And Tanya, I forgot to ask who's the administrator today.
We have the smooth sounds of Jason Hand.
And are we ready to go?
No, Chair, if we can wait for one moment.
No, let me know.
Yes, Lakeisha will step in and let you know.
chair we have 47 attendees you may start when you wish again my apologies i had some technical
problems that's why we're beginning a little bit late this morning good morning again everyone my
name is Frankie Chico. I'm the chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. I'll be participating
in today's hearing along with our vice chair, Ms. Carol Denary, board secretary, confessor
plaza, and board member.
Present.
Present.
Present.
Mr. Thomas Holliman. I know. It's one of those days. I apologize. All right. Also,
our Board Administrator, Mr. Jason Hand, and our Board Attorney, Ms. Sharon Saleta, are also in
attendance, as is our Zoning Board Administrator, Ms. Tanya Saleta. For those of you who haven't
yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you
can expect. First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their
testimony. Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that
by participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded and that the recording will be
made available to the public by contacting Ms. Tanya Sunkit at tanya.sunkit at phila.gov.
Third, for anyone participating by phone if you wish to testify you must raise your hand
by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself. I'll repeat for anyone participating by
phone if you wish to testify you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to
unmute yourself. Finally to enter an appearance statement call google 267-270-5548 and leave
your email address and the address of the property at issue i'll repeat that as well
to enter an appearance statement call google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address
and the address of the property at issue and i'd like to remind everyone please do not attempt
to testify in the chat any comments questions or concerns should be directed to mr hand
today's board administrator having said that
i will now read off a request for continuance on the 9 30 list case number five mi 2021
2031-003395, 2031-35 South 60th Street, that's 6-0 Street.
Continuous request was requested by Councilman Johnson, and I believe the RCO also requested the continuance.
Anyone object to that case being continued, please raise your hand.
only if you object to that particular case being continued.
No hands, Chair.
Chair, I will now ask if anyone would like to request a continuance or withdrawal.
Chair, you can now call number six.
Chair, you can now call number six as continued. Mr.
Nockamson confirms that he has no objection.
Yes, that's Jared Klein.
Jared Klein.
Sorry.
Number five, I just, I read that into the record, was Alan Nockamson.
60th Street, yes, that's right. I'm sorry, I was signed off for a moment.
No worries, no worries. All right, anyone, would anyone else like to request a continuance or
withdrawal for the 930 list if so please raise your hand raise your hand if you're requesting
Raise your hand if you're requesting a continuance or withdrawal.
a continuance or withdrawal
Mr. Chair, Mr. Sloan Foulkes had his hand raised. I have allowed him to speak.
Thank you, Mr. Foulkes. Please identify yourself and I'll swear you in. Spell your name.
Good morning, Chairman DiCicco, ZBA Board. My name is Sloan Foulkes, S-L-O-A-N-E-F-S in Fire, O-L-K-S,
representing the Office of Counseling Maria Caglione Sanchez, Room 508 City Hall.
I swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
I do, sir. Thank you. Our office would like to request a continuance for case number MI2021-003642001 Orthodox Street. The applicant has not met with the coordinating RCO. They will intend to meet the second week of December. So we're requesting the case be continued until after they have their meeting.
what street was that what's the street address number four uh mr chair orthodox okay thank you
carol all right mi 2021-003-664-2001 orthodox street is continued must be heard anyone else
requesting a continuance or withdrawal please raise your hand
no further answers this time Mr. Chair thank you having said that we will now proceed with
our regular list 930 list case number one MI 2021-003387 1200 South Carlisle Street
Attorneys of record, it looks like it's Dawn Tancredi and Alex Goldberg.
East Point Breeze neighbors sent a letter of opposition.
Good morning, Ms. Tancredi.
Please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Good morning.
Dawn Tancredi.
It's D-A-W-N.
my last name is t-a-n-c-r-e-d-i do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
but the truth yes thank you ms tenere has a few questions for you hi good morning do you swear
oh you just got sworn in to also agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy i do and i would ask that agada reister be added as a panelist she's the architect
in this matter. And my client is also on the phone. That's Michael Carosella. And there will
be a phone number. The last four digits are 7396. I'm sorry. Can I just interject a question?
Ms. Tancredi, would Agata have to share her screen at all? Is she presenting or are you presenting?
i'm going to present okay so she only needs audio thank you only audio she may want to share her
screen separately okay have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax
compliance a copy of the refusal or referral photos and or plans of the property five days
in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes okay you may
proceed. Well, before we begin, Dawn, the other two witnesses you spoke of, if they can raise
their hand, we can get them, I can swear them in. That way, in case they do testify, we'll already
have sworn, they already will have been sworn in. Do we have their names again? Oh, sorry.
One was Michael Carosello, and who was the other one?
Agata Reister.
Sorry, I was trying to share my screen at the same time.
I was distracted.
It's okay.
Don't worry.
Mr. Chair, excuse me.
We have a person with their hand raised with the number ending in 7396.
That's Michael Carosello.
We'll get him on.
Allowed to speak or be promoted?
Speak only.
Audio.
Ms. Reister's hand was up a moment ago, but it all went down.
Okay, I got her now.
They've both been allowed to speak.
Okay, ladies first.
Good morning, board.
Good morning, Dawn.
Good morning.
Good morning, ma'am.
Please spell your first and last name.
Agatha Reister.
A-G-A-T-A, last name, R-E-I-S-T-E-R.
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do okay now we'll go to the gentleman spell your full name and i'll swear you in
i do okay now we'll go to the gentleman spell your full name and i'll swear you in
hello my name is michael carosella my first name is m-i-c-h-a-e-l last name's carosella c-a-r-o-s-e-l-l-a
good morning good morning and do you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
but the truth yes i do thank you and miss tancredi please proceed okay thank you so good morning
Again, my name is Dawn Tancredi. I'm here on behalf of 1200 South Carlisle Street, LLC, the owner of 1200 South Carlisle Street.
And with me here today, as I mentioned, is Michael Carosella on behalf of the LLC and Agata Reister from Landmark Architectural Design, the architects that prepared the plans.
I do ask that the submission materials we turned in be incorporated into the record.
So what we have here is a property that was recently acquired by my client.
The property is situated at the corner of Carlisle and Federal Street, a small street between Broad and 15th Street.
The property sits adjacent to a string of single-family homes on Carlisle Street.
which can be seen in the photos before you.
As for Federal Street, it's transitioning away from commercial uses such as auto repair and becoming more residential.
For example, 42 dwelling units were approved to be built across the street just last year.
The property is currently used for four private parking spaces and one handicapped parking space.
The site has been known for a long-standing and undesirable loitering, repeated graffiti, and dumping of trash.
Prior to the property being used as a parking lot, it was used as a duplex.
And all of this information can be found in the archives which have been submitted to this board.
The goal is to clean up the site and construct a single-family home.
There's no off-street parking, which means eyes will be added to the street level.
In fact, if you take a look at this block, this would be the only eyes on the street
at street level on federal. In addition, the existing curb cuts will be eliminated
and two to three parking spaces will be added to the street. The proposal keeps the density low.
We did meet with the RCO, East Point Breeze neighbors. There was a handful of people at the meeting, mostly board members. The only near neighbor who attended the meeting supported the proposal.
In addition, my client spoke to the immediate adjacent neighbor on Federal Street who supports the project.
We submitted a petition showing other near neighbors on South Carlisle and Federal Street support the project.
Other members of the RCO board opposed the application because they want commercial included on the ground floor,
even though commercial space has not existed at this property for over 25 years.
There was no opposition to the minor dimensional variances.
So as for a commercial space here, it's not viable at this location.
There would be approximately 400 to 600 square feet of usable space.
It's not enough room for a viable business here.
There's not enough foot traffic to support a business, even a coffee shop.
It's difficult to be a destination spot since Federal Street is often jammed up with medical vehicles letting people out at the DeVita Dialysis Center down the street.
There's a nearby restaurant on Federal Street, Boom Cachacho.
They have empty tables inside and they rely on their large kitchen to support online orders.
In fact, a commercial space at this location could cause more burdens to the community than advantages.
For example, a loading space would be needed, which would mean no parking spaces would be added to the street.
Odors from nearby odors would permeate the adjacent neighbors' homes.
and then in addition my client built and owns commercial space right around the corner at 1221
south broad street and he also has other commercial spaces in the neighborhood so he knows firsthand
about the struggle to obtain commercial tenants and the inability to find a tenant for such a
to obtain commercial tenants and the inability to find a tenant for such a small space that does not
face a major thoroughfare such as Broad or Washington Avenue. With that I would ask Agata
Agata, you're muted.
Can the board hear me?
Yes, we can.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Dawn, could you please pull up the zoning map or if I can have the ability to share?
Yeah, you can share your own screen if that's easier.
No, she doesn't have the authority.
Jason, can you promote her, please?
Right away, ma'am.
Ms. Reister has been promoted to panelist.
In case you are not sure, you are muted still.
Can everybody see my screen with the zone map?
What I would like to point out, what I would like to point out is
The exhibit that Donna has shared, we are adjacent to, it's a pocket of single-family homes that are only two stories tall.
As you can see, this is the location.
It's a small wing that actually contains our lot and this property, the small two-story single-family home that also falls in the CMX2.
These lots comparably are very small to other pockets of CMX1 or CMX2.
and actually most of them are CMX1, which would only allow a single family on the upper floors.
And as you travel further down Federal Street, you can see that the corners are not primarily
commercial. There is a lot of residential corners all along Federal Street, and our lot is actually
comparably quite smaller than other commercially designated lots that we are proposing.
The reason why our client asks for single family is simply the context.
We are adjacent to very small homes, providing a three to four story parcel with a four story building with commercial at ground would force basically this portion to become quite out of scale and dwarf the little homes that you see in here.
We felt that proposing single-family was way less invasive than a duplex with commercial space at grade.
Also, a four-story building with commercial space would force the client to place the commercial at complete grade for accessible entrance.
and also we would have to provide a full basement which would force us to underpin the adjacent
building. Underpinning, as you know, is very unstable. These homes are over 100 years old.
They're a rubble foundation. That was another reason why our client chose to build a single
family with an elevated first floor without the need to underpin and endanger potentially the
occupant of the adjacent structure. We also wanted to bring to your attention that providing
the commercial space would allow us for a space for about 600 square feet, a coffee shop. Most of
the coffee shops privately owned, they close about 2.30, 3 o'clock in the afternoon. The rest of the
time, the building, the ground floor is completely empty. And as you can see, the street portion in
here. All of these businesses are businesses that leave about five o'clock, right adjacent to us.
This portion in here, the dialysis center, this closes up, it's trash behind. There's no eyes
really on the street. So you're walking basically the entire block all the way down without any
connection um it's it's we felt that this was another reason why it was
We felt that this was another reason why it was the right thing to do to propose a single
family with living room and kitchen and dining room right on the first floor.
That was our first really reaction to the context of the property.
As Odon mentioned, adding the parking back to the street was also a beneficiary and providing
quality materials providing a home that is more in scale with the adjacent homes that
is not proposing a use there's different that's already been there we felt that it was all very
appropriate and also not to mention that providing a single family home that our client is looking
to keep as a rental property brings a tenant that stays there a whole lot longer than maybe a small
occupant without really a small space without really room to grow for for the future occupant
so that was really all that our client had in mind as a result we would be proposing a three
bedroom home with three and a half bathrooms there are no bedrooms proposed in the cellar
there's no need really we're not trying to squeeze a lot of bedrooms in quality materials quality
space, comfortable space. We felt it was a very good addition to the current context of the site.
Thank you. Dawn, do you have anybody else? I would just like to call my client to adopt my testimony.
Michael?
Are you unmuted?
I'm unmuted now. Hi.
Okay, thank you.
Michael, you're already on the oath, so please proceed, Dawn.
Okay. Michael, did you hear my testimony?
I agree. Yes.
Is it accurate?
And do you adopt my testimony as though it were your own?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. And do you have anything else to add?
Or does the board have any questions for Michael?
Any questions from the board?
no mr chairman anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
mr chair a harley cooper has their hand raised i will allow them to speak at this time
please spell your full name and i'll swear you in
hello hi my name is harley cooper h-a-r-l-e-y my last name is cooper c-o-o-p-e-r
you swear we're from to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do thank you please proceed thank you um hi um my name is harley cooper and i co-chair the east
point breeze neighbors zoning committee along with vanessa davies who's also on the call this
morning. We're here in opposition to the proposal at 1200 South Carlisle Street, specifically our
opposition to the loss of commercially zoned space in our neighborhood. Our RCO feels very strongly
about the importance of preserving what commercial space we have. We consistently vote against
conversion of commercial space to residential and that is documented in our RCO summaries over the
past several years. East Point Breeze does not have a commercial corridor like Point Breeze Ave.
our neighbors to the west, or pass Yonk Ave, our neighbors to the east. What we have is CMX zoning
along our major east-west streets like Ellsworth and Federal here. Historically, the zoning has
allowed for corner stores, delis, pizza shops, taquerias. These are the local businesses that
are vital to our neighborhood. These businesses create all the activity, which I equate to safety
and convenience for our neighbors. Most importantly, for commercial spaces to be successful, you need
density of commercial and you need that proximity to other businesses. Our commercial spaces are
already limited. Excuse me, I'm sorry. I apologize, but could Avada please stop sharing her screen,
her emails are coming up. Thank you. Okay, you know, for commercial spaces to be successful,
you need that density of commercial and our commercial spaces are already limited and the
conversion of any additional commercial commercially zoned properties to 100% residential impacts the
ability of our current, it impacts the current and future market to lease retail space in East
Point Frees. Our concern is really for the neighborhood overall. At our RCO meeting,
the developer's attorney and the architect argued for a number of hardships. I want to speak to a
couple of those. The first is that, you know, it is a challenging block because of the DaVita
The first is that, you know, it is a challenging block because of the DeVita across the street, the pep bowl, the auto repair shop.
across the street.
It is not exactly a vibrant commercial corridor today, but it is a rapidly changing block.
There are currently two mixed-use developments within 150 feet of this property, 1439 Federal Street.
That's the 42-unit building that the attorney spoke of, but I think she neglected to mention that there's ground floor retail commercial space on that.
And that commercial space was a concession that the developer made before presenting to East Point Breeze neighbors, knowing that preservation of commercial space is a priority for our neighborhood.
That property is currently under construction.
The second mixed-use development is at 1205 South 15th Street, and that stretches from 15th Street to Carlisle.
So, you know, this block may not be a vibrant commercial corridor today, but we believe
that in the future it can be, but only if we're able to preserve our mixed-use zoning.
The second thing I want to point to is the cost of developing commercial.
You know, the architect mentioned that building commercial would require underpinning.
I'm neither an architect nor an engineer, so I can't speak to that.
But I do know that commercial is always more expensive to build, and it often takes longer
to lease.
And that's true everywhere in the city, but that's why we have zoning to ensure that the community's desire to use this space continues despite market dynamics.
This proposal is a real estate investment. It's a 3,000 square foot home.
Whether it's rented out or sold, the property owner is not invested in the well-being of our neighborhood, but rather maximizing this particular investment at the expense of our neighborhood.
We do not care about the height or the lot coverage.
you know but we do care about the loss of that CMX2 property on a block that is 250 feet from
a subway station and it is a block that has the potential to serve as a gateway to our neighborhood
um I appreciate the opportunity to speak on behalf of East Point Breeze's neighbors thank you
thing I would like to add is I'm very familiar with the Federal Street I live two three and a
blocks away on the east side uh there was a if i'm not mistaken the former bear distributor which
is on the southeast corner uh relocated i believe across the street to the northwest corner
uh and i think that building the the former location on the southeast side is still vacant
there are some other commercial opportunities there and in order for commercial to work
Not only do you need commercial activity, but you also need residential that supports the commercial.
I do appreciate your testimony, though.
Anyone else to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
There are no further hands at this time, sir.
Thank you.
Planning Commission?
Good morning, Chairman DeTico, Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
That's H-E-G-A-R-T-Y.
Each word will come to tell the truth, the whole truth.
Nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
All right.
Thank you, Chairman, members of the board.
The comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change here from CMX2 to RM1 on this lot.
And so this proposed use is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
However, the proposed dimensional variances, I'm not sure that we heard a sufficient argument as to why no rear yard is being provided and why the lot coverage is so high.
And, you know, there's evidence of recent single family development on similarly sized lots with rear yards on the 1500 block of Manton, the 1300 block of South 13th, where the rear yard is being provided.
So our recommendation would be that the board grant the use variance and add a condition that a nine-foot rear yard be provided.
Sean, either you or the architect, could you speak to that issue, not having any yard space available?
Where are they going to keep the trash?
So we did address this in a memo that we submitted to the board.
This property does conform to other properties nearby where there's actually 100% lock coverage.
The spirit of the code is met where there's open space and a deck, and Agata can address this further, these issues.
Okay, so there is a deck, right?
All right.
I think that'll answer my question.
MI2021-003387.
1200 South Carlisle Street, my vote is yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes.
Confessor Plaza, yes.
Professor Plaza, yes.
Thomas Holloman, yes.
Thomas Holloman, yes.
Case number two, MI 2021-003, 393-124 Mercy Street.
Alan Knockinson is the attorney of record.
Penn Sports Civic Association sent a letter of support.
Good morning, Mr. Chair and members of the Board.
Alan Nockamson.
Alan Nockamson, last name Nockamson, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia PA
19109.
You swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Ms. Tenere has a few questions for you.
Hi, good morning.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos under plans of the property, five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, in all respects, and we have a letter of support from the coordinating RCO.
Okay, great. You may proceed.
May I share my screen?
Yes, you may.
Thank you.
All right, so in front of you, I have 124 Mercy Street.
What we're trying to do is have an erection of an addition on the third floor of this pre-existing two-story home.
And as we indicated, we have support from the community, as well as nearby neighbors, as we'll show in our presentation packet.
This property is owned by BTS Square LLC.
I have Tim Gu on the line, who's the owner's representative, who will adopt my testimony at the conclusion of my presentation.
In my presentation packet, you'll see the notice of refusal, correspondence from Penn
Sports Civic Association, a letter of support from 122 Mercy Street, the nearby neighbor,
as well as petition showing support from the surrounding neighborhood.
Maps of the area, photographs of the property in the surrounding area, plans and drawings,
proof that we met with or at least we sent out notice to the affected properties regarding
in the community meeting or application for appeal or deed to the property showing that BTS
Square LLC is the owner of the property and a certificate of tax clearance showing that no real
estate taxes are due on account of this property. First things first, this is an RSA 5 property.
All we're trying to do is use this as a single family structure. We have two refusals. The first
is the maximum occupied area where 75% is allowed and 89.31% is requested. All we're
doing is squaring off the rear of the property and we'll show that in the site plan. That
portion that is being filled in is closest to 122 Mercy Street. That's why we specifically
reached out to 122 Mercy Street to find out their stance on our request and they support
it and we have a letter of support in the file. Secondarily, or second, the second refusal is the
fact that because we're a two-story block on the left and right of us, we technically would have
to go eight feet set back. We're asking to go straight up. You'll see in the letter from Penn
Sports Civic Association, neither request is uncommon and that's why the Penn Sports Civic
Association supports this. Again, just quickly, the Penn Sports Civic Association, this is a
letter of support. I'm just going to read quickly from the letter. We are not aware of any opposition
from neighboring properties. We are aware of a few properties in the immediate area lacking the
required setback and many properties exceeding the maximum occupied area. Currently, we do not
believe the requested relief would be unreasonable. Shift from the relief granted in the surrounding
streets and area, and that's why they support the project. Again, we made a point to reach
out to our neighboring property at 122 Mercy Street because they're going to be most directly
impacted by the infill in the rear regarding the occupied area, and we have a letter of
support from them. We also reached out to the surrounding area on that 100 block of
Mercy Street 2, and you can see we have a petition in support from many of the nearby
neighbors. You know, showing where we are in Pennsport, we're between Front and Second Street
and Snyder and Emily. And they're just a different thing.
and Snyder and Emily and they're just a different thing you know from the city's website
and google maps as well photographs of the property again we're pre-existing two-story structure
all we're trying to do is modernizing it by adding a third story uh just like this and what we're
trying to do is keep like a traditional brick facade uh and you know have it uh match as much
as possible to similarly situated properties in the area as the Penn Sports Civic Association
agreed with us. The back of the property from a rendering standpoint, all we're doing in the back
is filling in this little section which is closest to 122 and they're not objecting to that.
And then just a simple floor plan, open floor plan on the first floor. We do have a finished
basement second floor are two bedrooms laundry room and a full bath third floor is a master
suite with a bathroom and the fourth you know and the roof is uh you know has a roof deck
just proof of mailing you know in terms of community meeting uh and you know we have you
know in our presentation packet which we previously sent to the zba's administrator
also our certificate of tax clearance.
So with that being said,
I would ask that Mr. Gu virtually raise his hand
so he can dock my testimony.
Mr. Gu, please spell your full name
and I'll swear you in.
Chair, I do not believe I see the individual in question.
um mr uh knockinson you being officer of court will stipulate your client would have adopted
your testimony i appreciate that uh questions from the board no mr chairman no anyone else
like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand once again no hands at this time sir
thank you planning commission
Thank you, Chairman DiCicco. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RSA 5 single-family zoning
on this block. We appreciate that the neighbors have given some support for this and that the RCO
is in support of this as well. However, the appeal doesn't meet the hardship requirements for
dimensional variances. Namely, it specifically says in the code that it has to impose a financial
burden on the applicant to meet the code requirements. We don't think that's the case
here. And the proposed dimensions are clearly not equivalent to the surrounding block. And so
in this case, we have to recommend that the board deny the variances.
Thank you. Understood. MI 2021-003-393-124 Mercy Street. My vote is yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes.
Professor Plaza, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Before I call the numbers off on the next cases, I'll call the first one and then we'll have a conversation with Mr. Klein.
MI 2021-004015, 1431 North 25th Street.
mr jared klein is the attorney of record on this case and eight other cases but we'll have a
discussion before we proceed mr klein if you can spell your full name i'll swear you in
you're breaking up jared jared jared you're breaking
yes jared you're breaking we can't hear you're breaking up
can you hear me now uh try that again can you can you hear me now yeah yes
your screen your screen freezes and then it's then it goes it opens up it freezes
jared i'm sorry jared can you turn off your video first yes let's see if that worked at all
yes just turn off your video and then use your audio only let's see if that'll work
excuse me maybe you could oh there you go
yeah i i can hear and see all of you can you hear me
can hear you now we can't see you but we can hear you okay well we
We can hear you now. We can't see you, but we can hear you.
Okay. Well, we've solved problem one of two then.
Chair.
Jared, spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Sure. It's Jared Klein, K-L-E-I-N from Blank Rome, 130 North 18th Street in Philadelphia, 19103.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
All right. Before we proceed with the list of cases that you have, we had a conversation earlier in our executive session that there is still no RCO letter. Is that correct?
