
as well as providing some needed residential spaces within this corridor, which is a rather
large one. There was a request about the trash. We have proposed a trash enclosure in the rear
for a dumpster. And we are also going to provide bicycle spaces within the building
so that we can meet some of the needs for people to be able to
traverse the area without necessarily having to have cars.
traverse the area without necessarily having to have cars.
So with that, I think we'll ask for any questions.
You want to have your testimony adopted first?
Can we bring my client, who is Meharry Bailey?
Meharry Bailey has been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Meharry Bailey, M -A -H -A -R -I, last name Bailey, B as in boy, A -I -L -E -Y, owner of the property.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
And Meharry, do you adopt my testimony as your own?
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, I'm good, Mr. Chairman.
Counsel, one question.
How did you get to six floors?
I'm sorry?
How did you get to six floors?
What was the decision -making in going six floors?
well we are uh providing um basically two floors of the commercial space so the six floors will
add in the other um space for we're we're going to have 14 units within this um in the property
And that gets us to them. So per floor, it's three units on the second floor, three on the third floor, three on the fourth floor, three on the fifth floor.
And then on the sixth floor, there's only two units. They're larger size units, but that's how we've done it.
All right. Thank you. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing CMX2 commercial corridor zoning at this location.
with regard to the dimensional refusals for lot coverage and roof deck setback we believe the
proposed lot coverage is consistent with other trapezoidal lots on this block and that the
setback is related to the irregular shape of the lot and the commission has no objection
however with regard to the dimensional variance for height we believe the proposed height is much
greater than the minimum variance necessary to overcome any hardship related to the development
of this site and finally with regards to the use variance to allow additional dwelling units
this is particularly concerning to the commission we believe that the proposed dwelling unit count
sidesteps the mixed income housing bonus which is available for development in the cmx2 district
the appellant's asking the board to grant additional dwelling unit density without
requiring the appellant to provide the required public benefit of deed restricted affordable
housing. City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the variance for lot coverage and
roof debt setback but deny the variances for dwelling unit count and for height. Thank you.
And can I can I? You can. Sure. We had this discussion with the RCO. And again, the there is now a provision, I think an overlay that went into effect.
But at the time that we did this application, there was no such thing.
And we had a discussion about the fact that my client has several projects, including one right across the street, which is also six stories.
So which was granted by the board and that we my client provides affordable unit.
i .e. the units that he provides are the rentals are lower than what would ordinarily be considered
affordable in this particular area and so the height is to make up for again providing
additional commercial space on their commercial order in a property that has not been used for over 10 years.
in a property that has not been used for over 10 years
and put that back into commercial use
in a way that will provide the commercial use
that is needed and also to provide
what are affordable, i .e. not market -great housing
in this particular area.
So, so counsel, thank you very much.
Planning is raising the issue that I'd like to really discuss with the other
members of the board. We will hold this till next Wednesday.
We will discuss this at executive session and look to vote publicly next
Wednesday at nine 30. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you.
number seven mi 2021 002 095 4319 rawn street leo mulvihill is listed as the attorney
um there's a letter of opposition from holmesburg civic association
Mr. Mulvihill.
Good morning, Mr. Mulvihill.
If you're in the virtual audience, please raise your hands so you may be promoted, sir.
Mr. Mulvihill.
I see him in the audience, but he doesn't have his hand raised.
Is Mr. Mulvihill in the audience?
Yes, he is, sir.
Okay, thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Mulvihill.
Still hasn't raised his hand.
Chair, if we could, would you mind moving forward until we get his attention?
All right, I'm going to go to the next case, okay?
Number 8, MI 2022 -004 -371 -5616 North Broad Street.
Adam Laver is the attorney.
Letter of support from Concerned Community Association with Proviso.
Good morning, Mr. Laver.
Mr. Laver, how are you going to go to the panelist?
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, Chairman Bergman. Adam Laver, L .A. V .S. and Victor, E .R., Blank, Rome, 1 Logan Square, Philadelphia, 19103.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I do.
Thank you. Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Blancrome represents 5616 North Broad Street Associates, LLC, owner of the subject property.
Okay, our board secretary has a few questions.
Thank you.
Good morning, counsel.
Good morning, sir.
Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, Mr. Shahid, I do.
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required, such as proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of refusal or referral, pictures and drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
You can see that it's open to the elements in this photograph, and I'll get into that in a moment.
The property was owned for approximately 28 years by prior owners who, quite frankly, did not keep up the property to acceptable standards.
It was last occupied as part of the commercial thoroughfare along Broad Street.
It was last occupied by DTLR and Sneaker Villa.
However, during the spring of 2020 unrest that our city faced, along with many other cities through the country, the store was destroyed by fire.
And you can see some photographs here.
Broad Street would be here in the upper portion, Chu on the left.
And you can see what occurred to the property.
prior to Scott's purchasing it. This is the property open to the sky from the back
and another image. Scott purchased the property after that occurrence in January of 2021. He
purchased the property as shown on the screen. Since then, he has invested tens of thousands
of dollars in working to make safe and to rebuild the property. The proposal is for Foot Locker
to become a flagship tenant at this space that has sat vacant and in eyesore for too long.
On the screen before you is the zoning map showing the corner in purple here. The property is on CMX
2 .5, which permits the retail use that I described. However, foot lockers space requirements
necessitate an addition in the rear of the property back along Chew Street. That addition
would be approximately 141 square feet more than the zoning code allows, a true example of
de minimis variance, dimensional variance relief. On the screen before you is the notice of refusal
that was issued. I've taken the liberty of highlighting a few things to bring to your
attention. The code requires that the rear yard depth of here in the CMX 2 .5 district be at least
10 % of the depth of the lot or 15 feet as shown right here. However, the code does not allow
the 30 -foot easement area in the rear of the property, which I'll show you in a moment,
to be counted in that rear yard requirement. So subtracting out that 30 feet, only 12 feet
of setback is contemplated, this is the one issue before the board.
Here is the zoning site plan. And let me further describe the technicality.
The full depth of the lot from Broad Street on the right back to the adjoining property,
which would be to the west, is 150 feet. I know it's a little too small to read,
but that highlight here shows 150 from broad all the way to the back. The 150 -foot depth includes
a 30 -foot easement area here at the rear of the property. That must remain fully open by order of
the law. Beyond the easement area, or to the east, is the proposed setback of 12 feet instead of 15
feet. 15 -foot setback is required, 12 feet is proposed, beyond which a 30 -foot easement must
remain. However, effectively from a passerby's perspective, the actual setback would look to
include the easement area of 30 feet plus the 12 feet that we are proposing for 42 feet, a 42 -foot
and appropriate stock space are required for a first -class retail store. At 5 ,184 square feet
proposed, this store would actually be slightly smaller than Center City's 7 ,500 square foot
footlocker at 1517 Chestnut Street and 5 ,700 Germantown Avenue's footlocker at about 6 ,200
square feet. Foot Locker really believes in this location, believes in North Philadelphia,
and in the community. Here at the bottom of the screen, you can see the proposed rebuilding of
the store with a brick facade, which extends along Chu Street, I should note as well,
and simple conceptual signage above. Foot Locker's commitment to the community has been
noted recently in the press, as recently as August 2nd last month, by BET News recognizing
Foot Locker's investment of $54 million to support communities of color and an ongoing
commitment of $200 million over the next five years. The article goes on to state,
quote, through strategic investments, community partnerships, and opportunities that empower
we being Foot Locker, are taking actionable steps to drive meaningful and lasting change both within
our organization and in the communities we serve, end quote. Really exciting, a leader in retail
commercial here in Philadelphia and through the nation. The photos on the screen now, and I'm
getting towards the end, thank you for bearing with me, are showing you the rear of the property.
So we see Chu Street on the left. Broad Street would be out of the range of this photo. Why am
I showing the rear of the property? I'm showing the rear of the property because this is most
important to the residential area beyond. You see here the 30 -foot easement area. This is
an area that cannot be built upon. Within the gates, the proposed addition would be right at
the back of the property and would stay within that. It would not encroach on the easement.
And I'm going to share with you improvements that are proposed for the entire area.
Here we're looking at an aerial photograph, Broad Street on the left and the rear area on the right.
Some additional photographs. And here we're looking from Chu into the easement area. This is
not footlocker space. This would be footlocker on the left, looking out from within that space.
And to the left would be the proposed addition. So the area west of the present fencing
is the 30 -foot easement area, which must be preserved. The proposed addition of the former
building is inside the fenced area only, an eight -foot deep addition of which the zoning code
permits five feet, a variance of three feet. Foot Locker plans to improve upkeep and secure
the rear driveway. Here's the conceptual rendering. They will do that through new blacktop,
new macadam, working with the community on the materials and lighting security plantings where
appropriate commercial trash removal out of site. We're very pleased to have partnered with
A Concerned Community Association, which offered its unanimous approval of the proposed variants
with provisors that I've highlighted, the 30 -foot easement area to be milled and repaved,
addition of security cameras rear wall to be painted with anti -graffiti paint
parking to be prohibited within the easement area for the record the ownership commits to these
provisos and looks forward to working with the community we're also grateful that councilman
bass through mr richardson who i believe is present today has offered its non -opposition
to the grounding of the variants. Mr. Hummel has also gone door to door along North Broad Street
with many near neighbors, business owners who fully support the redevelopment of the corner
and the required variants. I noted with the signatures below that they have reviewed the
site plan and renderings and providing full support. There are about 12 signatures here.
We are not aware of any concerns beyond what I've described through the provisors.
any concerns beyond what I've described through the provisors. Mr. Chairman, members of the board,
the proposal fits into the surrounding neighborhood as evidenced by the support of the coordinating
RCO, the partnership with the district council member on the project, the support of near
neighbors. The proposed variance would represent the minimum variance that would afford relief
to allow this commercially zoned property to fully function pursuant to current national retail
health standards, as requested by Foot Locker, a well -known national retailer. The grant of
variance relief will not substantially increase congestion in the public streets, increase the
danger of fire or otherwise endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare. There is no
adverse changes. This will not adversely affect transportation or unduly burdened water,
sewer, school park, or other public facilities. There are no environmental issues. Mr. Chairman,
If it's appropriate, Scott Hummel, the principal of the ownership entity, is here and is prepared to raise his virtual hand to adopt and affirm.
Thank you. That's fine.
Mr. Hummel, would you kindly raise your virtual hand so that you may be led into the virtual meeting?
Mr. Hummel has been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
Yes. Can you hear me?
Yes, we can.
Scott G. Hummel, H -O -M -E -L.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Receive counsel.
Thank you.
Mr. Hummel, have you been present during the entirety of this virtual hearing?
Yes, I have.
And would you adopt and affirm the testimony that I've offered as your own?
Thank you, sir.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, Mr. Charles Richardson has his hand raised.
I will let him speak this time.
Good morning again, sir.
Could you just state your name?
You've already been sworn.
and did you meet with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yes, I did meet with the RCO and I received RCO letters.
Okay, thank you so much.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Mr. Chairman, I would appreciate it
if I could promote the representative of my client,
Mr. Paul Aylsworth.
Is he going to testify or just work the screen? He's going to work the screen for me. Okay,
good. Fine. We'll just let him do the screen. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Ellsworth has been promoted
to panelists. He'll be coming back in shortly. Mr. Ellsworth, would you please
please put the site plan, share the site plan on the screen, please.
And I would appreciate it if you would assist as we look at the plan.
Is he your client?
Yes, he is.
Sir, could you state your name, please?
And spell it for the court reporter.
Yes, Paul Aylsworth, last name spelled A -Y -L -E -S -W -O -R -T -H.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Aylsworth, I'm going to ask you to also place a pointer on the screen so that we can facilitate showing where the subdivision will occur.
This is a site, this entire site was owned by the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority.
It was all wooded and had a few homes that you see listed at the top of the site plan, above the site plan, and a few in the corner on the right side at the bottom of the site plan.
The property at the far right on the top is at 470 Column Street.
One thing I'd like before we go further to straighten out that seemed to be a confusion for the RCO, one of the RCOs, is that this property's deed is the official address is 417 East Worcester Street.
The property was transferred from the Redevelopment Authority to the Community Justice Land Trust, and they received funds from the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency and the Philadelphia Redevelopment Authority to develop this into affordable homes.
It's 35 affordable homes on the site.
Recently, we discovered that there's an encroachment.
If you'll point to the little triangle.
Thank you.
There's an encroachment by the owner of 470 Column Street.
This is roof on the right side and Column Street above, along the top.
The encroachment is a car parked and a bump out of the house. Could you please show that photograph
of the aerial view? Thank you. You'll see that the car parked in that triangle, that is the
triangular spot that we showed you on the site plan. And here is the bump out of the, I assume,
a dining room or a room on that house. The lenders have required that we remove the cloud
on title. An encroachment presents a cloud on title. And this is a simple case of removing
the cloud on title by subdividing this small piece away from the property that has the loans.
I would like to show the photographs as well. The next slide, please, for the photographs.
You can see where the car is parked and where they bump out on the house is.
It is understandable, Mr. Chairman, that this encroachment occurred years and years ago, because for years, I don't know, maybe 50 years, this property was mostly wooded.
It was called the Worcester Woods, in fact, and when the development occurred, there was some concern by some of the residents because they had been parking in this site.
because they had been parking in this site.
At the time we developed the property,
the owner actually allowed the neighbors,
some of the neighbors who had been parking on the site
to continue to have parking rights on the site.
And so they have tried to work with the neighborhood.
We're asking for a subdivision
so that we can have a separate parcel here
we would like to give it to the owner, transfer this land to the owner so that she will no longer be encroaching.
And that is really the crux of our case.
If one thing I would like to make clear on the record, since I heard some of one of the RCO chairs indicate that I was referring to her,
that was Ms. Rosalind McKelvey. I was not referring to Ms. McKelvey. I was referring to a separate
RCO person by the name of Inez Love who attended the RCO meeting. Ms. McKelvey was not at the RCO
meeting. And Ms. Love actually assisted when I was trying to explain that this had been
a long -term encroachment that probably entitles this neighbor to owning this property by adverse
possession. That is the crux of our case. I'd like to have Mr. Ellsworth adopt my testimony.
Thank you, counsel.
Mr. Ellsworth, did you listen to my testimony this morning?
Do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
questions from the board yes mr chairman uh counselor multi -family what number of units
are you going to build there we're not going to build any units there we are going to subdivide
this away from the existing uh could put the site back uh please mr halesworth we're going to
subdivide this away from the existing development of the of the houses that were developed last year
However, these properties are fully occupied now as affordable homes, but this one property in the corner, this in red, will be subdivided away and we will therefore never have a cloud on title.
We will no longer have a cloud on title.
Okay, thank you.
We're not developing the property.
That's why I said there's no impact on the neighborhood.
Dijmiel?
I'm good, Jeremy.
okay questions or comments from the virtual audience
mr chair we have a hand raised from cheryl smith i will allow her to speak at this time
hi miss smith i think i swore swore you in earlier this morning
yes you did hi could proceed with your testimony um my name is cheryl smith i'm with the 12th ward
RCO. I was the coordinating, we were the coordinating RCO for this meeting. There were
four near neighbors present and the near neighbor that is actually attached to that property was not
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Mr. Charles Richardson has his hand raised.
Hi, Mr. Richardson.
You've already been sworn.
Good morning again, Mr. Chair.
Sorry, I got to lower the...
I know that Inez Love is in the audience,
and she just texted me that she would like to...
