ZBA Hearing - May 3, 2023

Thank you.

Okay, Chair, we have 37 attendees and we can start as you wish.

We're ready to go.

Good morning.

My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this morning's EPA hearings.

With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.

Present, Mr. Chairman.

Our Board Member, Thomas Holloman.

And our Board Member, James Snell.

Present, Chair.

Also present is Hilary Emerson, our attorney.

and our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkit.

Here's our virtual format.

Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.

The video will be available by contacting

tanyasunkit at phila.gov.

For the benefit of our court stenographer,

we ask attorneys and witnesses

to identify themselves before testifying.

If you're participating by phone,

if you wish to testify,

press star nine to raise your hand

and star six 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 comments or testimony. All comments should be directed to our executive director,

Tanya Sumpir. Let's look at our continuances for today. Number four, MI 2022-005-219-4212

Parkside Avenue. This case is a continued attorney moving party. Number 15,

M.I. 2022-006-979-2151 East Sargent Street. Cases continued, attorney moving party.

And number 16, MI 2022-006-822-2521 Jefferson Street. This case is continued. Are there any

comments relative to the three cases I just read? Good morning, Chair. This is Javette Benton. I'll

be your co-host today. I see no hands at this time. Are there any other requests for continuing?

i see no hands at this time chair thank you so i have a few cases i'm going to call out that we

do not have documents or exhibits number one mi 2022 006 882 1545 jefferson street

we have no exhibits this is the first listing sherman toppett is the attorney

I see no hands at this time, Chair.

Thank you. So MI-2022-006-882-1545 Chess Jefferson Street, that case is continued. Mark must be tried.

Okay. Number three, MI 2022-006-880-2219 Sigel Street. Newman Investing is the listed owner. No exhibits. First listing.

I see no hands at this time, Chair.

Okay, so MI-2022-006-880-2219 Single Street, cases continued, mark must be tried.

Number five, MI-2022-006-746-226 Rittner Street.

J.G. Premier Homes is the listed owner, no exhibits, first listing.

No exhibits, first listing.

Thank you.

I see no heads at this time, Chair.

Number five, MI 2022-006-746-226 Ritten Street.

Cases continued.

Mark must be tried.

And number eight, MI 2022-006-757-1134 Waverly Street.

Diane Walsh is the listed owner. No exhibits first listing.

I see no handshare.

So MI 2022-006-757-1134 Waverhill Street, number 2R.

Cases continued. Mark must be tried.

We're going to go to our add-on list for today.

Number one, MI 2021-003-722-1901, West Westmoreland Street. We're re-voting this with a corrected proviso.

I vote yes, provisos. Revised plan, two pages, stamped by ZBA on May 3rd, 2023. Approved use

is adult care on the first floor with multifamily household living above.

Thomas Solomon, my vote is yes, with provisos. James Snell, my vote is yes, with provisos.

Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.

Number two, MI 2021-003-767-2622 East Allegheny Avenue, my vote is yes with proviso, per amended

refusal dated 4-26-23.

Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.

James Snell, my vote is yes with provisos.

Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with provisos.

Thank you. We're going to go to our regular list. Number 12.

MI 2022-006-922-557 Parker Avenue. Number A, Chanel Peterson is the owner.

This application is for the erection of the tax structure to an existing single-family household living, size and location per plan.

An accessory structure for residential use shall not exceed 130 square feet and shall not exceed 15 foot in height, whereas the proposed structure is 160 square feet.

Chanel Peterson.

Ms. Peterson, can you raise your virtual hand?

She's coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.

Okay, I think you can hear me.

I'm here.

Good morning.

Could you turn your video on so we can see you, please?

Sure.

Let me figure this out.

I'm sorry, I don't do many of you.

All right.

