And they do have, I'm sorry, they do have one proviso here about no rooftop deck.
um i don't believe our property like our application calls for a rooftop deck or
rooftop deck access structure but the board feels so inclined uh to make that as a proviso as well
we have no objection to that uh and this is our revised proviso plan form we're removing the
egress well from the front of the building structure that was an ask from the community
and we have no objection to that and then here is the uh here is showing that we actually removed it
in the front and then our petition so you know we met with not just the community at a meeting but
we also canvassed the neighborhood and you know based on that you know canvassing we have uh
received much support from surrounding neighbors, and this is just an example.
And then it's not uncommon to have multifamily dwelling nearby. I'll just give you an example
as a project that this board granted in the past at 2009 North 31st Street, which is around the
corner, for an RSA 5 property for multifamily use. And then if you look at another zoning matter,
2008 North 32nd Street, which is down the block from us, which is three apartments.
And then the Lower North District Plan 2014 indicates prioritization of commercial residential
development on and adjacent to the corridor, which could assist in restoring street life
and customers, as well as raising perceptions of safety. And then this is just, you know,
showing our block from a zoning perspective. As you can see, our block is equally RM1 as it is
RSA5. If this was RM1, which is not, this project would be allowed us, right, given the lot size of
164 square feet. But, you know, I tried to get from a Google Map perspective showing
how this project relates to the Lower North Plan. But as you can see, there's a park here.
but as you can see there's a park here this is the commercial corridor on bridge avenue
This is the commercial corridor on Ridge Avenue.
we're basically in the middle of both and then photographs of the property this is the front
of the property you can see this is a porch neighborhood and you'll see through our design
that we try to emulate that as much as possible but this has been a vacant lot so google earth
only goes far back as 2007 so this has been a vacant lot of record for at least 15 years
probably a lot more. When we met with the community organization, there was an inclination
that this has been a vacant lot for much longer than 2007. Because of its RSA 5 designation,
it's been very hard to develop this lot, especially now with rising interest rates,
construction costs and such. The way to responsibly develop this property or develop it at all
would be to do as a duplex. And then this is North 32nd Street to the right of the property.
north 32nd street to the left of the property and here are our plans and drawings again what
we try to do is emulate oops uh emulate like what's there to the left of us so you can see
that we try to match the roof line brick facade porch this is what we got rid of this is just our
rendering um we haven't we didn't have a chance to change that uh but we really did try to match
what the look and feel of the properties nearby with our property. And then this is the rear of
our property as well, where there be a rear deck, not roof deck, but rear deck, as well as an ample
open space. And as you can see, we match in line from that rendering the property to the left of
us. There is no property, there's no building structure to the right of us. And then as you
can see here, this is the edge of our building structure right here, the edge of the building
structure right there to the left of us. We nearly match it. And then this is our floor plans, very
basic. Unit number one is a first floor lower level, has access to the rear for garbage storage.
Unit number two is the second and third floors, and they have a ventilated trash room for
garbage storage. And then this is our meeting notice. Our meeting notice, as you can see,
we met with the community at September 22nd at 6 p.m. 188 properties were notified of that meeting.
These are the properties that received notice of this. Proof of mailing.
our application for appeal to the uh to the zba along with our notice of refusal and project
information form our deed to the property uh showing that uh riley denise llc is the owner
of the property and our certificate of tax funds uh with that being said i'm going to unshare my
screen um i want to ask that mr matheson virtually raise his hand uh and then after uh he adopts
are to my testimony, we'd be more than happy to take any questions from the board.
Hi, sir. Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Chair, there's no hands raised at this time. Okay. Mr. Notkinson, you're an officer of the
court and your testimony is fine. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Knott, one quick question.
Does the revised plan have the proviso from Strawberry Mansion in it about the roof deck?
Again, no, it doesn't.
I think it's necessary because our original plans have nothing to do with the roof deck or the roof deck structure.