I think she might be having trouble raising her hand.
Do we see her hand raised?
No, Mr. Chair.
Let me see if I can bring her on.
Charles, is she available by phone? Because her name is not visible.
She is.
is uh she's not able to get on now she says right uh so let me bring her on by telephone
with my uh with my cell and i can do it like we normally do
she's a
your speaker hi could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
yes your name
i'm sorry can we just pause a minute that's that's what i was asking thanks chair
uh mr chair and and uh miss sunkett i have to apologize first of all i'm getting a echo
So I don't know if that's me or not.
I think we all are.
All right.
I was kicked out right when Ms. Haskins was speaking to her client.
And I just was able to get back in.
And I'll mute now.
All right.
So let's, let's, Charles, can we get a better, hear her a better way?
Or is there anything we can do for that?
problem is that i'm using two devices and one device let me see if i can get if i can come
off of zoom on my phone first okay and um chair this is tanya um as always i was just thinking
if this case is going to be resumed at a later time we can allow testimony then or a letter
could be provided if we are unable to get her testimony at this time all right charles that's
what we're going to do okay because we're going to continue the vote on this anyway
all right miss haskins mr chair may i respond to what was clearly stated on the
that i heard clearly stated before there was some confusion uh i mean the only testament i heard is
where the one woman just said there was confusion. That was it, right? I heard testimony that I was
lying and I'd like to respond to that. Okay. If it's not a matter of the record, then I don't
have to respond. I didn't hear that. Okay. I want to explain, I would like to explain clearly
what I meant by one of the chairs providing some assistance during the meeting. And that was when
people were saying that the next door neighbor would be burdened by taxes, that she would have
not have any benefit. And a lot of discussion. The person that Ms. Smith mentioned is yelling
and upset was really trying to speak on behalf of a neighbor that he hadn't spoken to.
Okay. All right. Thank you. Wait a minute. Mr. Richardson has his hand up. Charles.
Charles?
Charles?
Mr. Richardson?
I'm here now.
Ines, can you hear me?
I can hear you.
Mr. Richardson?
I'm here.
Ines, say something.
I'm not I'm concerned about the no wait wait wait Mr Richardson wait a minute I I mean I think we're
still having a hard time hearing her I think what we're going to do is we'll take her information
you'll get it to us at a later date we're going to leave the record open when we so when when
we continue this case we're going to leave the record open okay that'll work okay thank you
is there anyone else in the virtual audience
mr chair i have
Mr. Chair, I have Rosalind McKelvey. With her hand raised, I have allowed her to speak.
Okay, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Rosalind McKelvey. I've given it before. R -O -S -A -L -I -N -D McKelvey.
And I think I swore you in before, too.
Yes, sir, you did.
Proceed. Proceed.
Hi, my name is Rosalyn McKelvey. I'm the coordinator of the 49ers, and we had the first zoning meeting where they put 417 into building. It was still, at that time, it was still woods.
um i'm just here to clarify as one of the co's um miss haskins had told me she was trying to reach
this person or the people that live at that property i told her i didn't know them but if
it would help i would give them a notice of our next community meeting and if they come to the
same meeting, they could talk to each other at the meeting. We had this meeting for 4 -17. I was
not there, but I sent a representative. I'd like to bring to the attention that for the RCOs,
we do not want to be responsible for it, and we are hesitant to do anything that would impact
on the developer or the person with an issue because we're hosting the meeting. If you look
at the refusal, the refusal is for 417 East Worcester Unit 103. If you look at it, Unit 103
is at the other end of the units, and the neighbors were confused why we're bringing up
unit 103
and all we said was
we think your refusal
doesn't apply to a property
on another street.
It's not.
So could you listen to me?
I think what this needs is
it's going to need a future meeting.
We're going to continue it.
There'll be a chance
and we're going to leave it open
if people have to testify.
I don't think we have to get into that detail right now.
Thank you so much.
All right. Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Burke.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Go ahead.
I'm sorry, Ian.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you, members of the board.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Board members, the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change from RSA 2 to RM3 at this location.
This application proposes a lot split on an existing multifamily development that was funded by the Low -Income Housing Tax Credit Program.
The applicant wants to create a parcel that is nonconforming with regard to size and deed it or allow it to be deeded by adverse possession to this adjacent property owner who has encroached on and openly used this small segment of the development to be parceled off.
the proposed parcel is undersized but it would effectively merge with the encroaching property
given that this action legalizes and formalizes an existing encroachment and given that the denial
of the dimensional variance would have a clear negative economic impact on the appellant the
city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variance thank you so we're going to
continue this case we'll leave it open um tanya i don't think we can talk about a date yet right
we'd have to wait to hear from them or do we want to give a date that it has to be done by
yes we have to give a date for resumption hearings and i just want to put on a record this is a not
typical we don't do resumptions it's only for this particular case and we're going to give
november the 15th at 9 30 a .m chair thank you very much and mr chair listen to hillary i think
we should um specify that the resumption hearing is limited to taking testimony from representatives
of the rcos as well as the council office and then ms haskins can respond to that testimony
thank you very much ms haskins okay thank you very much all right thank you everyone
okay number chair this is tanya may i just say one more thing
because this is a controversial case Ms. Haskins I would ask that your client post the property
again and you can and my office will send out posters which is not typical for resumptions
but just so everybody involved will understand what's going on thank you so much thank you all
everybody thank you all right number 12 mi 2021 002 284 4500 d street halle at the lease must be heard
applications for a vacant commercial space use registration
Applications for a vacant commercial space use registration permit required prior to occupancy
at basement in the same building with existing use as previously approved, no sign on this application.
The proposed vacant commercial space is prohibited in the zoning.
The proposed multiple principal uses on lot is prohibited in the zoning district.
Mr. Abdelaziz.
I do not see Mr. Abdelaziz in the virtual audience, sir.
All right.
So this case is marked, must be tried today?
You still don't see his hand?
No, I don't, sir.
no hands raised at this time all right all right um mi 2021 002 284 4500 d street
i vote that we dismiss this case thomas solomon my vote is to dismiss this case
okay so let's go back here to um
Let me see here.
Steve Masters, okay.
MI 2021 -002095 -4319 Royal Street.
Is Mr. Mulvihill here?
Sir, Mr. Mulvihill is present and he's been promoted to Panamist.
Good morning, Mr. Mulvihill. Could you spell your name and state your name and spell for
the court reporter
mr mobile
first name is leo leo leo we're having a really hard time to hear hearing you
leo this is tanya it seems like it might be um your internet that might be a wee bit shaky
okay well let's see if i can try to get something that's better that's better that's fine leo state
your name and spell for the court reporter all right certainly leo mulvihill l -e -o last name m -u -l
v as in victor i -h -i -l -l you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth? I do. Okay. Could you identify your client in the relationship to the property?
Certainly. The principal of the owner of the company is Johnny Frias. That's J -H -O -N -N -Y
capital F -R -I -A -S. The company that owns the property is J and A Real Estate Investors, LLC.
Okay. Our board secretary has a few questions. Yes. Good morning,
Counselor, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required, such as the proof of ownership,
tax clearance, copy of refusal or referral, pictures or drawings of the property five days
jna real estate investors i have my table of contents up on the screen for refusal
appeal project information form at page one area zoning maps at page nine deeds at 11 tax
clearance at 17. zoning letter at 18 rco letter 23 photos at 25 plans at 35. so initially members
of the board we received a lot of refusals this is page one this is page two essentially what
were seeking to build was a six -unit building in an RSA 3 zone. Currently there is an empty lot.
After a significant number of meetings and discussions with Holmesburg Civic and their
body at large, we revised this project several times and ultimately landed on a three -unit proposal
which changed the front of the property as well to set it back a bit and add a porch to be in
line with neighboring properties we are proposing those three units as I said
there's a significant number of multifamily units both two and three in
the immediate area as well as a number of apartment complexes in the area
furthermore we're by public transit such that the multifamily use for this
property wouldn't be unduly burdensome for this project so members of the
board here now have the zoning map showing we are at the intersection of
ron and cottage street this rm2 this is all multi -family apartments and cottage street
kind of ends here abruptly and then there's a significant drop to get to this property so this
street doesn't actually go through so this is our subject property we have a number of single
family homes and garage directly behind us and you can see then from the overhead shot via google
Now on page 10, where the street kind of ends, we have this condo developed next door by the creek.
This is a deed for the property.
Leo, could we see that Google shot?
I don't think you put that up.
Let me know if you guys can see it.
It seems like there might be a little bit of a block.
It's a little tough.
It seems like my audio might be ahead of my video now due to whatever my internet issue is.
My apologies.
I do have the deed at page 11. I have tax clearance at page 17. From page 18 rather, here it is. This is specifically the notice after we had done the revised plan to reduce an overall number of units from 6 to 3.
On page 22 is our certificate of mailing.
We have received a letter from Holmesburg Civic on February 27th. Ultimately they were opposed
to this project. It was their position that this area was not fit for multi -family housing. However,
as specifically noted, and I'll show you in pictures as well, there's a number of duplex
and triplex units in the immediate area as well as a number of apartment buildings
this is the site as taken from google our subject site is right here it is the vacant parcel with
the gray car parked directly in front of it this is cottage as you as we discussed earlier you can
see the where the road dead ends the other single family properties on cottage and the property off
to the right here directly across from cottage trust is a multi -family property i believe it's
three units but here's our notifications that we're up more shots of the lot itself as i said
we took a lot of design cues from this house next door when doing a redesign from an initial
proposal of six units so you'll see that we kind of match the setback the porch area and the
um the design more overall these classical homes rather than something more modern
looking down wrong that's looking across the street this is the structure here specifically
multi -family i think there are two or three pardon three or four mailboxes out front
floor tenant, and the porch will be used by the second floor tenant as well as the yard.
This is the area lot. We can see where it's set back here. We can see the media, the adjacent
area behind us, and the relatively sizable backyard is 16 feet 4 inches. Note that we
do have the detached side yard, so we're about just over 5 feet from our neighboring structure.
That's our elevation. We are going up three stories, but again, we're not exceeding the
38 -foot height. To the height of our
roof, pardon me, of our pilot
house, it's only 39.
I'm sorry,
Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, pardon me.
Proceed, Mr. Kelly.
I'm sorry.
I'm getting an echo again.
There is an echo.
Tanya, is that coming from Leo's?
I'm not sure.
I'm not getting an echo.
but it might be the back it might be his background but what i could what i could
recommend mr kelly is you can get the video and be able to use the video as necessary for
the information you need is that okay that's fine and one other thing i appear on the screen twice
when i came back in there's two court reporter yeah i see that no problems
that could be the issue yeah that's no problem do you have another another device
that you didn't log out of check that that could be the issue no i just have the one okay
all right proceed leo okay so proceed yeah i'm just hoping everybody can still see my screen at
this point yes we see it okay great so our basement is on unfinished this is unit one
we're going to have one two bedrooms one in the front one in the back decent sized dining
room to the middle living room to the front going up the stairs we then get into the next
unit which has a similar layout same thing with the third three unit although that allows
us to go all the way up to the roof deck on the third story which is here there's no roof deck
in the rear no roof back in the front focus back um that's ultimately our presentation today i'm
happy to answer any questions you might have at this time mr mobile do you want your testimony
adopted i would mr free us if you're on the line would you please raise your hand so we can have
you adopt my testimony mr frees has been allowed to speak
could you state your name and spell it please for the court reporter
spell your name please j -o -h -n -n -y
and your last name Mr. Frias
F -R -I -A -S
did you get that Mr. Kelly
yes chair
um pages that would need to be stamped it'll be about two to me um but again that's if the board
grants this case and i under and i see that there is there are other um individuals who are waiting
to testify all right questions or comments from the virtual audience mr chair i have a hand raised
from mr david blugos i will not speak this time with permission thank you sir could you state
your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter. Hello, can you hear me? Yes, I can.
State your name and spell for the court reporter, please. My name is David DeLugos, D -A -V -I -D,
last name D -L -U -G -O -S -Z. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth? Yes. Proceed, sir. Yes. Hi, my name is David DeLugos. I'm the zoning
chair for the Holmesworth Civic Association, as the attorney mentioned that we met with them
twice in the past about their proposal, you know, and we met with them, they gave a presentation,
and the association voted to oppose even the modified plan. Primarily, you know, I want to
start by saying that first and foremost, this used to be occupied by a single family house
that was in disrepair and was eventually demolished. The current owner bought it from
sheriff's sale, you know, and the existing zoning was in place. And so for someone to say that,
you know, you buy a property, you know, the zoning of the property, and you can't build a buy right
development, certainly does not seem to meet the burden of a hardship, in my view, because
he knew what he was getting into when he bought the property. Secondly, that with regard to the
character of the street, that even though there are some houses that house multiple families,
those are houses that either were grandfathered in or are occupied by multifamily illegally.
I'm sure that if you were to go property by property, some may have, you know, some may have two family rental licenses, but certainly anything more than that will probably not have any kind of variance for, you know, for multifamily and anything.
So, again, just because the character of the street may have a smattering of multifamily doesn't mean it's what the community wants or what is even legally there.
You know, if you look at at like a street view of the other thing, they're all single family, either they're either twins or single family detached homes and not multifamily.
With regard, you know, lastly, I'll say is that we did, you know, in the spirit of cooperation, you know, that we did talk to them.
A lot of the membership thought that because of the corner property, that the RCO would be okay with a two -family dwelling because that would be more in line with what's going on there.
And our Civic has been accommodating to corner properties being two -family dwellings.
The community also had concerns about parking because currently parking is at a premium at this location, both on the side street and especially on Rohn Street, which is a state highway.
and thereby we ask that you just deny these variances requests outright
and have them resubmit a new plan with either a two -family plan
or a two -family proposal or a single -family.
I mean, I take any questions.
Thank you very much for calling in.
We appreciate your input.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
of a separate document with the revised plans reflecting what was presented today along with
the proviso plans for him. Okay. Very good, Hillary. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Mulvihill. Have a good day. All right. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the 930 meeting
whose case has not been called?
Mr. David Orfanides has his hand raised.
I can allow him to speak at this time, sir.
Maybe I missed this case.
Mr. Orfanides.
This is number 13, Mr. Chair.
That's right.
I saw the, I had it in yellow.
I'm sorry.
Mr. Orfanides.
Yes, sir.
Could you state your name
and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes, sir.
This is Tanya. I'm sorry. Can we just pause and promote Mr. Orphanides to panelists? Thank you, sir.
That has been taken care of.
So it's MI 2021, 004 -592 -5901 Latona Street. David Orphanides. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Certainly. My name is David Orphanides. The last name is spelled O -R -P -H -A -N -I -D -E -S.
Right.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are we ready to go today with this, sir?
Yes, sir.
Could you identify your client and their relationship to the property?
Certainly.
My client is 2750 Wharton ST period property management comma LLC.
The owner of the property and here on behalf of the ownership LLC is Maria King, who's
the sole member of the LLC.
Okay, our board secretary has a few questions.
Keish?
Yeah, I'm here.
Somebody muted me.
Good morning, counsel.
Good morning, sir.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do, sir.
The only property is one of two properties that are zoned residential, but the only one, again, that at the kind of at this five point intersection, but the only one that fronts on three streets.
In addition, it's the only one that has a longstanding history of always having been used as a non -residential for non -residential purposes, both when it was zoned for commercial and then since it was remapped to residential.
And we'll go through that in a minute.
