and U-degree Section 11 of the Philadelphia Code
concerns streets and right-of-way.
Are you familiar with the definition of a curb cut?
I don't know what it says exactly, but I'm familiar with it.
Right.
If I read, I'm going to read for you
or represent you that Section 11.104.1b
of the Philadelphia Code provides
that a curb cut is defined as an alteration to the curb that facilitates vehicular access
across the sidewalk to connect the roadway to any public or private property. Does that sound
accurate? Yes. So if a curb cut is, if there is an alteration to the curb that does not
for the purpose of facilitating vehicular access, would you call that a curb cut?
I'm sorry, could you repeat that?
I'll rephrase that.
So you'd agree that if it does not facilitate vehicular access, it's not a curb cut?
I'm going to object.
If you're asking for a legal opinion of what a code section of the Philadelphia Code means,
then um that would be an interpretation for a court or this board or um or an attorney but
um that's not her testimony that that um that curb cuts are are require vehicle access
so i'm going to allow the question if if she knows i mean she seemed not to be sure about that if she
knows. It's hard to say because the existing curb cuts, yeah, they should, they're there to allow
for vehicular access. Okay. And you'd agree that the plan that Mr. Masters just showed that was
approved, only one of those, what you call three curb cuts, provides vehicular access to the
the property into parking areas?
Well, at the time of the plan,
I mean, I'm looking at the plan.
The plan shows three curb cuts.
The plan shows three curb cuts.
But two of those references lead to paper patios where there's no parking and there's no vehicular traffic allowed, correct?
But two of those references.
I guess although I had seen that the plan, I can't tell that there are bollards on the plan or any restriction to vehicles on the plan.
okay um i don't have any further questions uh one more question on on cross certainly
mr masters go ahead um miss templeton
is it your opinion that uh the zoning board when they first issued their provisos prior to uh prior
to the vote um that they had um an intention to to stop ingress and egress off of pastoria street
objection beyond the scope of my cross and we're back to talking about no it isn't it's talking
about vehicular access your cross is all about vehicular access and my questions are about
vehicular access for the curb cuts you're asking what the what the zoning board intended to do
you're asking Ms. Templeton to testify as to what her understanding of the board's intention was.
As expressed in their decisions, both in October of 2017 and in November of 2017.
I'm going to allow her to answer that question to what she understands.
My interpretation was that they intended that there was no access on Pistorius Street,
that there would only be access on Tulpa-Hawkins Street.
I understand that there was a question after that proviso,
what about the existing curb cut?
To which that answer I interpreted as
you can use the existing curb cut,
but you can't create a new one.
And was there any discussion among the board members
or even among the witnesses at the hearing in October 2017
concerning a continued ingress and egress
from Pastoria Street.
Objection, the board has the transcript from the hearing
and can see what it is.
That's not a basis of an objection.
There's no objection there.
You're just saying that you think that this is redundant
because the board can read something in writing
and then a witness can read it to it.
So you're asking her to testify to what she recalls the board saying when the board, there's a transcript that the board can easily review and access.
Mr. Masters, we will work with Hillary. We'll be able to see that.
Just to be clear, Mr. Chair, members of the board, there was literally no discussion whatsoever as to what it means when Mr. DiCicco, the chair at the time, said no additional curb cuts, existing curb cut only.
And the entire proceeding, including Mr. Bilby's testimony at that hearing, was around whether there should be ingress and egress off of Pastorius or off of Topohokan.
And the Planning Commission, who is here today, Mr. Bednar, testified twice that no ingress and egress from Pastorius, only ingress and egress from Topohokan.
And Mr. Billby's attorney said that clearly to the court is in her attempt to get the proviso overruled because she said this was too restrictive to only allow the access from Topohokan.
So everyone, it seems to be clear on this, except for Mr. Phillips, who came many, many years later to this situation and has a different understanding than his client and the first attorney.
But I had wanted Ms. Templeton to just confirm that for you. I will ask, Ms. Templeton, you've heard my oral arguments and comments today and also in the last hearing. Do you agree with them or would you adopt them as your own?
i'll object to a to an expert witness adopting an attorney's uh testimony as her own generally
that is for property owners to you know move things along and to avoid redundant testimony
miss templeton is here as an expert she's a representative of my clients and under the
She's a representative of my clients, and under the zoning code, she is allowed to adopt testimony.
under the zoning code she is allowed to
I can ask someone else.
I didn't understand both for you, or the question's been answered.
We'll let it stand.
Are we through?