That is correct. We are scheduled to have the formal meeting with the RCO on Thursday evening.
there there have been there have been five prior meetings generally with the community as this
project went through but the formal rco meeting is scheduled for thursday i believe you had spoke
you spoke with ms saletta about doing a hear and hold that was our initial uh thought though we
would also be happy to do it as a resumption if that is easier for the board we can do i
i'm sorry this is sharon i believe that what um we decided was if it is to go forward today
that there would be a resumption hearing that limited to feedback from the um feedback regarding
the rco meeting and that if that is to be scheduled for a date within the next couple of weeks
that it would be limited to a certain amount of time maybe 10 minutes if it if Mr. Klein expects
it would go past that then we would ask that he would um he would let the board know in advance
so that it could be rescheduled thank you thank you does that work Mr. Klein it does yes thank
you Mr. Chair all right so there's a number of properties uh they're not all in succession there
are a few of them uh how would you like us to proceed should i read off all all nine cases
yes so the these cases are all part of the same affordable housing master plan
so i have one exhibit packet and can take the board through all nine at one time okay so i'll
begin now read off the nine cases case number three on our list is mi 2021-004015 1431 north
25th street parcel e as in edward case number six mi 2021-003380 2422 harlan street h-a-r-l-a-n
street parcel d as in david case number seven on our list mi 2021 that's zero zero four zero two
zero 2433 harland street
parcel d as in david is that correct
yes there's two two parcel d's okay i see it's a different address i'm sorry all right case
number five on our list MI 2021-004-018-2401 Stewart Street. Case number nine on our list MI 2021-004-019-2406
harland street parcel b as in boy case number 10 mi 2021 dash zero zero three three seven nine
2401 harland street number 11 on our list mi 2021 dash zero zero four zero one seven
2401 master street parcel is that l i believe it is i believe it's leonard thank you mi 2021
that's 004 388 2408 sharswood street and case number 13 on our list mi 2021
21-004-364-2408-Stewart Street, Parcel L, as in Leonard.
I believe I read all nine of your cases off correctly.
I believe so.
Thank you.
Excuse me.
This is Sharon again.
Before Mr. Klein starts, I would say that though you would not usually proceed even with a first hearing
before the RCO meeting, Mr. Klein informed me that the RCO actually has no objection to it.
Mr. Klein informed me that the RCO actually has no objection to it being handled this way. Is
that correct Mr. Klein? Yes it is. We have had email communication with them where we let them
know we were going to proceed this way with the explicit understanding that we were scheduled to
come back in two days. The RCO was okay with it and they understand I can explain to the board
the reason that we're in a bit of a time crunch has nothing to do with pending abatement or
construction tax, as many developers, this project's being financed by low-income housing
tax credits. And so if we don't meet a certain closing date in December, we would have to
reapply and pay some substantial fees to change those credits around. So the RCO is trying
to work with us to meet that deadline. Other than the Brewery Town, Sharswood
Community Civic, is there any other entity that was going to be weighing in on this?
As an example, maybe the district council person or something like that?
uh we do not believe um that the district council person has anything specific um his office has uh
been involved in our conversations with the rco but they did not indicate they were going to appear
but there has been communication with the office of the district council yes we spoke we actually
spoke to them earlier today uh they were trying to representative come on and confirm that they
were okay with this uh resumption hearing also okay thank you so please proceed
okay thank you i'm going to share my screen and hope that does not
break my connection can everybody see that
not yet
dig out what's happening jared you're breaking your voice is breaking up
jared this for a second do you think it would help also if he went out and tried
coming back in? Jared, can you hear? Yes. We're getting that echo again once you start ready to
share. Try saying something right now. Can you hear me? Yes. Yeah, right now you're clear. Okay.
I'll try not to touch anything. Okay, thank you. So, I don't know, with me or my end, Jared.
You're breaking up again.
You're going to have to go out, Jared, and come back in.
Yeah, it's an internet problem that I see.
Sign off and then come back in.
We good to go.
Is that okay, Tanya?
We told him to sign out.
Yes, Chair.
That's very well.
And I agree, Ms. Sunga.
I think that he might be having some internet issues.
I would have had a problem once before a few weeks ago the same thing.
Can I be heard now?
You're breaking up.
Mr. Klin, are you in an area that you usually receive like internet issues?
In the area where it usually works very well, unfortunately.
can can everybody can can anyone hear me now or or no it's just we can hear you clearly now
okay okay if i if i could just interject the thought what's going to happen is once you
try to share your screen it's going to cause another problem um i'm not sure pauline how
would you suggest we handle it um i would say either one of two things i don't know if someone
else could share their screen for him and then he can speak to it. Or I don't know if there's
another Wi-Fi network you could try connecting to. I can get that. So you're breaking up. Maybe what
we do is, Pauline and or Tanya, we can go ahead with a couple other cases while we're trying to
work out these technical problems. Sure and Mr. Klein like I said if you can get someone if that's
okay with the board to show your screen while you speak to it that would work or if you try
connect okay you could do that. Yeah I do the board would like to take another case I'll get
one of my colleagues with better internet to share their screen. Without any objection we'll do that
Okay, we'll go to case number 14.
Okay, MI 2021-003-382, 2520 Grays Ferry Avenue.
Henry Clinton is the attorney of record.
South of South Neighborhood Association sent a letter of support.
South of South Neighborhood Association sent a letter of support.
I understand there may be revised plan, one page.
So, Mr. Clinton, if you're out there, please identify yourself and I'll swear you in.
Please raise your virtual hand, Mr. Clinton, if you're available.
Please do not raise your hand unless you're here to present this case.
Thank you kindly.
He's been promoted.
hi henry please spell your full name and i'll swear you in good morning mr chairman henry
clinton 1313 south 33rd street photo ppa 19146 we're affirmed to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i know thank you ms tenere has a few questions for you good morning do you
agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed
the exhibit packet with the required documents consisting of proof of ownership, tax compliance,
refusal referral, photos, and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing,
and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter? Yes, to all of the above. Okay, great.
You may proceed, and yes, you may share your screen. Good morning.
is this visible enough you can make it just tiny bit larger that'll be helpful there you go that's
good thank you good morning Mr. Chairman my members of board Henry Clinton on behalf of
the owner of Mark LaCourse who's on the call with me as well as your architect Tom Wiedemann
Mr. Clinton, I'm sorry.
This is Tanya, the ZBA administrator.
May I just request you maximize your screen?
Thank you, Tanya.
Thank you, Kylie.
Is that good, Ms. Sunke?
Thank you.
Thank you, Tanya.
Perfect, Mr. Clinton.
Thank you.
These are my table of contents, exhibits AA through 810, which will have to be admitted.
This is my appearance statement.
This is a refusal.
So this is an RM1 zone, but this is a single-family house.
And what we're asking for is the addition to the third floor of a very small addition, which will then match the home next door.
And the photographs will tell the whole story as I walk the board through this presentation.
But basically, refusal concerns the fact that when I appeared in front of the board back in 2011,
there were four or five new construction homes built on Grace Ferry Avenue,
all with front-loaded garages and all with very, very, very small rear yards, and you'll see that.
And at the time, some of the homes were built with the third floor setback, and some were built straight up.
So we're asking today that our house match the house next door.
we have we do have a letter of support from SASNA we met with them we made a couple minor changes
and if the board looks kindly upon this project we'd ask that it approve it with a proviso form
and one page of a plan that has been revised but basically this is a letter of support there's the
tally these are photographs so this is Grace Ferry Avenue you're looking to the Naval Square
project behind us, but my client's house is right here. It's the third black two-story bay.
The adjacent neighbor already has a roof deck with a pilot house, and basically, as I said in the
beginning, our project will mirror what is next door. These are just some context photographs
showing looking east to center city and then looking west out toward Grace Ferry Avenue.
this is probably the best and the clearest picture again here's my client's property
here's the the home next door and you're looking out to Penn's campus
this is the rear of my client's property my client's property is just to the right of where
I came down the middle of these two buildings this is the home next door and basically what
we want to do is make our third floor the same in terms of depth and height as the addition next
door. Although frankly, this house was built with a full third floor. Ours was not, or my clients
was not. This is a photograph I took looking down into the rear yards. This is my client's rear yard.
This is the home next door with an actual smaller rear yard. And these are the homes,
the rear of the homes on Christian Street.
And this is a good pictorial of what we're trying to do.
The green space is what we want to fill in.
Again, some more aerial shots to give the board perspective.
And these are the proviso form as well as a revised plan.
and these are the proviso form as well as a revised plan and this is the zoning plan so
basically we are taking the existing property and adding a third floor addition on the rear
of the property we're eliminating the outdoor deck with the spiral staircase to to the rooftop deck
and in lieu of that the spiral staircase we're going to have a pilot house which basically
matches the dimensions of the
pilothouse on the adjacent
property at
So that's
really it in a summary
fashion. I
can entertain any questions from the board.
I can have my client adopt a testimony.
Why don't we get your client on?
Mr. Clinton, why don't we get your
client on? I'll swear him in.
Mr. LaCourse, can you
raise your hand, please?
of course that's been allowed to speak yes good morning sir please spell your full name and i'll
swear you in yes it is mark lakursi m-a-r-k-l-i-c-u-r-s-e you swear or firm to tell the
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do thank you mr clinton uh mr lakursi you were
on the call when you heard my testimony yes and uh if you had the opportunity to testify would you
adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct. Yes. Thank you, Mr. O'Coursey.
Questions from the board. No, Mr. Chairman. No. No. Would anyone else like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand. I see no further answer this time, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Planning
Commission. Thank you, Chair DiCicco. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Members of the Board, this proposed dimensional variance is minimal, does not conflict with the
purpose and spirit of the zoning code. City Planning Commission recommends that the Board
grant the variance. Thank you very much. MI 2021-003382. 2520 Grays Ferry Avenue.
my vote is yes with proviso revised plan one page approved today carol tenere my vote is yes with
proviso confessor plaza yes with proviso thomas halliman yes with proviso you um where are we
with mr klein's cases we have gotten the technical issues resolved yet yes chair mr klein is coming
back in as a panelist and he'll be under the name lindsey no so hi hi tanya can you can you hear me
now yes so if you if you're able to add uh miss lindsey sampsy as a panelist she can share her
screen while i narrate yes she's already promoted okay and can the board see that and hear me
yes okay thank you we've we've gotten ourselves a creative workaround um so uh once again uh i'm
here on behalf of penrose an affordable housing developer with a collection of parcels that is
part of an affordable housing master plan in the shoreswood area of the city uh this is actually
the second phase uh phase one was completed and the board granted several variances earlier this
year and this is now the second phase of the development and all of these parcels are located
in the same general geographic area and are all going to be used for affordable housing with a
variety of housing styles as I'll get into as we move through the presentation. Lindsay you want
to go to page two? So this is a summary. We attached all of the individual refusals for the
board in our packet. We'll prepare this summary just to give the board a sense of what the
proposed use is and what the refusals are on each of the parcels. As you'll see, the majority of
these are proposed to be multifamily dwellings, ranging from 3 up to 16. And the refusals that
we received were primarily use refusals for having multifamily in RSA 5 zone lots. Some
dimensional refusals due to the rear yard and occupied area and one of them includes parking
spaces which also required a use refusal. All of these parcels as I mentioned are located in the
same area of the city which is an underserved and underdeveloped area and many of the surrounding
properties are either vacant or with structures that are in severe disrepair and would be in need
major rehabilitation to use in their current state and the nature of the surrounding area
combined with the affordable housing nature of the project creates the hardship
both for the use and for the dimensional variances that we're asking for to build perfectly compliant structures on the size of the lots that we have would not render them viable for affordable housing purposes.
both for the use and for the dimensional variances that we're asking for to build.
Lindsay, can you go to scroll through all the refusals if you could? And there's some maps.
I'll be as efficient as I can about this board. I appreciate you indulging my technical difficulties.
properties. So this is an aerial view of the area in which the properties sit. They're
located sort of in a square and it's in the middle of your screen. There is in two pages
a map that actually has dots on the affected properties that make it a little bit easier
to see. That's the zoning map and this map shows you where the dots are indicated the
location of each of the nine parcels that are here for your review. As you can see they're
sort of all within uh two or three blocks of each other in that square area there lindsey can you
scroll through to the photos of the sites this is just to give the board some context as to what
what is existing in each lot uh this one is a vacant parcel and i've labeled all these for
the board's review 2401 master is again a vacant parcel
2401 to 29 harlan again a collection of vacant parcels uh this is uh 2401 to 55 stewart
again vacant lots this block of harlan street uh is made up of either uh vacant lots or pre-war
uh townhomes that would be in need of substantial rehabilitation if they could continue to exist at
at all. Again, this is another shot of the 2400 block of Harlan showing the condition of some of
the existing structures and the rationale for our need to demo them. Again, Stewart Street
is being used for trash disposal purposes. And again, we think we can make this lot a little
bit nicer. And this is again, 2433 Harlan Street. Lindsay, can you then scroll down through to get
to there you go photos of posting of each of each property and then lindsey if you just can scroll
through slowly each of these floor site plan sheets so what we've done is given the board
a site plan for each of the nine properties showing what is intended to be constructed on
each again these range from triplex properties uh through to a 16 family uh multi-family building on
one of the larger consolidated lots the intention from a design standpoint is to make these look
similar to the existing housing stock in in the area and we're going to as you can see on that
one landscape and add other street trees and lighting to provide a quality finished product
and as Lindsay keeps going you'll see that we did include a sample rendering at the end of
of the site plans to give the board a sense
of what the final product might look like.
As Lindsey goes through,
I'll just reiterate what I said earlier
in that we have had a number of productive meetings
with the Civic Association,
particularly the executive committee
of the brewery town Shardswood Civic.
They've indicated a lot of support
in terms of their view of the overall project.
And we're meeting with them, as I said, on November 18th.
um and you know we'll be having a resumption hearing so they can share their thoughts but
this is a uh affordable housing plan that's had a lot of community involvement uh and these all
all the lots are subject to a master development agreement with the Philadelphia Housing Authority
um so although it's a private developer the land's coming from PHA and it really is a
sizable investment into the Shardswood neighborhood uh the remainder of the packet includes the tax
clearances um equitable ownership interest uh and other items that i don't think the board needs to
see at this time though we can certainly show it if the board would like to see it all of the
properties are tax compliant uh and we did send out a mailing uh to 500 and some addresses uh and
just so the board is aware the mailing that we sent out specifically noted our intention to have
this sort of resumption hearing and advised all neighbors both of this zoning hearing
and the upcoming meeting on the 18th. My client, Lindsey Sampse, who's sharing the screen.
Lindsey, do you have audio also? I do. You do. Did you have the opportunity to hear
the presentation I just made? Hold on, Jared, Jared. Sorry, just need to be sworn in. Sorry.
Lindsey, please spell your first and last name and I'll swear you in.
sure thank you chairman lindsey samsi l-i-n-d-s-e-y s-a-m-s-i
s-a-m-s-i you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but
i do thank you mr klein uh lindsay thank you i know you had the opportunity to hear me as you
were sharing your screen um so do you adopt my statements as true correct in your own if you'd
had the opportunity to testify yourself i do thank you um board we do have the architect on the line
also if the board has any questions about the design uh and lindsay is here as the project
developer to answer questions as well um with with unless the board has any any questions for
us we would rest our presentation with the ask that we schedule a resumption hearing for community
feedback as we talked about earlier thank you any questions from the board no mr chairman
anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
mr chair miss mary jones has her hand raised i will allow her to speak at this time
good morning ms jones please identify yourself and i'll swear you in
good morning mary jones on behalf of council president daryl clark city hall room 494
each swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do thank you please proceed um yes members of the board i um am calling in to express the
council president's support for this um for these all of these zoning projects
thank you and you heard i could you hear earlier we're going to have a resumption hearing
i did hear that limited to testimony from the rco i did hear that i just wanted to go ahead and get
okay thank you thank you very much thank you mary anyone else to testify in this case
no further hands at this time sir thank you planning commission thank you chairman de chico
ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission um this uh scattered site redevelopment
proposed here is, as Mr. Klein has described, in conformance with PHA's plan for redeveloping
affordable housing, public housing in the Sharswood, these sites have conformed to the
comprehensive plan goals of providing a broad range of housing. And so the City Planning Commission
recommends that the board grant variances for each of the appeals noted at the beginning of this
very much um so rather than read through the nine cases uh as recorded earlier uh the nine
cases that have been read into the record by uh by myself and testified to by mr klein
and correct me tanya and or sharon if i'm wrong this hearing will be resumed on do we have a
specific date december 8th at 9 30 a.m december the 8th at 9 30 a.m at which time the board will
consider any feedback from the rco and testimony will be limited to 10 minutes yes okay thank you
very much mr chair and thank you for indulging my technical difficulties thank you no worries
Take care. So it's 6789. We go to case number 15, I believe. MI 2021-003396. 31-33 North 43rd Street. Rachel Pritzker is the attorney of record. West Poulton Saunders Park RCO. My notes indicate that we've not yet received a letter from that RCO.
Ms. Pritzker, please identify yourself.
I'll swear you in.
Good morning, Chairman, members of the board.
Rachel, R-A-C-H-A-E-L, Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R,
1635 Market Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA 19103.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Ms. Canary has some questions for you.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance,
refusal referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing,
and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, and we have a letter of support. It was sent late last night,
so I believe the board should have it in their updated packet.
Okay, great. You may proceed.
great thank you okay can you all see that on my screen yes yes okay so this is 31-33
Yes. Okay, so this is 31-33 North 43rd Street. This is a proposal for a triplex on an existing RSA5
lot that has been vacant for a very long time. It's a very oddly shaped parcel, so
as you'll see in a few minutes, that's what basically triggered a lot of our dimensional
refusals we're taking up a bit more lock coverage we're only allowed 80 we're taking up 97.1
we're not providing a rear yard and the building height is slightly higher 39 feet six inches
as opposed to the 38 feet let's see just going to show the site first
so that you can get an idea of the odd shape of the site and then I will have
our architect go through the plan so as the board can see on my screen it's this corner property
that sort of fronts on 43rd and Powleton there's this tiny triangular shaped at the actual corner
that is we believe city owned it doesn't really have any ownership but we're kind of stuck in
between that and the adjacent property so our property doesn't really have a great even street
frontage it kind of has this angled triangular street frontage and then has a very short side
width and then it's very it's not very long it's longer on the on the Palton Street side
So a lot of our hardship for providing a single-family home is given the odd nature of the lot and then having it sort of be located on this busy corner adjacent to mostly CMX3 properties.
A lot of the properties on Powhatan Street are zoned RSA5, but they contain both legal and illegal multifamily.
And then further down the block on Powhatan, it's almost all RM1.
So what we're proposing here is not out of character with the adjacent block, as you can see from this larger aerial, there's multifamily and high density commercial mixed use, both directly adjacent and across the street from our site.
Again, as you can see, really oddly shaped small lot on this kind of corner with no real great street frontage.
So we are proposing a triplex.
We felt like the multifamily homeownership units would be better use of the site, add
additional eyes on the street and would make more sense for a apartment building than a
single family home with no real true street frontage and kind of odd to be on this corner
is probably why it's been vacant for many, many, many, many years.
I'm going to have Zamir from, this is a photo, a front photo of the lot, as you can see.
So I'm going to have Zamir from Morrissey Design share our plans. And then before I do that,
I'll just go through the community part. We met with the community a number of times starting
back in October. We met with the directly affected near neighbors and the community as a whole.
And as you can see from my screen, their position is of support.
There was six in support from the board, seven in support from all attendees, and then five
directly affected neighbors that supported the project.
So we got a letter of support from the West Paladin Saunders Park RCO.
And they provided a little bit more color to some of the additional reasons they supported the project, if the board wanted to read that in the letter that was sent over and I did for that earlier this morning with a revised hearing packet.
I'm going to stop my screen I see that Zamir has been promoted so Zamir if you can just wait for the chairman and then you'll be able to share your plans.
here please spell your first and last name and i'll swear you in
zamir uh z-a-m-i-r garcia g-a-r-c-i-a you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do thank you rachel samir can you share the plans and just go through them
for the board and specifically any changes that we made as well sure so the plans are
this is the zoning plan which as Rachel Rachel shared earlier the lot is
quite narrow on one end and so we're really kind of squished in there the the building
We're really kind of squished in there.
The building itself, so we've been able to utilize the site and take advantage of that
narrow lot to put in sort of a garden at the end, a stair entry to the upper units
at the smaller corner, and then as the building widens, it opens up to a larger, not too large,
about a 16 foot wide um apartment sorry condo that's by level and then you enter from off of
43rd street and then as you go it goes down to the lower level and then um as you go up to the
second floor there's a flat that's one bedroom unit and then just again the stairs here with a
garden up on the higher end off of that stair and then at the top floor another bi-level unit
which is more like a loft unit and you enter at the third floor and it's open on the fourth floor
as a mezzanine space. So the building at the the roof is a big skylight at the corner and then
the building facade is primarily brick to tie into the neighboring buildings red brick
to relate back to the neighborhood and then with some accents of black metal windows and black
metal bands and then black railing where we have areas that open up since there is no yard per se
on the site because of the narrowness of the site we do have large opening windows that are like
juliet balconies which allow the units to have kind of an inside outside space and then they do
there is a garden here which is not accessible but um it's sort of will be planted there kind
of look like that um and then at the ground floor we would plant that as well this is a
view of the building
if there are any questions um we can thank you thank you rachel anyone else no just um if
If Tyler Small or Andrew Yeager could be promoted so that they could adopt my testimony.
Mr. Small has been allowed to speak.
Morning, sir. Please spell your name and I'll swear you in.
Tyler Small, T-Y-L-E-R-S-M-A-L-L.
I'm going to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Ms. Pritzker?
Yep. Tyler, have you heard my testimony today?
and do you believe it to be true and accurate
and do you adopt it as your own?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Would anyone else like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
I see no further hands, Mr. Chair.
It's a very handsome-looking building.
Planning Commissioner.
Sorry, Chairman.
i believe that pamela andrews from the rco has her hand raised oh sorry about that sorry about
it pamela miss andrews please spell your full name and i'll swear you in pamela andrews a-n-d-r-e-w-s
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do thank you i'm sorry i passed over you please proceed
I'm here because I just wanted to support Rachel and the developers in this project.
Westphalden Saunders Park met with them for three times.
The near neighbors had an opportunity to give input into the design.
um and we feel that we got we have a good result and we also entered into a community benefit
agreement which we feel um will help support some of the beautification projects that are going on
in the community so i just came to basically lend my support to the project thank you so much
thank you anyone else to testify in this case please raise your hand
no further answer thank you planning commission
thank you chairman de chico ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
members of the board in 2015 the zoning map was amended in this area from rm1 to rsa5 in
from RM1 to RSA 5 in accordance with the recommendations from the comprehensive plan.
in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan.
However, as Ms. Pritzker has demonstrated, this lot is unusually shaped and constrained.