But as the property is owned RSA 5 and as an RSA 5 property, the proposed use, which is a takeout restaurant, is not permitted.
My client wants to open up an ice cream and water ice stand because she does not have any seating proposed inside the building.
It's a pretty small building. And you'll see in the first floor of the ground floor plan that there's not a ton of room inside where there could be seating.
but the existing structure that she wants to utilize, that rather than being a prepared food
shop, which would also require a variance from the zoning board, is characterized as a takeout
restaurant. So there's no indoor seating, no bathrooms indoors, and all the food is served on
disposable wear. Here's an aerial image of the intersection of the three streets. Here to the
right, you can see our property. I've clouded it as a triangle, but again, there's a portion here
where, and you'll see, I can show you in the deed where it actually fronts on three lots.
We have the Blanche Nixon Public Library located across the street right here that I'm circling
with my cursor. There are residential properties extending on the opposite side of Baltimore Avenue
from the opposite caddy corner from us and extending away.
There's the KPP West Philadelphia Preparatory Middle School
and the Motivation High School located on the opposite corner of Baltimore and 59th.
And then you'll see there's a commercial property located across the street from us
at Latona in Baltimore that's been used as a daycare.
Extending to the west of us are Prop Residential Single Families
and extending to the west of the commercial properties that are located here at the corner
of Latona and Baltimore Avenue. Those are also residential properties utilized for single family
use. And just to kind of, here's a closer up view of our property showing the existing structure
and then the open areas around it. There are two existing curb cuts that we plan on filling in with
the proposal. They are related to a prior use of the property for auto upholstery in a private
garage dating back to the 60s. And that was also utilized when the property was most recently used
as and as and for auto detailing, which was by variance granted by the zoning board in 09. That
I'll show you. Here's some additional aerials. You can see the high school and middle school,
middle school and high school, up here to the top right. Residences to the far upper left,
the Blanche Nixon Public Library across the street from us.
Here are the commercial properties that are located on the opposite side of Latona,
between Baltimore and Latona. Again, this property is zoned RSA 5. You'll see in the zoning archives,
It has a history of being zoning or mapped for commercial use sometime between 88 when there was a zoning permit for a vacant building and the property was indicated as being zoned C1.
Prior to that, it had been zoned C2 and ACOM.
There's an alley behind those properties that extends away from South 59th Street.
Elevation then rises up to Cobbs Creek Parkway, where you have a mix of residences and commercial uses.
Across the street, here's the Blanche Nixon Public Library.
Views up and down Baltimore Avenue.
And here's the high school and middle school, middle school and high school.
multi -family buildings located down Baltimore Avenue just past the middle school and the high
school and then the residences on our side of Baltimore Avenue that then convert into commercial
uses and then at the top and at the bottom you can see the property located across the street
that was utilized for a daycare so you have a real mix of uses at this intersection
in immediate area, you know, schools, library, daycare, some other commercial uses. And
this property, again, is an RSA 5, but has a very long history of being utilized for
non -residential purposes. And here you will see in 09, the permit that was granted by variance for
the auto detailing. It's interesting, when I went out to take the photos, the guy who used to run
the auto detailing, was actually parked on Baltimore Avenue and called me over and asked
if he could use the property for auto detailing again. We feel that the proposed use of an ice
cream stand and water ice stand is probably something that's more agreeable to the community
than going back to auto detailing again. In 88, I had indicated the property was shown as being
zoned C1. It was a vacant building at that time. In 69, a variance was granted for a mail order
sales. The property is indicated as being C2 commercial. 69, 62, C2 commercial. That was
signage for auto upholstery and private garage, which you can see here was granted in 61. Here
are the zoning drawings that went with the building that was permitted in 61 along with the auto
upholstery and private garage. And you can see those two existing curb cuts that presently exist
that we're going to be filling in and returning on -street parking abutting our property on South
59th Street. There have been prior applications for a church and to build a building which doesn't
appear to have been pursued. Sanborn maps that we have show that the property in 1916 was vacant
as well as 1925. And then you see the auto detailing that in 1976. And then the office,
which I believe is the mail order is 85, 87. Then you have the auto repair in 90, 95, 97, 99, 2003.
three. Here's a site plan for property. Our lot is, again, is very irregularly shaped. You see it
comes to a very narrow point at the top. You've got three street frontages here with a very short
one on Baltimore Avenue. The lot is 2 ,385 .23 square feet. I did pull the OPA records for all
the residential properties extending to the west of us on either side of Latona Street, and they're
1 ,624 square feet. So our lot is, if my math is correct, 32 % larger than those lots, those
residential lots. Here's a ground floor plan of the proposed operation. You can see we're filling
in the curb cuts, creating additional, extending the grass buffer across those curb cuts that
presently exist, adding landscaping and grass to the rear, to the north, and then to the
to the south here along latona street we're providing buffering plantings between us and
the residential structure to the west of us both oops both to the rear and the front of the building
trash cans are shown on the property you'll see there's a windows walk up windows that you have
you'll have to order trash is to be in stored inside there's an interior trash room you have
an office you have a walk -in you have prep areas over here obviously we'll have to submit to the
health department for this additional plantings along or and planters along both the north side
of the property and then the the east side of the property along south 59th street we're proposing
security cameras around on the different fronts of the building you can see the notes here and then
downlights, shielded downlights on the perimeter of the building as well, to be shielded to not
produce any glare to any of the surrounding properties. The existing retaining walls that
were shown in the photographs will be maintained, restored if necessary. The existing steps leading
up from Latona Street will also be utilized. Here's some elevations showing the proposed
landscaping. There's no signage as part of the present application. You know, lighting, security
cameras that I had shown to make sure we have a safe corner. Again, landscaping, security cameras,
lighting along the other sides of the property. And then here's a basic rendering, a mock -up of
what it would look like. The application that was submitted to L &I, a copy of our zoning as
Exhibit 12, a copy of our Zoning Board Appeal, and our Project Information Form or Exhibit 13.
Again, the deed showing 2750 Wharton ST period Property Management comma LLC as the owner of
the property took ownership in 2016. Our tax compliance is at Exhibit 15, a copy of our
hearing notice that was posted at the property on the various frontages in conformance with
the requirements of the zoning code or at tab 17. And then in terms of the 14 .303,
here's the email from and the meetings with the coordinating RCOs. Here's the email from
November of last year designating the Cobbs Creek Neighbors Association as a coordinating RCO.
The list of addresses to which we mailed the 14303 notices.
We had to do an initial mailing within the 20 days set forth in the zoning code prior to having a meeting hearing date established by Cobbs Creek.
And then here's the 14303 of the meeting we had back on February 7th, along with the certified certification of the first class mailing.
There is a letter of opposition from the community group.
As you can see in their letter, the only three people attended the two meetings that were held.
The one, the immediate neighbor, Mr. Morton, I was presenting at the meeting.
I was very clear that he didn't want any use of this property and or any type of restaurant use anywhere in the neighborhood.
And I think some of this comes through in the second paragraph, where there seemed to be this discussion of we have enough eating establishments, we don't need more. And that's really not a basis for opposing or when it comes to the criteria for a granting of a variance.
and will let the free market determine whether the community needs them all or not, which ones survive.
And they even acknowledge that the reasons that they stated aren't really the basis for granting or denying a variance.
Real quickly, I'm going to, if Maria can raise her hand and I would have her adopt my statements.
I also have Rustin Oler on the line, who's the architect for the project.
I want to ask him a question or have him adopt my statements and also ask him a question or two.
So if Maria could raise her hand.
Maria, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Has she been promoted to a panelist?
no staff can you allow her to speak please
it bill
panelists because she's on like an older version of
do okay mr orphanetes we'll we'll accept your testimony you're in love to the court okay i can
have i could arrest and adopt as well but just real quickly maria king is a decorated retired
city of philadelphia police officer um she brought this property and um her goal was to
she's always wanted to operate under ice cream stand and um okay kids in the neighborhood and
And, you know, she's a very responsible individual that wants to run a very fine operation for the benefit of the community.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Proceed, counsel.
Rustin, did you hear the statements I made to the zoning board regarding the property and the designs that you've provided on the plans?
And are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
Would you adopt them as your own?
And then real quickly, you've been in front of this board countless times, correct?
And you've designed everything from rehabs of single -family dwellings up to, you know, large apartment buildings and office buildings, correct?
And in your opinion, is this property, given its irregular shape, given its frontage on three streets, given the other uses in the area, but primarily the configuration of the lot,
Is it a property that's suitable, suited for what's permitted under the zoning code, the single -family residential use?
No, it would typically be more commercial or mixed -use properties.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Tazon DeVore with his hand up.
hi could you could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please uh yes my name is
tyson devore t -a -i -s -o -n last name devore d -e -v -o -r -e right and uh swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do affirm to tell truth whole truth
and nothing but the truth proceed um i'm an impacted resident that lives on the 5900 block
of latona i'm at 5906. um i'm very very aware of the history of this building and as mr orphanidi
said in the prior use it was zoned as r9 which would allow residents with a doctor's office in
the prior previous uh zoning that means that that particular traffic was controlled when you have
a small block this particular location sits on a more situated on the smaller side of the block
And it's also at the mouth or the opening of Latona.
So it's not really, you got about four feet of Baltimore exposure, but the top of the block is 5 ,900 block of Latona.
We already have increased volume of traffic over here, and it's very unsafe now.
People speed, we need speed bumps, but we cannot allow speed bumps on Baltimore Avenue because we have the trolley cars.
Latona also is a pass -through block, and so is the right side of this particular location.
So when traffic isn't congested at 58th Street, they're trying to cut through, do this block right behind the library,
which causes even more congestion and causes a dangerous environment for more people to try to pass through and go around each other.
Two, we have a petition that was signed by 23 impacted neighbors all on Latona, and their expressed concerns is safety, traffic, loitering, trash.
And we're also looking at the fact that Mr. Organides and Mr. King never even researched that the Baltimore Avenue is a commercial quarter.
That's true. We also, Mr. Morton also agreed, and the neighbors also know that an ice cream store is coming next spring right on Baltimore, on a 5900 block of Baltimore Avenue.
So now we're going to have two ice cream stores on the same block.
I mean, if we're going to look at and rule this as a business corridor at this point in decision,
now you've got two businesses offering the same product on the same block.
In that particular location on 5900 block of Baltimore, basically is a CMX1, which they are by right.
They don't have to go through the zoning.
This issue of safety is a very big concern right now.
And when we're talking about the increased violence in the city, the increased hit and runs and the increased traffic violations that's going on and nobody adhering to the traffic violations.
This is a very, very deep situation. And I am a developer. I'm an investor. I invest.
the traffic that's going to come through there. And it definitely can't accommodate on Latona
without impacting all the other neighbors. People double parking, people filling in the parking
spaces for the residents, you know, and just pulling up trash that will be blowing down the
street. I mean, right now, Ms. King owned that property for maybe two years. And Mr. Morton,
who sweeps her property up and everybody else's property up, he's like the neighborhood savior
because he keeps that area clean. And what we're trying to tell you is that we understand that
this community is a tight community. We're not just saying no for no reason. We're saying no
for valid reasons. And we're basically just trying to say, hey, if this was a business that had a
controlled type of clientele, such as the daycare, the daycare only has 22 kids approved. So that
means 22 parents dropped their kids at that daycare there's no overflow of kids there's no 45 50 kids
there's nobody gathering out front there's no trash uh blowing there's no there's there's nothing
that's going to bring a major threat to safety to public safety this situation you know at the
corner Tyson Tyson I think you've made your case okay you're starting to repeat I we understand
we understand your position. Thank you. All right. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, I have Alejandro Utrea with this hand raised. Hi, could you state your name and spell
for the court reporter, please? Good morning, Mr. Chair. My name is Alejandro Utrea. My first name
is spelled a l e j a n d r o my last name utria is spelled u t r i a right do you swear for him
to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do swear proceed hi so i am also
an affected neighbor on this block of 5900 latona and i'm a newer neighbor right i moved in this
year with my wife and being able to meet neighbors on this block especially mr morton um and
understand the character of this block over the last several several years understand the concerns
that they have at this present time about change about more people coming in about more businesses
coming in like just happened at 58th and baltimore up the road um this has been a quiet place a
residential place a place that has had a lot of seniors and just as mr tyson has been as mr
devore has been saying there is concern about changes in the parking but ultimately the most
important thing is the safety and the trash so you're against the property you're against it
yeah all right thank you for calling in and thank you for your input is there anyone else in the
virtual audience. Mr. Chair, Ms. Bernice Wilcox has her hand raised. I will allow her to speak at
this time. Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter? Okay, it'll be Mr. Morton
speaking in my place. Could he state his name, please, and spell for the court reporter? Yes,
Hubert Morton, H -U -B -E -R -T, M -O -R -T -O -N. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth? The whole
truth is nothing but the truth. Yes. I think the last person referenced you when they spoke. Could
you just tell us, are you against the property? Yes, I am. I'm the person that lives next door.
Okay. Okay. Thank you so much for calling in, and we understand where you are. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair or Mr. Joseph Moorhead has his hand raised. I've allowed him to speak. Mr. Moorhead?
hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please joseph moorhead j -o -s -e -p -h
m -o -o -r -h -e -a -d right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth yes sir um do you have anything different than what's already been testified
no sir i am against this as well okay and and where do you live mr moorhead 5915 latona street
Thank you so much, Mr. Moorhead, for calling in. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands at this time, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Ian Hegarty for the City Planning Commission.
Board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing single -family zoning on this site.
However, the existing structure has a pretty clear documented use history.
And as you can see in the photo that's actually up on the screen right now in the exhibits, a physical configuration that's consistent with commercial only use city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variance.
And as you can see in the photo, that's actually up on the screen right now in the exhibit.
Thank you.
Mr. Bergman, would you like to hear from me any other responses to the neighbors or have you heard enough.
Do you do you want to do yourself you want to talk again.
I mean, just real quickly, you know, in terms of, you know, the operations here, this is probably going to be a seasonal operation.
Again, and Maria may be back on right now where she could adopt my statements, but, you know, as a retired decorated police officer, she's not looking to create a nuisance.
We have these types of operations here in downtown Philadelphia. We have Rita's on South Street, Rita's on Spruce Street. We have them, and cars aren't double parking and blocking traffic. The roadways are very wide.
I'm not sure what the statement was Mr. Tyson made about another operation on the same block of, I'm not sure where that would be, 59th Street, there are only two parcels between us and Cobbs Creek, then you have the library across the street, if it's further up or further down, Baltimore Avenue, you know, I would say that that's a different animal.
okay all right thank you mr orphanetes mi 2021 004 -592 -5901 latona street i vote yes
thomas helman my vote is no
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes so mr orphanage what we'll do is we'll give this to the rest of
the board and let them look at it and then we'll we'll do another vote okay next week okay all
right thank you thank you is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called
mr chair um this is hillary i i don't know it'll if it'll be next week it just it will depend on
whether the other members have a chance to okay view the video between then and next week but
we'll hold for a vote right well we'll get to it okay yes thank you is there anyone else in the
audience's case okay all right see everybody at 2 o 'clock thank you may I
state to all um vba staff and board members try to update i'm sorry um update your um zoom
because we're having a lot of issues um with zoom so if you update to the most recent product
it might work better for us at two o 'clock all right thanks okay okay thanks fine
we can begin thank you good afternoon my name is bill bergman and i will be chairing this
afternoon's zba hearings with me is ishmael shaheed president mr chairman thomas hallman
our president mr chairman and james snell our board member present mr chairman also here is
our Executive Director, Tanya Sunket, and our Board Attorney, Hillary Emerson. Here's our
virtual format. Be advised, proceedings are being recorded. By participating, you acknowledge your
agreement to be recorded. A video will be available by contacting tanyasunket at phil .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 nine
to raise your hand and star six to unmute. To enter the period statement,
call 267 -270 -5548. Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is now for comments or testimony. All comments
should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Sumpkin. So let's look at our continuances
for this afternoon. Number two, MI 2022 -001 -060 -7034 North Broad Street, that case is continued.