Okay.

there you go

there you go

very good

could you state your name

please

and spell for the court reporter

it's Chanel N. Peterson

C-H-A-N-E-L

middle initials

N

last name is

P-E-T-E-R-S-O-N

my former name is Brodus

which is what's on the records

B-R-O-A-D-U-S

okay

do you swear or affirm

to tell the truth

the whole truth

and nothing but the truth

I do

okay

our vice chair

has just a few questions for you

okay

mm-hmm

Good morning, Ms. Peterson. Have you emailed in all the required documents that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?

I did.

Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.

Ms. Peterson, do you have a letter from the RCO?

They said they were sending it to you.

Okay, thank you.

And when did you check with them?

um we had our our here our meeting or whatever in january and that's the last we spoke all right

and you don't have the vote went in favor of me they said yes okay good proceed thank you

share your screen okay what am i sharing on my screen exactly all your documents okay all right

uh let me sorry let me see if i can't and yeah so i would if you would why don't you start with

you have any photos sure uh why don't you show us some photos okay so do you want to

sure uh let me show some photos okay so do you want to see where the space where the shed would

go sure okay um hold on so that's the can you see it yeah we can okay so that's the rear so

in front of the fence in the back where it would go the tree may have to be removed right um but

that's it. What else do you need to see? What else would you like to see? The photos. Okay, so

there's more of the where that's just facing the house.

That's the side of the house. I'm sorry. We need photos, ma'am.

It's not coming up. Oh, okay. Could you take this down off the screen

and then re-click on your actual photo so we can see those things thank you kindly okay you're so

okay i'm trying sorry we're still looking at the drawing that you oh i'm sorry okay i thought you

could see everything all right can you see that we just see the drawing oh wow okay let me let me

start this sharing over again stop share there okay okay now share screen let me see if i can't

share this now can you see this picture okay that's the side of the house right so let me

show you let me try to get to the back um take your time i'm sorry i just don't do these very

often at all. So it's a struggle for me a little bit. Um, show us a photo of the backyard. Yeah,

that's what I'm, that's what I'm pulling up now. So now I'm going to share that one.

There's a share, share screen. Okay. And the backyard. There we go. I can see it now. Okay.

All right. So explain to us what you're doing. Why are you doing this?

I'm putting a shed in the yard. I was trying to maximize the space, you know, because they cost so much money.

I would like to get, you know, the biggest space possible that would suit my needs.

I am working from home now. I have a growing family, a granddaughter, children, all that.

And so I need a place where I can go and sit down and do my work.

I work for PGW. And so I am working from home a few days, well, four days a week, as well as we

just need extra space for storage. So the thought process was for me to put a shed back there that

I could kind of work out of and store some things in. The shed that you want to use is a little bit

bigger than what you're supposed to. Is that right? So I think the rules are that you can

have 130 square feet and i wanted to get 160. okay all right thank you um questions from the board

no mr chairman

so is the 130 yes i have a question so it's 130 feet is it deep or wide

uh it would be wide it's 10 it would be 10 by 13 and i want 10 by 16. 16.

all right no further questions so it would fit nicely like kind of like in the middle of that

backspace by the back thank you thank you uh understood any other questions on the board

questions or comments for in the virtual audience

i see no hands at this time chair planning commission good morning chair bergman david

effecto F-E-C-T-E-A-U with the City Planning Commission. Do you swear or affirm to tell the

truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes, sir, I do. Proceed. Thank you, sir. Mr. Chairman

and members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single

family zoning at this location. The proposed dimensional variance for an accessory structure

will not impair the use of adjacent properties, and so the City Planning Commission recommends

of the board grant the dimensional variance. Thank you. MI-2022-006-922-557, Parker,

number A, I vote yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.

Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. You have your three votes, ma'am. Okay, thank you. Okay. I can

get off. Thank you. Thank you for your present. You can get off. Thank you. Thank you. Bye.

We're going to move to

number two. MI 2022 00686

MI-2022-006-868-212 East Price Street.

Lee Elsie is the attorney for the owner.

Letter support from the Faith CDC.

Attorney Elsie is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.

Okay, thank you.

Good morning, Mr. Elsie.

can you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter? Yes, Lee Elsie, L-E-E-E-L-S-E-Y.

Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do. Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?

Yes, I am attorney as well as architect on this project. My client is Mr. Mitchell Causey. I

believe he is on the meeting although i do not see him at the moment okay our vice chair has

just a few questions for you counsel do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate

to his accuracy i do have you emailed in all the required documents to proceed to proceed

with this case five days in advance of this hearing?

I have.

Thank you.

Please proceed and share your screen.

And Mr. Elsie, if I could just interject a thought,

your client is online, so you can proceed as you wish,

and as you need them, you can let us go.

Thank you.

we're looking at 212 east price street here currently a vacant lot you can see this red

arrow is highlighting partially behind the van an area that was demolished let me move into some

aerial views here is a locating us with some zoning you see 212 east price street here with

the red dot running street to street fronting on Price Street with a rear frontage on Stafford

Street or RSA 3 zoning. We've got some CMX 2.5 as well as a little bit of RSA 5 across the rear

as well as more RSA 3 and RSA 5 across Stafford, sorry, across Price Street. Here's an aerial

showing the previous structure that did exist on the site when my client purchased it.

Here's a picture of the existing building that was on the site when he built it.

His intention was to rehab this existing building.

And you can see that the rest of this is also the lot.

But it was condemned by the city.

There wasn't too much he could do to restore it.

and as of such he raised it. Here are some current pictures of the site. Again here you can see

kind of the same picture as the cover. You'll notice this is Price Street if you can see where

my little hand is moving. As you move across the site from Price Street through to the rear

there's kind of a significant drop in elevation to a point where the townhome on the rear

It's almost, you know, an entire story down from the first story on Price Street.

And the existing rear includes this masonry wall.

Just a few pictures of context around the site.

I'll kind of bounce back to some of these later, but we've got a significant amount of multifamily around us.

You can see, you know, quite a few of these structures have two mailboxes or three mailboxes, as well as the structure immediately across the street, which includes 12 units as a sort of a men's home.

We posted the site. These pictures are from March 17th.

We posted all three of the posters as requested by the RCA, including the zoning posters as well as the flyer for the meeting.

Here's a copy of the deed.

Here is a revised zoning plan submitted to the hearing.

The application consists of subdividing the lot into two equal sized lots.

equal-sized lots. So to the screen left, we have Price Street. Screen right, we have Stafford

So to the left screen left, we have.

Street. There's a new lot line running directly down the middle, dividing it into two 30-foot

wide lots. This gray area on the plan denotes the occupied area of the zoning plan. Each of these

buildings is a semi-detached four-family house. And to the rear, each of these lots has four

parking spaces. And there's a shared access easement between the two of them to allow

all of the parking spaces to be accessed. A modification we made after meeting with the

RCO includes a one-story porch on the front and a segment of the building set back to match

the frontage of the adjacent building, as well as, you know, they have a porch in front of theirs.

There's a vacant lot is on the other side, so there wasn't anything to match there.

As you can see in this zoning section on Price Street here, our first story is just a few steps

above grade. But as the site drops down Stafford Street, we were able to take advantage of that

change in elevation to have a parking level with some slight retaining walls that allow for a

direct walkout from what is a cellar so that each of our proposed units can occupy one entire story

and the the basement unit is able to have a full access door and full windows at grade at the rear

as well as windows you know full windows above grade before the elevation rises too much

along the side. Now, our refusal, as previously stated, we are in a single family district and

we're proposing four family structures in each of these two lots. And then the parking that we've

proposed sits within the required side yard. So we have a, you know, it would be required to set

those parking spots back eight feet from the sidelines which would make them impractical.

We also have an amended refusal the initial there's no change to the actual refusals but

the description of the original one said that there were only two parking spaces per lot where

there's actually four and here's the original with that slight error. These are our proposed

building plans. I don't mean to interrupt. There's going to be four units on each lot? Correct.