But again, belts and suspenders, if you want to put that in there.
All right.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa 5 single family attached zoning at this
location there is no unique circumstance or physical condition that would prevent this
1164 square foot block from being used in performance with the zoning code and there
is no financial hardship however most of the homes in the block appear to have been built
as duplexes or triplexes prior to the adoption of the original zoning code. The proposal matches
the character of the block and will not impair the use of adjacent property. Accordingly,
the Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the use variance.
Thank you. MI 2022-002-272-1942 North 32nd Street. I vote yes. Proviso. Revised plan,
one page stand by ZBA on October 12, 2022 and no roof deck or roof deck access structure.
And no roof deck or roof deck access structure.
Thomas Holloman, my boot is yes with provisos.
James Snell, yes with provisos.
Chris Millishaknit, yes with provisos.
Thank you, Mr. Nockamson.
Thank you. Have a great day.
All right.
Let's go back to.
number one mi2022001676 3618 sears street mr mobahill all right i should be there you go
thank you thank you sounds better now as well right i think i've already sworn you're sworn
in right yes and just one more time could you uh do you identify your client in relationship
to the property yes my client's the owner of the property emerald properties of philadelphia
okay and i and his name is oh jesse are you available on the line
now just tell me his name that's all um one moment chairman i i suddenly blanked on my
client's last name my apologies it's a a i r t i g as in golf h as in hotel okay thank you
i had that right for the reporter all right have you uh ishmael have you already asked
appropriate questions i can run them over again no problem um yeah okay do you agree the way
to release the reading of a few of them yes did you know all the exhibits and elements
are required such as proof of ownership as clear copy of refusal or referral
everything except for an rco letter which we did not receive however my understanding is that the
rco chair has been in contact uh with the zoning board with respect to their vote
all right so a good afternoon members of the board who should be staring seeing my screen
right now which is page one of my presentation packet three six one eight sears street uh this
is a rm1 zoning district what we have right that is for our proposal today pretty straightforward
we're asking for a single family home or we're asking to go up three stories without the eight
foot setback. That's it. Sears Street is a residential block. It's relatively small.
There's a copy of our application for appeal. Deed for the property. And as of right now,
it's lined more or less by either empty lots or single family homes. So we're just proposing to
build a new single family home. It's going to be a little bit bigger, a little bit different than
newer than the older homes that are existing so members of the board what i'm now showing
you is page 15 of my packet and this actually is i'm gonna go one page up here
there we go and what we're looking at is the block itself so the red brick building to the
upper left of the presentation screen that's an existing house it is two story but as you can see
it's up significantly out of the ground i'm assuming that's due to the underwater
pardon me underground requirements of the area whether that's rock or streams or flow
i'm not entirely certain our property is located here middle picture top in between the two homes
that are there that are existing then we see the property adjacent to the west
additional shots going down the row this is what the lot like looks like behind the fence
and our street view looking west.
If you look at a larger view of the general area, though,
members of the board, you'll see there's a large vacant lot
directly across the street from us,
which probably we'll see development at some point in the future,
but just hasn't done show yet.
So we're just looking to do some infill development.
So this is our site plan, members of the board,
as presented to L&I.
This is our actual lot itself.
And you can see that our structure that we're proposing is only about as deep as the existing structure, which is immediately to the left of our property.
So we have a significantly sized rear yard. It's about 11 feet, nine inches, give or take, which is larger than the other existing older single family home directly next to us.
The reason that we're asking to go to that third story is kind of gets to that hardship is if we're going to have to go out of the ground a significant amount anyway for construction, we're asking because the lot size because the open area requirements because of the width of the lot size.
We're asking because the lot size, because the open area requirements, because of the width of the lots themselves, which members of the board, the lot itself is not terribly wide.