Number three. Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. The request for that case was a continuance must be
Number two, that case must be heard next time.
All right, thank you.
Number three, MI 2022, 003 -851 -7200 -MARSTON.
That case is continued.
Number 12, MI 2022 -003 -166 -4847 -49.
Haverford Avenue. That case is continued. And number 14, MI 2022 -001 -058 -332 Delancey Street.
That case is continued. Mark must be heard. Are there any other requests for continuances?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. I see a hand raised by Mr. Sean Ward. I can allow him to speak at this time.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Sean Ward.
Hi. Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, Mr. Ward?
Certainly. Sean Ward, S -H -A -W -N, last name Ward, W -A -R -D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
What case?
Mr. Chairman, this is MI 2021 -004365, 4501 Belgrade Street. I had it at a 2 o 'clock hearing. It might be at 3 .30, though.
That is on the 3 .30 list, Mr. Ward, and we did get your request for continuance for that case.
Okay, very good. Thank you very much.
Any other requests for continuances?
Ms. Diane Munro has her hand raised. I will allow her to speak at this time, sir.
I'm not asking for continuance. I'm just following up on a project.
All right, wait a minute, wait a minute.
So what case do you have, ma 'am?
i was looking at 643 north 11 street that case will be voted on shortly
okay thank you okay are there any other requests for continuance
i see no further hand at this time sir case number 13 mi 2022
to zero zero four four nine three forty one hundred orchard lane that case is withdrawn
in case number 15 mi 2022 004 556 2550 north 5th street owner is innovation properties
uh we don't have exhibits for that case from the appellant
anyone from innovation properties
check in right now sir
do you see anybody hands from anyone from innovation property in the audience
no sir no hand okay that case is continued mark must be tried
we're going to go to our add -on list
number one on the add -on list mi 2022 0 0 3 3 0 8 1 5 6 43 north 11 street i vote yes
thomas tholoman my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes
Ishmael Shaheed, my voters, guys.
Number two, MI 2022 -005 -190 -271 Delmar Street.
Appeal granted.
Thomas Holloman, appeal granted.
James Snell, appeal granted.
ishmael shaheed appeal granted number three mi 2022 003 388 2112 ridge avenue i vote yes
2112 Ridge Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Number, hold on.
Number four, MI 2022 -001 -494 -2507 Almond Street.
This case was to be voted today, will be voted on sometime in the future.
and number five mi 2022 001 357 901 west spencer avenue i vote yes thomas haliman my boot is yes
jane snell my vote is yes
It's not Shahid. My vote is yes.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
I'm going to call number four.
You're going to call number four, too?
I will, as soon as Mr. Patterson gets on.
Okay, great.
And just wanted to note for the record that we received a revised letter from Councilmember
Squilla asking for a one -year temporary variance.
That we do need clarification on that, if that would have just applied to the parking
lot use or the signage as well.
If it's only applying to one, we would need to vote the cases separately.
okay so thank you mr patterson
mr patterson if you're in the audience please raise all right okay mr patterson
has been promoted to panelists he will be rejoicing
Mr. Patterson?
I am here. Thank you.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Sure. Good afternoon.
Ronald Patterson, P -A -T -T -E -R -S -O -N, 1835 Marcus Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103, on behalf of the owner and operator, Pavilion East Associates, LP.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I do. And Mr. Patterson, we want to do number four with this. Is that OK?
Yes. Consolidated case, because one is for the use, the parking and the other one is for the signs.
All right. Number four, 2022 -002 -808 -800 -338 Market Street. That'll be cool. And have you seen the updated letter?
I have, yes.
Okay, you're okay with that?
Yes, we are.
Our board secretary has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Good afternoon.
Do you agree to rave the reading and refusal to stipulate and stipulate to this accuracy?
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required, such as proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of refusal or referral, pictures of drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And did you meet with the RCO and do you have a letter?
I have. Yes to all of the above.
Okay, thank you. Please share your screen and proceed.
Okay. Can you see my screen?
We can. We're fine.
Great. Thank you. So this application regards the public non -accessory parking lot located on Market Street, spanning 8th Street to 9th Street.
That's 292 spaces. It's the site of the former Gimbel's department store. Some of you may remember.
It was created as a parking lot in 1985. In 2002, the Pavilion East Associates LP, which is an entity of the Golden Group, purchased and took over the parking lot.
And we obtained since 2002 interim use variances to allow for interim use, including 2002, 2007, 2012, 2017, 2020.
2017 -2020. It's a 24 -hour parking lot. In 2017, as part of one of those cases, the parking lot
It's a 24 -hour parking lot.
was reconfigured and redesigned, added an attendance booth along with a new signage
package, which is the same package it's in front of you today. At the time, the parking lot was
reconfigured, sinus was added, as I mentioned, landscaping and fencing was added, and variances
were granted for that design as best we could design it based on the needs and the amount of
parking spaces that were there. As I mentioned, the owner, you know, Goldenberg Group is an entity
that owns, develops, and operates many large shopping centers and projects, Ikea Shopping
Center, Snyder Avenue, both sides, east and west, the Whitman Plaza Grand and the Boulevard,
52nd and Parkside, and the Vantage Student Housing at 1100 Cecil in the Temple area.
The point is that they're a serious developer and are not here to run a park. But as you'll hear
from Mr. Freeman talk about what the owner has done and tried to do to develop and market the
property. As I mentioned, former Gimmel site, there's been proposals for Disney Quest,
possible casino, many other things, some of which have been rejected because they're not
the best and highest use of the property. In the interim, though, the property continues to provide
beneficial use for needed parking in the area, which continues to, parking continues to dwindle.
It has operated without issues, and we've included a traffic parking study in the package
So here's some pictures, as you'll see.
I can get this in here.
Anyway, it's located in the CMX 5 commercial zoning district and subject to a handful of overlays.
The refusal for the parking is for the use and some dimensional issues in terms of stacking, open space, landscaping,
But all of which, as I mentioned, were designed and approved by variants in 2017. So there's been no changes since that time. The signage as well is the same, which predominantly, well, are directional type signs and fee signs, of course, if I could find them.
So, with that said, we did meet with Wash West Civic Association.
We did meet with Councilman Squill to discuss the issues with the case and the uses of the property.
And again, we believe that this property is providing a beneficial use for needed parking, at least in the interim, with the hopes of developing the property.
So with that said, if you could, I have two witnesses, Mr. Robert Freeman and Mr. Brian Conlon, C -O -N -L -O -N.
We'll start with Mr. Freeman first, if you may.
Mr. Freeman, if you're in the virtual audience, please raise your hand.
Mr. Freeman?
who's the second person mr patterson uh brian conland brian conland yes
okay mr conland has been allowed to speak sir okay thank you mr conland could you state your
name and spell it for the court reporter please uh yes do you hear me okay everyone i can i'm fine
Good. Brian Conlon, B -R -I -A -N, and the last name is Conlon, C -O -N -L -O -N.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Thank you. Counsel?
Thank you. Before I begin, you'll see on your screen that the sign is that I was referring to.
Good afternoon, Brian. Please tell the board where you work.
Yes, I'm an associate principal with Langen Engineering and Environmental Services.
and you're quite familiar with the property we've we've worked together on the site plan
for this property for many of the uh temporary variances approvals correct correct so you're
familiar with the property yes and uh we've commissioned langan uh to provide a traffic
a traffic parking study report is that correct correct and in summary could you describe
parking study report is that correct correct and in some
what you looked at what the parking needs that you found and how it operates and functions
yes in in general you know we looked at the parking lot where it's located obviously a very
a highly dense area of the city here and basically in general the parking lot we think is needed you
You know, it's a beneficial use for the businesses that are there, of course, the residents that are there and certainly are, you know, visitors that are coming to visit the city.
As Mr. Patterson mentioned, it provides 292 parking spaces.
There's access on both 8th Street and 9th Street.
We went out there recently again, as we do, you know, every couple of years when we come back to the board here.
We, you know, did a visual observation of the site.
We don't see any visual circulation issues. Everything functions pretty well. And again, in summary, we think the parking lot certainly serves a good purpose for the city.
And in your report, you mentioned it's, or it is mentioned, it's heavily utilized, correct?
That's correct. Yeah. We actually just some observations during the weekday, approximately 85%. It's filled weeknights about approximately 70%. And then on the weekend, 60 to 65%. So it's certainly being utilized.
Okay. And you would say it provides a beneficial use yet, yet, yet creates no adverse impacts to the neighborhood or that area. Is that correct?
Correct. Yes, correct.
I have no further questions for Mr. Kahn and hopefully Mr. Friedman's here.
Mr. Friedman here.
Mr. Patterson, you're off to the court.
Your testimony is fine.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair.
Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
Peter, just for sake of it, could you spell your name for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is spelled P -E -T -E -R, B as in boy, A as in apple, R as in Roger, N as in Nancy, A as in apple, R as in Roger, D as in doll.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Chair.
Proceed.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing CMX -5 commercial mixed use at this location.
we feel that the applicant has been using a temporary variance process to skirt zoning
requirements for surface parking lots for decades the current lot does not comply with the zoning
codes landscaping reservoir spaces by bike parking or signage requirements the applicant has failed
to advance development proposals that would justify continued temporary use we feel that
the surface parking lot use can no longer justifiably be considered temporary and should
thus be considered permanent and associated improvements uh be made such as required in the
code accordingly the planning commission recommends the board deny the variance unless it includes a
proviso requiring installation of landscaping reservoir spaces bicycle parking and signage
that meet the zoning codes provisions for service parking lots thank you peter if i may mr chairman
And Mr. would have testified about the types of projects, again, that they have been looking at and what they've declined, but also that once a project is identified and it's encouraging if the 76ers actually move there, that this would be placed on the front burner again.
I vote yes to both with proviso, temporary until November 1st, 2023.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no to both.
James Snell, my vote is no to both.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes to both.
okay so ron we'll we have a fifth member we'll get with the fifth member and we'll
okay thank you i appreciate that thank you thank you all right all right number
number five mi 2022 001 091 1312 north 24th street
melanie lacy is council um community voted to support the project ruby town shardswood
community civic association and hillary once i get her on i'll have the other two cases
thank you mr chair and we can vote we can vote these um together uh if the the board wishes okay
Melanie should be in it as a panelist now, sir.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Melanie Lacey, that's M -E -L -A -N -I -E, last name L -A -C -E -Y, and I'm with Claire Harrison Harvey in Bransburg, 1835 Market Street, Suite 14th.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
And Melanie, I'm going to add these other two cases, okay? You'll do all three at once?
Thank you.
Okay, so number 11, MI 2022, 001 -571 -1300 North 24th Street, and number 16, MI 2022, 002 -204 -1317 North 25th Street.
uh could you identify your client and the relationship to the property please yes i'm
accompanied by zach frankel who represents the equitable owner frankel enterprises inc okay and
our board uh secretary has a few questions for you sure good afternoon council good afternoon
do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy
i do did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required such as proof of ownership
text clearance copy of refusal or referrals pictures or drones of the property five days in
advance to this hearing yes and did you leave it with rco if you have a letter yes to all of the
above sure please proceed to show your screen okay are you able to see my screen i'm currently
yes it's up yeah okay great um so this as mentioned is a consolidation hearing of three
separate applications brought by the same equitable owner and they all relate to the same relief
so the applicant is proposing for sale townhouses in collaboration with the philadelphia housing
authority as part of the choice neighborhoods development initiative for workforce housing
And the Blumberg -Scharswood neighborhood was identified as one of three territories where the city seeks to reduce the concentration of vacant and blighted buildings and lots and to increase the number of for sale affordable homes.
So these projects relate to that initiative, as mentioned, and we do have the support of both Councilman Clark, as well as the RCL Brewery -Scharswood Community Civic Association, which I'm showing you here.
We met with the Civic Association back on May 19th, so it's been quite some time, but we did have great attendance and overwhelming support.
The letters were submitted to the ZBA on Monday, and they are included in the exhibit package, as you can see here.
So the subject properties are located on 24th and 25th Street between Ciber Street and West Thompson Street, as you can see here.
And I'll summarize each application briefly.
As mentioned, they're all very similar.
So for 1300 North 24th, the application entails a lot line adjustment to create one lot from four existing lots and new construction of four single family townhouses.
For 1312 to 18 North 24th Street, the application entails a lot line adjustment to create one lot from four existing lots and new construction of four single family townhouses.
And for 1317 to 19 North 25th Street, the application entails new construction of two townhouses with.
North 25th Street, the application entails new construction of two townhouses with, and this
one already has a consolidated lot. So the property is zoned RSA 5, and we're here because we're
proposing three planned unit developments, also known as PUDs, which are a type of ownership
construct. And as you're aware, a PUD relates or results in one zoning lot with two or more
single -family homes that share common elements. Since the zoning code does not recognize PUDs,
which are created under state statute, LNI treats multiple dwelling units on the same lot
as a multi -family use. So because we are in RSA 5, which I'll go back to, we're here because
a technical variance for multi -family use is required.
However, the spirit of the zoning code is met because these units constitute single -family
homes as contemplated by the RSA 5 zoning district for fee simple sale. And I'll show you the
elevation so you can see exactly what it looks like. So that summarizes the presentation. As you
can see these applications meet the standards for variance relief because they won't cause
congestion. They won't overcrowd or overburden the land. They won't cause any negative impacts
and they'll conform with the spirit of RSA -5 and the character of the surrounding area.
So I'll have my client adopt my testimony unless you have any questions at this time.
Mr. Frankel has been allowed to speak. Hi, could you state your name and spell for the
court reporter, please. Zachary Frankel, Z -A -C -H -A -R -Y, F -R -A -N -K -E -L. All right. Do you swear
affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed, counsel.
All right, Zach. Did you hear the testimony that I provided to the board this afternoon? I did.
And do you affirm that my presentation was accurate? I do. And do you adopt the testimony
it's your own yes i do thank you okay questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman
no mr jerry and melanie melanie so everybody's clear these are single properties correct right
so it's essentially technical yep okay questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no further answers chair planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rsa 5 single family zoning at this
location the current zoning was enacted in 2020 with community support by consolidating single
family lots into three clusters of lots. The applicant's clean hardship for building units
is self -created. The applicant would be permitted to build the same number of units by right
if the lots were not consolidated. Accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends the board
variance. MI 2022 -001 -091 -1312 North 24th Street. Number 11, MI 2022 -001 -571.
and number 16 mi 2022 002 204 i vote yes to all three thomas hollum my vote is yes to all three
james snell my vote is yes to all three ishmael shaheed my vote is yes to all three
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number six, MI 2022, 003 -148 -1513 -17 Pine Street.
David Orfanides is the attorney.
Letter of opposition from the Center City Residents Association.
you've already been sworn could you just state your name for the record certainly david orphan
eds o -r -p -h -a -m -i -d -e -m could you identify for us your client and their relationship to the property
Certainly. My client is Z11513Pine, LLC, the owner of the subject property.