So from floors one through three have an identical plan. We've got this shared porch at the first

story. Each of these units, and this holds true for all four of them, are two bedroom and two

bathroom units. They're a little bit over 1,000 square feet each, and each of them contains a

private deck to the rear um it's it's eight feet by 11 foot seven which gives it a fairly

you know decent private exterior area um there's a slight difference in our basement unit which

is our type b accessible unit it has an entry directly off the parking area which allows for

accessibility without any ramping. The bathrooms end up being slightly different, and the front

bedroom functions with a window well. This is our current rendering of the proposed concept.

We had a bit of revisions to this concept working with the community group. Initially,

we had had a full balcony across the entire back and we were our building was set fully up

to our front setback line without a porch and our stair had shifted back a little bit to allow for

entry from the side closer to the parking the RCO felt strongly that there should be a porch

on the front that this segment should be set back and that the stair the front entry should be the

main entry to the stair and we've we've fulfilled all of those requests to their desire they also

requested that the building take on a more traditional character and bring incorporate

some of the red brick from the neighborhood we've done that as well in our concept renderings

here's a rendering of the side of the building we've provided for trash

here's a rendering of the side of the building we've provided for trash storage and these fenced

storage in these fenced off areas along the side walkway along the front price street

start.

frontage where trash collection will be you can see the single story porch now on the front of

the building and the setback as well as the private balconies to the rear here's a rear elevation

this would essentially be standing in the parking lot looking at the building

uh we had a we've got a summary of the meeting with uh the faith um development community

sorry the faith community development corporation here this is a letter of support

They've included some proviso language, part of which in this, we had a little bit of a difficult time meeting with the group.

We weren't able to get an original meeting scheduled until March.

There were no attendees at the meeting, so we rescheduled for a meeting April 25th, which was just last week.

Again, there were no attendees.

One neighbor did join the meeting.

The other two non-applicant members of the meeting were both representatives of the RCO committee, and I do not believe either of them were actually living within the affected neighbor area.

um one proviso they included was a brick firewall between the two buildings we object to this

proviso as we we do not feel um that the the reverend chester who made that recommendation

um has the necessary expertise for a building code situation like this we believe

The building code provides for adequate protection between the buildings, and it was not something that was agreed by our party during that meeting.

We've got copies of the zoning notices.

The second zoning notice that RCO requested, we provide it according to their proposed method of flyering, which includes these several pages as well as this document.

this is our hand flyering inventory which marks all the addresses which we're able to deliver

the flyers to as well as those which are vacant or otherwise not possible because they're you

know combined lots with a single building or parking lots or other things like that we've

got three pages of these as well as our original RCO meeting notice that went out according to the

zoning board standards. I've got the bulk certified USPS form here.

I did want to jump back to the original aerial image here just to point out some of the other

variances that have been granted in the community. The most on point is 222 East Price Street,

which received a variance for four units in a very similar block to the one or the very similar building, the one we're creating existing, but, you know, same block, same depth.

And that was in 2020. We've got the variance for the 12 units across the street.

We've got some commercial variance. We've got, I think, over here on Utah, we've got nine units.

and over here on written house we've got some six unit variances so we're essentially we're asking

something um in line with what's already been granted in this neighborhood this is a blighted

neighborhood um and we do not believe that the current lot uh supports a large footprint

single family housing we're also there's a financial justification due to the fact that

the existing building had to be demolished at the owner's expense we've got an application for appeal

we've got our product information form included in the packet and then we've also we were unable

able to obtain a tax certification due to some unrelated issues with businesses that are no

longer existing, which have overdue tax filings for years in which they weren't in existence.

you know, overdue tax filings for years in which they weren't in existence,

but we are able to show that the property, the real estate tax has a balance of zero.

But we are able to.

At this time, I'd like to ask Mr. Causey to join the meeting.

So first, let me ask you a question. What's the property next door? How many units are the

property next door? The property next door is a duplex. That's a duplex? Yes. Okay. The property

on the other side is a vacant lot owned by the city. Okay. Thank you. Bring your client on,

please. And one other question. How did you get to eight units? I mean, how did you get to eight?