The dimensional variances correspond to the lot shape and don't conflict with the purpose and
spirit of the zoning code and the use variances are reasonable. City Planning Commission recommends
that the board grant the variance thank you mi 2021-003 396 31-33 north 43rd street
my vote is yes there are no revised plans correct um uh zamir there are no revised plans correct
go on my vote is yes carol tennari my vote is yes thomas my vote is yes
thank you uh case number 16 mi 2021-003397
3932-36
Mount Vernon Street
Alan Nockenson is the
Attorney of Record
Mantua Civic Association
sent a letter of opposition
and Councilwoman
Gauthier's office is
expressing opposition as well
Mr. Nockenson or
Ms. Amazon
yes i did okay alan please identify yourself you're still under oath from earlier
alan a-l-a-n last name knockamson n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-n
1-2-3 south broad street suite 1600 philadelphia pa 19109
do you swear truth and nothing but the truth i do do you agree to waive the reading of the
refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of
ownership tax compliance refuse a copy of the refusal and refer or referral photos under plans
of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do
you have a letter uh yes the only thing i would object to is the uh characterization of that the
council member uh opposes the project our understanding is that they were going to
support the project so we have a some correspondence so i i haven't seen anything
from the council member i knew that they were going to send something in writing so i haven't
seen that excuse me mr novinson i received an email from mr goodman i'll double check but i
believe that um he reported that the councilwoman was in opposition i will check that now yeah i
also got that email that's why i was like a little bit surprised maybe mr goodman might
be testifying so let's proceed okay all right um let me uh share my screen if i may
we love screens sure there you go um and that's why i'm in front of most of the time nowadays
i know um it's the covid world uh i'm here to present 3932 uh dash 36 mount vernon street
i am representing kumas homes in this endeavor uh it's a little bit of a drawn-out history
uh and we'll explain why so that's why i'm a little bit surprised that there's any opposition
uh for the community yep excuse me i'm sorry mr notkinson i just checked that and it was my mistake
um the council mr goodman sent in three recommendations the recommendation from
for mount burning was in support okay great i appreciate it i was like a little i was a little
my mistake i'm glad you caught it thank you no worries yes that makes a huge difference uh
I know because the board respects the council member's opinion.
All right.
So we have a table of contents, notice of refusal, correspondence from Mantua Civic Association.
It was a close vote, not a well-attended event, essentially it was a three to five vote.
We have correspondence from Andrew Goodman.
I don't know if it's the same correspondence that Ms. Saleta has, but we had some indication
from Mr. Goodman yesterday afternoon that the council member would support this project
because of the unique circumstances, I have a purchase and development agreement.
So you'll see a little background when we go through it.
My client, Kumas Homes, originally owned a property on North 41st Street in the same area of Philadelphia.
Unbeknownst to us, a portion of that property touched a community garden.
We were requested by the council member at the time, as well as the community, to facilitate a sale of that property.
uh to to facilitate um a sale of that property which we did with the city of philadelphia it
which we did with the
took us over a year working with the community as well as the council member at the time
to identify a property that made an equal property that made sense that's where we landed on 39 32-36
mount vernon street um you'll see the agreement of sale it indicates that we're seeking 14 units
exactly the amount of units we're seeking today, indicate that there would be 11 two-bedroom units,
three one-bedroom units. So between the council member and acquiring their property through the
land bank at the request of a portion of West Philadelphia, we endeavored on this project to
get a variance. So we were a little bit taken aback when Mantua Safe Association did not support
this project but i also think that we didn't expect you know such a low turnout so that's
where we are with that we have maps of the area photographs of the property plans and drawings
and you'll see that again we can go through extensively the drawings but the drawings that
are part of our purchase and development agreements are simply you know or have similar floor plans
or exactly floor plans to the ones that are in our architectural plans and drawings that we submitted
to the L&I as well as to the ZBA. We have our hearing notice or community meeting notice
showing proof that we actually mailed notice to the community and for whatever reason members of
the community did not attend this meeting in great numbers. Our application for appeal or
deeds of property showing that a subsidiary of Kumas Homes owns the property and that's IRA
Development and MECOS Enterprises. We have our Certificate of Tax Clearance. And we have a
representative from Kumas Homes who will dot my testimony. All right, so our notice of refusal,
this is an RSA 5 property. It's located not far off from a commercial corridor on Lancaster Avenue.
It's near public transportation. Both Lancaster has the 40 bus and the 10 trolley, and it's right
off of Haverford as well where the 43 bus goes. It's a rather large lot. It's over 4,000 square
foot lot. So when we identified a lot in consultation with the council member at the
time, this was a lot that made most sense under all circumstances to put a 14-unit building there.
We received the council member's support and we entered into the agreement with the city through
the land bank. And you'll see that. But we're an RSA 5 property. We have three refusals. First is
the multifamily use, obviously. But, you know, again, this was fleshed out in 2019 before we
agreed to do the land swap in order to accommodate the fact that we owned a portion or a portion of
our previously owned property touched upon a community garden. The second refusal is the open
area where 25 percent is required and 17.7 percent is proposed again something that was fleshed out
in 2019 at the time of the land swap and finally in terms of the bicycle parking five is required
zero is proposed we would have obviously no objection to putting parking bicycle parking
in the rear because you'll see that we have you know extensive amount of open area so if the board
assets. We will obviously put it in the rear of their property where the garbage is also stored
in this extensive rear yard. But again, we're near public
transportation. We have two major lines, one on Lancaster
Avenue, one on Haverford. So our letter
again, the Mantra Pacific Association, they don't
take an independent determination of whether they support a
project or oppose a project.
um we you know there were you know eight well nine people attended the meeting which is not a
great attendance for mantua typically one person abstained which i would believe would be myself
because i can't vote as a counsel to the applicant uh and then there were two people in support one
in non-opposition so i treat that as three in non-opposition and then five opposed so it was
a close vote and unfortunately mantua civic association cannot take a position based on
my understanding of how they take their positions other than opposition but we did have extensive
communications with them even before the uh the uh community meeting uh and we were prepared and
we are still prepared to enter into a community benefits agreement with man choice of association
um this is an email that i received from andrew german we just made a copy of it but like again
And you'll see the subject line is the address of the property, and it says community benefits agreement.
He says, and Mr. Grumman stated, though, I don't think we'll be able to be there live.
And Mr. Goodman stated, though I don't think we'll be able to be there live, our office will submit supportive testimony to ZBA staff in writing for 3932-36 Mount Vernon Street.
So that's the extent of the communication I had with Mr. Goodman yesterday.
I haven't seen what they've sent, but it sounds like they are in support.
The purchase and sale agreement with the Philadelphia Housing Development Corporation, I would just point the Board's attention to improvements, like the definition of improvements means 14 rental housing units consisting of 11 two-bedroom, two-bath units, and three one-bedroom, one-bath units, as more specifically set forth in the plans attached as Exhibit C.
And then we have Exhibit C, where, again, as part of this land swap, we were required to show how we were going to construct this building.
But you'll see, here are the floor plans for this building.
Here's the elevations.
Again, matches to what we were proposing in front of this EVA today.
Next thing is the map of the area.
Again, we're a sliver of RSA 5, but it's not uncommon to have RM1 or CMX 2 within close proximity.
And again, if you can see where we're in the neighborhood, we're basically a block away from Haverford, a block and a half away from Lancaster.
Our goal was to support the commercial corridor.
We identified a property, which was a rather large RSA 5 property that can fit the type of use that we're requesting.
and that density will support the commercial corridor in that part of town.
Photographs of the property, again, it's a large vacant lot.
As you can see right behind us, you can see an inkling of another large apartment building there.
Our building is only 14 units, though.
Pictures to the right of the property on Mount Vernon Street.
Pictures to the left of the property on Mount Vernon Street.
And then just our plans and drawings.
I mean, what we're trying to do is typical, you know, mix between brick and stone facades.
There are five units on the first floor and lower level, and then the second,
third, and fourth floors each have three units in them. As you can see, I just want to go back,
But as you can see, we have a rather large backyard where you have access from front to back for all the units.
Garbage will be stored in the rear.
We can put the bicycle parking, if necessary, in the rear as well.
But again, there's a ton of public transportation in close proximity.
Examples of the typical Kumas homes.
Kumas Homes is a well-known builder, property owner, landlord, as well as property manager in the Philadelphia region.
They've been in business for approximately 15 years.
So not only do they construct these properties, but they hold them, a lot of them, and they also manage these properties.
So the person who is in the neighborhood is not only going to see someone who's constructing something, but is actually going to keep it throughout its life cycle when it opens up for business.
But examples of just the interiors, again, hardwood floors, stainless steel appliances, a lot of different minor amenities that one would expect of a newly constructed residential apartment building.
And then the meeting notice, again, it was November 4th, 2021 at 5.30 p.m., so I don't
know if it was because there was an early time, but we really didn't have a well-attended
meeting. 149 addresses were notified at this meeting, and only a sliver attended that.
And then our application for appeal, we have the deed and our tax clearance certificate.
it. With that being said, I would like my client, Mr. Eze, to raise his hand.
Mr. Eze, it's been a lot to speak.
Good morning, sir. Please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Yes, it's Ifa'i Chukwu
I-F-E-A-N-Y-I-C-H-U-K-W-U
Last name's E-Z-E
We're affirming to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Mr. Knackinson
Mr. Easy, you heard everything I stated today
Yes. And is it true and correct? Correct. And do you adopt this in your own testimony? Yes. And specifically, you were involved with the land swap with the city at the time regarding this property, right? Correct. And everything I stated about the floor plans and the configuration of the project is true and correct? Correct. And you've relied on this land swap to build exactly what we're proposing today. Is that correct? Yes.
And is it true and correct?
Correct
And do you adopt this in your own testimony?
all right thank you thank you any questions from the board no mr chairman and mr chairman
would anyone else like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
mr chair a jihad ali has their hand raised i will allow them to speak at this time thank you
mr ali please spell your first and last name and i'll swear you in my name is jihad j-i-h-a-d-a-l-i
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, sir. Please proceed.
I attended the meeting on the Zoom meeting on behalf of Jimmy Allen, who is a strong community activist in that area.
He was in the hospital. He couldn't attend. He's a member of Mount Airy Civic Association.
I also represented Ms. Florence Foreman. She lives at 3901-05 Lancaster Avenue.
She's a business owner and her family owns an apartment building there.
They both were in support of that. Mr. Allen would have been here today. I'm not sure if he'll try to attend this morning, but he would have been here today, and he would have said that he adopted it.
He also asked for, he asked me to help read his community benefit agreement that he presented to Mantua Civic, and I think there was a disconnect between if all the members had gotten it on behalf of the board,
but Jimmy Allen supports this and he would be here today had it not been for him recovering
from his surgery. Thank you very much. Anyone else to testify in this case?
Ms. Colleen Ford has her hand raised. I'm allowed to speak.
Ms. Ford, please spell your name and I'll swear you in.
Ms. Ford, please unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Ms. Ford, please unmute yourself.
While we're waiting for Ms. Ford, is there anyone else?
Hello, can you?
Yes, Ms. Ford, please spell your first and last name.
Yes, Colleen, C-O-L-L-E-N, Ford, F-O-R-D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
okay um as we just said my name is Colleen Ford and I live right next door to where they want to
build I'm at 3930 Mount Vernon Street and I really don't want to see this project built because we
have one in the back of me I don't know if it's 50 60s a whole bunch of units um that's been here
I don't know roughly I guess four years now and first of all they took some of my land to build
that and i'm getting ready to do that fight because i just discovered that uh i should say
first of all that uh the little where they put the trash at it's always just trash all over the place
the dumpsters are just a big eyesore um i'm gonna check mr chair i believe she's talking about
another project yeah i'm just gonna ask you can't be talking about this property because it hasn't
been developed in but it's the same kind of property that he's going to develop it's the
same property that he's about to develop it's one they just developed on the corner of mount
vernon street across the corner so now you're talking about putting another one here that's
like i like i said it's becomes the eyesore nobody comes in check and make sure they put the
trash you know the the area where they put the trash that is clean you know um we don't have
anywhere to park as it is because of these buildings because of these apartment buildings
that they have we have nowhere to park
okay thank you anyone else to testify
no other hand sir thank you planning commission
thank you chairman de chico uh members of the board in in 2015 the zoning map was amended
in this area, like many blocks from RM1 to RSA 5. And this was done in accord with recommendations
from the comprehensive plan, but more importantly, with really broad community support in the
Manchu area. The zoning map change was made well in advance of the land swap that was described
by council here. So the single family zoning was well established and known to the appellant at
and known to the appellant at the time of the deal. So I really feel that the applicant's
at the time of the deal.
hardship claim is not supported with any kind of unique physical circumstances. We have a recent
community-led rezoning that intentionally designated this block as RSA 5, indicating
an intention for single-family use. In any RSA 5, 14 dwelling units is clearly an overuse, and in
this case, it's also clearly contrary to the intent of the zoning map and code change that was
made for this neighborhood and so in this case the city planning commission will recommend that
the board deny the variance yeah and mr chair i would say as to the hardship we you know we have
detrimentally relied on this land swap um and i think the council member now the current council
council member recognizes that that we did have to receive city approval through councilmatic
prerogative plus the city agency for all intents and purposes the city did approve this and this
It's just a formality to go through the ZBA approval process.
Yeah, understood.
Thank you.
MI 2021-003397, 3932-36 Mount Vernon Street.
My vote is yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes.
Professor Plaza, yes.
Thomas Holliman, yes.
Case number 17, MI 2021-003390, 635 North 5th Street, number 5th Street.
Catherine Missimer is the attorney of record.
My records and my notes indicate there has not yet been an RCO letter from Northern Liberties.
Neighbors Association, I suspect that that will not be the case once we begin hearing.
Chair, this is Sharon. I just wanted to say we received an amended
applicant, an amended refusal for this property. So if you should vote to approve it, you would,
I will give you the ZP number for the new refusal.
Okay, Miss Missimer. Please spell your full name for the record and I'll swear you in.
hi sorry it's katherine missomer m-i-s-s-i-m-e-r 1835 market street suite 1400
19103 you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do thank you ms canary has a few questions for you sure you also agree to wait the reading
the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. I was coming in as a panelist. I know that Sharon
started to talk about it. I just want to confirm that we're in receipt of the revised refusal dated
yesterday, 11-15. Great. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required documents
consisting of proof of ownership tax clearance, refusal referral, photos under plans of the
property, five days in advance of this hearing? And have you met with the RCO? And do you have
letter and i'm looking at the letter right on the screen i anticipated the question and yes all of
the above um just one additional clarification even on the revised refusal there is a typo
um rather than 15 as stated on the refusal this would be 16 units and that was reflected in both
the presentation to the community as well as all of our plans and materials okay great and as we
see on the screen. Northern Liberties supports this. You may proceed. Great. Thank you all.
I'm here today on behalf of the property owner, 635 Fairmount Ventures, LLC. With me today are
owner's rep, Carr, Vivek Panathon, and project architect, Tim McDonald. Here today with a
proposal for the lot consolidation of these two lots at the corner of 5th and Fairmount,
and the new construction of a mixed-use building for use of 16 multifamily dwelling units with a
ground floor commercial space, and five accessory off-street parking spaces. As mentioned, we have
met with Northern Liberty's Neighborhood Association. They do support this proposal.
These lots located at corner 5th and Fairmount are zoned ICMX, but as you can see from the zoning
map, this is sort of the divergence of several different zoning designations in this area. You
little bit of CMX1 as well as RSA5 in this area. These are two vacant structures at the corner.
They have fallen into disrepair. They have been made safe, but they're not really candidates for
rehab or revitalization. The proposal generates two refusals, first being that the properties
are zoned ICMX, meaning that the multi-family use is not permitted by right. As you can see,
meaning that the multifamily use is not permitted by Wright.
As you can see, this area is surrounded by residential units.
A typical ICMX use such as storage or warehouse wouldn't really make sense here,
especially at this vibrant corner.
And there are similar mixed-use projects across Fairmount Avenue as well.
I'll just decrease this so you can see the zoning site plan.
Again, this is Fairmount Avenue and 5th Street. We're wrapping the corner by this consolidation,
separated on Fairmount Avenue by a 20-foot-wide drive aisle from the homes located here, and
residential use directly next door on 5th Street as well.
Closal, in addition to the use, which again is more along the lines of an IRMX designation,
although we're not seeking the 60-foot height that would be allowable by right in IRMX.
We're more comparable to the neighboring properties at about 42.
We also generate a parking refusal. As you're aware, ICMX requires a ratio of one for two parking
spaces, whereas in an RM1, you would have no parking required, and in an IRMX, it would be
3 for 10. So we do meet the 3 for 10 standard, but we are falling short on the 1 for 2 because
we're proposing 5 spaces rather than the 8. Obviously, the proposed project does conform
to Northern Liberty's Neighborhood Association's view for this section of their neighborhood.
It does complement the neighboring residential uses on either side. As you can see, it's similar
to the new construction of the neighboring parcels. Again, this is the revised refusal
dated yesterday of 11-15. We're confident that this proposal represents the lease modification
of the code necessary to revitalize these two corner properties in a prominent section of this
neighborhood. It will not be detrimental to the public welfare, as again evidenced by our letter
of support. We're not negatively impacting adjacent parcels, as again this is more complementary to
the residential uses on either side of us,
as well as the mixed use located across Fairmount Avenue.
I would just ask if Carr could unmute himself
and be sworn in.
I have Anurah Vivekanathan with her hand raised.
Yes, thank you.
Ma'am, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Hi. First name is A-N-U-R-A. Last name is Vivekanathan. V-I-V-E-K-A-N-A-N-T-H-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Ms. Zimmerman.
Thank you. Carr, have you heard my testimony today?
I have.
Would you agree that it's true and correct?
Would you adopt it as your own?
I would. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Any questions from the board?
No, sir. Anyone else to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
Mr. Larry Friedman has the hand raised, sir. I have allowed them to speak.
Mr. Friedman, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Larry Friedman, L-A-R-R-Y-F-R-E-E-G-M-A-N.
Where from to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, sir. Please proceed.
Very briefly, we support this project.
ICMX is kind of an odd zone there,
considering I was friends with the inhabitant for 25 years
who lived there, Carr's dad.
And otherwise, we appreciate the work that Onion Flats did,
specifically to McDonald, working with the neighbors to meet their needs.
so we support this project. Thank you. Anyone else to testify in this case?
And Mr. Todd Lowell has their hand raised. I will allow him to speak at this time, sir.
Please spell your name, sir, full name, and I'll swear you in.
Mr. Lowell, are you there?
We'll move on.
Is there anyone else to testify?
Mr. Ohl was back on, sorry.
No, Chair, we can continue.
Thank you.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Tico, Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Members of the Board, in 2014, the zoning map was amended in this area and accord recommendations
for the comprehensive plan, this parcel was intentionally not changed. However, given the
similarity of the proposed use to adjacent uses and the overall degree of non-conformity in the
ICMX zoning district in place on this block, the City Planning Commission recommends that the
board grant the variances. Thank you. MI 2021-003390, 635 North 5th Street, that's number 5
Street. My vote is yes with the proviso as per refusal for amended application number Z as in
0, P as in Paul, 2021-007905 and maximum 16 units. Carol Tenneri, yes with proviso.
Professor Plaza, yes with proviso. Thomas Holloman, yes with proviso. Thank you. Miss Missimer, I think
you're up next. So case number MI 2021-003378, 814 North 2nd Street.
I'm going to turn it over to Herc, but thank you.
Okay, thank you.
Am I next, Catherine?
Well, I think Herc has to be promoted to paneling.
Catherine has to be sworn in.
Yeah, my notes had Ms. Mismur on, but you need...
We horse traded.
Mr. Chair?
Mr. Chair, Ian?
Yes, sir.
Mr. Herkenes-Grigos has his hand raised.
Allow him to speak.
Ms. Grigos?
Jason, please be a turn for the applicant, if you could promote him, please.
He just put his hand down for some reason.
please promote it we can continue okay thank you thank you good afternoon members of the board
hercules grigos 1835 market street philadelphia pa representing david perlman prdc properties and
its affiliate 820 north second realty llc owner of the property located at 814-26 north second
street where he goes please spell your full name and i'll swear you in h-e-r-c-u-l-e-s last name
g-r-i-g-o-s and do you swear or find me to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do thank you ms tenere has a few questions for you hi do you agree to waive the reading
refusal and stipulate to its accuracy uh i will waive the reading um but we do have a few changes
that i can uh explain in my uh presentation thank you have you emailed the exhibit packet with the
required documents consisting of proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the refusal or referral
photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the
rco and do you have a letter yes thank you you may proceed great thank you very much members of the
board and I will share my screen if I may. Please let me know if you can see that. Yes. Great. Thank
you very much. As I said, I'm here representing PRDC Properties and David Perlman and their
affiliate 820 North Second Realty LLC, owner of the parcel located at on North Second Street in
between Poplar and Brown.
You can see it highlighted here.
Today I have with me David Perlman and Tony Maris
from ownership as well as Russ and Oliver,
the project architect.
The property is an assemblage of a few parcels
on North 2nd Street,
the set between Brown and Poplar.
It's currently a portion is a vacant lot
and some vacant buildings.
I believe there's two existing curb cuts here.
um you'll note this this is a unique portion of second street uh the uh area here it's on north
second is a hundred foot wide so the width is pretty much double uh typical uh street um and
other portions of the streets probably 50 foot wide so as a result you have the unique condition
of perpendicular parking that you see lining the street um and because of that you have sort of
these unique conditions with the existing curb cuts.
Previously, about a year ago, this project was approved for a 78-unit mixed-use multifamily project, 70 feet in height, with a ground floor fresh food market.
Previously, about a year ago,
this project was approved for
We're here today to seek approval for underground parking. I believe 25 underground parking units, and the reason that we are here is because we have no rear street to access the parking,
So the only way to access the parking is through the front of 2nd Street.
And because this does not have a rear street, that generates a refusal.
There had been some confusion in the application about changing the Fresh Food Market designation.
I've spoken to Ms. Saleta. We have withdrawn that request.
So we are just here seeking approval for the underground parking.
And I'll speak to those refusals and variances that we're seeking.
As I said, the property is zoned CMX 2.5, and I'm just going to scroll through.
So here's the condition on the ground, as you can see, ground floor commercial space.
There was existing curb cuts that were basically relocating.
I believe that there was a fire hydrant here that's going to be relocated.
So you can see the condition of North 2nd Street, curb cut here, bus stop, and the breakups in the pavement, additional curb cuts.
There was previously a curb cut here, and I think a little bit further south.
There's an existing perpendicular loading zone here, which will not be disturbing.
So effectively what we have is, I believe there's previously about six on-street parking spaces in this area.
We're going to improve that to, I believe, 10 off-street parking spaces as a result, plus 25 underground spaces.
Just scroll through.