Our board secretary, Ishmael Shaheed, has a few questions.
Our board secretary, Ishmael Shahid, has a few questions.
Yes, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Good afternoon, sir.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Did you email all the exhibits and documents as required, such as proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of refusal or referral, pictures or drawings of the property within five days of this hearing?
and did you meet with the RCO and did you have a letter? We met with the RCO twice. We have
two letters and I didn't submit everything five days in advance except for the position letters
because we thought another one might be coming out between last week and today but one wasn't
so I emailed an updated package with the letters that we had included in that this week but
everything else was sent on Friday and you should have already had those letters in any event but
wanted to include them in my package okay great uh please proceed and share your screen thank you
and also um i have with me uh tom familletti who's one of the members of z1 1513 pine llc
representing the owner and derek spencer from gnome architecture who are the architects for
the project so at some point i'd like to have them um promoted to panelists so that they can
either adopt my statements and or provide their own testimony.
Why don't you start? Okay. Can you see my screen? We can. Great. All right. So we're here today for
1513 Pine Street. It's also known as 1513 to 17 Pine Street. The property is located on the
northwest corner of Pine Street and South Hicks Street. Here you can see an aerial image. It's
right here. And here you can see an image on the zoning map. The property is an RM1, which allows
for multifamily dwellings. The property is 6 ,006 square feet in size, which by right without
bonuses would permit 13 units with the green roof bonus would allow additional four, which gets you
to 17. And then with the mixed income housing bonus, there'd be an additional at low income
levels, there'd be an additional six, which would get you to 23 units. So it could, and that could
all be developed without parking. The property is presently utilized as a parking lot.
Here you can see some images. This is a tab 13. It's been utilized as a parking lot
pretty far back in time. Sanborns have the property being a parking lot back to 1946,
which is the earliest that we could get for this property and then every map that came out since
then shows the parking as well and it continues to this day as a public parking lot. Historically
at least in terms of the zoning archives the zoning archives for the property only go back
to 1961 and again show that the present use is a parking lot and a proposed use so that's
consistent with what's shown on the Sanborn maps. The property is in the Rittenhouse Square
residential or historic district. It is not contributing. So we did go to the historical
commission. And that's kind of part of the reason why we're here. When we presented the project
to the historical commission, as is required, because it's in the district, even though it's
not contributing. What came out of that was that, and you can see here,
our property, again, is on the northwest corner of Hicks and Pine. This is the facade or the face
of the north side of Pine Street between Hicks and 16th Street. All of the buildings are
uh non -conforming with the current um uh height limitations for rm1 uh two of them have these
little bump ups you know mansard roof here and a faux um peak here there's there's nothing behind
it it's a flat roof behind it but they have been pretty consistent as you can see cornice line
It is also a series of four -story buildings with a very common cornice line.
So what happened is we went to the Historical Commission and if I can show.
Right here.
This is what happened is this is a Bywright building.
And so we went, we showed this historic.
Well, this is what a Bywright building looks like in context of the buildings on Pine Street.
and those existing structures to the west of us.
Behind us, we have the Drake, which is, I don't know, about 30, 33 stories,
over 290 to 330 feet tall.
So we're bookend at the north end with the Drake.
And then obviously at the other end, at the east end of Pine Street,
you have that 1011 -story UARC building.
But the common thread you have to the west,
And then you have our building dropping down at the by right height. And you can see, again, here's the Drake towering above us, that it creates this kind of awkward visual effect.
Our application is for five single family dwellings with we're going to be eliminating all the existing curb cuts, except for reducing one on Pine Street that will access two car parking for each of the units.
So a total of 10 car off -street parking through a single curb cut.
Again, reducing the size of one of the existing curb cut on Pine Street.
But you can see here, like, the visual issues with it.
And then we presented to them, because when the design team and Tom and Derek can speak to this, not really liking that, we just happened to throw out at the meeting, hey, what do you all think about this?
And of matching the Pine Street elevations.
And what came out of that was a general consensus that with some other design feature changes that we made with the nice suggestions, good suggestions of the Philadelphia Historic Commission, was to undertake this process of going for a height variance.
And that's what we're here for today.
We're here for just a single height variance.
That's the only – we don't have a used variance.
We don't have a parking variance.
again it's a lot less dense of a proposal than in terms of the number of units than what there
could be as a matter of right less of an impact in terms of on -street parking than what there
could be or would be as a matter of light right and we end up being a little bit taller we did
have two meetings with CCRA following the first meeting at the end of June they tabled our request
for us to come back we did come back in July at that first meeting there were two neighbors
There were two or three neighbors on South Hick Street that wondered about what the shadowing and what the impact would be regarding our proposed development, given that it's taller than what the by -rate development would be.
We came back in July for a second meeting, and what we presented was not only massing comparisons, which we also presented at the first meeting, but in conjunction with these massing comparisons that show effectively that when you add in how tall, how high a pilot house could be by right on a 38 -foot tall building with parapets,
that the height difference was very de minimis and that the, and then, you know, we can take
some time to go through these. I can go through these with Derek, but you see that there really
isn't, you know, our proposed pilot house is at 56. A by right pilot house would actually be taller
at 58 .6. Our guardrail would be at 50 for the roof deck. By right would be at 52. The roof deck
surface would be essentially at the same height. So what we did, though, is we went and we did
shadow studies. And we studied at different times of day, spring, summer, winter. And what we did
So you could see, I'll show you in the photographs, that that is a very low three -story building with a very short third floor.
It's contributing in the district.
The chances of them ever getting a roof deck on that building is slim to none.
But that's the only shadowing.
And then here you have, at the summer solstice, it's just this little teeny bit right here.
So it's the shadowing.
We came back in July.
We showed the shadowing.
What came out of that meeting was there was a request about the Pine Street facade, the idea that even though we had these windows here and the doors were all facing on Hick Street, that this was somehow a bit of a blank wall.
And so what that came out of the July meeting, we said that we would dress up the Pine Street
facade.
We were supposed to go back to see them in August.
There was something came up with a meeting.
There was a miscommunication.
CCRA didn't actually have an August meeting.
Unfortunately, their next meeting is not until the end of September.
But we did forward to the co -chairs or to the chairs or the co -chairs of the zoning
Committee for CCRA, this rendering, which shows an additional door, the same as the Hick Street
doors on Pine Street. So that we're not, it's always a problem with corner properties. Somebody,
one street's going to get a shoulder. And by doing this, we feel that we complied and addressed the
non -zoning related request, the design request or concern of CCRA. And again, this was provided to
them over the last several weeks. We did revise our zoning drawings accordingly. And you can see
here, we're calling out the step. You can see here, we're calling out the additional entrance.
And we've included that with the revised proviso plan form. Presently, unfortunately, given the
timing, the fact that we couldn't get back to CCRA with the meeting at the end of August in
advance of this meeting. We only were left with the letter that came out of the meeting in July,
which was one to oppose the proposal. We thought that that was a little odd because during the
meeting, there were no neighbors on this call, whether voicing a concern or otherwise. And we
really didn't hear any concerns or objections from the zoning committee for CCRA other than
the pine street facade after we went through the revised presentation materials what we had
presented to ccra in advance of our first meeting ccra has a request requirement that you contact
the properties located next to or across the street from the property we have a pretty long
frontage on hick street we sent either my client tom famuletti went out in person and got individuals
to sign the letters, or we did the mailing, and they didn't come back one way or the other. We
provided them with return envelopes, and you can see here's the result. These are the properties
that are located across from us or abutting us. You can see that the abutting property to the
west of us, which is this property, 1519 Pine Street, which is nine condos,
everybody who responded was either in support or not opposed.
and then the uh the two letters we got we actually got a response on for 341 and 343
hick street um they were they were uh in support and i have their letters included here's the
letter kind of with everybody's uh docusigning it for 1519 pine street
and then here's the letter for 341 South Hicks. We have a practice here of our firm that we don't
just give them a letter, that we give them a copy of the refusal, we give them a copy of the plans.
Now, this was an approval before we dressed up Pine Street. I would imagine that nobody would
have an issue with that change. And then here's 343 South Hicks. And then just as an example,
these are the letters that went out to the other owners of the other properties that we didn't
have. We sent it certified return receipt and we haven't heard back. And these are just examples
and that everybody that was on that original list that I showed to you got here, got the mailing,
and we just haven't heard back. So I would take that, that if people were really concerned,
we would have heard from them. I mean, possibly they're here on this call. I don't know. We'll
find out. But that's the extent of our, the responses
we were received were either from the actual neighbors or either not opposed
or in support of what we're doing.
Let me just see here.
Here's a letter, tab 16 from the Philadelphia
Here's the letter, tab 16 from the Philadelphia Historic Commission.
Historic Commission.
I did pull, I did include it at tab 19, the zoning archives for those properties that are of that consistent height with what we're proposing on the north side of Pine Street between South Hicks and South 16th Street.
And they are a combination of multifamily dwellings and single families.
Obviously, 1519 is nine condos, as I mentioned.
You have nine condos or nine units, apartments, the 1521. Then you see a mixed single family at 23, single family at 25, four family at 27, and so on. So a mixed use. Again, you have the Drake to the north of us. And as I mentioned that, I'm going to go to the aerials.
again you can see the drake right here absolutely towering over everybody and then you can also see
here in the aerial the um the uarts building so um we have mixed a couple we only have three i
think single family dwellings to the north of us before you hit the drake and then i think uh
there's the interact theater company before you get to the drakes you have a mixed use on south
Hick Street, in addition to some of the very old single -family dwellings. You have a multifamily
at the north end of the block right before you get to CVS. So you have a mix on Pine Street,
you have a mix of uses and structure heights on South Hick Street. When you take a look again
at the, you know, what we're trying to do here and maintain the cornice line of those existing
properties on Pine Street. We view this as a valley view type of case where you look at the
fabric of the block, you look at the existing structures and the existing uses that are there.
We even went so far real quickly to look at maintaining the heights on Pine Street and
dropping, as I mentioned, the height of the north building. There was no appreciable difference in
the shadowing, we thought it resulted in a really kind of oddball scenario of stepping down. It's
still at by right, you know, whether it's the northernmost unit or all the units, they're still
significantly taller than the Pine Street buildings. And again, our additional height doesn't have any
type of meaningful shadowing impact on any of the properties surrounding us. And again, we talked
about the by right um the renderings so um you know your testimony adopted what's that what you
want you want your testimony adopted yeah i was just going to get but i just was going to say so
we feel that there's a basis in law and then there's a basis just uh in going through the
criteria for the uh in the zoning code for the granting of this height variance um that there
is a hardship both effectively practically speaking in terms of the cases in the commonwealth
There's no material or substantial impact to conforming properties. We're obviously improving traffic congestion because we're eliminating and reducing the curb cut on Pine Street and eliminating the curb cut on Hick Street and going through the other various criteria.
As you see in my zoning copy, my zoning abort appeal that I did include with the package at tab 20 that we comport with the criteria for the granting of variance.
Our deed is included, tax compliance is included at 21 and 22, and all our various 14303 notices are at tab 25.
So if I could have Tom Famoletti promoted, if he hasn't already been to a panelist, I'd have him adopt my statements and provide some additional testimony if necessary.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
My name is Tom Famoletti, T -O -M, Famoletti, F as in Frank, A -M as in Mary, I -L -E -T -T -I.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Counsel?
Tom, you heard the statements I made to the board this afternoon?
I did.
And are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
They are.
And would you adopt them as your own?
I would.
A couple quick questions.
The property presently has a Pine Street address, correct?
Correct.
And you would maintain the Pine Street address with this project, correct?
Correct.
Correct. And the goal here is to match the Pine Street properties rather than doing something, doing a structure that matches neither the South Hicks nor the Pine Street structures. Correct? Correct.
And that when we submitted our zoning permit application, I can ask Derek Spencer about this as well, that the Planning Commission designated the street, the property line opposite Pine Street as the rear and Pine Street frontage as the primary frontage on the original zoning drawings, correct?
frontage as a primary frontage on the original zoning drawings correct correct okay do you have
Correct.
anything else you'd like to add for the board i do not okay thanks thank you questions from
the board i just want to have derrick spencer real quickly um adopt my statements okay derrick
sir yes hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
Yes, Derek Spencer, D -E -R -E -K -S -P -E -N -C -E -R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Derek, you heard the statements I made to the board this afternoon?
Yes, I did.
Are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
Would you adopt them as your own?
I would.
And do you concur that Pine Street was designated as the primary street with, and Hicks designated as a rear street is showing up on the screen right now with the stamp of February 24, 2012?
Yes, that's correct. We are providing the rear yard between our proposed structure and the structures on Hicks Street to our north.
And that does create some additional buffer, and then as a result of reducing or eliminating the shadowing with the additional height to those structures to the north, correct?
Correct.
And we are eliminating all the curb cuts on South Hick Street?
Yes, we are.
And we're reducing the curb cuts on Pine Street, correct?
Correct.
And is there anything about this project providing the off -street parking, the two cars per unit, that required the increased height?
um you could do the parking with a buy right structure correct yes well when we did propose
the buy right there was the same number of cars okay and again the goal here is the idea was to
match and in conformance with what we presented and what we heard from the historic commission
was to to match the heights of the pine street structures correct okay do you have anything else
you'd like to add at this point no not at this time okay thank you there's questions from the
board. No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman. Questions or comments from the
virtual audience? Mr. Chair, I have a hand up for Ms. Michelle Liu. I will allow her to speak at
this time. Sure. Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please? Hi,
my name is Michelle Liu. My first name is spelled M -I -C -H -E -L -L -E and my last name is L -U.
Right. Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes. Proceed.
I'm the homeowner of 334 Hick Street, South Hick Street, which is the property right adjacent to the proposed townhomes.
I just wanted to mention that even with the tall, you know, like the shade, I think, analysis that they did, my property would be affected the most.
right? It seems like in all seasons, my property will be thrown into permanent shade. And I have
a backyard patio, I have side windows that are currently opened to the parking lot, as well as
skylights that right now collect sunlight through my bedroom at the top floor, as well as the kitchen
There's also, you know, the loss of privacy, loss of the view, and, you know, in general, it looks completely overpowering, and it's towering over all the other townhouses next to it, right?
Like, it doesn't look anything like the townhouses next to it, it doesn't look like my townhouse, and it will look massive, basically, next to the townhouses on Hick Street, South East Street.
If I can quickly...
Thank you for calling in.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
So, David, I'll give you a chance.
Sure, yep, yep.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, there's a Mr. Wade Albert with his hand raised.
I won't allow him to speak.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Hello?
Wade Albert, W -A -D -E, last name A -L -B -E -R -T.
Right.
Do you swear, affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thank you.
So I am a counsel for the Center City Residents Association, and I'm with the law firm of Stevens and Lee.
I just want to clarify a few points from Mr.
We appreciate the fact that he came to CCRA and he made redesigns.
But at issue, the reason why we have not withdrawn our opposition to this project is because at the very first meeting,
we heard from neighbors who opposed the height on hick street uh the neighbors were concerned
that the height was out of context with the character of the neighborhood and the presentation
that was made today does not still does not address those issues so uh as a result our
opposition remains okay thank you for calling in is there anyone else in the virtual audience
i see no other hands mr chair planning commission oh i'm sorry go ahead david
no no i can i can wait till the planning commission goes maybe i'll address everything
at one time if i need to planning commission
excuse me mr chair sorry um france pierre from councilman johnson's office has his hand raised
preparation for him next and then go to peter thank you okay he's been about to speak
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Mr. Pierre, if you're still available, please unmute.