Explain that to me. Sure. So initially we looked at a by-right subdivision

to see what we could do with single family on the site.

And we were thinking if we could divide it down the middle

and then again, you know, that we had two lots facing Price Street,

two lots facing Stafford Street.

If we could do four units by right, you know, single family homes,

maybe that would work.

But the lot's not big enough to subdivide by right into four.

The most we could subdivide by right was into two.

And once we got looking at multifamily, considering, you know, the demolition, the change from front to back, the desire to put parking for the community, the amount of retaining, you know, the new sort of excavation requirements, it pretty quickly, you know, realized that if we could do one unit per floor, we could, you know, this building would be feasible.

Bring your client on, please.

Mr. Elsie, what is your client's name?

Mitchell Causey.

Mr. Causey, if you're in the virtual audience, please raise your hand.

Mr. Causey, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.

Good morning, sir. Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?

Good morning, sir. Mitchell Causey, M-I-T-C-H-E-L-S.

l-c-a-u-s-e-y proceed council good morning mr cossey were you willing to uh hear and observe

my presentation yes i was are you willing to verify the veracity of my statements and adopt

my testimony yes thank you questions from the board yes mr chairman yes mr chairman

Councilor, you have a refusal for parking in side yard.

Could you park in the rear yard and less cars?

So that is not a question we directly addressed.

Now, there are some new landscaping requirements that have come into effect more recently.

We have a 20 foot rear yard setback and I, you know, we did look at other ways to arrange parking. This gave us a one to one parking. If we remove this eight foot stretch from the parking lot.

um there's a potential that we could fit two or three parking spots um directly behind the

building although I don't know how easy it would be to maneuver in and out of them

as a direct pull-in um you know this was one thing that the RCO did not seem concerned about

i believe they were happy to have the parking and i this will it's essentially a retaining wall

along this side separating it from the adjacent building um and there will be

a slight retaining wall on the other side so we did we entertained a few parking scenarios

this was the one that gave us one-to-one parking and it's a working thing or maybe not for general

with what I believe to be the least amount of disturbance or the least amount of variance.

But with two cars, you could fit that in the rear, though?

Potentially.

Yeah.

Now, we would still have some issues.

So they'll want it would be an eight, you know, be an 18 foot parking spot.

you know it would be an 18 foot parking spot and then we would need to have a I believe that's now

And then we would need to have a.

at a 16 foot aisle so I do think that that aisle would go into the landscaped area I'm not sure

that we could even with two spots that we could get by without a refusal thank you any other

questions from the board no questions or comments from the virtual audience chair i don't know if

uh mr lc's client mr causey was sworn in oh i'm sorry my my mistake do you swear or firm to tell

the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth mr causey yes sir okay proceed counsel any more

questions, please? All right, questions are coming from the virtual audience. Chair, we have Charles

Richardson with his hand up. Mr. Richardson, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.

Good morning, Mr. Richardson. Could you please just state your name and spell for the court

reporter? Certainly. Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass. Richardson is spelled

R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, room 508 City Hall.

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

I do.

Proceed.

The councilwoman is not opposed to granting the variance based on the meeting summary as provided by FAIF CDC.

We do note that there were no near neighbors that were present, except for the one person living on the block in that second meeting.

but uh the councilwoman is not standing in in any opposition at this point thank you thank you for

your call um anyone else in the virtual audience

chair i see no other hands at this time planning commission thank you chair bergman david fecto

with the city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential

single family zoning at this location there is no unique physical condition or circumstance of

this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.

The applicant has not shown that four times the allowable dwelling units on each of the

proposed lots is the minimum needed to afford relief, so the City Planning Commission recommends

that the board deny the use of variances.

MI 2022-006-868-212 East Price Street, I vote no.

Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.

James Snell, my vote is no.

Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Number six, MI 2022, 006903, 1619 Master Street.

Zen Jin is the attorney.

Letter of support for the United Neighbors Atlantic Alliance Civic Association.

with proviso, no roof deck.