Here is the underground condition, 25 parking through a mechanical elevator.
and here's the condition on the street where we have uh sort of the uh stacked reservoir spaces
that are because we have such a large area here for the perpendicular parking we have the reservoir
spaces plus additional reservoir spaces in the interior this is just the layouts above
we had met with northern liberties about a year ago when we first came through the project
um even though we had no cdr and no refusals but we did um speak to them at that point i think
their desire was really that we seek a variance for the height and not obtain the fresh food and
affordable housing bonuses that we did but um but we came through with with designing the project
consistent with the cmx 2.5 zoning code and we returned basically with this change to show
um a uh parking uh accessed from the front um and i think it's an important um it's an important
distinction here to to note this it's about a hundred foot wide facade and you have um a large
amount of uh the lobby and glazing etc so i think that's um um that's an important um distinction
there um typically the prohibition against front-loaded parking is for much smaller
properties is really what's contemplating where you have those um you know breaking up the uh
the building facades and pedestrian experience you know uh typical um cmx2 2.5 you have lots
of small 16 to 20 foot wide this is 100 foot wide with a very considerable amount of glazing
um uh large retail tenant and lobby so we think the impact is de minimis and i think it's
outweighed by um adding 25 additional uh parking spaces below grade which as everyone know is
always is always a premium just here's our zoning site plan and i just want to um
scroll down a little bit and give everyone a sense of the um the condition on the ground here
um i think if i can switch to google earth
everyone can see this i think you can see the this is the existing condition
um here this is no parking here there's a hydrant we're going to relocate this hydrant
you have uh existing curb cut here where there's no parking and as you come up the street
another this is part of the property another existing curb cut so all of these this area
will be replaced and will be given back for on-street parking and just to give it the context
of the neighborhood directly across the street you have this condition it's actually a worse
you have this condition it's actually a worse condition because you don't have the amount of
condition because you don't have the amount of glazing in retail but you do have
glazing and retail but you do have um a front loaded um you know parking for a multi-family
building um additionally just as we scroll this space here is dedicated for on-street loading
so we we would suspect that that would be utilized as well for our retail go back to
let me speak to the refusals if I may
some more pictures
I look forward to handing everybody paper
burn pointing to a board in person someday. So the refusals are essentially for the
off-street parking. Access from the front is prohibited in the CMX2. The reservoir spaces
too are required, as well as the commercials required for the entire frontage. We do have
that and i believe they wrote a refusal because of the uh entrance that small portion that is
the entrance into the parking access from the front um originally we we had had a tenant prior
to the pandemic uh for the fresh food market that tenant uh lapsed so there was discussion about
seeking a different use but we um since everything is moving in in a we sort of see some visibility
out of this um we've uh withdrawn the request to remove the fresh food market which i think
cause some confusion. So I spoke to Ms. Saleta about that as well. So those are the only two
relevant refusals. And then we met with Northern Liberties and, you know, after the meeting there
was some discussion and the letter was that they were opposed to the addition of parking on this
project, which was kind of a surprise to us because we think that, you know, most projects
that we work on the desire for underground parking um is you know tantamount i think that is
typical what people desire um and you know they say the curb cut for parking removed the loading
zone for the fresh market and broke up the pedestrian experience however i don't know if
they're mistaken but the loading zone remains we're not changing that and we're actually um as
i said increasing um the amount of parking on street i think that the amount of glazing and
retail that we have um creates a fantastic pedestrian experience and improves the condition
that's there of numerous curb cuts um and we believe that this uh adding 25 parking spaces
plus the additional on-street parking is a huge benefit for a 78 unit building on this part of
North 2nd Street. I believe Rustin Ohler is here as well as David Perlman. So I'll ask David Perlman
to be promoted and I can ask him a few questions. Perlman, please spell your first and last name
and I'll swear you in. David Perlman, D-A-V-I-D, P-E-R-L-M-A-N.
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do thank you mr grigos david have you heard my testimony uh and you adopt it as your own i do
um and i guess uh i'll just say that i believe this is the minimum relief necessary
uh this will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood i think
mixed use residential retail um and adding parking is certainly a benefit uh it will not
impair appropriate uses or development or adequate uh light of adjacent properties uh will not
substantially increase congestion and will not be detrimental to the neighborhood uh as an increase
in parking um off street and on street parking we think is certainly beneficial um so i will um
turn over to the board to ask any questions um and i believe russian always available if you
have any questions on the design thank you any questions from the board no mr chairman
Would anyone else like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
Mr. Chair, Mr. Larry Friedman has his hand raised.
Mr. Friedman, please identify yourself again, spell your name, you're still under oath.
Larry Friedman, L-A-R-R-Y-F-R-E-E-D-M-A-N, Northern Liberty Zoning Chair, 700 North 3rd Street.
Northern Liberty Zoning Chair, 700 North 3rd Street.
Please proceed.
I'm here to explain to everybody why we oppose the application for parking.
At our public meeting, we really wrestled with this one.
If somebody offers you 25 parking spots with underground parking, you know, typically you would jump at it.
But we dig, and we dig, and we dig, and we talk.
And there are other elements here that create a different story.
The main one is walkability and safety.
uh it's the most highly trapped trafficked uh street in the neighborhood especially between
poplar and all the way down to the l stop at spring garden uh at rush hour and throughout
the day hundreds of people walk up and down uh north 2nd street um the idea of cars coming in
and out, create a, hamper that walkability, especially with this elevator system, we just
know their cars are going to be waiting to come out and come in and probably be on the
sidewalk, which creates a safety hazard for people who are going to have to stop and maybe
want to walk out into second street to get around, which is really not a good idea.
You can see by the picture, the cars are coming down there at 50 miles an hour.
And so we had to make a tough call here.
The people who were at the meeting and the committee members, we wound up on the side of honoring the neighbors who were walking down to the L, trying to get to, you know, get to work.
And the safety aspect of this. In addition, when we continue to analyze this, we realized that in the past 10 years, things have changed drastically in terms of we might have come up on a different side of this a while back.
there's a lot of opportunities for people who want to live at this building that don't require
them to have a car or require them to have parking you got uber you got lyft people work from home
you got the l stop so this is basically a tod and you got enterprise uh rent a car on spring
barn street so you can actually exist in this building um and have a a wonderful life and not
have to have parking and not even have to have a car uh there's a second street's full of
restaurants and full of everything else that you need um let me talk about that that loading zone
real quick which is with a fresh market you're going to have daily um deliveries uh we would
like to see if possible the area where they're proposing parking as a loading zone so the
trucks can pull in there and won't help take up any more space on the street and create any more
of a safety hazard um and with for those reasons we we can't support this application uh for parking
um there are any questions uh not i'm going to turn this over to chris kennedy who is the
executive director of the northern liberties bid
mr kennedy yeah let's get him sworn in and then i'll because i have a couple of questions as well
great um hello i'm here please spell your full name uh yes my name is christine kennedy k-r-i-s-t-i-n-e
last name k-e-n-n-e-d-y if you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth? I do. Thank you. Before you proceed, Mr. Grigos, you had some questions for Mr.
I just wanted to respond to say, I mean, the idea that that would be an off-street loading zone,
I think would be a much more dangerous condition to pedestrians of trucks backing in there. So I
don't see the logic in creating an off-street loading zone. I think it's inconsistent with
what they're saying. And frankly, I think that what we expect as a tenant and speaking to our
brokers and david can can uh agree to this testify this is what we spoke to but we think this is
going to be you know small vans and box trucks based on i mean this is not going to be a trader
a trader joe's or whole foods this is going to be um smaller van service and box trucks that we
joe's or whole foods this is going to be um smaller van service and box trucks
think can come back in and i think if you look at the come back into the space and if you look at um
if i can um find the uh the overview here um it's it's there's there's really a lot of space here
um from you know you have you have probably 20 foot wide plus additional where the street
line is and there's it's 100 foot wide so we think there's plenty of room for to utilize
the existing loading zones and i think with the queuing um and some some engineering that we can
do here um there's plenty of place for stacking and stacking the interior and the exterior so cars
don't stack um on the um on the side issue mr grigos on that issue with your cursor you have
you're showing the two vehicles entering the garage to the right you have a void between the
right the car on the right and the perpendicular parking the three cars you're showing for
perpendicular parking are they the loading zones for the food market well they're just they're just
on street parking currently i believe i believe this spot here is currently reserved as a loading
zone from the city um we expected that our our tenant would use that but it's possible that they
may seek to use one of these a loading zone as well um but there's there's not going to be a
situation where you would load parallel because of the condition of the street you would load
perpendicular i was getting to that i'm not not that because i think it's i don't want to say
we should suggest we should be moving on street parking but i was wondering if there was a way
in which we did you would eliminate one or two of those cars those meaning the two of the three
and create a lay-by or a queuing area for entrance into the garage.
I think that could be done.
You know, you'd have a better sight line looking north on second
as you're leaving the garage.
Just a thought. I'm looking at it.
I think that makes a lot of sense.
I believe Rustin Oliver is here,
but we could also talk to our civil engineer
and confirm that work with um streets department to do that and i'm not sure how northern liberties
would react to that and i'm just mr freeman brought up larry and and northern liberties and
i i appreciate that it was we appreciate where they're coming from and we recognize that it was
you know it is a tough call for them but but we we think that um you know the opportunity for
below grade parking um you know can be is is worth it and can be mitigated with some of the
things that you're talking about so um just the thought i had and my you know again that was
basically to address mr freeman's concern about you know sight line he may not have used that
terminology but stacking of cars waiting to get in the garage if we had a lay-by along the curb
parallel that could potentially be the lay-by waiting to get into the garage if i can rustin
always here rustin rustin can speak to that um if you want to promote yeah i'm again i'm not looking
to redesign this i'm just no but i think there's a solution to that we have great respect for
northern liberties david has built a lot of stuff in the neighborhood and we have you know it's there
and for a long time let's do this uh hercules if you could let's hear from miss uh kennedy first
and then we'll ask the board thank you miss kennedy thank you yeah uh sure um my name is
Christine Kennedy. I'm the executive director of the Northern Liberties Business Improvement
District in which this property lies. And in consultation with our executive committee
and the NLNA zoning committee, we've agreed to support their opposition to this parking plan.
Much like what Larry was saying, you know, for so many reasons, the addition of parking
to this district would in most cases be a great idea
that we would really support.
This particular location is a little bit problematic
for a lot of the reasons that Larry cited.
One is just that in general,
we've just completed a streetscape vision plan.
It will change and evolve as we kind of continue
to talk to property owners and see how we can create
some more public space on 2nd Street,
make better use of the street in general.
And, you know, the addition of another driveway, an actively used driveway, like this one, is going to definitely impede some of the things that we have been thinking about doing to Second Street to make it just a better commercial corridor in general.
I do think that there will have to be additional loading zones. That one space certainly won't cut
it, regardless of whether this ends up being one commercial tenant or three. Also, I'm fairly
um also i i'm fairly certain and i'd love this to be verified that circles actually pays for um
certain, and I'd love this to be verified, that
the loading zone that's in front of their business and i think it would be um not not a great plan
to bet on using that space which they use often for their delivery vehicle their delivery cars
to deliver um their food um i do kind of think that that you know this elevator plan um it's
untested in this neighborhood. We already have a lot of congestion on Second Street with
delivery trucks of all varieties just parking in the middle of the street.
And I do worry much the way that Larry had cited that this is going to create something of a backup
as cars are trying to enter and exit this parking garage. And, you know, the addition of
residential parking on the commercial corridor it you know it doesn't really add to the commerce
part of it um and which is kind of where my my focus is um it's not adding parking for instance
for shoppers and people who might be coming to visit this place those people um would be relying
on um the on-street parking um i think that you know the tipping point for us might be um if this
parking was available, you know, for instance, for shoppers, and it would be a slightly different
conversation. But the fact that it is there to support the residents, it will encourage people
who own cars to live here. And, you know, just in general, like Larry was saying, you know, for us,
just maintaining mobility, and that pedestrian access is really just a high priority for us.
i just want to see if russin allers available just to respond to some of the um the functionality
okay while we're waiting is there anyone else who would like to testify in this case
yes chair we have mary jones if jason can allow her to speak next
ms jones please identify yourself you're still under oath
ms jones you can unmute yourself okay i thought i was unmuted sorry about that i'll start again
um based on communication mary just identify yourself that's all oh oh okay um mary jones
from um daryl clark's office thank you okay sorry about that uh yes um based on communication from
the uh um coordinating rco um citing their concerns about safety and interrupting the
pedestrian flow uh the council president does support them and ask that the board
opposed as variance for parking thank you thank you anyone else
is rustin or available to speak yes i'm here i didn't realize it was the fifth district
he used to be the first all right uh rustin please spell your full name and i'll swear you in
Rustin, R-U-S-T-I-N, last name Oler, O-H-L-E-R.
Where from to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Rustin, can you talk a little bit about the mechanical parking and the controls that are in place and your experience with that?
So we've done these in several other buildings.
And, you know, normally for a 25-car parking garage, we would only typically just put in one elevator through our conversations and looking at this site.
We've chosen two, so there's basically one dedicated for down and one dedicated for up.
And we've also recessed the elevators back into the building, which creates a reservoir space both for the car coming down and for the car coming up at the same time on site.
and allows those cars to be set back with a wider entrance so they would have a view of
you know the sidewalk before they would pull out they would then be able to cross the sidewalk and
then there's essentially because the parking on this street is perpendicular instead of parallel
with the sidewalk we have another reservoir space where the parking lane would go so essentially
you have two reservoir spaces on the way in and two on the way out without impeding traffic or
the sidewalk. We've also spoken with the owners and if the need or if the board should so see,
we have the ability to introduce a flashing light or signal or some sort of other pedestrian
notification for pedestrian safety. Also with all of our projects where we introduce curb cuts,
we do change and delineate the sidewalk pavement just as additional means of safety to notify
uh the sidewalk pavement just as additional means of safety to notify somebody that's not
paying attention um that there's something clearly different going on there
uh you heard my questions uh rustin uh there was a couple but yes if you could be specific i'd be
happy to answer well i was just curious if you eliminated one or two or quite possibly the three
on-street parking perpendicular spaces to the right of the lane that I guess is the ingress
lane to the garage. Would that be something that might make sense in terms of queuing up in the
event there's some stacking of cars getting into the garage? Yeah so if you look at the plan that
we have now just for what we need to make the curb cut with of how it comes out straight
with the streets department regulation there's already naturally room for another car to the
right on coming in before you get to the parking so there would be room for another car to pull
over there um and then yeah if we needed to make additional loading or um we could do that it
would basically have to be designated as a no parking area because the streets wouldn't want
us to widen our curb cut um but yes again but russian i guess what you're saying is because
of the width of north second street you have you could you could actually queue along this area as
well or we could remove some of these no no so what i'm saying here because between the car that
you show going in with the dash lines and the first parking space there's already room for
another car there right here right um you have about you know nine feet from the car to where
that first line is so there's already that natural room there so essentially you have a car in the
elevator that's functioning the elevator moves um it goes up and down in about a minute um so it's
pretty quick then you have a car um in the recess area you have another in the drive lane there's a
room for another one's the right of it so you essentially got four cars going down and three
cars coming up and there's only 25 spaces in the basement so um as far as industry standard goes
i think the amount of reservoir room that we have is excessive so thank you all right um
any questions from the board uh yes mr chairman no is there any is there any data on the uh
breakdown of these lifts i'm sorry i didn't hear that the list for the cars
would you repeat your full question i we didn't yes any data
going to break down the mechanical system for the lift of the cars like how they function and
operate and speed and stuff yes i mean we we have that data from from our specs that we use to
design around what's the service uh regularly what's the service on them
well just as a normal elevator that you would have in your building so regular and routine
maintenance um you know they have to be inspected every six months or so um they are they're
governed under the same rules as as the uh elevators in the building because they are
registered for it's not just like a mechanical lift it is meant for a person to be in the car
while it's while it's moving so it's governed under the same rules as any passenger elevator
that you have in any building thank you any other questions
No. Just to be clear on that, PRDC manages all their own properties. They have a management
company. They have hundreds of units under management. So that's stuff that they maintain.
Thank you. Is there anyone else to testify?
Yes, sir. Mr. J. Crosby with his hand raised. I will allow him to speak at this time.
Sir, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Jay Crosby, J-A-Y-C-R-O-S-B-Y.
Where are we from to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you, sir. Please proceed.
So recently there's been a change in the parking on 3rd Street between Poplar and Wildey, where now it's all three-hour parking.
and i know that there's also some talk of developments uh another like thousand units
plus up around the liberty walk area so any of this that i can see coming to
our neighborhood that's going to provide more parking we absolutely should be doing it and i
think as long as we're doing it in a safe manner which it sounds like that's what's happening here
like we're taking into account the safety of the pedestrians that this actually should be approved.
I'm all about parking. So I know for me, I've lived here for 30 years.
I'm all about parking. So I know for me, I've lived here for 13 years and having my kids in
a car and trying to be able to find parking now has just been a complete struggle. So I think
that we should really consider approving this as it's definitely going to create, you know,
a lot more parking for us. Thank you. Anyone else?
Mr. David Grasso with his hand raised I will love to speak at this time sir
Mr. Grasso please spell your full name and I swear you in
sure my name is David D-A-V-I-D Grasso G-R-A-S-S-O
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
I do thank you sir please proceed
Mr. Chairman Madam Vice Chairman thank you for your time today
um i live about uh two blocks from this site i walk my dogs by in front of this property every
single day and you know what i walk past before getting to this site are cars parked on the
sidewalk numerous cars parked on the sidewalk numerous cars parked up to the curb up to the
corner blocking handicapped ramps. And that's because there's not enough parking in this
neighborhood. We have a project here that's offering, a developer that's offering of its
own volition to add additional parking that's not required. And the neighborhood doesn't want
that for some reason. I've heard all of the reasons that they've given for it, but that
makes absolutely zero sense to me adding additional parking here will will free up the parking spaces
in front of this building for the retail if people are going to have cars it's it's a fallacy to think
that just because you don't provide parking people are not going to have cars 100 they're going to be
cars they're going to be people in this building with cars and they're going to be searching around
the neighborhood to find a place to park and they're going to park on on this on the sidewalk
walk and up on the curb because there's nowhere to park. And not only that, much of the streets
surrounding this neighborhood are unregulated, meaning that they don't even get tickets for
doing that. So to me, it seems ludicrous that the neighborhood association is opposing this
project or this particular variance to allow additional parking. Now, as some of you know,
I'm a real estate developer. I've been doing this a long time. I've developed several projects in my
career that have mechanical lifts very similar to this. They're very simple operations. They're
one-stop hydraulic elevators, essentially. They don't have a lot of moving parts.
They don't break down a lot. And you're only talking about 25 cars here. I don't see how
there could be a lot of backup of cars trying to get in and out of this thing. There's only 25 cars.
So, look, as a neighbor, as a resident, I just see this as being something we should welcome into our neighborhood, not something that we should turn away.
So I'd urge you to vote in favor of this application.
Mr. Grasso. Anyone else?
No further hands at this time, sir.
Thank you. Mr. Grigos, I think it was mentioned, is there anything in the plan that talks about a warning device or devices so that pedestrians would know?
Yeah, I think what we can do, I mean, prior to building permit, we're going to have to go back to streets department on that design.
So I think we can agree to work on warning devices, the queuing, and continue to work with Northern Liberties Neighbors Association on that.
I think the warning devices will be beneficial to everybody.
Yeah, and we think that makes a lot of sense.
And I think it's something that would, you know, I guess we should have had that on here.
But I think it's really something that when we come to the building permit phase is where that stuff gets added with the streets department.
But I think that is we are absolutely willing to do that and willing to continue to work with the neighbors.
because we understand Larry's point that it was a tough call
and that we have great respect for Northern Liberties
and we have great respect for the councilman,
who I think is usually on record as seeking additional parking.
So we think there's a way to do this
that meets both the need for more parking
and does it in a safe way for pedestrians.
And I think as we get through the design phase
with the streets department,
we can loop in Northern Liberties
and make sure we have all those warning lights
and queuing if it's appropriate.
Thank you. And if the board were to approve this this morning, there's afternoon, whatever time it is, it is afternoon, I would ask that you stay in touch with the RCO as it relates to a warning device and talk to them about the type of device they would have, you know, one that may be a silent one with the light flashing as opposed to a beeping sound, whatever.
Thank you.
And if the board were to approve this this morning,
this afternoon, whatever.
Just work with them. I think that would be helpful.
We always do and we're happy to continue.
Okay, Planning Commission.
Thank you Chairman DeChico, Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Members of the Board, in 2014, the zoning map was amended in this area from I-2 to CMX
2.5 in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan.
With respect to the height variance, the height was previously earned as described.
Sorry.
Excuse me?
There is no height variance.
It's been withdrawn in the request for removal of the freshman year.
Yes, that's understood.
and if you would allow me to finish my um testimony i would thank you apologies um the
height was previously earned through the now defunct fresh food bonus and provided that the
applicant intends to continue to provide the fresh food store we do not object however with the
respect to the variants for parking access uh we concur with the rco and the business association
and the council member's office uh that the and we concur that this variant should be denied the
purpose of prohibition on public parking access from a primary street is to preserve and enhance
pedestrian safety and comfort. This proposal will be a detriment to both regardless of pavement
markings or warning devices. Provision of parking is not as desirable at this location as it may be
in others given the intensity of the pedestrian activity and the proximity to the L station and
we further believe that the hardship here is self-created since there is no parking requirement
in the cmx 2.5 zoning district city planning commission recommends that the board deny the
variance for parking access from second street very interesting case interesting arguments on
both sides um mi 2021-003378 814 north second street my vote is yes with the proviso request
to remove fresh food market withdrawn.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes with proviso.
Professor Plaza, yes with proviso.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is no.
I would ask, is there anyone who feels that they've not been recognized on the 930 list?
Please raise your hand.
Any unfinished business, please let us know.
No hands, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Thank you all. See you back here at two o'clock.
Okay, Mr. Chairman.
All right.
We'll give Jason and whomever time for us know when we can begin.
We're ready to start here.
Hey, thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Frank DiCicco. I'm the chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. I'll be participating in today's hearing along with our vice chair, Ms. Carol Tenere.
I'm sorry, Confessor Plaza, our board secretary.
Present.
Board member, Mr. James Snell.
Present.
Also in attendance is our board administrator, Mr. Jason Hand, and board attorney, our board
attorney, Ms. Sharon Saleta.
Also, our zoning board administrator, Ms. Tanya Sunkett, is also present.
For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through
some of the basics of what you can expect.
First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded
and that by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded
and that the recording will be made available to the public
by contacting Ms. Tanya Sunkit at tanya.sunkit at phila.gov.
For anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify,
you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
I'll repeat, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify,
you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google number 267-270-5548
5 5 4 8 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue. I will repeat
leave your email address and the address of the property at
that. To enter an appearance statement, call Google 2 6 7 2 7 0 5 5 4 8 and leave your email
address and the address of the property at issue. And I'd like to remind everyone, please do not
attempt to testify in the chat. Comments, questions, and or concerns should be directed
to Mr. Jason Hand, today's board administrator. With that, I will go to the first case, which is
an add-on. No, before I begin that, let me ask. The following cases have been requested to be
continued. Number two on our list, MI 2021-003290, 1300 North Howard Street. Number 10 on our list,
MI 2021-001633, 5928 Walnut Street. And number 11 on our list, MI 2021-003
336 627 East Thompson Street. If anyone disagrees with the continuance request for the three cases
I just read into the record, please raise your hand at this time. Only if you have a
concern about the request for continuance as I just read into the record.