I wait to be sworn in.
Mr. Pierre?
Do we see his hand?
you just left okay peter
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rm1 multi -family residential zoning
at this location while we recognize the historic commission's recommendations for four stories
along Pine Street, the applicant has failed to demonstrate a sufficient hardship for the
20 -some years I've lived in Center City. You know, you do have bookends at either end of the block
that are much taller. But, you know, the issue has been from the beginning, and it was something
that the Historical Commission looked at, is you've got these two different heights of the
structures on Hicks and the structures on Pine. You know, the thing is the structures on Hicks
couldn't even be built now. They don't have the required open area. That's another thing to keep
in mind, the zoning code talks about the impact upon air and light upon conforming properties.
Rear yard depths are not adequate. Open area is not adequate. So in that respect, any claims
regarding that should actually not be, you know, should be irrelevant. But I understand from a,
I don't want to be callous. So I understand the practical aspects of this, but, you know,
we've shown you what it looks like to step a building down. You create a very odd type of
situation. It won't match 334. 334 and 332 and 330, these three single family dwellings before
you get into Interact and the Drake, which becomes a totally different build, totally different use,
totally different structure, are the only ones on this side. They, you're not going to be able,
they're not going to be able to be torn down and reconstructed at 38 feet, which is the permitted
height on this because they're in the historic district and contributing. Again, the chances of
getting a roof deck are slim to none. I've tried it on these types of properties and the historic
commission doesn't take too kindly to it. And again, in terms of the, you know, and I understand
the concerns of the neighbor to the north, this property has been a vacant, you know,
of the light coming in across that no structure property since she's owned the property lived
there and for decades. But, you know, the highest and best use is not as a parking lot. And we've
demonstrated clearly through the shadow studies, through the renderings, that the difference
between the two structures, you know, a by right 38 foot to the, you know, on Hick Street versus
is what we're proposing and you can see right here doesn't create cast any shadow on her on
her windows or in her yard any more than the by right would so here you have a by right
so it's all going to be in shadow with a by right building this is we're not asking for
dimensional variance where we were no closer to the um to her property than what we're permitted
to be because pine street again is the primary frontage so our rear yard has to be here um the
The question regarding looking down into a yard from a roof deck, you know, if that's something, you know, could be to be considered, you know, to set this back a little bit so somebody isn't looking over the edge.
I think that's Tom can speak to that if that's something that at least mitigates that addresses that concern. Because, you know, view, as we know, privacy aren't legitimate basis for contesting a zoning variance.
Nobody has a right to a view. But I think, Tom, you could speak up if that's something to address, because I don't know that it would impact it that much. Maybe that's something possibly we can do it to at least address the privacy issue. We don't have any windows.
Or I don't know, Derek, do we have windows in this north wall?
I don't know if Derek's still here.
But in any event, she raised the issue about people looking down from the decks, and we could set the decks.
I think we could probably set them back from that north property line.
Tom, can you confirm that?
David, he doesn't appear to be on here.
Oh, he's not on anymore.
i think i think but anyway i'm on um tom if the board needed you know felt even though again it's
not a basis for the granting you know for opposing a variance that the privacy issue i mean if needed
be in order to secure approval is that's pulling the deck back a little couple feet so that somebody
wouldn't be looking over the edge of the building and to their rear yard is that something that you
might be amenable to do yeah similar to how we from a street frontage we have a you know five
foot setback where we have a railing past the parapet wall we could do that on the rear of
the property so that you're not um up against the parapet and the rear and you're you're set back
um so that is something we could do if that was um to get us approval but okay i don't see that
major issue okay but again and derek just real derek is derek still on spencer i don't want
i don't want to belabor this to answer your question we do have windows on the rear property
to belabor this to answer your question we do have windows on the rear
since it is the backyard okay and you would have that on the 38 foot tall building apartment
building whatever the case may be yes whether 38 foot or the proposed height um we would both
be allowed to the parapet um we'd be able to go up to the parapet on the roof deck as well as
have windows on the back since it is a rear yard and not a side yard and then okay thanks tom and
And then I don't know if Derek's still on, but you can see right here from the shadowing that, you know, the claims that, you know, you're going to get extra shadowing by our proposed building is not supported by the shadow studies that we did.
It's not going to make any difference to her windows, south face windows.
Thank you. I think, David, you've made your point.
Thanks.
Hi, Chair. This is Tanya. I see now that France Pierre is back again. Can we try in one more time?
Sure. Mr. Pierre.
France, unmute yourself and try.
Hello?
I think you state your name and spell for the court reporter.
Yes, that's France Pierre, council member Johnson's office.
That's F -R -A -N -P -D, last name Pierre, P -I -E -R -R -E.
Can you hear me?
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I certainly do. Proceed.
Yes, good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and fellow board members.
As of this time, Council Member Johnson does join the near neighbors as well as the coordinating RCO in their opposition to the appeal.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And again, here's a copy of the by -rate rendering, which, again, doesn't really comport with either hype.
Okay, so David, you know, there's been a lot of issues raised.
i'm going to take this and sit with the in an executive session with the board and go over it
all and then we'll get back to you next wednesday at two o 'clock okay okay and again we're willing
to make you know some of the changes to protect the privacy of the property owner to the north
Thank you.
We appreciate it.
All right.
Number seven, MI 2022, 004 -562 -1164 South 18th Street, Peel Against Hell and I.
Richard DeMarco is the attorney.
Sir, Mr. DeMarco has been promoted to panelists.
He will be joining us shortly.
good afternoon mr chairman your name state your name and spell for the court report
richard demarco uh d -e -m -a -r -c -o right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth
We will do that today, one page, as we discussed via email. Thank you.
Yeah, and thank you, Hillary, for the suggestion. That's probably the best way to accomplish this.
So I'll just briefly explain why we're clearly entitled to the admin review.
The examiner that denied it thought that the property was increasing in size and thought that we were relocating lot nines.
were not. The problem is the original plan that was formed the basis for the zoning format
showed a rectangular property. You see it right here. And that is incorrect. The deed is not
incorrect. This plan was. It was an architectural error on the original plan. This is the correct.
You see, there's one. It's trapezoidal and not a complete rectangle. And our property,
the correct property is actually smaller. And the examiner denied the administrative review
because he thought the property was growing when in fact it's actually shrinking. And as is the
building. This board granted this multifamily structure a couple of years ago. And all that
we are doing is correcting the lot lines to show the correct line. There's no change in the actual
property itself. The property is legal and correct. The deed is correct. But these plans
that were accompanied the original permit are incorrect. As you can see, the back is a full
rectangle when, in fact, it should be this way. It should be a slight diagonal on the exterior
lot line. Otherwise, everything is completely identical. We just have to make sure the zoning
permanent plans are correct. And we probably should have been granted this, but we had to
take the appeal to you. And again, Len looked at it and understood the issue. There's otherwise
no change at all. It's just to have the correct lot line on the exterior. So let me just have
Casey Lafferty raise his hand so he can adopt my testimony.
Mr. Lafferty has been allowed to speak, sir.
Hi, Casey.
Casey, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
My name is Casey Lafferty, C -A -S -E -Y -L -A -F -F -E -R -T -Y.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Casey, did you hear my factual summary and testimony?
And is it true and accurate?
And can you adopt it as your own testimony?
And is it in fact correct that it's the same exact building, but you have to have the correct lot lines and the original architect made the mistake on the original plan?
Correct.
And that was not your architect.
You bought it from a prior owner, correct?
Correct.
All right.
and your architect has done the correct drawing right that is correct that's harman deutch that's
the on your screen all right questions questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman
hillary do we have do we do we need planning in the uh virtual audience um uh no uh no to planning
Sure, it's Vern Anastasio, A -N -A -S -T -A -S -I -O.
I'm at 2016 Spruce, Philadelphia.
I represent Gershon Seymour, who is the principal of 44 West Allegheny, LLC.
Our board secretary has a few questions.
Good afternoon, Mr. Counsel.
Do you agree to waive the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Did you email the exhibits and all the documents as required, such as the proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of refusal or referral, pictures and drawings of the property, 5Bs, and advance to this hearing?
Did you meet with the RCO? Do you have a letter?
All of that, but the letter. They just haven't forwarded it over yet, for whatever reason. We have asked.
All right. You can proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
okay mr chair members of the board one two three four west allegheny uh this is a legalization of
a pre -existing five family dwelling oh my when my client purchased this a couple years ago it was
in fact a five uh family dwelling we did some digging and it turned out that it was zoned
and know you all do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes sir proceed counsel thank you mr chair mr seymour did you hear my presentation to the board
today i did and is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge yes yes and do you adopt
it as your own testimony i do thank you i have nothing further mr chair questions from the board
no mr chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no further hands mr chair planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the existing rm1 multi -family residential zoning at this location
the property only allows two units by right and has already received permits for four units twice
the allowed density that said the applicant has demonstrated the fifth unit is an existing
condition that they are legalizing accordingly the planning commission recommends the board
grant the variance. Thank you. Hiller, I understand we want to hold this vote until if we can see if
we can get something from the RCO. Am I correct? Correct. Vern, maybe we should do since Ben a
little bit, just give them two weeks and then we'll vote if we haven't gotten the letter by then.
Is that okay? Two weeks from today, I can come back? Yes. You don't have to come back. We would
just vote. We closed the record except for the RCO letter. And if we don't get it, we'll just
vote without it and you'll vote you'll just put it on the vote list yes yes thank you thank you
very much mr chair thanks thank you burn yep okay all right number nine mi 2022
zero zero three one six five fifty three sixty four jackson street number three
letter of non -opposition from wissa hit wissa no means civic association
no meeting was held but notices with rco information was sent out the rco has received
no feedback and is backing this program project good afternoon mr chair members of the board
jared klein j -a -r -e -d last name is k -l -e -i -n from blank rome 130 north 18th street in philadelphia
do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Yes, I represent New Cortland, which is the owner and operator of the subject property.
And our board secretary has a few questions.
Certainly.
Keish?
if if he is unable i can say that i do stipulate to the accuracy of the reading and i supplied all
the materials five days in advance with a letter from the rco uh share your screen thank you very
much mr chair so 5364 jackson street uh is an existing premises that's used for senior
housing. And this application seeks an addition to the existing building to add an additional 48
senior living residential units to the existing facility. So there are 42 units there now,
48 being added, total of 90. We receive refusals for parking minimums at the height of the facility
and the multifamily use. And just to contextualize this for the board, we're really matching
existing conditions at the site. So the height refusal and the parking are in context to the
operation as it currently sits now. Just to orient the board as to where we are, this is the subject
site here. The addition is going to be to the north of the existing facility. It is zoned RSA 3,
just as just about everything around it is so the existing multifamily use is there but is
not entirely consistent with the RSA3 zoning. Photos of posting of the zoning notices at
at the property and then you can see this is the existing site as it sits today
on Jackson Street here as it comes across and this is the surrounding area just to give the
board a sense of the types of structures that are around the existing building.
The plan, as I said, is to make connections to the existing building at floors three through
six, which will result in the 48 one -bedroom senior housing units.
which will result in the 48 one -bedroom senior housing units.
There's going to be a total of 31 new parking spaces that are going to be installed.
Right now, there's an existing 24 spaces there.
So as part of the improvements, we'll be redesigning the current surface parking
for a net increase of seven spaces above what's there now for a total of 31.
on. And these are the elevations of the proposed structure to give the board a sense. Each of these
units on each of the floors are going to have 16 single -bedroom units on each floor. Each floor
will also have a common lounge area and a trash room. And the ground floor of the new addition
is going to have 19 parking spaces, a trash room that will be shared throughout the building,
and an egress stair tower. There is also a management office that is proposed for the
third floor to handle the administration of the building itself. As the chair mentioned as I was
coming into the hearing, we did have a conversation with Wissanowing Civic. They gave us their letter
of non -opposition. They declined to meet with us, as their letter says, not for lack of us asking,
but the RCO told us to send out letters, and they would collect responses, and they did so,
and they did not receive any notes of opposition.
And I won't take the board through it now, but my packet also includes the tax clearance,
the deed and a copy of the letter that was mailed out to the community members uh i understand the
board has a long agenda today so i'll be brief if i could just ask john unger to raise his virtual
hand so that you might adopt my testimony and then i can address any questions the board may have
i could you state your name and spell it for the court report john unger j -o -h -n -u -n -g -a -r
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do proceed
counsel john did you have an opportunity to hear my presentation this afternoon yes i did and was
it true and correct and do you adopt it as your own as if you'd be given the chance to testify
yourself yes i do thank you very much i don't have anything further at this time mr chair we're happy
to answer questions sure questions from the board no mr chairman questions or comments from the
virtual audience i see no further hands good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning
commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rsa three single family
detached housing at this location however the proposal advances the comprehensive plan's goals
providing diverse housing options at diverse price points accordingly the planning commission
recommends the board grant for variances thank you peter mi 2022 003 165 5364 jackson street
number three i vote yes thomas hollum my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes yes my vote is yes
thank you very much have a good afternoon number 10 mi2022 004 -767 -601 gall street
daniel reisman reisman is the attorney this is a reconcession reconsideration hearing
um fishtown fishtown neighbors support this
Mr. Reisman has been promoted to Panama, sir.
He'll be joined shortly.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Yes, Daniel Reisman, R -E -I -S -M -A -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and the relationship to this property?
My clients are Jonathan and Nicolette Dubrow.
They are the owners of the property.
Our board secretary has a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading and refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Did you email the exhibits and all of the documents as required, such as the proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of refusal, or referral?
Yes. Pictures and drawings within five days of disappearing of the property. And did you
Pictures and drawings within five days of...
have a meeting with the RCO and do you have a letter? Yes to everything. Okay, great. You can
proceed and share your screen. Okay, thank you. Can you see my screen? Yes. Yes. So again, my name
is Dan Reisman. I'm here with my clients, the owners of the property, Jonathan and Nicolette
Dubrow. Our architects are also here, John Weckerly and Sal Guerrero of Boxwood Architects.