It's 14 feet. So we're asking to have that third story because the lot sizes itself present kind of a hardship for a new construction home due to layout, due to new code requirements for rise over run of stairs, construction materials, other things like that, which are inherent to the new construction system.
that's why we're asking for that additional space so we do have a setback from the parapet this is
our roof deck enclosure area so it doesn't actually you won't be able to see it either
from the street or from the rear yard because the setback from the front in the back and it's
not terribly wide only seven feet three inches this is the cross section so again we're only
going to 35 feet 10 inches we could go higher up to 38 feet but we're not asking to do that
and we're asking for the additional full story without the setback because we'd like to have
that additional space due to the smaller sizes of the property
we go to the cellar we can see a den bathroom utility area washer dryer i'm going hopefully
we have some space in the basement for the meters but we all know how that works and going up the
stairs to the living and dining areas we can see just how small the footprint of the home is
again the kitchen and living area is only going to be about 12 feet wide on the interior because
we have a 14 foot lot so we can see and if you've lived in the house that's only 14 feet wide you
know the space is at a premium and any inch that you can get is a boon
so second floor plan has two bedrooms in the bath in the middle
third floor plan is the owner's suite with the bedroom to the front the closet and bathroom to
the rear then the pilot house that leads to the roof deck set back from the front and from the
rear um at our community meetings members of the board here's the property again with the posted
signs at our community meeting that we did hold down a grace ferry
Okay. Neighbors were generally in support. This was our, by the way, our notice of mailing that
went out. Neighbors were generally in support. In fact, the immediate neighbors, to the best of my
knowledge, were asking my client to generally see what they can do to assist with perhaps adding a
third story to their house and put them in the right direction for it. So there's no ill will,
there's no bad blood, there's nothing along those lines. Here, what we have is one of the final,
in fact the final page of our presentation packet members of the board so later dated july 21 of 22
from the owner at 3616 sears street which is one of those two homes that was shown
and more or less they talked about hours and everything along those lines she doesn't have
any questions about the third story in fact it supports the third story was really more
concerned about the logistics of construction itself and they're ultimately in support as is
to the best of my understanding the community itself we're happy to ask any or pardon me rather
answer any questions the board might have at this time you want your testimony adopted to
mr moldhill oh certainly jesse if you are on the line would you please unmute yourself
or perhaps matt if you're on the line would you unmute yourself if you're there
Mr. Frisk, you will have to unmute yourself. You are able to speak.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Chair, we have Matthew.
Last name again in an O.
That's fine, yes.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Matthew Ostroff, A-T-T-H-E-W.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Okay, so Matt, you've heard my testimony today?
Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
It is.
And if you were called to testify today, would you adopt my testimony as your own?
Yes, I would.
is there anything you'd like to add nope thank you very much thank you um questions from the
board no mr mr chairman uh mr melville from the notes i'm reading the the real issue is
there's not an eight foot setback on the third floor correct all right so in other words
the issue is is that if you go above two floors it's supposed to be an eight foot setback that's
is that if you go above two floors it's supposed to be an eight-foot setback that's the sole issue
the soul of
all right all right thank you questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
comprehensive plan recommends a change to rsa 5 single family attached residential at this
location the eight foot setback is required in both the current and recommended zoning the applicant
has failed to justify a hardship that just justifies the dimensional variance additionally
in a standing policy to object to bedrooms or rooms easily converted to bedrooms located in
basements due to safety concerns accordingly the planning commission recommends the board deny the
variance if i might respond to that members of the board with respect to the basement it simply meant
as an open down area can be used for storage or anything else there's simply no space especially
on a 14 foot wide house uh to really put a functional bathroom down in there so it's easier
to go either up or down one since there's bedrooms on the second we go there and then we go down one
to the basement because we have that space did you show bathrooms in the basement a bedroom in
basement oh it's a it's an open area with utilities and washer dryer thank you mi2022
001 676 3618 shear street i vote yes thomas holloman my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes
all right thank you members of the board have a good afternoon
I'm sorry, Ishmael, I didn't hear your vote. Can you repeat that?