There are no answers, Mr. Chair. Thank you. I will now ask if anyone would like to
request a continuance or withdrawal on the two o'clock list anyone would like to request
a continuance or withdrawal for the two o'clock list please raise your hand at this time
once again no hands at this time sir thank you sir all right we'll go to the first case which
is an add-on case. MI 2021-0003196134R, I guess that's rear, dash 46 Wayne Avenue. This is a
variance request. Ms. Pritzker is one of the attorneys and or Mr. Brandon Sovran for the
applicant, Steve Masters for WCGN, the appellant in the case against L&I. The appeal against L&I
was denied on November the 3rd, 2021. We're returning today to hear discussion regarding
a variance. So Ms. Pritzker and Mr. Severin, please identify yourselves for the record,
then I'll get to Mr. Masters, and then we'll proceed.
Good afternoon, Rachel Pritzker, R-A-C-H-A-E-L, Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R, 1521 Locust Street,
Suite 605, Philadelphia, PA, 19102.
You're still under oath from earlier today, Mr. Severin?
It's B-R-A-N-D-O-N, S as in Sam, A, V as in Victor, R-A-N, also a Pritzker Law Group
at the same address you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i did okay mr masters
you're muted steve you're muted yes i noticed that good afternoon mr chair members of the board
steve masters from the law firm of just laws i represent west central germantown neighbors
or from to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do all right how do we begin here
I'm trying to remember how we left off.
Yeah, so Chairman, this is our variance case.
As you mentioned, the additional, the L&I appeal was denied.
And so we are just here for one refusal.
So I'm going to share my screen.
We have a number of individuals that are going to be testifying on our end.
And I will introduce them and ask that they be sworn in and allowed to speak.
I'm first going to start with our refusal. This project is for an existing RM3 property.
We are looking to put a multi-family building. We again utilize unity of use as it is a rear
property with the street fronting on Wayne Avenue and the only, we'll go through the plans,
but the only refusal that we have is for tree replacement requirements pursuant to section 14705.1f.
And other than that, we don't have any other refusals for this project. The unit count is by right.
Other than that, we don't have any other refusals for this project.
The unit count is by right, the height is by right, the massing is by right, the parking is by right, and we're just here for tree replacement.
I'm going to bring on Sarah Poindexter, who is our civil engineer, so that she can go through the site plan.
So if she could be promoted to a panelist.
Before we begin that, does this have to do with heritage tree replacement?
uh no it's just tree replacement requirements in general okay because there's legislation
moving through council or will be regarding heritage trees and i do have a client that
heritage tree is impacting its development so if it's not heritage trees i'm okay
mr chair it is it's our understanding that it is a heritage tree issue um specifically i thought i
read that somewhere so uh i apologize but i'm going to recuse myself from this because to be
clear we don't have a refusal for any heritage trees it's tree replacement requirements the
heritage tree section is a completely different provision in the code and we did not trigger the
heritage tree special exception we triggered the variance for tree replacement mr chair if it's of
any help um we will we have an arborist who's going to be one of our witnesses and um after
his testimony i think um you may if you're comfortable now that's of course fine but that
may provide more um ammo for your decision of whether or not to recuse but i just want to go
on record uh if in the event that i have to recuse myself you'll understand why yes understood okay
all right steve yes absolutely great to hear from the office okay thank you okay so bring on sarah
poindexter i'm gonna jump to um our site plan
he's been promoted so this is just the aerial um showing that it's rm3 surrounded by other rm3
properties and as the board's aware from the lni appeal it's this odd rear-shaped parcel
with this kind of dog leg that comes out onto wayne avenue um if we can get um sarah sworn
and I believe the site plan is 181 yeah. Sarah's last name? Poindexter.
Poindexter? Yes. Please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Sarah Poindexter, s-a-r-a-p-o-i-n-d-e-x-t-e-r. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth nothing but the truth thank you yes thank you uh rachel okay uh sarah if you could
just go through the site plan um and the existing conditions um on the site
sure so you have the site up now and um as explained this this project was um designed
And to the most part, as of right, we had some definite design challenges on the property, including steep slopes, which you can see in the red diagonal areas shown throughout the site, which resulted in the configuration that you see here.
And the design team worked really closely to come up with a thoughtful design that we feel, you know, meets the intent of a transit-oriented parcel.
Unfortunately, there are large trees that are – that some were unavoidable in this configuration.
So that's what brings us here today.
And my colleague, Laura Hansplant, is going to speak more about those.
thanks sarah and sarah can you just confirm that you are the engineer that prepared the site plan
that's currently on the screen yes i'm the engineer of record on the site plan okay thank you
case where we had some issues regarding a wall or something of yes chairman you're uh you're
correct we were discussing the retaining wall and the setback at the lni appeal
so if we could bring on Laura Hansplant she is our landscape architect for this project
so that she can go through and talk more about the tree replacement variants that we're requesting
Hansplant please raise your virtual hand and wait to be sworn in
Good afternoon, ma'am. Please spell your full name, and I'll square you in.
My name is Laura Hansplant, spelled H-A-N as in Nancy, S-P as in Peter, L-A-N-T.
We're firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
We're firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you, Ms.
Thank you.
Ms. Pritzker?
Laura, can you just share with the board a little bit about your expertise and specifically the role that you played for this project?
Pardon the interruption.
Did we not have this testimony at the first hearing?
We did not bring in any testimony related to trees.
Okay, thank you.
Please proceed.
Yes, I'm a registered landscape architect in the state of Pennsylvania.
I've been working as a landscape architect and as a specialist in sustainable site design for over 25 years.
And my role on this project was to support the team in configuring the buildings and the development with respect to the trees
so that we could preserve as many as possible and to help prepare a planting plan and strategy to replace as many trees as we could
and as appropriate to the character of this site.
We'd like to qualify Laura as an expert in landscape architecture unless the opposing
council has any issues with that or questions for Laura.
I don't at this time.
So now, Laura, I'm going to be going to the landscape plan that you prepared for this
project.
Just give me a minute to zoom out.
And if you could go through the plans once I get it zoomed out and explain the process that went into the, I guess, first of all, talking about the existing site conditions that were on the site and then going into the plans and the way that you reviewed this to prepare for our application and the considerations relative to the tree replacement hardship that we have.
based on the code. Yes, thank you. So this is, Sarah mentioned, this is a wooded site. Any
development on this site will impact trees to some extent. The existing site is, has a mix of trees.
The predominant species are silver maple. They're quite large, mature to over mature,
with secondary, but also with sycamore maple. Sycamore maple are not native. The silver maple
are. Secondary species include Norway maple, walnut, box elder, and elm. It's my observation
that the silver maple are fairly old, as I mentioned, and the young trees that are coming up
are the sycamore maple and the Norway maple. These are not native species, unfortunately.
They are invasive. They are unfortunately fairly frequent throughout the woodlands in the city.
And without intervention or active management, unfortunately, they would increasingly become the dominant trees on this site.
So one of the considerations we brought to our landscape management plan was how to reintroduce a greater diversity of native species appropriate to the edge of the Wissahickon.
When we looked at the trees on the site and considered how to advise the team on the placement of buildings, we also looked to trees that I think contribute to the character of the site, how it is perceived relative to its neighbors and to the value of these trees as a whole.
So if you look at the large tree that you see in the sort of center of the plan, I don't know if you're able to point, Rachel, that, yes, that is a large London Plain tree.
We also, we put a high priority on that.
We put a high priority on the trees in the top right corner of the site plan that you see.
And we put a priority on the trees just below that in the bottom right of the plan.
That's correct, between the buildings and the station drive.
We also put a priority on the trees on the wooded slopes that you see on the left-hand side that help screen the buildings from the station, the Tulpa-Hawken Station.
And on the landscaped area that is shown in white on the left-hand side of the plan, that's a flat lawn area that the community uses.
we were told that the community likes to use as an open space.
So it was important to us to be respectful of those existing features on the site.
The landscape plan that we put together departs a little bit from conventional planting.
Conventional planting would place evenly sized trees at, say, 20, 25 feet on center.
and it probably would have
And it probably would have a handful of species. This plan looks at instead using a range of planting sizes so that we could plant trees more closely together and pair fast-growing trees next to slower-growing, longer-lived trees and quickly recreate a layered planting arrangement, tree community structure, which is characteristic of the Wissahickon
a handful of species.
This plant
and characteristic of wooded sites. So in that respect, this plan not only aims to replace a
wider range of native species, which would be appropriate to the Wissahickon, but also to
recreate the density and the structure that are emblematic of the wooded character of the
Wissahickon. And in that sense, we are able to also put in a higher number of, replace a higher
number of trees. So we're putting back, if we are 125 trees were inventoried, 49 removed that count
towards the zoning calculation, we're putting back 188 trees. And we're putting them in as
densely as we can with respect to good horticultural practice. Laura, this is Brandon
Saverin. So, you know, and I don't know whether you or Jason is in the better position to speak
to this but um you know just going right off your comment there about the um you know large number
of trees that will be on the finished site um can you speak a little bit as to why even that does
not satisfy the tree replacement requirement and whether it would have been possible to under you
know, some other reasonable plan. Yes, thank you. The zoning code requires replacement of trees
and the replacement is measured in caliber inches. So if you remove a 20-inch tree, you have to put
back additional trees that's equal 20 inches in caliber or 20 inches in diameter. So the total
replacement inches required based on the arborist report is 903 inches. We get credit for both
preserving existing trees and for replacing trees. The actual number of inches that we're putting
back is 942. That's more than we're taking out. However, because of the way the code is written,
you get credit for trees preserved up to 12 inches. So if you preserve a tree which is
12 inches in diameter or 24 inches in diameter or 60 inches in diameter, the credit that you get
is capped at 12. So although we are putting back 942 inches, sorry, although we are preserving
and replacing in combination 942 inches in diameter inches we are getting credit for 766
and that leaves us short. This is also a wooded site so we have spaced the trees as closely as
we thought was responsible horticulturally but we run out of room.
so um as a expert in landscape architecture when you looked at this um and the tree replacement
requirements it in your opinion would it be um appropriate or in good practice to
jam on more more trees just to meet the code requirements instead of what the site
needs to yield or what is uh responsible and respectful and uh landscape architectural
practices. I'm going to object that that's a leading question. Can we rephrase that?
We can rephrase it. Laura, is, would you have. This is Sharon Saleta. The rules of evidence
don't apply. This is an administrative hearing. So, Laura, can you, do you want me to state it
again, are you able to answer the question? I can answer. We thought very hard about how
closely we could space the trees in order to replace as many trees as we could. We have spaced
the trees very tightly, and I do not believe as a design professional that it would be responsible
to place them any closer. Okay, thanks. And Laura, just to recap one specific element of your
testimony there will be uh more trees uh newly installed on the site than are being removed is
that correct that is correct okay um i'm gonna ask you to hold on just for a second um you
referenced an arborist report so i just want to briefly bring on that arborist jason to give a
So I just want to briefly bring on that arborist, Jason, to give a real short version of sort of
what that report is and how it's compiled. So we're looking for Jason Lubar to be sworn in.
And I do have some cross-examination when it's appropriate.
Well let's hear from the arborist then we'll get to you, Steve. Okay.
please spell your full name and i'll swear you in
i'm sorry who are we looking for now jason blue bar l-u-b-a-r but okay here he is
He's ready to be sworn in.
Chairman, you're muted.
Mr. Lubar, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Mr. Lubar, we're not able to hear you.
and it doesn't appear that you're muted what um mr chair the um the code to unmute on the phone
is it star six hit um nine star nine and then star six jason if you're on the phone um give
that a shot i think we don't have them on the phone oh it's on the computer okay okay well
we do have a report from jason as well as his resume um in our exhibit packet so can you hear
me now oh yes yes okay there it is please spell your full name and i'll swear you in j-a-s-o-n
l-u-b-a-r do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do thank you uh please proceed jason we have your resume on the screen can you just give
the board a real brief background on what you do for a living and you know the degree of your
experience in that work the the uh his resume or his information is blocked out at least on my
screen how's that there you go there you go got it all right i work at morris arboretum uh doing
arboricultural related consulting i'm a board certified master arborist and a member of
the American Society of Consulting Arborists. And part of what I do is work on
projects like this where we deal with ordinances, tree-related ordinances
in different projects. So I teach professional level courses. I'm the president of our local
ISA chapter. That's the International Society of Arboriculture chapter. And I'm a local tree expert.
okay so um we would ask uh if the board has any objections to uh mr lubar being uh qualified as
an expert uh arborist don't see any reason not to object i believe i am i have some examination i
want to do on that issue okay okay um mr lubar um steve okay go ahead steve i'm sorry um can you
can you tell us what your formal education is around forestry and arborist?
Sure. I'm a board certified master arborist, which means I've taken tests through the
International Society of Arboriculture. I'm a certified arborist. I went to school for
business administration, but for the past 20 years, I've been working in this field.
So you haven't received any degree in forestry or in agriculture?
Correct.
And were there forestry schools available to you at the time that you were pursuing this field?
When you say you're a certified board arborist.
Board certified master arborist.
What does that mean?
What does the board certification say that you can do?
Well, the ISA board certification tests my applied knowledge, not general knowledge, but applied knowledge in arboriculture.
trying to figure out what's the difference from what well it's not it's not a degree
Trying to figure out what's the difference from what.
it's a certification so the ISA certifies that I have this knowledge I also have the
tree risk assessment qualification and that's a qualification that just says that I you know
qualify i've taken the test and i qualify for that um whatever that is so i'm certified
is it correct but for the certification you qualify you qualify as what was that you were
asking steve a well he versus i believe mr chair i believe he is a board certified master arborist
according to his resume but he doesn't have any formal education degrees in in that field
Could I, could I redirect them? That's what I'm trying to understand. What's the difference? Yep. Steve. I'm sorry, Mr. Brandon.
um my my one question at this point for jason would be jason is it is it uncommon for others
in your field including others that have your certifications to um not have a university
granted degree in um you know in our arbor sorry arbor culture or uh you know is is it uncommon
No, it's not uncommon. The people who are in our industry, especially consultants, come at it from many different backgrounds, many different disciplines.
So a prerequisite is not going to forestry school or arboricultural school. You could just start working in a for-profit arborist company. You don't need to go to school.
Understood. I think, you know, we'll rest on that in terms of Jason's qualifications.
I'm going to be okay with that also. It sounds like this field is more of like a guild,
kind of an apprentice situation where it's, my college had a very famous forestry school,
but apparently a lot of them, I guess, don't have a lot of schools with forestry around.
okay thank you mr master thank you all right um so jason um to bring up uh the landscape plan again
um is is it correct that you provided um what we might call it a tree assessment um
data set that sort of served as the the starting point for this landscape plan right we did the
tree inventory and assessment which involved looking at each trees assessing their conditions
and uh you know providing recommendations for this assignment uh the assignment was to
look at the trees in light of the ordinance okay um is is there um you know can can you walk us
through, I guess, in brief, the conclusions that are in your report that is featured in our exhibit
packet? Sure. The same thing as what Laura just stated, that given the design constraints,
the design that we see, that we've seen here, that there is no real way to achieve the tree
replacement ordinance given what was there and given the footprint of any buildings on site.
Okay. Okay, thanks. Rachel, do you have anything else?
I just would want to hear from you, Jason, your thoughts on if we were to try to accomplish
it by adding jam-packing trees in, in your opinion, I guess I'll rephrase it this way,
in your opinion, is the tree planting strategy and landscape plan that we've provided for
this project in your expert opinion uh appropriate and healthy and uh meets the
hardship requirements for the tree replacement variants as best as as you can uh explain
i'm gonna object that that calls for a legal opinion as to what meets the hardship requirements
and he's not qualified to give that opinion can you answer that mr lubar um well not for the
hardship but for the design and the constraints on the design and what trees are there and what
we would like to put back there uh you know i think this is a great plan for putting back
great plan for putting back diversity and putting back the number of trees that will eventually
diversity and putting back the number of trees that will
hopefully grow to replace the trees that are being taken out. One thing we have to remember is that
the trees on the site, we want to preserve all the trees on the site that we can. And trees have a
root plate and the roots really don't grow much past a foot and a half deep, maybe two foot deep
on the site so if you go around and and if we were to replace the trees per the ordinance you know
using three inch caliper you know three inch diameter trees uh four inch diameter trees you
would end up causing great harm to the trees that are on site because you would have to dig
you know remove pretty much a lot of their root systems to accommodate the new trees
Using more smaller trees, you can place them around the roots of the trees that are there now.
So it'll preserve the trees that are there now, and it'll allow these new trees to grow,
whereas if you try to shoehorn all the trees necessary onto the site,
Given the building footprint as it stands now, it would do severe harm to the existing trees.
My last question, Jason, is just when you did the report, if you could talk a bit about the existing conditions on the site and the current tree species that are there versus our planned proposal and your expert opinion on the appropriateness of what's going to be planted versus what is there now.
Right. As Laura said, there's a lot of invasive exotic trees. These trees are not native to America and they're invasive. So they can come in and destabilize the environment like we've seen in the Wissahicken with Norway maples coming in, taking over, sort of bullying out the native trees that we want because the native trees provide so many of the benefits to the environment.
So we're removing a lot of those invasive exotic trees on the site and we're putting
back a higher diversity, a much higher diversity of native species.
So I think that will be very positive for this area in the long term.
Thanks, Jason.
I think we'll rest on our questions for now.
If Steve has any otherwise, I'll move over.
And would it be possible for me to share my screen also?
Jason, I'm showing you page 99 in the developer's exhibit binder, which is this the representation
of how the trees look now on the site?
yes okay um so would you would it be fair to characterize this site as a heavily wooded site
yes it's a a wooded site and the trees um that we're seeing here uh right uh where my cursor
is now this is the existing apartment buildings off of lane avenue right correct and there's a
fair number of large trees that are very close to that property line is that would that be correct
uh very close while it's across the driveway there and then into the site yeah um and then
there's a a fair number of trees that like on that i'm showing you here that are very close to
these existing buildings over here right those are trees on that edge uh right below the steep slope
So in your opinion, do trees like we see in this wooded area, do they provide a kind of a cooling effect for the buildings that are in the immediate vicinity?
Yes, I would say so. Given the direction of the sun, that their shade can be cast on the buildings perhaps and on the driveway, so there is some cooling effect.
so um isn't it true that in the project that you're that you're testifying for that many of
these trees in this area here are being removed and no longer are are going to be providing shade
to the apartment object to this line of questioning unless mr masters can demonstrate
which of the variant standards this pertains to because i i don't see the temperature or coolness
as relevant to the refusal or any of the other varied standard.
as relevant to the refusal or any of the other uh variant standard unless it pertains to human
safety or something it's public welfare we're talking about the urban heat island effect and
if you're eliminating um the cooling of these trees that have been used to cool and and preserve the
quality of life of of the residents in in this building in this very large apartment building
and also in these structures what it appears is that the the tree design the the tree redesign of
this wooded area is prioritizing the cooling effects for the new project and the new residents
that are going to be in this area but it's taking away um the same kind of cooling effect for the
apartments on Wayne Avenue and in this area and so I believe that that goes directly to the issue
of hardship and and the and the and the grant or the not of grant of a variance because we're now
looking at a negative impact i just steve i want the board to have a chance to rule on whether or
not this is relevant testimony to this case i don't believe it is and i would ask steve do you
have any expertise in cooling of trees or do you have anything to show that the way that we have
replaced the trees um well i'm going to go into more testimony with you with your witnesses as
to where you're replacing the trees and where they're not um but at a general site plan and
you're not looking at the landscape plan so i don't know that that this can specifically show
what exact trees we're even referring to well the plan will show the before and after i think that's
right right so look can we move on to the plan then i think we've seen this sure okay sure so
um the um what page is your plan on rachel in our packet yeah go ahead um 81
no that's the site plan the it's 97 the landscape plan it's 97
uh this is 97 you're on 101 oh oh so i was looking at the page numbers themselves okay
oh sorry yeah all right um
Wasn't there a different diagram that you were just showing to Jason?
So, Jason, these circles here, these are small trees that are being planted up here.
Is that correct?
When you say small, I believe so.
But I think the idea was to make them small so they would fit more of them in there.
And over time, they would grow.
Right.
But the circles are the canopy diameter.
Would that be correct?
Yeah, the replacement trees.
Right.
These are all replacement trees.
And so, but what we just saw before were large trees all along this perimeter, right?
Correct.
They're fully mature trees, which is what you showed before.
Right, right.
and now these are so what what's the approximate height of these trees i would uh depends which
ones we're talking about probably uh 17 22 feet let's just say 20 feet for the larger ones 20 25
feet perhaps and what's the height of the trees that you that you're removing
man um if i remember correctly the larger ones are about 75 feet
okay what is what is if if the trees that we're looking at uh the replacement trees
what is the gen a a average height of at maturity oh maturity it would be the the same the 75 80
you're removing okay yeah but how long will it take to get them from the 17 feet to the 75 feet
uh well that's conjecture relevance of that what does that have to do with the variance
that's why it's about it's about the well if we're looking at the impact on these on these
adjoining properties and the and the change and and the increase in in heat in for these buildings
because they no longer are shaded by these trees then how long are we looking at the impact forward
are we talking about 20 to 40 years i think look i think our position and mr chair you you can you
can allow mr masters to continue is that that this is not the type of safety or wellness issue that
the code contemplates for a variance we otherwise every development project in philadelphia with any
trees on the site be ineligible for a variance the adjacent sites being supposedly hotter for
some temporary number of years simply is not an adequate reason well that's your argument
well that's your argument i mean brandon that's an argument you can make but but the light and
i mean brandon that's an argument you can make but but the light and air and the
air and the impact on the light and air of adjoining properties the air the air is the
heated air versus cooled air from the trees we're talking here about look one at a time
i don't know if it's relevant but we can stipulate that there will be a lesser uh degree of shade
well mr masters has produced no experts or no reports that discuss any of that um and but this
this is not my burden rachel again i think your burden on a variance case and i'm raising questions
with your own experts who are telling me that it's not going to be as cool for for perhaps 20 30 40
years in the future for these people i don't believe that i don't believe that that was stated
And he said it's conjecture, Steve.
So let's not perjure ourselves.
It's not conjecture that trees take a long time to grow.
But I'm fine to re-ask the question, Mr. Lubar, how long is it going to take these trees to get to the same height that the replacement, that the trees that you're chopping down are at the moment?
Well, I'm not chopping the trees down.
but uh if i if you held my feet to the fire i would say about oh 30 to 40 years
okay so i might not be an expert rachel but i think i kind of like was pretty close to the mark
there um so i mean here and the reason the reason mr chairman and members of the board that i think
this is important is because this is as we saw before this is a profoundly wooded area
This is not a typical lot in the city of Philadelphia with a few trees. This is its own little woods. And so their design intentionally is removing trees and replacing them with small trees for the neighboring properties, but is clustering the good effects of the cooling for the trees for this own property.