I'm showing on the screen our exhibit package, Exhibits A1 through 11. I'm not going to go
through each one, but just to summarize, they include photos. They include plans. Exhibit A2
includes, as mentioned, the letters in support from the Fishtown Neighbors Association. It also
includes a letter in support from the immediately adjoining property owner um in exhibit a4 are the
plans those include a revised plan that are the basis for the motion for reconsideration
i previously provided this to hillary emerson emerson council for the board she told me that
in her opinion because the plans reduce the scope of the requested relief it's appropriate for them
to be heard directly by the zoning board. As you alluded to, Mr. Chair, this is a motion
for reconsideration. The prior hearing was on May 18th of 2022. My clients live in the neighborhood
half a block away. They've lived there for the past 13 years. They've purchased the property
and under their proposal, they will construct a single family, a new single family home at the
property. The home itself is permitted as of right under the code. It complies with all setback
requirements, all dimensional requirements, and the use is permitted as of right. As discussed at
the May 18th hearing, the original proposal, the only refusal related to two issues. One is I'm
showing you a photo and the property is right here where my cursor is. One is the original proposal
was for the widening of the curb cut and number two for the accommodation of two parked cars
on the property in the front of the property the board at the hearing expressed concerns
regarding the widening of the curb cut and the two parking spaces and denied the requested
relief we then filed a motion for reconsideration to the board and we included in the motion
amended plans. Those amended plans made two fundamental changes. One, no changes at all
to the existing curb cut. So the existing curb cut would remain. Number two, one parking space
would be allowed on the property and not to as originally proposed. I'm going to just go through
a few issues, but I want to focus on the changes. I would suggest that if I may, I'm going to
incorporate by reference the testimony from the May 18th hearing, Mr. Chair, so we don't have to
repeat all of the testimony. That's fine. Okay. This is Hillary. Thank you, Mr. Reisman, for
doing that. I neglected to mention that at the beginning that the record and testimony from the
prior hearing is incorporated into this hearing. Thank you. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. So
I'm just going to focus on the changes that have been proposed in the amended plans. So as I
mentioned, this is the property, existing curb cut. Right now, one car can be parked in the front
in the driveway. And then this is a photo of the face, the entire block face. And you'll see that
our property at the corner is one of eight homes that are all twins. And if you look at the photo,
to just show so the board can see that the amended plans that we're requesting approval of
that it shows the uh no change to the curb cut and no change to the number of parking spaces
at the front of the park uh at the front of the property john weckerley are you there
raise your hand can you hear me now yeah would you state your name and spell it for
the court reporter yes john weckerly w -e -c -k -e -r -l -y of boxwood architects do you swear
for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do proceed so uh go ahead dan yeah
go ahead go ahead so uh as requested you can see on the bottom of the screen there is uh shows the
existing curb cut and dan if you don't mind hovering over the curb cut there yep um
so that uh that condition exists today um we had previously gotten uh submission to this uh streets
department as part of the previous application to widen that curb cut we've removed that portion
with this application to propose that the the what's shown on the screen as existing to remain
And in conjunction with that, you can see directly above that curb cut is shown one car parked on the parking space identified as 18 feet by eight foot six wide.
That pad area is existing today. We previously had shown two cars parked on that pad, and our proposal today is to go back to the existing condition prior to the previous application where there is an existing curb cut with one car parked in front of the home.
Any other questions, Dan, that you want me to address?
no i think that shows that the amended plan reflects to retain the existing conditions
at the property relating to the curb cut and the parking space so i have no more questions
thank you unless the board has any questions for mr weckley um do you want to have your
testimony adopted by the owner yes um i would like to call jonathan dubrow
Mr. Dubrow has been allowed to speak, sir.
Hi, could you say your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Jonathan Dubrow, D -U -B -R -O -W.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Mr. Dubrow, you heard my testimony today.
Is that correct?
I did.
And is it true and correct to the best of your information, knowledge, and belief?
It is.
And do you adopt it as your own?
okay thank you questions questions from the board no mr chairman
no mr chairman mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
Mr. Young.
Young, it's been a lot to, has been promoted to panelists, sir, excuse me.
Yes, good afternoon.
As I was trying to come on as a panelist, I did not hear the end of Ms. Emerson's statement.
I did note that she mentioned.
So let me screw you in first, and then we'll get her to do that over, Jeffrey.
industrial uses from the more less intense residential uses in the neighborhood.
Here in the Pico substation, as I mentioned, is on this side of the bridge.
Again, here we refuse.
We refuse for essentially what we're trying to do is provide three spaces with the opportunity
to conduct banquet hall activities um it's not a nightclub it is not uh you know some uh you know
other entertainment it's not a private club um we are simply trying to use spaces um that are
uh that are very large for a banquet hall type uses um and we're also refused because the art
gallery space, which is used in space number 104, which I'll show you in a minute, is prohibited
in the I -1 zoning classification as well. So again, there are three cyberspaces. As I mentioned,
Space 104 is 3 ,360 square feet and that's the art gallery space. Space 107 is 3 ,356 square feet
which is banquet hall and Space 111 is 3 ,465 square feet which is also which will also be
used as a banquet hall to supplement a hair salon for hair shows, hair exhibits, and things of the
like. I mean, here, a copy of the leases just to show that my clients are, in fact, have a lease
with the current property owner, GM Holdings. This is the, excuse me, this is the, if I may go
back to explain. This is the space for space number 107, the lease for space number 107.
This is the lease for space number 111. As you see, this client has 109 and 111. 109 is used
as a hair salon, which is already a use that is allowed in this particular industrial building.
And again, 111 is a space that is directly next to her salon that she would like to use as a hair
studio, hair exhibits, hair shows, things of the like. And here is the lease for the space at 104,
which is the King's Art Gallery. Just pictures of the front of the building on the Fox Street side.
This is the main entrance to the building. This is the rear of the building on Westmoreland. As
As you can see, there's parking on both sides of the street here, and there are also entrances to other separate spaces at this building.
To give the board a sense of what this building is, this building lot size is 65 ,328 square feet.
The improvement area, so the building structure itself, is 72 ,762 square feet.
So this is a very large industrial building. The property right now is divided into 15 separate tenant spaces on the first floor, one tenant space in the second floor, and one tenant space in the basement.
This building was built in, I believe it was 1950 or 1955, as the horizontal style assembly line warehouse processing was implemented and popular.
And that's why such a large footprint, large horizontal footprint was necessary during the development of this particular building.
here's a view of the building from the south on from the box street bridge as you can see there's
a potential set at the second floor with the one space on the second floor again this is a rear of
the building showing a parking lot where we are permitted to have 37 parking spaces
and there's a picture of the zoning notice on the front of the property to give a board
sense here's a key plan to show what the the interior layout looks like again here's the
the entry to the to the property again space 107 here is a traditional banquet hall space 109 is
Space 109 is the hair salon owned by my client, Ms. Thompson, looking to use this space here, 111, as her studio.
the hair salon owned by my client.
And space 104 here is the art gallery.
Remember, this is pictures of space number 107.
this to show is just an open uh an open area um again there's a large large uh space uh again
these these this building is divided into on this to 17 separate um uh units uh tenant spaces rather
uh here's a space for uh space number picture of space number one one eleven um again a very just
large open area. And we'll provide some detail for the King's Gallery. You know, there were
many write -ups in Philadelphia newspapers about the gallery here. It is a place that is unique
to this area, to the city, and provides an opportunity for young artists to express themselves
and express their exhibits. Again, there's a write -up in Aldea magazine, newspaper, excuse me.
Here's a picture of the art gallery, again, primarily as a large open space that they have
decided to place some of the virus in for exhibits and to curate the art and the like.
And what they would like to do with this space, again, is to be able to have art exhibits
that can hold a certain amount of people
that allows them, you know, to offer, you know,
wine, cheese, play light music, things like that
while they have, while their customers, you know,
experience the exhibit
and also hold some special events here as well.
And this is a picture from the Philadelphia Inquirer article.
This is the owner, Ms. Freeman, one of the owners rather.
We have a letter here from Councilman Isaiah Thomas, expressing his support for the art gallery and the art gallery's uses.
I just want to talk about some of the current uses and zoning permits at the property.
You know, I did take a look at the letter of opposition from the RCO, and it mentioned, you know, an overuse of this particular property.
But I want to mention to the board that this property has multiple, multiple variances for non -industrial uses.
So in all effect, the industrial uses at this property are pretty much obsolete.
And again, this permit here shows our 37 parking spaces.
Again, this is just a zoning plan, again, for the property.
And I'll go toward the future, I mean, the current uses of the property now and what's currently
permitted. So in 2019, there was a use permit granted for office and professional, for business
and professional office space in the building. There was a blanket, I guess, variance that the
owner applied for. So when a potential business wanted to, or professional office rather wanted
to rent the space, they would not have to go through the variance process at that particular
time. Essentially, as the landlord marketed the property, business and professional office use
has become obsolete. Most folks have been decided to work from home if they needed this type of
space. Home seemed to have been a better option, particularly over the last couple of years.
As I mentioned, this is the reference to all the spaces that were granted this business and professional office use in 2019.
In 2020, a use permit was granted for a child care facility, a barbershop, a restaurant, a clothing apparel company, a gym, and as well as, again, some other professional office use spaces.
And this is the refusal for that particular product.
And this is the refusal for that particular use.
In 2019, again, this is a zoning permit for Space 113 to be used as a television and recording studio, again, with other vacant, again, business and professional office spaces.
So this building has a multitude of uses that already are not conforming with the industrial use that is granted, that's permitted rather by right.
Here is section 14, excuse me, 14 .6017 of the code that talks about the assembly and entertainment uses.
And the letter from the RCO, the affected RCO, Swamp Poodle, specifically mentions the nightclubs and entertainment.
I think it is just a, the code specifically categorizes banquet halls as nightclubs and private clubs.
I think that for those who understand those types of uses, really, in reality, those types of uses are two separate uses.
the nightclub and any banquet hall do not service the same crowd. And even in our special assembly
occupancy, you can see it breaks it down to and differentiates between nightclubs, cabarets,
discotheques, and banquet halls under a separate occupancy.
uh just here's a letter showing that you know our we uh submitted to uh the letter we submitted to
the community for the rco meeting um here's our proof of mailing uh to the community um again
here's the first letter um that we received from the rco uh from the initial meeting uh that we
had on april 14th uh where no vote uh was taken um and again here is proof that we had a second
meeting with the community. And again, we have not heard from the coordinating RCO regarding
a letter of support. So members of the board, given the unique opportunity here for this property
to allow for the expansion of some entrepreneurial endeavors, we believe that the surrounding
the community will actually benefit from having these uses there. Given the property already has
multiple commercial uses, which are legal non -conforming uses, and the size of each
tenant space, we believe a variance is warranted here. The spaces cannot be used under the current
zoning classification as it's broken down into 17 separate tenant spaces, which it is not the
the doing of my clients here. In effect, the 2035 North plan actually calls for the re -evaluation
of zoning of former industrial sites to encourage the reuse of vacant buildings. And as you can see,
there, when the owner applied for more business professional uses, those uses were not the uses
that entrepreneurs and the market could bear at this particular site.
The 2035 plan also calls for an improvement between the borders, between residential and
current and former industrial areas.
And as I showed you on the pictures of the railroad here, the railroad tracks kind of
separate the community from the industrial spaces and given the types of uses that are
already here, the more commercial uses rather than less intense uses, that creates that
natural buffer between the community and the industrial spaces.
And with that, moves with the board, I conclude my presentation and answer any questions that
you may have.
um jeffrey do you want somebody to adopt your testimony yes i have uh my my clients on the
line uh miss reed williams miss thompson and mr fordham um if they are on then i could have them
adopt my testimony okay why don't we um why don't we have them call in we'll swear them in and they
and adopt your testimony, okay? Thank you.
Sir. Hi, could you state your name as spelled for the court reporter?
Kalia Thompson, K -A -L -E -I -A Thompson, T -H -1, P -S -O -N. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes. And Jeffrey, is there anyone else we want to
want to? There should be Mr. Victor Fordham, who's the co -owner of King's Gallery. Hi, Mr. Fordham.
yes i'm here hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
victor fordham v -i -c -t -o -r f -o -r -d -h -a -m as in mary all right do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes is there anyone else yes uh yes miss kalila
Reed Williams. He's been allowed to speak, sir. Hi, good afternoon. Hi, could you state your name
and spell it, please, for the court reporter? Yes, Kalila Reed Williams, K as in Kite, H as in Harry,
A as in Alpha, L as in Larry, E as in Echo, E as in Edward, L as in Larry, A as in Alpha, H as in
Harry, Reed, R -E -E -D hyphen Williams, W -I -L -L -I -A -M -S.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
And have you all heard my testimony given today before the zoning board?
and do you stipulate to the accuracy of my testimony yes yes and and do you adopt my
testimony as if it were your own yes yes yes thank you my questions from the board
no no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
mr charles robert richardson has his hand raised i've allowed him to speak sir
hi mr richardson you've been sworn just state your name and um proceed
yes mr chair charles richardson from the office of councilwoman cindy bass from 312 city hall
councilwoman has concerns about this project because of the fact that uh number one uh we
received quite a number of telephone calls to the office with regard to opposition, and that's on
the 2600 block of Westmoreland. Ten properties of the 20 have expressed opposition, and then
on the 3200 block of Fox Street of the seven houses, four have expressed opposition. Understanding
that there was a second meeting that our office was not invited to, so I can't really speak to
that had been granted, there's no occupancy or services going on. Neighbors reported that there
was a flood in May of 2022 where many of the occupants suffered losses of property for their
businesses and therefore left this location. We as neighbors, this project is in the Swampoodle
neighborhood. We almost never see activity there unless there's sort of an illegal party that's
going on too late or something like that and police are involved and that has happened four
times um neighbors had to call since um april of 2021 um in our original letter in our agenda we
listed a number of issues um why the neighbors do not want any um the art studios are fine as
studios studios and banquet halls parties discotheques are totally different types of
operations abutted to residential neighbors. There are 59 affected addresses nearby this
property, and there's three affected RCOs within the boundaries of this property. Of the three
affected RCOs, one of them was chosen by the council office as the RCO coordinator, and our RCO
also attended the meeting. There were no affected neighbors at both meetings, not one. Also,
the RCO coordinator engaged in some illegal activity at both meetings, which caused the
meetings not to be completed. This is unfair to the applicant and their clients because that's
not what they're expecting. And they leave the room or the virtual room and expect that we
continue the meeting and vote and talk about any other issues. In both cases, the RCO coordinator
was manipulating the technology. For example, I was cut off of participation. I was hung up on,
and then I called back to participate. I thought it was a technical error, and I sent screen print
evidence that I tried to call in 24 more times and was not allowed to complete the meeting. Each
time, it was like children playing on the phone, and I was sent to a waiting room, and I could hear
are parts of the conversation, which is why I knew there was no vote. I did recognize one person
in the audience who was not an RCO, who I know she lives in Tioga. I know she's honest. She's a
pastor. And she was participating, but she's not from that immediate area. The property is listed
for sale on the market, which I also reported, and constantly allowing these variances or
enhancing the value of the property, those uses that have been granted, they're commercial.
Some of them will, you know, exist fine next to a residential area, but in most cases,
because the occupancy is not there, these variances are only serving to make the building
more valuable to the owner, who seems to be trying to get $7 .5 million for this building
as soon as possible, so he wants these variances to be granted. He has an upcoming hearing with
another variant appeal application that he's trying to reinstate some of these uses because
they have not been occupied. They've not had tenants. So the neighbors feel, though,
the affected neighbors feel, though, many of these tenants that are presented to us are
faux tenants. They're not real tenants. And the leases are not signed. They're not notarized.
This is what we've been experiencing.
So so I I think what let's put it here. You you're against this at this point. Is that right?
Yeah, but we need our reasons on the record because we were against it before.
And you're with Swampoodle. Yeah. OK. All right. Well, thank you very much.
