and no additional curb cuts on pastoria they added that that the the bottom here they added
that as the third sentence so those were the three the three phrases that were considered to be the
the the proviso mr chairman can i make a suggestion please right is it possible that
go back and listen to the tapes because a lot of us were not there
and please send us the tapes out for this weekend hillary
because we can't make it
I totally agree
there won't be a recording these hearings were not recorded at that time
the transcript's all you have but again
I don't think respectfully I don't think that we can do that here
That is exactly the whole case that went to the Commonwealth Court, was what did the zoning board mean? What was the actual proviso that the board issued? And, you know, again...
Excuse me, Counselor. We just read the ZPA transcript, so shouldn't we just follow that?
right and but we would also agree with mr phillips that the commonwealth court has said
that the intention of the board was to not allow additional curb cuts and pastorius we all i think
we all agree right ultimately there are no additional curb cuts on pastorius so the issue
is at least from my position the city's position is what were the original curb cuts what curb
cuts existed at the time the permit application in 2017 was submitted. That's it.
Well, I think, Mr. Count, excuse me, excuse me, Count. I think we should just follow the ZBA
transcript and not what the courts added.
Well, we do have the language of the Commonwealth Court decision that came down. It's in exhibit...
Exhibit 11, which is the decision on the stipulation, Mr. Phillips asked the stipulation to be stricken, and the Commonwealth Court said in their footnote on page 8,
moreover in a stipulation filed by petitioners and the city on november 5th 2021 those parties
stipulated that the city will instruct this department of licenses and inspections to require
that any zoning or building plans submitted by respondent restrict access through any remaining
curb cuts along pastoria street for the use of service delivery and emergency vehicles only
This reinforces our belief that LNI is the entity that should be addressing any current
This reinforces our belief that LNI is the entity that should be addressing any current zoning violations at the property.
Respondents, January 10th, 2022, application to strike stipulation, which seeks to strike the stipulation from the record, is denied.
um so in in that in their motion to strike the stipulation mr phillips argued that that adding
this language in the stipulation was so similar to the november 1st uh decision that had been
ruled invalid because of procedural reasons that it that it shouldn't be applied and the
commonwealth court disagreed and and did denied his motion and basically said that this stipulation
is valid um so this situation should guide should guide this board excuse me mr chairman
in the interest of time can we uh either call for a vote or hold it for another hearing
i i think where ismael was i think we have to hold it for another hearing i mean i i think
we got to get together as a group and figure out what this means and where we want to be and just
get it done. Thank you. So we're going to call for another hearing. We'll let you know
when that is. And then by then, we'll be better prepared to have a sense where we're going
and we're going to get it done the next time. And we're just not going to keep going around
and around and around. Hi, Chair. This is Tanya. Yes. May I respectfully request that
this be a special let's speak absolutely absolutely thank you chair and mr sheriff this could be done
expeditiously because mr phillips claims that he has a new application to basically vacate the
proviso from the zba which is a very high standard for him to do um but um since that is is pending
before lni right now and and will be presumably receiving a refusal um in in a short time he then
will be taking an appeal to this board on that we would like this board to have clarified and decided
on the contours of the proviso prior to that i i will i will talk to tanya with it and as usual
we'll try to do the best we can with dates so yeah and and just to piggyback on to what
Mr. Masters said, I mean, it would be our position that, I mean, if the court grants
the variances that we're seeking, I mean, if the board does, then all of this
is moot. So, you know, we're going to be on a pretty,
you know, they're going to be pretty close to each other probably in terms of timing, but if the board
grants the variances, everything that we're talking about here is moot. And also, I do have the original
zoning notice of decision that I can send Ms. Emerson that does state
no parking on Pastoria, curb cut on Topahawk and only. So I can send that
thank you thank you all very much but we have to move on okay i would just ask that you that this
did not be set for may i will be out of the country for the rest of the month
so um it has to be in june or or thereafter i i have i'm going to be out of the country in the
middle of june um i'm sorry i'm sorry we'll figure it out okay thank you all we'll look at that we'll
take care of that. We have to move on. Thank you, everybody.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I know you've all put a lot
of time in this.
Because we'll be out of the country.
Right, Bill?
Jesus Christ. For the rest
of the summer. MI 2020
001535
East Somerset Street.
Southport
Richmond
Civic Association, Lender of Support.
Daniel McElhatt, attorney.
Air Daniel McElhatton is coming back in as a panelist now.
Mr. McElhatton, state your name and spell for a court reporter, please, sir.
Yes, Daniel, B-A-N-I-E-L-P McElhatton, M-C, capital E-L-H-A-T-T-O-N.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chair.
And who is your client, and what's the relationship to the property?
The owner of the property is Elton Enterprises, LLC, and the managing member of that is Brett Brand, B-R-A-N-D, and he owns both this parcel and an adjacent parcel where his business, Brand Enterprises, is located.
He is on the call today.
Thank you.
Our vice chair, Carol Tenere, has just a few questions.
Hi, Mr. McElhatton. Do you agree to wait for reading the refusal in situate with that person?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with 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
photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you...
RCO and do you have a letter? Yes, all of those have been submitted. We met with the RCO and we
received a letter of support, unanimous letter of support from the RCO, the Southport Richmond
Civic Association. That's great. You may proceed and share your screen. While I'm trying to do that,
But I was wondering, Mr. Chair, whether, as an attorney, I can get CLE credits for the last hour that I spent.