Now, that's their right, I suppose, as property owners to selectively choose which trees remain and which trees are taken away.
But the impact is that this is going to detrimentally impact the neighboring buildings and it's going to benefit the new buildings.
And that's not an equity, that is not consistent with equity or with a way to distribute trees.
So let me just ask Mr. Lubar.
Let me ask you a question.
who's maintaining this this wooded area now who maintains it
could anyone answer that well that we we could bring on the property owner to speak to that if
the board would like i think that's just curious no one's maintaining it basically i mean i don't
mean that in a negative way it's a it's a wooded area right so chairman what if we're able to
redirect i think it might be helpful but i wasn't done with my cross-examination so i'm sure you
can redirect when i was done but i'm sure you can but i just she can but i asked the question i just
was curious so this area is really not and i don't mean this to be negative not being really
it's not being maintained well i i would ask the owners if their main point is if a tree if a tree
falls or trees begin to fall in there it's you're going to be losing trees no one's really maintaining
right mr chairman on our uh site visit there the interior was unmaintained in other words fallen
trees were there and uh it was unmaintained i would imagine but don't know that if trees fell
you know onto the right-of-way onto the road somebody would have to remove somebody would
remove it but the interior of the forest was not maintained okay um mr lubar i'm gonna finish very
very quickly mr chair um mr livar um in your opinion as an arborist is it possible to develop
this site in a different with a different design where the trees on the on the on the border on
the periphery of the sites are are the the larger trees are maintained and and the the trees on the
interior are the ones that are more removed i would i'm going to object on the basis that he's
not an engineer or architect he does not design buildings i'm not sure in the same way that mr
masters did not want him to opine on the variant standards because he wasn't a lawyer he shouldn't
be answering that question well okay let me try to rephrase it then mr um louvar is is um is this
Is the tree planting replacement pattern that you studied and developed,
are you the one who developed it for this project?
uh the tree replacement pattern well i worked with laura laura was the one who
The tree replacement pattern.
Well, I worked with Laura.
really put the pen to paper okay well to the extent that you worked on it was that the only
possible way of of replacing and maintaining the trees or could there be other ways of
of taking some trees out of this property and leaving others behind
Well, my opinion is that you could put one house, you know, just a small,
if you were developing a single house, you would lose less trees.
That sounds crazy, but is there a life expectancy for these trees that are 75, 80 years old?
Yes, each tree we assigned a life expectancy to. And just because a tree is large doesn't mean it
has a lesser life expectancy but our life expectancy estimations only go up to 15 years
greater than 15 years in other words if the tree looks good now we have no uh reason to believe
that it won't look good in 15 years given normal a normal set of circumstances
mr lubar are you aware that some trees can get nominated um as what there are heritage trees in
the city uh well if i can correct you it's not nominated it's based on the tree size
um right are you aware that that one of the sycamore trees was nominated um on this site
uh well again it's not nominated there's a uh philadelphia heritage tree is defined under the
zoning code as native trees that are greater than uh 24 inches in diameter plus london plain trees
uh we're gonna have some testimony later from from one of um our witnesses about a nomination
that was made for for one of these trees but um i it sounds like i would want to cross-examine um
miss hansplant around the same issues that i was just asking mr louvar about
are we are we finished with mr louvar steve yes yes okay um i think that we just have
some redirect but we can save that for after you question laura that would be more efficient i think
so uh to the uh board uh laura hands plan is who mr masters would like to question
the transplant you're still under oath
yes hi Ms. Hansplant so um
same kind of questions I was um planning to ask you so um you are the you're the person who created
the plan for the planting and the and the removal and the replacement of the trees on this site
i am the landscape architect yes okay um so uh would you agree with me that the trees that i'm
that um where my cursor is moving here um these are the trees that mr lubra identified as about
75 feet tall the site plan steve uh area is not as accurate if you don't mind well the site plan
doesn't show right but the site plan doesn't show them as they exist it only shows them after they're
removed so that's hard to really see where they are when the site plan doesn't include them
and then would that be the same for the for the height of the trees that are on this
um property boundary yes those ones are a little shorter okay like how how much shorter do you
think i'm looking at the diameter i don't have a guess on the height they're slightly smaller
diameter would you agree with mr libar that these trees have provided shade and cooling effect for
the neighboring properties yes just like all the trees in this neighborhood yeah so if if you if
If you had designed the landscaping differently, would there be a possibility that you could
have preserved the tall trees on the perimeter and then made the, so then where the built
environment would have been shifted more towards the train tracks?
Laura, sorry.
I object to any question that has to do with Laura opining on the built environment as
far as the building.
Let's stick to the issue.
I'm not asking her to answer questions about the built environment.
i'm asking her about the location of the trees that were removed and that seems to me a very
germane question as to why we are leaving trees on that north property edge
we're not taking them all out you're talking about this edge
correct we're leaving those trees right and we're leaving trees in the corner yes no there
correct we're as far as we're leaving those trees right and we're leaving trees in the corner
there are trees in many places i i agree but if we if we go back and look at uh let's see 97 um
so the the trees that you're leaving are clustered around the new construction would that be would
that be fair to say they are also on the north property edge so in the top right where your
where your cursor is yeah that's right right there we're leaving those large trees
and we're leaving the large the trees at the other end if you move to the left
we're moving we're leaving yep we're leaving large trees all in that portion of the site as well
but where you're removing a lot of trees is up on is right next to the big apartment building
well the apartment building stretches all across that top end of the page so yes the center portion
is is adjacent to the driveway that services the back side of the co-op as is the portion of the
but the co-op extends across the entire top of the page so the trees that we are leaving in the top
right of the plan and the top left of the plan also benefit the co-op in fact actually steve
to your point i would argue that the trees in the top right have a greater benefit because they
they are visible and are near the tree the co-op at the north side of the plan the top as well as
the co-op building to the right so the trees in the corner are particularly I think for me we
prioritize this okay but the but you did testify these are shorter than the trees that were removed
up here well they're shorter immediately along the property line if you move down on the page
the large dots you see are also large trees yep these dots okay but these are the smaller ones
those are replacement trees oh these are also replacement trees so really the whole the whole
perimeter that's closest to this this building up here they're all replacement trees except for
this area on the left side well we were we were tucking in trees as i mentioned wherever we could
So the top corner that you pointed to, the top right corner, we have replacement trees.
That's not where we're taking trees out.
That's where we see an opportunity to plant new within the responsible parameters of the site.
I have no further questions.
So we'd like to redirect.
We'll start with Laura with a couple questions.
um laura does um do do taller trees necessarily mean more beneficial effects to neighboring
residents or to the health of the overall um tree environment i'm gonna object because it's
it's a vague question as to what more beneficial means okay i'll be more specific laura do taller
trees necessarily mean more benefits to neighbors in terms of cooling, light, or air than trees that
may be smaller. Less tall, that is. Tall is one important consideration, species is another.
If you're talking about, in my professional opinion, if you're talking about benefit,
Not all species are equal. Native species which have better habitat value as food source and as
nesting sites, feeding sites for native birds, for insects which support native songbirds
are also important. And the third component is healthy. So if I had a choice of two trees,
tall would be one consideration, but species and health would also be in the mix.
In your professional opinion, is the arboreal environment that would be created by the completion of the proposed development, is that healthier along the lines of the same factors you just testified to, nothing else?
Is the proposed environment healthier than the environment that exists currently?
I'm going to object because the only health that you testified to was whether there were healthy trees or not healthy trees.
But what you mean by health, if it's beyond whether the trees are healthy or not, I'm objecting because that's not part of her testimony.
And I don't think she has any kind of an expertise.
We're going to answer that. Can you answer that?
Are you able to answer that?
Yes. It's always hard to lose trees.
It's always hard. We love our trees.
I understand that.
It is important that the trees we have are, I'd like to have a lot of as many trees as we can.
are, I'd like to have a lot of as many trees as we can. I'd like to have them be native species.
I would like to have them be healthy.
All of these things are important. Are any of the, are any of the trees that are being removed
from the property unhealthy or of invasive species? And are they being replaced by healthy
trees that are of native species? I'm going to object to this a compound question and it's better
if you could if you could separate it as to invasive and healthy as separate. Make the two
questions Rachel. Yes. Laura can you answer the first part of the question which is are we
removing trees from the site in the area near the co-op that are unhealthy or not native species?
We are removing trees which are not native.
Those include the sycamore maples, which are one of the two most predominant species on this site.
We are removing somewhat Norway maples.
So we're removing a mix of invasive and native species.
And we are separately removing some trees which are healthy and some trees which are not healthy.
and and Laura are we replacing those trees with native species and healthy trees
yes we're replacing the trees with a greater diversity of native species
and we're replacing them with trees which we believe to the best of our ability will be
healthy and thrive on this site and last question for Laura you mentioned in your
earlier testimony that there was an area on the site that we were not adding trees to that was
utilized by the community. If we were to utilize that space on the site for additional trees,
would that get us closer to the tree replacement requirements, albeit removing space that the
community has asked us to keep? That is correct. We deliberately made the decision not to plant
trees in the open grass area at the toe of the steep slope which is on this property but which
the community tells us they use because they told us that it was important to them as an open space
we could definitely have planted more trees and reforested if you like that open space
which would have gotten us closer to the required tree canopy replacement but which
I believe would have been a loss to the community. Thank you. Anything else for Laura? Laura and if
you can you can if you're not sure just tell us but using that community area that you just spoke
to um uh is it is it possible that that would have actually allowed us to comply with the zoning code
or in your opinion? I'm objecting to anything around code compliance that's a legal opinion
and she's not qualified for that she's qualified to answer questions related to tree replacement
and caliber inches as a relates that's her expertise we got okay go ahead that's my
question laura i mean do you know if what's your opinion on how likely we could have met the code
or if we still would have fallen short albeit been closer if we had used that community area
we would have gotten either very close or been able to comply with the required caliber inches
okay okay thank you um i i think that rachel wanted to um i just had one more question on
cross that came up um for recross so um you testified that you are replacing some unhealthy
trees with healthy trees and and with native trees but you agree don't you that the trees
you're replacing are going to be much shorter um than the ones that you then they're younger
that was from mr lubar she hasn't testified to it and i just want to get her testimony on the
record too that that's it that's a yes or no miss miss hand's point yes they are younger and
therefore shorter okay thank you so we we wanted to also call uh the engineer back uh miss poindexter
for just one or two questions for direct purposes sarah can you unmute yourself
i'm here thanks so as you saw mr masters was pointing to the top of the site that
is parallel to wayne avenue could you explain these site conditions and the elevation
change if there is one um which would on the top of the site
All right, Rachel, and you're saying top of the site, where do you mean?
um parallel to wayne avenue um between our property line where our property line starts behind the co-op
Um, parallel to Wayne Avenue, um, between our property line, where our property
need the exhibit up
um so at the at the um
there's an elevation drop from
a lot of
when there's steep floats
so there's about a 10 foot drop
in certain areas
but which
between which two points are you
describing?
Can you see the screen?
I can.
Sarah it would be between
the sort of the vertical
tree edge if you would on that
side of the site and I guess
the distance from there
to the edge of the
nearest edge of the co-op building do you know what that distance is so along along that northern
property line um adjacent to the co-op building there's a drop of um 10 feet maybe nine feet
nine to ten feet um it just goes across the site and then as you as you move from um let's see
north, I guess you can say northeast to south, there's a drop of, it varies across the site,
but it can be about 15 feet. So are you familiar with sort of how high off the ground at the co-op
edge the lowest residential windows are in that building? I'm going to object to relevance. What's
the point of these questions we're establishing the effect of the uh the uh tree cooling that you
uh developed uh during cross steve there isn't any testimony that tree cooling has to do with
certain heights of windows or steep slopes so can you put some foundation on the record first
because otherwise i'd have no idea what you're trying to prove that's what i'm attempting to do
here yeah it sounds okay you raised the issue steve on cooling yeah so uh i i don't i don't
know the elevation of the windows but this parcel is lower than the parcel to the north
based on the topography okay um so in in your opinion um is the um the folks who live on various
floors in the co-op building is it is it fair to say that depending on which floor they live on
as you go up in elevation the amount of shade that would hit them from the trees on that line
closest to them is reduced to the higher you go and is impacted even for folks lower in the
building by the elevation change you spoke to sorry i don't know the elevations of these buildings
um brandon as far as where they are at the trees um yes if a tree is lower than the elevation of
a floor then i would believe that it wouldn't have much cooling effect on that floor but i'm
not sure which floors that affects right but you've stated clearly that there is an elevation
drop from our site to the base of the co-op site correct yes this parcel is lower in elevation than
the the co-op site okay thanks sarah uh cross um hi sarah hey hey um so i'm gonna let's look at
the actual um site plan that has the steep slopes um marked out um uh this is page
oh i don't it's this it's this is your um this is your drawing right
correct okay and the red are the slopes correct those are the steep slopes so meaning if they're
over 25%, but the whole site is sloped. Those are just the areas that are defined as steep
slopes per the zoning code. Okay. Do you know how tall the co-op building is?
I do not. Okay. But we're talking about 75. Let's see. It says 40 feet high on this survey.
Okay. 40 feet high. And we're talking about trees that are 75 feet tall, correct?
i don't know the height of the trees well wasn't that the testimony that you heard before from
I don't know the height of the trees.
Well, wasn't that the testimony that you heard before?
the arborist yeah but that's not her testimony i just asked her if she heard it okay so if we
take what the arborist said that the trees were 75 feet tall and this building is 40 feet tall
is it your testimony that that the um that the elevation is so much lower um on the pro on the
the property of the the project property that these trees are are not um are not towering over
a 40 foot tall building i really don't because i'm not sure of the finished floor of the building
there's not enough elevation information for the front of the building i really don't know
what the elevation i don't have a cross section of this building compared to the existing trees
okay so you can't really say with any certainty that that um that there's any real that there's
any portion of the of the existing buildings to the north that are not going to get shade
from these from the existing trees really don't have the information to make any judgment on the
the height of the trees or how they affect the neighboring building thank you
up next that was our that was our case in chief we may have rebuttal witnesses to steve's witnesses
before we let we go to that i just there's two other things i wanted to provide one because we
promised the board and two because it's relevant um the last uh thing i wanted to bring up is
116. so as the board may know this project went through civic design reviews so it was reviewed
by the planning commission and the community twice i just want to point out the comments that
were public comments that were given and provided in the planning commission's report as you see
in yellow it states at the meeting of july 6th the committee noted the inherent challenges of
the site and applauded the development team for creating a delicate and careful landscape plan
the plan proposes to save several large trees includes a new woodland planning scheme that
could be successful while maintaining care for within the first several years the committee
also recommended investigating solar panels for the multi-family duplex so lastly i just want to
provide the video testimony given by tavis who is i was so late like a landscape architect who
sits on the design review committee i held everybody up i had some real tech issues on my
Hello, ma'am? Hello? Hello? Oh, Chairman, it's a video. Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I apologize. Sarah,
if I made that clear. Yeah, it's a video that was taken at the public meeting. Tavis on the
Design Review Committee and it was included in our packet. I apologize. Thank you. She's just
apologizing for being late and then she'll get into the contents of her testimony or her comments.
thank you um i would like to to comment on on the new planting plan um your name to me as if
uh this team is actually trying to hold on please your full name chairman this is still the video
oh i i keep i know but it's it's so real i'm sorry
I heard you. I said, well, maybe she came on live. I apologize.
No worries. I'll let you know when the video is up.
I can't swear her in. Okay, let's go.
Preserving as many existing trees as possible on this site and then also giving back
a really thoughtful forested landscape that will be in keeping with the Wissahickon
and really help to put things on an appropriate ecological trajectory.
It's always really hard for me as a landscape architect to see any trees go.
So when a development comes and there is going to be construction
and we can save some trees and then plant things
that will really help with long-term ecology,
You know, I think it's a job well done. I will say that I hope very much there is a long-term management plan for this property. And I'm sure any landscape architect will agree what we do in plan and is called for in construction and we manage carefully really has to be very carefully cared for, particularly over the first three years after building.
And, you know, if that can be done and everything successfully watered and all the invasive plants, I know this site, there's lots of stuff that's invasive on this site.
this site there's lots of stuff that's invasive on on this site on on all of these edge condition
sites it's not just this one um but that seed bank will still be there and that will have to be
managed over quite a period of time to make sure that the planting can really be successful so if
the development team doesn't have a long-term management plan i really want to encourage them
to spend some money and get that plan in place and then follow it so that this, you know,
continues to be a woodland that improves and improves over time because we really need
that on all of our, even our smallest little leftover places in Philadelphia.
Last, yeah, and as you may know, the developers for this site are Mosaic.
They don't do anything half done, so they will absolutely, as you can see all the experts involved, come up with a great management plan.
The last thing I just wanted to provide is the SEPTA letter that was talked about at the last couple of hearings.
I know that it was something where the chairman knew we're concerned about potentially approving a hypothetical project with hypothetical access.
So it is in your records. We do have written support from SEPTA that was issued to us on the 25th of October, essentially understanding all the different issues, strategizing with us about the different ways that we could help alleviate any of the concerns that were mentioned, their support for the project, additional infrastructure surrounding Station Drive and their site,
support for the multifamily project and also acknowledgement that they will be giving us
access to the private drive for the site in addition to obviously working with us on some
upgrades that can help in the future. So that letter is detailed in the packet. Mr. Masters
has it as well and it's so that you can understand that you would not be potentially approving a
hypothetical project and that we have this directly from SEPTA. Thank you. Before we go any
further, we are past one hour so far with this case. As you know, we were not permitted to put
time restrictions. I don't know how many more. Do you have any more witnesses, Rachel? No. And I,
Steve, I know you feel upset that you can't cross-examine that last witness. Do you have it?
Who do you have? For technical reasons, apparently, I'm not able to cross-examine her,
but we can we can accept that and where are you with uh you have a witness group of witnesses
we do yeah our expert was not able to appear today her she did testify at the last hearing and
um she went through a good portion of her report but we reserved the portion that was really
relevant to this appeal and she didn't testify to it so i was going to just um go through that
quickly in the record and then we have um about three witnesses from uh from the the community
group um mr luke smith is going to go through uh the whole um history with the community engagement
all the considerations and and how west central germantown neighbors came to their position
and summarize the rco meeting where the vast majority of all the community members voted no
um and then um i also have mr um michael um ramos who is a near neighbor who's going to
testify to the traffic um situation the speeding cars that go through the excuse me this is sharon
mr master the only issue that is before the board is the one refusal will your witnesses
limit their testimony to that issue how they will be affected by um well we don't agree we we don't
understand that and you can yeah but right now all that is before the board is that one refusal
so our our witnesses are testifying to the the the the broader impact um that that this whole
project has which no they cannot do that no that's not that's going beyond on the issue that's
before the board it it well this is a this is a variance and the variance in order to grant the
variance the board has to conclude that there isn't any negative detrimental impact no by the
grant of the variance in other words by granting them a variance for the trees right there's no
impact on the neighbors not generally the project well that's that's actually i i guess i i differ
Well, that's actually, I guess I differ with that, that the implication is, this is not a project to clear trees from a wooded area. This is a project to create a large multifamily project.
with that that that the implication
And the rest of it is by right. Therefore, their testimony on any issue other than the one variance that is before the board is not relevant.
well the reason it's relevant is because of the septa easement so the access are you going to
accept anything miss saletta is saying um usually i do but not today i suppose um so the well then
we'll let the board rule on it all right what we're going to need what we're going to need to do
is we're going to have to resume this hearing and so you'll know I will tomorrow it's Wednesday
today's what the 16th? Tomorrow's Wednesday. I know tomorrow's Wednesday tomorrow's the 17th?
Yes chair that would be it. Looks to be. Tanya you sent me a date of 118. Correct if we have to
resume that would be the date but therefore there will be someone else who would be handling the
case that's where i'm going i will my last day on as a board member is tomorrow
that would be that would be let me finish and there's one other board member
whose last day will be uh sometime early december december which means december 8th so
steve with all due respect yeah i don't think this board needs to hear testimony from
any of your witnesses with all the respect to them about speeding cars and traffic we do have
a proviso we do have provisos mr chair in the event that the board is inclined to grant this
variance excuse me mr masters is the proviso for the proviso to it has to be related to the relief
granted and enforceable if it is related to anything other than the trees it cannot be added
as a proviso well that our our understanding is that it would be relevant but it is not
specifically related to the trees then it's not relevant to us it's not relevant
sheriff we're going to continue this hearing can i just ask that um the board make a ruling and
announce on the record that the next hearing will be limited to the one variance that is before the
board i would prefer i appreciate that i would prefer that we vote this today again you're going
to have two new board members they're going to have to review tapes and and notes and you know
things get lost sometimes when you do that so i i don't have a problem with that mr chair and i and
i value um you are you've sat through these hearings and and i think you have a right to be
to be part of the of the adjudication on it but we do want to put our proviso in the record and
do want to have our our our rco testimony otherwise um that's that's um the the community
has to explain to you um what this what what happened with this process how the designs changed
how they came at one point with 30 units and then they moved to 82. we're going back it's not real
not relevant in the letter well keep in mind that we that we believe there are other variances that
that should be before you and that is that was decided and you can appeal that if you disagree
do you have a witness who is prepared to testify as a representative of the group on the issue of
how the one variance before the board will impact the community i do and this chairman with all due
respect to steve there was a very lengthy letter that was submitted in both the lni appeal and in
steve's packet and in our packet that does a very long detail of the full rco process every meeting
that was had the conversation so the board does have all of that information and it was signed
by luke smith who i believe steve would like to have testified just so the board is aware there
are there is information about that that was already provided well that was provided in the
record but i don't think the board has the exhibits my understanding is that the board doesn't usually
have the exhibits in front of them while they hear a case but they could have or could have it we get
it before they have to yeah we get it before um i i normally wouldn't do this um i have a witness
on the trees i i do their witness is going to testify that the taking of the tearing taking
down the tall trees is not going to provide as much shade and coolness because the trees that
are being replacing the existing trees are going to be shorter is that pretty much what your witness
is going to say well that's what that's what well i mean we've heard that you've got we've heard
that again no disrespect to your witness i know i'm out to be on these calls i'm going to move
that we uh hear from the planning commission and that
that we uh hear from the planning commission and that the board votes this case great any commission
one moment chair peter bernard for the planning commission my last name is spelled b as in boy
a as in apple r as in nancy sorry b as in boy a as in apple r as in roger n as in nancy a as in
Apple, R's and Roger, D as a dog.
Do you swear to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, Board Chair.
Please proceed.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RM3 multifamily zoning on this site.
The property is an unusually shaped lot with uneven topography.