We appreciate you calling in. Is there anyone else?
i see no further hands mr chair i'm sorry go ahead yeah if if members of the board would like
me to address you know i can address mr richardson's comment about not being um uh not being
notified of that second meeting um that second meeting was at the behest of the the rco uh the
rco sent out those notifications um and i i is my understanding i assume that you know the rco
send out notifications to everyone who should have been notified. My engagement of Mr. Richardson
again toward the end was copying on emails an email thread that was already established that
we continue to communicate on. So I was unaware that he was not invited to that second RCO meeting
and to address some of the issues that Ms. Fernandez brought up. One you know the owner
selling a property um it's not an issue uh for the zoning board um to uh miss uh
uh for the zoning board um to uh miss fernandez did submit you know some names of neighbors um
however she mentioned no no near neighbors showed up at the uh community meeting which is the proper
venue uh to voice those concerns um all neighbors were notified of the meeting i actually myself
today walked around that particular neighborhood to see if i can see if anyone was outside to talk
to them about the particular project the only concern that people mentioned to me was about
parking um but not necessarily in opposition uh to our uses here so we haven't had opportunity to
even speak with those who uh who signed this petition uh expressing their opinion um and
even on this uh petition there are a lot of uh there's some things that are are incorrect
um on that particular petition so i would like to just put that on the record all right thank
you misty home planning commission good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the i -1 industrial zoning at this property
traffic and crowds generated by assembly and entertainment use could cause disruption to the
operations of neighboring industrial businesses the applicant has not shown a hardship exists
that would prevent the property from being used for industrial.
Accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends the board deny the use variance.
Thank you.
Hillary, to stay consistent with what we've done today,
I'd like to try to, the coordinating RCO should,
I'd like to try to pick a couple weeks to see if we get some input from them
before we vote on this.
So I would suggest...
I understood where Swampoodle was, but somewhere along the line,
somebody decided that Upper North Neighbors Association was the coordinating RCO. So I'd
like to take some time to see what we can get from them and then vote after we hear. Or if we
can't get a hold of them, we'll do a vote. So what if we gave it then two weeks, we'll close
the record except for a letter from Upper North Neighbors Association and then the councilwoman's
office? That's right. That's right. Okay. Are you okay with that? Yes, sir. Okay. All right. Thank
you everyone thank you um for for everybody on the line here let's take a quick five minute break
and then we'll go into the 3 30 list and we only have a few things so we can really get done but
i'm going to give mr kelly a little bit of quick break and let's let's break for five
minutes then we'll come right back okay everybody that's much appreciated chair thank you okay mr
chair understood good afternoon my name is bill bergman i will be chairing this afternoon's 3 30
meeting of the for zoning the zba uh with me is ismail shaheed our board secretary
present mr chairman thomas hallman our board member president mr chairman and james snell
our board member. I know Mr. Snell's there somewhere, so we'll get to that. Also with
us is our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkett, and our attorney, Hillary Emerson. Our virtual
Your case number four, MI 2021 -004 -541 -251 -RIPKIT.
Yes, sir.
Can you hear me?
Are you requesting a continuance?
Yes, sir.
That case is continued.
Thank you, sir.
Any other requests for continuances?
I have Mr. Charles Richardson with his hand raised.
I have a lot of time to speak at this time.
I'm Mr. Richardson.
We've spoke several times today.
Just state your name and give me your case.
Charles Richardson, Office of Accountants, Cindy Bass from 312 City Hall.
1508 West Negro.
I don't know whether you have received him.
Obviously not, since it wasn't a call.
I do not have any.
I'm going to get to that, Mr. Richardson.
There's no exhibits and there's a second listing.
Yes, sir.
Unfortunately, the gentleman has not been able to get an RCO meeting established with the coordinating RCO.
They've had leadership changes at that RCO.
And I either may have to reassign or do it myself one way or the other.
But we're going to make sure the gentleman gets his RCO meeting.
When I call that case, I'll make sure we talk with him and tell him, okay?
I don't think he's going to be on.
Okay, fine.
Okay, so that, so number seven, MI 2021, 004 -460, 1508 West Negro Avenue, case is continued.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. Can we just make sure that, just call the applicant and make sure that he's not otherwise on? Thank you.
Okay, Pierre Gaston.
Mr. Chair does not appear to be on no I do not see him at all okay thank you Mr. Richardson
any other requests for continuances only have your hands up if you're requesting a continuance
if you have a question please provide that question in the Q &A thank you
i have a withdrawal number five mi 2021 004 399 78 east penn street the cases has been withdrawn
I know. I'm sorry. Okay. Sure. Thank you. Are you guys going to mail it to me?
You will receive information relative to that.
Okay. Number six, MI 2021 -004 -536 -1212, South 2nd Street, Keith Okowski. No exhibit, second listing. Mr. Okowski.
Mr. Olkowski, if you're in the virtual audience, please raise your hand.
Mr. Olkowski has been allowed to speak.
Mr. Olkowski here.
Yes, he is.
Mr. Olkowski, state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter.
Keith Olkowski, O -L -K -O -W -S -K -I.
do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes we we don't have any exhibits for you yeah that was an error on my behalf we do wait one
minute we do have information from pensport civic association and mr squill and an opposition from
a neighbor but we don't have your exhibits uh that was ignorance on my part i was unaware i
had to pre -submit my previous appearances at zba i just brought the documents with me
which i have ready to go today all right so here here's what we're going to do we're going to
continue this case but next hearing it's going to be mark must be tried okay absolutely and you
will hear from us when that case is continued to thank you thank you is is a attorney michael
McElhenney in the audience?
Yes, he is.
Do I allow him to speak?
You can.
Understood.
Mr. McElhenney.
Yes, can you hear me?
Counsel, just state your name for the record.
Michael, M -I -C -H -A -E -L
McElhenney
M -C -I -L -H -I -N -N -E -Y
counsel for Greg Mester next door neighbor. All right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth
to hold truth? Nothing but the truth. I do. I just wanted to make sure that you and your client both
know this case is being continued, but it will be marked, must be tried the next time. Okay.
Excellent. And on the record, counsel, I did speak with the applicant and to inform him,
he also has to post notice at the property, which wasn't done in advance. Okay. That was
another one of our objections, but okay. Fine. We'll take, thank you so much, sir. Have a nice day.
okay all right case number two am i gonna interrupt may i just respectfully mention
to mr okowski please contact the office so we can give you a step -by -step
account of what needs to be done since the last next time this must be heard please call us
directly and we'll help you out thank you i hope you're showing the audience mr okowski thank you
and mr chair um this is hillary um one for number three that was continued i don't think
we put the calendar number into the record so we could just put the calendar number for
gillingham street 2021 -005 -187 -2116 gillingham street cases continued mark must be tried
Thank you. And I believe there's someone else here on the 1212 South 2nd Street, John Rogers. I believe he's another one of the neighbors.
1212 South 2nd Street?
Yeah, we can just verify. He has his hand raised.
Hi, hello. Can you hear me?
Hill has been promoted to Panama, sir.
Mr. Mulvihill, you've already been sworn.
Could you just state your name for the record?
Good afternoon, Chairman.
Leo Mulvihill, M -U -L -V as in Victor, I -H -I -L -L.
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Certainly.
The client is David Lafferty.
He is the principal of D &B Investments, LLC.
He's on the line.
Okay. Our board secretary, Ismail Shahid, has a few questions.
Good morning, counsel.
Good afternoon.
Oh, good afternoon. Excuse me. Long day.
Do you agree to waive the reading of refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required?
I don't know what that is.
As required, such as proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of refusal or referral, pictures or drawings of the property, five days in advance to this hearing.
And did you meet with the RCO and did you have a letter?
Great.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Certainly.
So members of the board, hopefully my internet from earlier isn't giving us a problem anymore.
And everybody can see my screen.
So good afternoon.
Leo Mulvihill on behalf of D &D Investments.
David Lafferty is the principal, and he is on the line,
should it be necessary to call him.
This is for the property at 2038 to 44 North Phillip Street.
For the record, I'm showing you the table of contents.
We have the refusal at 1.
Area zoning maps at 9.
each of these is proposed to be a triplex and the reason that we propose that is that with these
slightly wider spaces now rather than building more narrow room homes we're going to have a
little bit more affordability for the folks a little bit more space for them a little bit better
design for the overall interior layout so going to the floor plans themselves uh in the cellar
you'll notice that we have egress from the back large living dining and kitchen area with a powder
room and the floor plans for these are butterfly as i stated before so i'm just gonna address one
of the floor plans at a time so that's our basement of unit a going on to the ground story
for unit a which is a bi -level unit across the first floor and the ground story
you'd come in from the street and enter the unit 1566 square feet on the ground story of a bedroom
essentially one to the front one to the back and then two paths then have the stairs that
lead out to the rear yard same thing with the other side going to the next page members of
the board quickly similar layouts on each unit b 770 square feet bedroom at the rears of the property
living space to the front third floor plan basically the same thing square footage is a
little bit different just due to the size of the structure itself there's the
pilot house roof deck layout set back from the street additional elevations as
well this is our our consolidation plan we're taking the lots and proposing to
consolidate them and then more photos of the property itself so we can have a
sense as to what the street itself currently looks like this is directly
across the street this is looking southbound towards Nara Street as you
can see here is the multi -use buildings there's another commercial building directly south of us
it's across the street
this is looking northbound on phillips street as you can see
as i mentioned it's a narrow road there's no parking allowed
it's a lot itself
and that's it self for pardon me that's it for the photos that i have of the property
So, ultimately, members of the board, what we're actually asking for in this instance isn't overbroad or overly taxing, and it fits within the requests and general zoning of the area, which tends to be mixed, being by a high transit hub, such as the Market -Frankfurt L -Line.
This layer of density shouldn't be too great because we're not going to be expecting folks to come in with vehicles.
They can't park them in this street anyway, so we'd hope that they'd be using the public transit so readily available nearby.
with respect to the units themselves because we're making decent sized units
they will be affordable as composed of new single family structures which would cost anywhere
between as your members are aware 450 500 000 at this point we're not looking to do something like
that so with these numbers of structures with community support with the support of the
neighbors immediately behind us on second street i believe who may be on the call right now
um we would ask that the zoning board support our request for variances to allow these two
multi -family structures on this lot due to the mixed use of the immediate area the fact that
there is significant multi -family in the area considering that there's nothing on these uh
particular parcels themselves right now and considering overall there's a demand for
multi -family we'd be happy to take any questions at this time and uh dave if you're on the line if
wouldn't mind raising your hand to a mute, and we can get you to testify as well.
He has been allowed to speak, sir.
Last name Bednar, B -E -D -N -A -R.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, Ron.
This property is indicated for residential use on the city plan or adopted district plan,
recommends no change to existing residential single -family zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances
or conditions to the property that would prevent it from being used in conformity with the
code therefore we recommend the quest for variance not be granted
mi 2021 -004 -540 -2038 north phillips street i vote no
thomas holloman my vote is no james snell my vote is no ishmael shahi my vote is yes
thank you council thank you members of the board
before i go to number eight i just want to mention number nine is mi 2021 004 538 3516
north 8th street joseph estrada is the applicant there are no exhibits this is the second listing
mr estrada
Mr. Estrada
do you see him
I'm unfortunately no it's not here
okay um that case is continued mark must be tried next time
Number eight, MI 2022 -001 -329, 1723 -25, South 20th Street.
keon stokes is the tenant applicant pro se applicant is for personal services at second
floor in the same building with all others uses as previously approved no sign on this application
the proposed use located on the second floor is prohibited in this zoning district
Okay, Mr. Stokes has been promoted to Panama, sir.
Hi, Mr. Stokes, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Yes, Keon Stokes, K -I -O -N -S -T -O -K -E -S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Our board secretary has a few questions for you.
I'm sorry, Tia, this is Tanya.
Mr. Stokes, can you put your video on, please?
I asked twice, it was denied, but we need to see you.
Okay, no problem.
Thank you, Vice Chair, please.
Our Secretary, Board Secretary has a few questions.
Good afternoon.
Do you agree to waive the reading of refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required, such as proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of refusal or referral, pictures or drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
Did you meet with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Okay, thank you.
Can you proceed by sharing your screen?
It would be the green square on the bottom.
Yeah, I have the grant access first.
Hi, Mr. Chair, this is Tanya.
Yeah. May I make a request respectfully for the refusal to be read into the record?
that have also signed um a petition um the community we went around to ask them for their
permission for our business in the community um either the other neighbors and like i said these
are all the other businesses that's surrounding um our business that's located on 20th and piers
these are pictures of the actual location um how it looks inside at the current state
um and these are the other properties that's in our surrounding areas that's zone cmx ones and cmx uh
cmx2 um this is also the letter from the rco with votes from the community um
basically giving us the approval of the business and the community support um i believe it was a
The RCO position was five to zero, and the community was three.
I'm not sure if you guys, do you guys need to see the tech variance?
I'm not sure if I have to bring that up also.
We have it.
Mr. Stokes, this is Hillary.
Just a question.
In the RCO's letter, they asked about, I wasn't clear if they, they said there had been a discussion and I wasn't clear if it was about a temporary variance or if they wanted, if they, if another use came into the property, they wanted to come back before the board, which, you know, would be required because this is only for this particular use.
You able to shed some light on that?
That was a little unclear from the RCO's letter and obviously it was not at the meeting.
Okay. So what the RCO was basically putting into writing or asking the board to was basically give me the variance of the term of the lease or of my business being at this property.
If I no longer, I guess, if I'm no longer a tenant here or I'm no longer utilizing the property, then the actual owners will have to come back in front of the board and ask for another variance.
Okay. How long is your lease?
uh three years okay
um i believe this is the appeal letter the application for the appeal process that we went
through um i believe this is the zoning hearing and then the actual the letter that we had to
post on a property just stating that this meeting was you know currently having to let the neighbors
and everybody know so just just to give a little insight about the business um the business um i'm
a local owner so i'm from the area um i grew up around the area um i decided to open up the
business because i wanted to do something in my own community where it gives me the opportunity
to give back um i've also done back to school drives we have done thanksgiving drives and also
a lot of things that we also have um a youth basketball team that plays in point brook point
breeze youth development basketball team so we donated some of the money for that to help keep
the kids off the street and out of crime um in the past summers um we also also recently did a back
the school drive with a local clothing line brand that's from South Valley also. So it's been things
that this has also helped me help the community and it gave me an opportunity to give back to my
local community because I grew up right down the street. So I know a lot of the neighbors, they
have known me and their support of this business. And also it helps the community where we do a lot
of things with our new block captain on a block when it comes down to cleaning up the block and
keeping it clean also um we haven't had any complaints from the from the neighbors um it
doesn't doesn't hinder any parking or anything like that so we've been able to to get along
with our neighbors and our local businesses questions from the board no mr chairman no mr
chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands mr chair planning commission this is uh ron bednar city planning the property is
indicated for commercial mixed use on the city plan 2015 the property received a permit for
religious assembly use given the documented use history of the site and its physical conditions
we recommended a temporary time restricted variance be granted
MI -2022 -001 -329, 1723 -25 South 20th Street. I vote yes. Temporary variance until 10 -1 -25.
MI 2022 -001
Tom Solomon, my vote is yes without a provision.
James Snell, my vote is yes, without a provision.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, without a provision.
Okay, congratulations.
Thank you.
And a quick question before I get off.
If we renew the lease or anything, I know you, I'm not sure which way it went.
If we renew the lease, we'll continue the Varency B as long as I'm here.
I'm sorry.
If you have any questions, could you reach out to the office and we can explain it to
you, okay?
Thank you.
I greatly appreciate it.
Thank you very kindly.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
All right.
Anyone else from the 3 .30 list in the virtual audience who's still waiting?
I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair.
I think the chairman has been kicked out.
Secretary Shaheed, could you close out the hearings first, please?
So is anyone else out there in the audience that has not been called?
Once again, I see no further answer.
All right.
Thank you all for your participation today and your patience.
We'll see you all next week.
Very good.
Good night.
Thank you all.
IT Bill, thank you.
I know everybody was having Zoom problems, so hopefully next week will be a little better.
Hopefully.
all righty bye all have a good night