Mr. Jin is coming back in now as a panelist here.

Good morning.

Good morning, Sheriff.

Could you please state your name

and spell for the court reporter?

Yes, my name is Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N,

last name J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard,

Suite 1838, Philadelphia PA 19103,

here on behalf of the applicant.

Right, you swear for him to tell the truth,

the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

I do.

Could you identify your client, your relationship to this property?

My client is Kristen Brown, who is the owner of the property.

She unfortunately cannot be with us here today.

She does have a project manager who is here, Mr. Tim Gu.

If the board would like him to speak, I can certainly let him.

And we'll see how the testimony goes, okay?

Sure.

Our vice chair has just a few questions.

Good morning, counsel.

Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?

I do.

Have you emailed in all the exhibits and documents that are needed and required to proceed with

the request five days in advance of this hearing?

Yes.

Thank you.

Please proceed and share your screen.

Thank you.

I'm going to share with the Board the documentation previously submitted.

We have submitted the refusal support letter from the UN ACA RCO, photos, plans, tax, and related documentation.

This is an application at the corner of 16th and Master Street.

This is an RM1 zone district.

And what we're asking is to essentially demolish an existing structure to erect a new structure to be used as a six-family dwelling along with two surface parking spaces.

to be used as a six family dwelling along with two surface parking spaces in the back. Now these are

because of the corner property the parking spaces are actually accessed from the side of the

property and not the rear as required. As you can see the parking refusals mostly are triggered due

to the district and the location of the parking port. In addition we're asking for a use refusal

variance for the number of units. We met with the RCO and received their support in this matter.

The RCO of this area realized that, of course, this property, like many in the area,

are surrounded by student housing. In fact, we are also surrounded on both 16th and Master Street

by generally student housing. Across the street on the corner, that's a large 48-unit plus

community center. That is also across the street from this property. Because of that, the larger

units, which would happen if we were to try to go for three units, was something the community

actually had more concerns with than what we are actually proposing. We're proposing to build a new

structure and split the units, in essence, front and back, but they're individually much smaller

units. Each unit would be essentially a one-bedroom unit accessed through a central stairwell.

There is trash management in the rear yard. There's actually trash storage areas that is

built into the plans. Again, it's all accessible from the side of the building, and we're providing

two off-street parking spaces as a way to also help with the parking issue that would normally

come with the additional units. As a result, the community is generally in support of this use.

They actually have no issue with the idea of the units because of the bedroom setups. I'm going to

move to the, I'm sorry, I have to scroll down, but I'm going to move to the actual

plan of the units. I think it's easier to go this way. So as you can see, these are one-bedroom

units that we're proposing, and they're basically smaller units. This avoids one of the biggest

concerns of the community, which is having people come in, occupy a unit, and then hold parties.

Initially, the RCO also had concerns with the roof deck. However, we worked out a CBA with the community, and they understood that the roof deck is a small deck that only applies to the upper floor one bedroom unit.

therefore it's not a openly accessible roof deck that all units can go up to and it alleviates

again the concern of the partying that is one of the biggest issues in the area so with the

trash management the additional parking spaces as well as the minimized decks the community

gave us their support in this particular application because we are also across the

street from a very dense development. And we're surrounded also by student housing. A six unit,

smaller unit design in this area, I believe would be a fitting use and would not negatively impact

the area. The smaller units individually also would generate less concerns with safety,

noise, and general cleanliness and trash. We are working also in addition, as part of the CBA,

we're going to be working on trash cleanup with the community on a regular basis as an owner to

make sure and the owner herself actually grew up in the community so she is familiar with the area

and this is through a lot of discussion with her architect and also her understanding of how

the community would prefer having the smaller units and this is why this particular application

was brought forth in this manner and that is essentially why we're asking the board's favorable

review of these particular variances to point out the two parking spaces in the back are mostly

refused due to the access and the width of the lot being 17 foot rather than 18 foot which is

the normally required depth for a parking space so the two spaces in the back essentially are a