The proposed use and density have not been refused since they are consistent with the existing zoning.
we further note that the proposed use multi-family household living is consistent with several
comprehensive plan recommendations to encourage housing near transit the applicant has made a good
faith effort to minimize the impact on tree canopy we believe that the proposal represents
the minimum variance necessary with regard to heritage trees accordingly the planning commission
recommends the board grant the variance thank you sharon is this a straight up and down yes or no
vote i believe so i mean if mr masters would like to put his proviso on the record i suppose he can
do that just read it out and then i can i can decide that we have one page of revised plans
just so the board's aware okay mr mr masters yes you heard sharon so if you want to put your proviso
in please do. Okay. Sorry. I thought it was teed up but it's just one moment. Okay.
our proposal is that the developer must develop a comprehensive pedestrian safety plan together
with septa office of councilwoman bass and west central germantown neighbors and file a copy with
the zoning board of adjustment this safety plan should include changing the direction of station
drive to one way with traffic entering on wayne and exiting on walnut lane that is contained in
the letter that the developer's attorney presented in her exhibit. Extending the sidewalk along most
of the length along station drive. Providing signage warning of pedestrian crossing before
the curve in station drive. Providing pedestrian crossing signals across station drive from the
development. Establishing a speed limit on station drive and installing speed cushions and providing
pedestrian scale street lighting along station drive the the part that's that's for the board
is the developer develops this plan files it with the board and it obviously it requires the close
cooperation of septa since they own um the the street and most of most of of these um traffic
safety uh considerations will will be on the septa property but some of them will be also touching on
the developer's property. So, Chairman, I would just state that we have a letter from SEPTA. We
cannot agree to provisos that have nothing to do with the tree replacement variants, and especially
we cannot agree to provisos that impact an adjacent property owner who's not here, but we have already
stated and have a letter with SEPTA showing that we're willing to work with them on similar site
improvements as we move through the process and i'm happy to keep mr masters in the loop
with those conversations as they progress that's great
chairman you're muted
sorry mi 2021-0003196134r as a robert i assume that's rear dash 46 wayne avenue my vote is yes
with the proviso revised plan one page approved today carol ternary my vote is yes with proviso
Professor Plaza, yes, with proviso.
James Snell, yes, with proviso.
We'll now go to the first case on the regular list, MI 2021-003291.
12002 East Roosevelt Boulevard.
I'm sorry, Chair.
This is the ZBA Administrator.
I hate to interrupt, but may I make a special request?
There has been some confusion about the list of continuances for today.
There has been some confusion about the list of continuances for today.
Would it be possible for you to submit the list again for all those who's waiting in the background?
Yeah, I think Sharma brought that to my attention.
I don't recall this case that I just called up.
I don't remember saying that was continued.
No, I think you said one, but did you say a different address?
Yeah, I said the address, the number two, I think.
Correct. Thank you so much, Chair.
So I'll read the continuance request again. Number two on our list, MI 2021-003290, 1300 North Howard Street. Number 10 on the two o'clock list, MI 2021-001633, 5928 Walnut Street.
and number 11 on our two o'clock list, MI 2021-003336-627 East Thompson Street.
Those are the only requests that we had prior to beginning this hearing.
Is there anyone who would like to request a continuance or withdrawal for the two o'clock list?
All hands Mr. Chair. Thank you so now go back to case number one MI 2021-003291-12002 East
Roosevelt Boulevard. Mr. Brett Feldman is the attorney of record. Somerton Civic Association
sent a letter of support. Yes good afternoon members of the board Mr. Chairman again Brett
feldman 1835 market street philadelphia pennsylvania uh i represent the uh property owner
provco good bybury lp with me today is mike cooley mr feldman please spell your last name and i'll
swear you in i'm sorry feldman f-e-l-d-m-a-n you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do thank you is miss tenary still available if she is i have i have
been. I've been in a coma. Do you also agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy? I do. I do. Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents
consisting of proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral,
photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing? And have you met
with the rco and do you have a letter uh yes to the exhibits uh yes to a letter from the community
group we also have a letter from the district council person uh brian o'neill thank you you
may proceed and uh mr chair can i ask the court stenographer to strike that comment i made about
being in a coma oh he can't hear me i think he's muted i muted yes i got that and you'll let us
know when you're ready you'll be leaving shortly i understand uh at three oh gosh no 420 okay yeah
thank you strike that statement that i made
please because i may be the third board member not being here
we're still the video carol so oh that's right god okay can i begin you may proceed
Thank you. Again, Brett Feldman. I represent the property owner applicant, Provco Good,
Bybury LP. With me today is Mike Cooley, a member of the ownership group. We also have
George Hartman, who is the project engineer from Bowler Engineering, who testified many
times in front of the board. And I think out there is Alice Udovich from Councilman O'Neill's
office. I'll get right to it. We passed up these exhibits one through 10, which I'd ask
be incorporated in the record uh you'll see at uh four we have a community letter of support we
have a letter of support also from the council person um our refusal letter and um some of the
board members were here two weeks ago um we had a case on one of the properties that makes up this
so let me just uh let me go right to the location this is the property um this was the nabisco the
massive Nabisco site all the way up, way up Somerton. This is Roosevelt Boulevard. This is
Byberry here. This was what was Nabisco. And in 2016, we first came in front of the board
to demolish the Nabisco plant. At that point, we presented significant testimony talking about the
At that point, we presented significant testimony talking about the hardship on this industrially zoned property.
hard show.
That factory was outdated, outmoded, was obsolete, and it had closed.
The area around here has become increasingly retail commercial.
We provided additional testimony on the hardship and why the industrial zoning no longer made sense at this location.
The board granted the relief back in 2016.
This is a Wawa that was built with the Zoning Board's approval back in 2016 in the corner.
We then came back in front of the Zoning Board in 2019 for the rest of the site.
Here, this is under construction as we speak right now.
This is Topgolf.
This is the golf facility, nationally known, well-regarded, that is well underway.
You go under here, you hit the balls, here's the net.
And then the other part of this site was approved by the board was a Chick-fil-A.
That's this pad site here.
That's under construction.
And then there are a couple of retail commercial buildings that are on this location here.
And you'll see right now under construction, the pipes and the utility lines being put
in for the Chick-fil-A and also for the commercial buildings here.
We were here two weeks ago for the Chick-fil-A for some minor alterations.
And we're back in front of the board today.
for these three buildings um we and i'll let me just go right to the the rendering um that would
help the board uh understand what is being proposed here what is what is being built this is the
rendering um again that's the approved um top golf that's the wah-wah we're here for the uh some
minor modifications to the chick-fil-a this is these are the retail commercial buildings that
we got approved in 2019. And all we're asking for right now is some very minor modifications to
these, the buildings here. And I'll go right to the plan. But basically, when we got these
approved, we didn't know exactly who the tenants were. And then COVID came along. And what we have
to do now is we're asking the board's approval is to show you right here. Let me go right to it.
These are the three buildings that were approved back in 2019, 13,000 square foot building,
a 6,000 square foot building, and another 16,000 square foot building. We now have identified
tenants for these buildings, and I'll go right to the plan here. Here is the change.
Building number one, we were, a second here, a second here. You see we approved for 13,496.
We're now asking for $16,000, which is made up almost entirely of outdoor seating area.
We have two great restaurants on the end caps.
Obviously, because of COVID, now they would like an outdoor seating area.
So that basically adds up to the additional square footage.
It's under a roof, which creates the additional square footage.
So that's the only, that's a major change here for building number one.
building number two another COVID related change we're adding another outdoor seating area
to to this building number two and then building number three we had that approved as a supermarket
but we didn't have a tenant we're really pleased to now that we have a tenant we actually have a
real grocery store versus kind of a you know we talked to the community about obtaining a grocer
We now have a grocer that looks like it's going to be moving into the location, and they have their own prototype, which requires a different layout, which requires different loading areas.
So the 16,000 square foot grocer is now 19,000 to accommodate the actual tenant that we have that we hope to bring into this shopping center.
the only reason we're back at the zoning board is once as you know once the zoning board approves
a project we have to come back to the zoning board for supplemental approvals unless these
we're all getting smaller you know they're not smaller they're slightly larger so we needed to
go through this whole process to come back in front of the zoning board and ask you for your
approval we've during the whole time we've worked closely with Somerton Civic we met with them in
September. You see their letter of support at exhibit tab four. We continue to work closely
with the councilman, and we have his letter of support at exhibit tab four as well. So that
So that that really is in a nutshell what we're what we're looking to do here.
really is, in a nutshell, what we're looking to do.
And I guess with that, I would ask if the zoning board has any specific questions, but it's you can bring on your client for it to adopt your testimony.
Yeah, I don't know if Mr. Cooley is still available.
Well, if he's not, we'll stipulate you being an officer to court, he would have adopted your testimony.
Yes, I am fine with that in this case.
um i also have uh george hartman i don't think it's necessary but uh he's our project engineer
and he would he would do the same but let me let me ask the board board have any questions
no sir no okay uh anyone else to testify in this case please raise your hand
spell your full name and i'll swear you in this alice udovich had her hand raised i have louder
to speak sir good afternoon alice please identify yourself spell your name and i'll swear you in
Good afternoon, Chairman, members of the board.
Alice Udovich, U-D-O-V-I-C-H, from Councilman Brian O'Neill's office.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
The Councilman supports the granting of the variants at this location,
and we look forward to these tenants coming to that site.
Anyone else to testify in this case?
i see no other hand sir i hope when that top
golf gets set up to take a few strokes off my
you're muted mr chair my computer's so sensitive i apologize again uh planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the i1 industrial use at this location
this proposal went through civic design review process in 2019 the cdr committee recommended
that the site plan become more cohesive to better connect buildings activities and pedestrian
circulation as a unified destination instead the proposal includes a wraparound drive-through
creating a hostile pedestrian environment additionally proposals that differ so
significantly from the zoning should be handled
through the re-zoning process.
We feel this applicant has failed to demonstrate a hardship.
Accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends
the board deny the variances.
Thank you.
MI 2021-003291-12002 East Roosevelt Boulevard.
My vote is yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes.
Confessor Plaza, yes.
James Snell my vote is yes thank you go to case number three am I thank you Mr. Chairman and
thank you for your service oh thank you MI 2021-003093 1730-38 North 2nd Street
Michael Phillips is an attorney uh as is Melanie Lacey uh South Kensington Community Partners
my notes indicate we have not yet received the letter
but you'll let us know if you have one
you can submit it to us
so Mr. Phillips and or Ms. Lacey
Good afternoon
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Michael Phillips
1835 Market Street, Suite 1400
truth Philadelphia PA 19102 Claire Harrison here on behalf of 1730 North Second Street LLC the
equitable owner of 1730 of 54 North Second Street. Could you spell your last name and I'll swear you
in? P-H-I-L-L-I-P-S. You swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth?
I do. Is Miss Lacey representing someone or she? No she's yes she's uh one of my associates. Okay
Thank you. Ms. Tenere has a few questions for you.
I'm Michael. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required documents consisting of proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, or referral,
photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
I have, and yes, there is a letter of support that was sent in the revised packet to the
board yesterday.
That's great.
You may proceed.
Thank you.
I have with me as well Nathaniel Darman, who is here on behalf of the equitable owner, 1730 North 2nd Street, LLC, as well as Barr Levy, who is the project architect with Sandbar Design.
I have with me as well Nathaniel Darman, who is here on behalf of the...
Matt Kearse and Nick Lewis at Bowler Engineering are here as well in case the board has any questions for them.
So I will take you through the plans, but in a nutshell, this is on North 2nd Street and South Kensington in between Berks and Cecil B. Moore.
There's been a lot of activity in that block, and this plan proposes a six-story mixed-use building with about 9,000 square feet of ground floor commercial, 115 residential units, 27 parking spaces, and 42 bicycle parking spaces.
We are here for two refusals. One is the use of multifamily in the ICMX zoning district, and the other is height. We are proposing 70 feet instead of the 60 feet that is max, but as you'll see in the plans, the portion of the building that goes up to 70 feet is really de minimis, and we're not proposing any pilot houses and have sufficient setbacks.
We went through CDR and completed the CDR process two weeks ago on November 2nd,
and there is a letter in the packet indicating preliminary CDR completion. I also want to note,
because it's very important for this project, although we are not in the American Street
overlay and there is not an affordability requirement, we have agreed with South
Kentington Community Partners, and at the outset, let it be known that we were going to implement
an affordability component into this project. And as such, we are proposing that 10% of the units
be maintained as affordable at 60% of AMI. So in other words, it's the moderate income
threshold. And we have agreed to that as part of a memorandum of understanding with South
Kensington Community Partners that is in the packet and will agree to that as a proviso.
At Exhibit 2, here is a letter from South Kensington indicating their support.
You will note that they did note a few provisos, including 10 percent of the units affordable
at 60 percent AMI, that we will provide an easement to certain neighbors on Phillips
street to allow them access for deliveries and trash collection and that we provide lighting and
surveillance and greenery along the northern edge of the property where there will be a pedestrian
path and we've agreed to do that as well. I believe their ultimate boat as reflected in the
package is seven to one. I will quickly just take you through the plans and the development.
This is the existing site right here. It is currently a warehouse. This is North 2nd Street, and here is North Phillips Street, which we don't have any record of being opened, and as part of our plans, we're agreeing to turn this into essentially an outlet street so that car from our development can enter through what will be the parking lot and then utilize this as outlet.
This was one of the major discussions with the community of avoiding a lot of bottleneck and congestion on the street.
As you'll see in the plans, there is another development proposed at 1705 North American that was approved that similarly utilizes Phillip Street solely for an outlet.
Going on, there's more pictures of the current site.
we have
the sun
solstice and I show this only because it's
important that you see when the
orientation of the building
we have focused it so that we
maximize sunlight to the units
and to the courtyard
that you'll see. So here's our
proposed massing. Again we have
our ground floor commercial
and then the residential
component is from the second to sixth
floors we have seven town homes that you'll see on the next slide fronting north phillips street
and we've created a number of setbacks uh so that we have this area here that will be a courtyard
there will be a pool and some roof decks and the portion that is you know 70 feet is this
minor portion right here at the top the sixth floor level that is set back 30 feet from phillips
Street. And again, we're not proposing any pilot houses as part of this. Here is the massing from
the opposite view along Phillips Street. And you'll see these are all the other projects that
have been approved that are coming online in the surrounding area to give you a sense of the height
in the surrounding area to give you a sense of the height and density. I believe a project
that was approved here has 54 units including townhomes running north Phillip Street. This is
a 110 unit project and I forget the exact numbers I believe this is in the 90s at 1725 North American.
As you'll see from the zoning map, everything in the area is zoned ICMX, so we require variants for
the multifamily use. There are proviso plans that have been submitted with our packet and that were
provided to Ms. Saleta consisting of five pages, and the reason for the number of pages is just to
reflect the changes that we made as a result of CDR as well, but mostly for purposes of zoning,
it reflects the setbacks along the sixth floor level. So I'll pull up the just the zoning plan
to orient you with the site. So again, this is North 2nd Street. We are providing 27 parking
spaces, the majority of which are will enter off of this existing curb cut and exit onto North
phillip but we also included about five parking spaces here again another existing curb cut that
would exit onto north phillip and our loading zone is right here i'll jump right to the renderings to
give you a better sense of what the development will ultimately look like as well as the floor
plans so this is the view from north second street with the ground floor commercial and
the residential units above. We're looking mostly at, you know, there's a mix of studios and two
bedrooms, mostly one-bedroom apartments, and there is one three-bedroom. These are the row homes,
the seven townhomes that front North Phillips Street. We wanted to really give North Phillips
Street that residential Philadelphia row home feel and interact with those developments across
across the street. There's more of an aerial view, so you can see the courtyard, pool. There
would be amenity spaces on the sixth floor, and the setbacks that have been used for the
apartments. And again, that 70-foot area really is all along the top right here, and it is setback
significantly both from North 2nd Street and the Phillips Street frontages. Just run through a few
more of these for a little more context. This is again that second parking entrance. More
views along Phillip and again you can see the setbacks that were utilized so to ensure that
there isn't a canyon type feel. We're also proposing a mural from my local artist here along
the northern frontage just to break up where the parking is.
um and i'll get just to the elevations landscaping that we're proposing
from floor plan standpoint this is north second street again we have the commercial space here on
the ground floor that will be accessed both parking here and here but there is a through
door on both sides two lobbies with the bicycle storage and then those townhomes running north
phillips street trash would be obviously commercial trash collection and and we put these two doors
here so trash can come in pick it up and exit right on to um north phillips street so no there
won't have to be any um stopping on second floor plan this is at the second floor level with the
courtyard again mostly ones but there is a mix with uh two bedrooms and studios and then as as
we go up to the third floor you'll notice that there are additional setbacks at each floor
level so the footprint decreases and it improves those views and this is that final sixth floor
area with the roof deck fronting on north phillip and some other roof decks and tenant amenity spaces
um up at the top a few other elevations this will show you the east north site section
this uh is the again view from north 2nd street here's the town homes and again
points out the those additional setbacks so we go up to 60 feet here and then it's just this level
here uh that's 70 feet that's by this point we're set back 30 feet and no pilot houses and no other
levels of height beyond that level. Then there's the east elevation, and then this is with the
levels of height that's beyond that level again there's a
proposed mural. And then lastly, just some additional materials, and here's the materials
that we're proposing for the townhomes. Also in the packet is the memorandum of understanding
that we executed with the community.
And I have just some, you know,
the permits for the surrounding developments
that also utilize multifamily use
and have a similar component.
So with that, I'd like to see
if a client, Nathaniel Darman,
come on to adopt my testimony
and then I'll make a far levy available
to answer any questions the board might have
in addition to the public comment.
Mr. Dorman has been about to speak, sir.
Good afternoon, sir. Please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Nathanel Damo. N-A-T-A-N-E-L-D-A-R-M-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Mr. Phillips?
Natanel, you heard me go through the plans a moment ago. Is everything I stated true and
correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief? Yes.
And do you agree to adopt my testimony as your own? Yes.
Thank you. I have no further questions. Again, Barr Levy is available for any questions the
board may have and the public that they may have. Questions from the board? No.
Anyone else would like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
Chair, we've got Sloan Foulkes. I've allowed him to speak.
Mr. Foulkes, please identify yourself for the record and I'll swear you in.
Good afternoon, Chairman DiCicco, CBA Board. Again, my name is Sloan Folks, S-L-O-A-N-E-F-S-F-I-R-O-L-K-S, representing the Office of Councilman Maria Quiñones Sanchez, 7th District, room 508 City Hall.
You swear to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do, sir.
Thank you, sir. Please proceed.
Yes, sir. Thank you.
The applicant, having met with the coordinating RCO and receiving a letter of support, the council member offers her support for this project.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Anyone else to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
There are no further hands, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Planning Commission?
Good afternoon, Chair.
Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
this property was rezoned to ICMX industrial commercial mixed use in 2016 in accordance
with the comprehensive plan we feel the proposal represents an overuse and is not the minimum
necessary variance and would be better handled through a rezoning than a variance additionally
proposals additionally the privately negotiated affordable units are unenforceable underneath the
City Code. Accordingly, the Planning Commission recommends the Board deny the requested variance.
MI 2021-003093 1730-38 North 2nd Street. My vote is yes. Mr. Phillips, there's six pages.
Five pages, Mr. Chair. Five pages. My vote is yes with proviso revised
plan five pages approved today. Carol Tenere, my vote is yes with proviso.
Confessor Plaza, yes with proviso. James Snell, yes with proviso.
Thank you.
Case number four, MI 2021-003334, 1919 Cotman Avenue.
Daniel McElhatton is the attorney of record.
Ron Hirsch Civic Association sent a letter of support.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the board.
My name is Daniel McElhatton, and I represent PATH in this application.
PATH is a...
Daniel, could you please spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
Daniel, D-A-N-I-E-L, McElhatton, M-C, capital E-L-H-A-T-T-O-N.
McElhatton, M-C, capital E-L-H-A-T-T-O-N.
Is your firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Thank you. Ms. Tenere has a few questions for you.
Hi, Mr. McElhatton. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral,
photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing,
and have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
We have complied and we have met with the RCO
and their letter of support has already been identified
by the chair.
Thank you, you may proceed.
May I share my screen?
Yes, we love screens.
This is a part of a project that was approved two years ago
by the board for the renovation of the old first trust building at 1919 Kester and Cotman.
And that first trust building, we put a four-story addition on.
At the time, we also proposed a four-story building,
which we called the Children and Youth Services Building.
That project has moved forward and it has now been completed
and is occupied we are back here before the board to be able to request permission for signs for the
buildings and you see on the screen the three slides that Mr. Mecca Hilton this is the VBA
administrator we don't have your screen yet all right did you hit the green button at the bottom
Yeah, let me go back, share the screen, all right.
I'm getting there.
Okay, it's coming up, thank you.
Thank you, my apologies.
No worries.
this is the um in the lower right hand side you'll see the completed buildings this is the
old first trust building this is the children and youth services building i'm sorry
mr mecca hilton is tanya again yeah we don't have it's not open so we're actually in your files
so how about you try okay let me go back
well let me let me just continue to speak what so we have some sense of of what we're looking at
the first trust building has a nose on it that faces castor and cotman and that building had
signs on it previously that were on top of the building and are on the side they have been
removed in the reconstruction and we want an analog clock to be on the facade of the building
and a sign that says path at 1919 and um that uh those images are um let me see if i can
if you are getting anything now
so my my suggestion would be to unshare okay open up the file
and then re-share and see how that works for you.
Okay, I'll continue to try to talk.
The only other sign is on the Children and Youth Services Building.
We want a digital clock or digital sign at the top of that building
that spans the nose of that building.
These are applications that we have submitted to the community group
and they have accepted those without any problems
and without any issues.
Let me see.
There we go.
All right.
Mea cupo, mea cupo, mea maxima cupo.
No worries.
Mr. Chico you're old enough to remember what that means. I know, I know. I'm older than the building.
Yeah this is this is the building as it is now and this is where we want the
analog clock to go on that facade and the path at 1919 run under it. You see in the background
the Children and Youth Services building.
And you'll see here, this is what it looked like
And you'll see here, this is what it looked like when First Federal came in.
when First Federal came in.
And they had the sign up top.
They had the First Federal building there.
They had a clock there.
And this is the courtyard between the two buildings.
It's there now for the construction.
And, again, this was the second group of signs on the First Trust Bank building.
So, you know, what we have proposed is, and this is Betty Endel Petkoff,
who is the president and CEO of PATH.
This shows you the area where the signs are located, the commercial area of around Castor and Cotton.
So, you know, those were the, that's where we proposed the signage to go.
And I would ask that if Betty can be promoted, that she be asked if she would adopt my testimony.
and I thought she'd be under her name she may not have been able to stay on but
as a member of the bar I would represent stipulate Dan we'll stipulate that you
adopted your testimony any questions from the board no no
anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no hands at this time sir thank you planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the cmx2 commercial mixed use at this location
The Planning Commission has no objection to the Board granting the variance.
Thank you. MI 2021-003-334-1919 Cotman Avenue, my vote is yes.
Carl Tenere, my vote is yes. Professor Plaza, yes. James Snell, yes.