I think we're through.
So, Hillary, we're going to now continue this for another resumptive hearing from Mr. Montanez.
Am I right?
That is correct.
And Mr. Reuter and Mr. Phillips also will give their presentations.
And Mr. Masters, did you have any additional witnesses other than Mr. Montanus?
I do not believe so.
So just so we're clear, Mr. Montanus will be called first at the next listing.
Because he's been here three or four times already and hadn't been called any of those times.
Yeah, he will absolutely be first.
Thank you.
Thanks, everyone.
All right.
Thank you, members of the board.
thank you thank you okay so now we're headed to thanks miss templeton
mr chair we can um go back to the gerard avenue case we received the additional document that
we needed to proceed mi 2022 001 328 914 west gerard avenue demetrius ware
it's been promoted to panelists thank you
hello hi mr ware we now have all your information just for the record again i believe i already
swore you in once. Could you just state your name for the record? Demetrius Ware. That's D-E-M-E-T-R-I-U-S-W-A-R-E.
Okay. And our vice chair has just a few questions. Ishmael, are you on?
I am. I am chair. Proceed.
Good morning, sir. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Okay, thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Mr. Chair, would you like me to read the refusal into the record?
Okay. This application is for use as assembling, entertainment, nightclubs, and private clubs with live entertainment in an existing structure. No signs this permit. There is one referral. The proposed use, assembling, entertainment, nightclubs, and private clubs requires special exception approval under CMX2 Commercial Zoning District.
And I would note that the 14th Ward Democratic Executive Committee, RCO, has sent a letter of support.
Mr. Ware, proceed.
Okay, so, again, let's work with me here.
This is the letter of refusal that's on the screen.
So I'm going to go to the next picture, which is the application that I first done.
All right.
So next is the project information.
This is another exhibit that I had to present.
Troll down.
It's both papers.
Right there.
Hold on.
My fingers are sweating here.
I'm moving.
This is the lease.
This is the lease that I signed.
It's about 20-something pages.
okay we know we have that so far why don't you show us pictures of the property okay all right
well right here is the letter i had to put in front of the uh front of the door
yeah post it right the notice of refusal um let me move this up a little bit
i'm displaying the uh front of the door the plethora of parking space that available
i have a few shots of that um this is the inside of the property
that's one angle stay outside parking right in front of the door
this is another shot inside the property
this is the prep kitchen area
this is the this is the front to the right of the building which is more parking i wanted to
This is the front to the right of the building, which is more parking.
I wanted to display the special variations, a plethora of parking areas.
So I took a lot of pictures of a lot of places they could park.
This is the side street.
Exit door right there towards the end of the screen to the right.
But I'll give you another shot of that inside.
This is the special letter that the community, the 14th Ward, presented to me.
It's the floor plan, which is very basic.
It's another letter.
Mr. Ware, this is Hillary.
The 14th Ward RCO indicated that you entered into a community benefits agreement with them.
Is that correct?
Absolutely.
And that included all the provisos in there?
All right.
Thank you.
Did you finish everything you had?
Yes, I did.
And you did go to the RCO and you made your presentation?
right and they're in favor of where of you doing this with providers absolutely okay okay
uh questions from the board no mr chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience okay i see no hands leaning commission this is uh
Ron Bednar city planning the property is zoned for neighborhood commercial mixed use on a city
plan the proposed use have no more of an impact than would be expected to have for its specific
location therefore we recommend that the board grant a special exception thank you MI 2022 001
328 914 West Gerrard Avenue I vote yes Thomas Holloman my vote is yes
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes
Thank you, you have your vote, sir
Congratulations
Appreciate you guys
Okay, so now we're going to go to
Number 7
MI2022
001058332 Delancey Street
David Orfanides is the attorney
And I also have
Let's see here
I also have Paul Boney as the attorney for Society Hill Civic Association, and also Henry Clinton, who represents some near neighbors.
They've all been promoted to panelists.
Mr. Orphanides, you've already been sworn today, so just state your name for the record.
Certainly, Mr. Chairman, David Orphanides, O-R-P-H-A-N-I-D-E-S.
And could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
Certainly. My client is Phyllis Ellen Jacob, the owner of the Suffolk property.
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth again?
I do again.
Okay. Mr. Bonney, please state your name and spell for the court reporter.
My name is Paul Bonney, P-A-U-L-B-O-N-I.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. And I represent.
Could you identify your client, please?
Thank you. I represent the Society Hill Civic Association, the RCO, in this matter.