I mean, I'm not sure. I'm not sure that you'd get credits for that.
Why not?
I am attempting to share my screen, if you'll give me just a moment.
While that's coming up, this is a parcel that is at the intersection of Somerset and Salmon Street in Port Richmond.
It is in the shadow of I-95, and it is a building that is two stories high, and it is basically two widths wide, and it is currently vacant because it has been purchased by Mr. Brandt, and it's in the process of being renovated.
And you'll see it on the screen now, I hope, on the right-hand side of the upper building, of the upper panel.
It is this building right here that has two widths, and it's two stories high.
You'll see I-95 on the left-hand side here.
And what Mr. Brand is attempting to do and proposing is to convert the first floor into one apartment with two bedrooms and the second floor into one apartment with two bedrooms.
These have been vacant for quite some time.
This is the side view of it down below that.
And you can see the other views of the parcel.
He has attempted to and has started to make the interior renovations, which you can see on these slides here.
This is an addition to the community, which I think is very appropriate.
The community was very excited about having this work done and to make it conform with the rest of the community.
You'll see where it is in relation to 95.
So part of our hardship is that selling a single-family home at this location is extraordinarily difficult
because of the proximity of I-95 and all of the work that has been done on Richmond Street and
will continue to be done for quite some time. There is parking in the rear of the building.
There will be an eight-foot, no, there is not parking. There's parking on the street, but
the rear will have an eight-and-a-half-foot rear yard, and that rear yard goes into Mr.
Brandt's property, which is Brandt Imaging, they cover motor vehicles with plastic coverings,
and you see them all over the place. This is not a complex request. This is a request that is
consistent with the uses in the neighborhood and for all of the other properties. There's
residential property across the street. It is one that is proper for the general area of Somerset
and Simon Street, and we would request your favorable consideration for the variance.
Mr. Brandt, are you on? Can we add Mr. Brandt to the panel?
Mr. Brandt, you can unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, Mr. Brandt.
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Sir, it is Brett Brandt, B-R-E-T-T, B-R-A-N-D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chair.
Proceed.
Brett, you've heard me summarize what your application is to convert this building,
which is rather darlick at this point, into two separate apartments, two bedrooms each.
Is that correct?
That is correct.
And would you describe where your business is in relationship to this property?
So my business is just south of this building down Salmon Street, which is a semi-dead-end street.
And we have a single-story warehouse.
And then there is a vacant piece of land in between.
And then this property in question.
and how long have you had your business at that location about three i think we've owned
uh these parcels for about four years we renovated the warehouse to move in there and
we've been operating out of here for about four about three years excuse me council
excuse me council yes do you have a site plan
Thank you.
i think i put that up there now thank you and mr brand you've heard me summarize the testimony
um that you would we would present we have presented you adopt my testimony as your own
that is correct questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments
from the virtual audience i see no hands at this time chair planning commission good afternoon
david vecto city planning commission mr chairman members of the board the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning at this location the applicant
has failed to show that a hardship exists that would prevent the property from being used in
conformance with the zoning code the city planning commission recommends the board denied the
variance. Thank you. MI 2020, 001535, 2724 East Somerset Street, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Thank you, Counselor.
Mr. Chair, that will complete my business. May I be excused, sir?
Absolutely. Thank you. Good to see you, sir.
M-I-2020-000657-4154 North 7th Street.
Joseph Vaccaro is the attorney, letter of opposition from Nuevo Esperanza Housing and Development Corp., RCO.
Mr. Vaccaro is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
I just wanted to note for the record that I did receive a tax clearance on this property since the notes that I sent you.
So the case can be voted today.
Thank you. I appreciate it.
Mr. Vaccaro, state your name, please.
Good afternoon.
And spell for the court reporter.
Good afternoon. My name is attorney Joseph Vaccaro, V-A-C-C-A-R-O, attorney for the applicant, Dana Santana.
To my left is her husband, who is physically present with me, Giovanni Figueroa.
All right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you tell me the relationship these two people have with the property?
Are they the owners?
Anna Santana is the owner of the property, and Mr. Figueroa is her husband.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you also emailed the exhibit packet in with proof of ownership, tax compliance, 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?
Thank you.
You may proceed and share your screen.
Sure. Insofar as the submission of the tax clearance certificate, I was able to submit the tax clearance certificate today, and I never received a letter from the RCO meeting, which, according to my records, took place on July 20th of last year.
But if the board has one, then the board has the letter.
Hillary, we do have a letter, right?
yes i um mr vicar i can send that to you momentarily okay much appreciated thank you
because uh because uh again here for the record um before i was retained my client had met with
my esperanza rco uh and there was a letter of opposition and then after that uh after that
event then i i was retained so i don't know uh if if the board has a more up-to-date letter or the
original letter from 2019 or 2018. So that being said, I'll share my screen.
Where's that button to share the screen?
On the bottom, the green.
All right. So this is an application to permit.
Okay. Could you share it for us, please?
This is an application to permit a duplex, one apartment on each floor. Here's a photograph
of the outside when I put up the poster.
I apologize, I shouldn't have done that.
Here's the photograph of the zoning poster.
I keep, I apologize.
I apologize. We have the refusal, we have the summary meeting form from the prior meeting with
the RCO, the application for appeal, the 7th Street, the deed to the property on 7th Street,