Thank you. Case number five on our list. Thank you, Dan. MI 2021-003-337-2006 Pemberton Street. Henry Clinton is the attorney of record. Letter of support from SOSNA, South of South Neighborhood Association. Mr. Clinton, please identify yourself and you're still under oath from earlier today.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. Henry Clinton, Queen Memorial Building, 1313 South 33rd Street, Philadelphia PA, 19146.
Ms. Benary has a few questions for you.
Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans of the property, five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of the above.
Thank you. You may proceed.
Is that visible?
Partially.
Better?
Better.
If you could make it a full screen, it would help me out.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the board.
This concerns 2006 Pemberton Street.
On the call with me is Stanton Kuklik, who is the owner as well as the architect, Julie
This is my table of contents containing exhibits AA through A10, and I'll walk through these.
appearance statement.
This is the refusal. It's a pretty straightforward matter, basically. My client is the owner of a
two-story home on the 200 block of Pemberton Street. He's going to put a third floor on his
home, and the second and third floor are going to impinge a little bit on the rear yard so that the
required 75% open lot area is going to be reduced to actually 80% because we actually
expanded the building beyond the 78%. So we still have the same size rear yard and I'll show you in
the photographs that the rear yard has not changed, simply the building above it, cantilevers over the
yard and we did that so we could match the depth of the newly constructed house next door.
We have a letter of support from Sazna.
They explain what we presented, which I will explain to the board.
And the vote was nine, support, and no opposition whatsoever.
This is an existing property under construction, which I was before the board.
This is an existing property under construction, which I was before the board on about a year and a half ago.
We got approvals for this.
This is my client's property to the right.
Right here, we're going to keep the first two floors and add a third floor.
This is the rear of the property.
So the second floor will come out beyond the first floor wall by about two feet.
And then the third floor will match the depth of the second floor.
This is probably the best picture to give you a feel of what's going to happen.
So again, the second floor will come out and meet the depth of the house next door, as will the third floor.
Again, some more perspective shots.
The rear yard depth will not change whatsoever.
But because of the cantilever, you can see the house next door is about two feet deeper than our house or my client's house.
And so just to make for construction ease, we ended up matching the depth of that just on the second and third floor.
And because of the overhang, the L&I examiner, rightly so, identifies that as a shrinkage of the rear yard when in actuality, the footprint of the rear yard will not change at all.
Again, just some more perspective photographs to give the board an idea.
Not that you don't know where Pemberton Street is, but it's in the Graduate Hospital area.
And these are the plans.
First of all, we did have some revisions.
So we have a proviso plan as well as one page.
And these are numerous plan changes that we made.
And we've tried to outline them as much as possible.
And I stand corrected.
There's two pages of revised plans, A1 and A2.
Yeah, that's what I have on my notes, two pages.
So basically, we changed the mansert roof in the front.
We didn't get a refusal for that, but since the plans have changed, we did point that out in our proviso form.
But here's a real key change, Mr. Chairman, is we have cantilevered the rear second and third floor.
I said two feet by, it's more like three and a half to four feet.
And again, that will match the depth of the house next door.
This is the final product of the home.
We'll have new Manser roof, simulated shingles on the top.
And the only thing I wanted to point out is we have a tax printout from the City of Philadelphia
indicating that there are no real estate taxes paid.
We could not get a certification, but there are no real estate taxes due in any way.
So that's really it in a nutshell.
We're increasing the open space.
It should be 75%.
We're increasing it by 5% to 80%, and we see that as a de minimis variance request,
and that is really the only refusal before the board today.
We have the support of SASNA
as well as the neighbors on both sides.
And with that, I rest.
Do you have a client to adopt your testimony?
Yes, I do.
Mr. Kukla, can you raise your hand?
He was on the call.
We'll stipulate you being an officer of court,
your client would have his top.
sir i'm on can you guys hear me okay good thank you spell your first and last name sir uh first
name stanton s is in sam t-a-n-t-o-n last name k is in kangaroo u-k-l-i-c-k cookbook you swear
affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes thank you mr clinton good
afternoon mr cookbook how are you today i'm well thank you for uh everything great uh were you on
the call and did you hear my testimony yes i did and if you had the opportunity to testify would
you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct absolutely all right thanks a lot
thank you questions from the board no no anyone else would like to testify in this case please
raise your hand there are no hints at this time sir thank you planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa 5 single family residential at this
location we feel the reduction in open space is de minimis accordingly the planning commission
recommends the board grant the variance thank you thank you peter mi 2021-003-337-2006
pemberton street my vote is yes with the proviso revised plans two pages approved today
carol tenere my vote is yes with proviso professor plaza yes with proviso james snell yes with proviso
Confessor Plaza, yes, with proviso.
James Snell, yes, with proviso.
Thank you.
To the court reporter, we have three, I'm sorry, four cases left.
And I know Carol is going to be leaving shortly.
Do you need a break?
Chair, it's really up to you.
I can keep going or I can take a break as you wish.
I don't think there's any, doesn't look anything controversial.
If it is, we'll stop and give you a break.
All right.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
So case number six, MI 2021-003-341-2217 Aspen Street.
Mr. Clinton, you are the attorney of record again.
There's a letter of non-opposition from Fairmont Civic Association.
Just identify yourself, Henry, for the record.
You've already been sworn in, and Ms. Denary will have some questions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Henry Clinton, Queen Memorial Building, 1313 South 33rd Street, Philadelphia PA, 19146.
Mr. Clinton, do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Can I get away with this? Have you emailed the exhibit packet with everything in it that you
know has to be in it? And have you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of you, Bob.
Thank you. You may proceed.
Thank you.
This is 2217 Aspen Street.
The issue before the board today
concerned two-dimensional variances.
Table of contents exhibits AA through A10,
which I will walk through as necessary.
Appearance statement.
Here's a refusal.
So there's two refusals, both as I say, dimensional.
one is for open space. Again, this is the de minimis issue. The requirement is 80%.
We're going to occupy 82.5%. Then the other refusal concerns a rear yard depth.
And as I will show the board as we walk through the presentation,
we are simply moving the rear yard from the ground grade level to the first floor level,
and I'll explain why. This is a letter of non-opposition from the Fairmount Civic Association.
We presented to them, explained the situation, and I'll explain it to the board,
but they go through pretty meticulously the background, the site, the proposed development,
and one thing I'd just like to point out to the board, in the letter it says,
although the majority of the community voted in support of the variance,
the option of non-opposition was not presented. So this is a letter of non-opposition, but
the vote was about 80% in favor of this project. We also have an email from Bill Greenlee,
the Democratic leader in the 15th Ward, supporting the project. So this is an existing project. What
happened was the builder decided to get a buy-write project on this corner of Kroski and
Aspen Street. It formerly was six one-story garages. So during the course of constructing
this building, one of the neighbors who lives in the neighborhood and has several children
attending the local schools, who is my client, Matt Gorman and his wife, Mr. and Mrs. Gorman,
walked by the project and said they really liked it and they wanted to buy it. But they wanted to
buy it and have a another garage door opening at the rear of the property where the yard was
and instead they're going to move the yard to the second floor living area right off their living
room because it really doesn't make sense to have a rear yard with children if you're going to have
a garage here you have to walk through the garage to get to the yard so they're going to put the
yard outside their living area and I can show you that on the floor plans but one of the concerns
was at the community group was that the garage was already partially built and that really was
on the builder he took full responsibility for that and it's really not an issue before the
board right now but it was a concern and we understand it with the community group
so i took this picture myself just to show the board that this would would be the yard my client
had nothing to do obviously with the construction of it and the builder left the existing walls that
were there he did not put a roof on the garage he was not so presumptuous as to to feel that he
would get a zoning board approval simply what he did was build i think he put about 22 blocks
on the front wall of the garage in the hope that this request would be granted
we also added a pilot house but again that's not before the board it's not part of the refusal
Again, there's some more pictures of the rear yard, and this is Croskey Street looking north.
Again, there's some more pictures of the rear yard.
And this is across.
Again, picture of the side of the property.
More pictures showing the zoning notices.
Here are the plans for the property.
So basically, this is a buy-write project here.
Before the board today is we are eliminating the yard, open space, moving it to the first floor, and putting a deck there.
that's simply the only issue before the board as well as the open space issue but i think that i
have addressed that by arguing that it's a de minimis 2.5 variance so this is what the property
used to look like for 20 or 30 years three garage openings each two bay garages so this is 100
coverage of the corner of krosky and aspen and our building also will cover 100 of the corner
this was the original by right project where there was an open space in the rear yard
this is our proposal we're going to have a garage another garage bay with the yard area above the
garage this would be the second floor and as i said to the board in the very beginning the idea
of putting um and i'm calling it the yard it may be a stretch but it's a deck above the first floor
is that the living area and the dining area in the kitchen are right here on the second floor
and it makes sense to have your open space here rather than on the first floor
where you would have to go you know through the property through the property to get to the rear
yard and and you'd have to go through the garage to get to it it really doesn't doesn't make sense
from a construction point of view.
So these are the floor plans.
I certainly can go through them,
but it's a four-story project under 38 feet
with a rooftop deck.
You can summarize, Mr. Clinton, that would be helpful.
So this is basically a pictorial view
of what's going on here.
This is going to be the final product of the project.
And it's really not affecting any light and air.
it's in harmony with what the neighbors are okay with
and it's in harmony with the code
and I think based on the presentation
and all the photographs
I think I can basically ask the board
if they have any questions
and this is probably the best view
of what we're trying to do here
just add another bay with a rooftop
excuse me, with a deck above that third bay
Do you have a client to adopt your testimony?
Yes, Mr. Gorman, can you raise your hand so you can be unmuted?
Mr. Gorman has been allowed to speak.
Thank you. Mr. Gorman, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Matthew Gorman, M-A-T-T-H-E-W-G-O-R-M-A-N.
We're firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Mr. Clinton?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Gorman, have you heard my testimony?
i have okay and if you had the opportunity to testify would you adopt my testimony as
your own and that's true and correct i would thank you very much mr gorman questions from
the board no sir anyone else to testify in this case please raise your hand
no further hand at this time sir thank you planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing rsa 5 single-family residential
at this location but we feel the reduction open space is de minimis we do not feel the applicant
has demonstrated a hardship for the additional garage and associated reduction in rear yard
that is not self-created accordingly the planning commission recommends the board deny the variance
Mr. Clinton, you're worth three garages there, correct?
There are actually three garage bays with six garage spaces.
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Correct.
Thank you.
All right.
MI2021-003341, 2217 Aspen Street.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
And there's two pay, excuse me, there's no revisions.
My mistake.
um confessor and jim
confessor plaza yes for proviso my apologies there's actually no proviso that was a mistake
james my vote is yes thank you case number seven mi 2021 that's zero zero three three nine four
2636 east york street the attorney is out in labor we have a letter from councilman mark squilla
that is in non-opposition and the rco fish town neighbors association has submitted a letter of
support mr labor can you this scenario i think we lost oh there he is okay i thought we lost the
chair and i was starting to talk to mr labor and i got i went completely off yeah i got so
well where did i didn't even know where i got to um i said we do have a letter about non-opposition
remarks we have a letter of support from fishtown neighbors adam can you put your name and address
on the record spell your last name and the chairman will swear you in good afternoon mr
chairman mrs tenere members of the board adam laver of blank rome one logan square philadelphia pa
19103 on behalf of l m real estate developments llc do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth nothing but the truth yes chairman to chico i do thank you please proceed thank you
and i'd like to remind um miss saletta that we have submitted revised proviso plans two pages
uh mr laver do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
yes indeed i do mrs canary have you emailed the exhibit packet with everything that it is
supposed to have in it that you're very well aware of and have you met with the rco
and do you have a letter yes everything has been submitted on time thank you you may proceed thank
you uh adam laver of blank rome on behalf of lm real estate developments uh better known as the
Riverwards Group. With us today are Larry McKnight and Mo Rushdie of the Riverwards Group,
also Rustin Holler of Harman Deutsch-Holler Architecture. This case came before the board
previously, and this afternoon we are here simply to discuss the addition of accessory signage.
The subject property, as you can see, fronts on East York Street, Thompson Street, and Cabot Street, across from the Exxon gas station, as seen on your screens.
As I mentioned, River Wards previously appeared before the board and obtained approvals for a new construction project, which is in the process, the early stages of being built at the site.
The approval is for 42 residential dwelling units, ground floor business and professional office, and off-street parking for 26 cars.
The current application seeks to increase the number of off-street parking spaces to 35 spaces.
This does not require zoning board review, but it's a positive, I would say, for everyone to increase the off-street parking.
and what is before the board is the proposed accessory signage.
Here you can see one projecting sign on the right of the screen and one painted flat wall sign
at the top of the building. I'm running through additional elevations. Only two signs are proposed
at this point in time you're just seeing a different angle for that proposed uh projecting
sign the subject property is zoned cmx2 requiring zoning board review for the uh
proposed signage above the second floor that was the painted sign up at the top
and the projecting sign uh is proposed at five feet projecting whereas four feet are permitted
by code. Once again, we have removed two of the three flat wall signs. A total of two signs are
proposed. We have worked closely with Fishtown Neighbors Association, which offers their support
for the project, and Councilman Squilla's office offers non-opposition.
a revised signage proposal has been submitted maintaining the proposed projecting sign but
removing the proposed flatwell signs along york and thompson leaving just the one sign that i
mentioned i leave you with the renderings we have um mr rushti available to adopt and affirm
the proposal fits into the surrounding neighborhood as evidenced by the support of the coordinating
RCO. The variance would be the minimum necessary to afford relief. This will not substantially
increase traffic congestion, etc., or otherwise endanger the public, and there are no environmental
or otherwise endanger the public and there are no environmental issues. Once again Mr. Mo Rushdie
is available and we have the full complement of the team if there are any questions by the board.
Thank you Mr. Laver if you can get your client to adopt your testimony and then we'll move on
from there. Mr. Rushdie would you please raise your virtual hand so that you may be sworn in
by Chairman Tachika.
Yes, I'm here.
Please spell your full name, sir,
and I'll swear you in.
First name is Muhammad, M-O-H-A-M-E-D.
Last name is Rushdie,
3020 Richmond Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19134.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And Mr. Rushdie,
have you been present for the duration of the virtual hearing in this matter?
And would you adopt and affirm the testimony that I've offered as your own?
Thank you, Mr. Rushdie.
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
Hearing none, anyone else to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
I see no hands shared.
Thank you. Planning Commission. Planning Commission, are we frozen here? Or is it me?
Oh, sorry. Good afternoon, Chair. Peter's having some technical difficulties. David Vecteau.
No worries. David Vecteau, City Planning Commission, F-E-C-T-E-A-U.
We're a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Thank you, David. Please proceed.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed use to zoning at this location.
The applicant has failed to demonstrate a hardship for oversized signs and placement above the second floor windowsill.
Accordingly, the planning commission recommends the board deny the variance.
MI20, thank you. MI2021-003394.
2636 East York Street. My vote is yes with the proviso revised plan. Two pages approved today.
Confessor Plaza, yes with proviso.
James Snell, yes with proviso.
Thank you. Case number 8, MI 2021-003236, 3236 South Sydenham Street.
Vincent Dufino is the attorney of record.
Packer Park Civic Association sent a letter of support.
Mr. Dufino, when you get on, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Mr. Dufino is coming back in as a panelist.
Mr. Dufino, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Here I am, Vince Dufino at 2541 South Broad Street.
It's V-I-N-C-E-N-T-Defino, D-E-F as in Frank, I-N-O.
And I'm here on behalf of the owner, Michael Guida.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Mr. Plaza has some questions for you.
Mr. Dufino, you agree to wait the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents,
proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans
five days prior to this hearing? Yes, I have. And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, we do have a letter of support. Thank you. Please proceed.
all right do you see uh mike the pictures yes okay this is uh packer park it's uh sydenham
street britain estates i'm sorry mr defino may you um maximize your screen for all to see please
Oh, certainly.
Thank you.
Thank you, Tony.
We have some black and white pictures here.
And, of course, this is the new deck in question that is being refused because of its setback.
Nine-foot rear setback is required.
It's five-foot proposed setback with this deck.
This is the new deck.
There was an old deck there that was actually larger than this deck.
um but when they started to build this deck uh they told them that we needed a variance in order
to build this deck they and we took basically took away the stairs from the old deck
And we basically took away the stairs from the old deck, which I could show you.
The new deck is actually 295 square feet, where the older deck was 324 square feet.
And this deck is synonymous with all the decks that adjoin the area.
So it doesn't change anything.
All that did change is we took the steps from the side here away, which reduced the square footage of the deck by about 30 square feet.
so we met with the neighborhood they were all good with the deck and uh nobody has any issues
with it in fact there's a lot a lot of decks in that vicinity that are a lot bigger than this
particular deck and all we did was take away the steps and make it a smaller deck than it
originally was so basically that's it um you have a client your client to adopt your testimony
Yeah, I have Mike Guida here.
Mike, step into the picture.
Mr. Guida, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Michael Guida, G-I-U-D-A.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you.
Mr. DeFino?
Mr. Guida, you heard my testimony today.
Is that correct?
And do you believe it to be true and accurate?
And would you adopt it as your own?
Thank you.
any questions from the board no no anyone else would like to testify in this case please raise
your hand i see no hands chair thank you planning commission good afternoon mr chairman members of
the board david fecto city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the residential single family zoning at this location the planning commission recommends
that the board support the requested dimensional variance. Thank you MI 2021-003236 3236 South
Sydenham Street my vote is yes. Professor Plaza yes. James Snell my vote is yes. Thank you case
number nine mi 2021-003 342 5028-34 frankfort avenue augusti o'neill is the attorney of record
my notes indicate we've not yet been able to uh or the applicant and or the attorney has not yet
been able to get uh email exchanges between the rco frankfort cdc um chair this is sharon there
has not been an RCO meeting on this one
yet, so
if I may, I can address
that. Mr. Patterson, just spell
your name and I'll swear you in.
Good afternoon, Ronald Patterson, P-A-T-T-E-R-S-O-N.
Claire Harrison,
1835 Marcus Street, Philadelphia
PA 19103, on behalf of the
owner and applicant. Do you swear
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth? I do, thank you.
And let's go, Ron, just
let Confessor ask you some questions
and that may clear things out.
Yeah, and I'll clarify.
Thanks.
So, Ron, Mr. Patterson,
you agree to waive the reading of his refusal
and stipulate to his accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet
with the required documents,
proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance,
copy of the refusal or referral,
photos and plans published prior to this year?
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
And no, I don't have a letter.
In my package, you'll see that I've been trying to get a meeting with the Frankfurt NDC since August and had no response and unable to get a meeting.
We did finally start corresponding within the last week or so, but still no date.
So I had asked if they would consent to me presenting the case and the board holding the vote.
And I also checked with Councilwoman Sanchez, and she agreed as well, only because if we postpone, of course, it will be three months until we have another date.
So with all agreeing, I was hoping that we could move forward with the hearing today.
So we'll proceed and we'll do a resumption hearing to get feedback from the RCO.
Perfect. Thank you.
So if I can proceed.
Should I proceed? Yes. Okay, thank you. So this case regards 5028
Frankfurt Avenue. It concerns a demolition of an existing building that was last used.
It concerns a demolition of an existing building that was last used as a 7-Eleven convenience store since 1999.
It closed in May of 2020.
What we're proposing to do is to construct a new commercial retail store,
having a Dunkin' Donuts and a vacant commercial space for Sonny Ho, who you may know as the Dunkin' Donuts king of Philadelphia.
Generally, the takeout use is permitted in the zoning district, which is CMX 3.
But also generally, we know that it has a drive-through and that drive-through sales
requires special exception approval from the board.
The property is depicted here.
It's located adjacent to the Area Health Frankfurt Hospital.
The lot is approximately 21,000 square feet.
Their sign is proposed with a pyrite, including reusing existing pylon and placing flat wall signs.
Again, the one-story building.
Go to the site plan here.
the left here is a proposed on good donuts the right is the tenant space which would probably
be a by right use um drive-through it's a new the new type of store that has been created
i guess with the pandemic age here it's a drive-through with walk-up only no indoor
seatings and also pre-order pickup by way of a by way of a you know a phone app
The police department has signed off on this different type of drive-through, which are two lanes that then converge into one.
The reason being that it would help prevent adverse impacts to street traffic and the like, considering the fact that this was a 24-hour convenience store.
this use is less intense anyway but these changes were made in order to um you know prevent any any
future adverse impacts from traffic to occur um you also have an enclosed trash storage area here
you just have to see in the upper left i mentioned about frankfurt nac that we're awaiting a date
for the meeting um and so you'll see that um based upon what you're going to hear that uh
the fact it was a 24-hour convenience store and this is a lesser use that this use would have
its drive-through use would have no adverse impacts on the public health safety offer on
traffic and we're also asking for a higher fence than is allowable to create a better separation
between the commercial and the residential uses so with that said if you could promote Sonny Ho
S-O-H-O, to confirm my presentation.
Sir, please identify yourself, spell your name, and I'll swear you in.
Hello.
Hi, please spell your name.
Yes, Sonny Ho, S-O-N-N-Y, last name Ho, H-O.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Mr. Patterson?
Hi, Sonny.
So you've heard my testimony.
Would you agree that it's true and accurate?
Yes, I do.
And you would agree to adopt it as if you were your own?
And so a few questions.
This operates seven days a week, primarily right now from 5 a.m. to 9 p.m., is that correct?
Yes, correct.
And the number of employees, there's approximately eight employees per shift?
and at this location you're not you're not actually cooking uh you're it's cooked off site
the food and you're you're reheating of course making coffee so there's no need for deep fryers
or venting of uh of uh smoke exhaust but you will have an exhaust that vents heat is that correct
that's correct okay um that's all i have for mr ho there's any questions
Do you have any indication when the RCA will be meeting?
I believe it might be a two-step process.
So I would say within, you know, I would hope within 30 days.
So what I'm asking is, I'm sure you want to wrap this up before the end of the year.
Yeah, yeah.
So I'm going to ask Tanya for a date.
We don't have any hearings the last week in December.
so uh what is the last date we have scheduled in december tanya and if so can we make that the date
for a resumption hearing only for information as it relates to the rco yeah unless
only for information as it relates to the RCO.
Yeah, unless we can do it by letter saying we met with the RCO,
we submit their letter and consent to it provided that we have the support.
Of course, if it's-
Mr. Patterson, they don't do that anymore.
They'll have to be presented at a hearing.
Sorry.
I'm using the last possible date in December to give you enough space.
December 22nd at 3.30.
December 22nd at 3.30.
thank you okay so mi 2021-003-342-5028-34 frankfort avenue this hearing will be resumed
on december the 22nd at 3 30 tanya correct chair 3 30 p.m at which time the board will consider
any feedback from the rco okay thank you thank you uh i believe that concludes the uh hearings for
today uh have any as anyone fails or they've not been recognized please raise your hand
i see no handshare thank you any other further business
board tanya anyone all done as usual thank you again everyone and when i say thank you i want
the planning commission to understand that we're thanking you as well even though we may not always
agree thank you as well uh mr chair chair this is the corner i won't be on the call tomorrow so i