Thank you.
Have a look, LaKeisha.
Okay, Chair, we have 37 attendees and we can start as you wish.
Thank you.
Good morning.
My name is Bill Bergman and I will be chairing this morning's ZBA hearings.
With me is Ismail Shahid, our vice chair.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thomas Holliman, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And LeBaron Leonard Palmer, who will be filling in on the board today as a voting member.
Good morning, President.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Also here is our attorney, Hillary Emerson, and Lakeisha Dandy, our ZBA hearing supervisor.
Be advised these proceedings are being recorded. By participating, you acknowledge your agreement
to be recorded. The video will be available by contacting tanyasunkit at phillip.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify
themselves before testifying. If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify,
press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute. To enter the appearance statement, call
267-270-5548. Leave your email address and the address of the property in question. And finally,
the question and answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony. Any comments should be
referred to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken. Let's look at continuances on the 930 list.
Number two, MI 2022-005-088-4913 North Lawrence Street. That case is continued.
Number four, MI 2022-005-082-5600 North Sydenham Street. That case is continued.
And number 12, MI 2022, 005085, 4811 Spruce Street, that case is continued. Is there anyone who has
comments or questions about the three cases I just continued? Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. I just
wanted to clarify that that last case you continued was 4611 Spruce Street. Oh, I'm
sorry 4611 screw street thank you thank you good morning mr chair this is jason and i do not
see any hands raised for those cases okay thank you and no exhibits i have one case
Number one, MI-2022-005-083-1314-16 Marlborough Street.
That's Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
Mr. Anastasio, it's been a long time to speak.
Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Good morning.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Sure, of course. Vern V, like Victor, E-R-N, Anastasio, A-N-A, S-T-A, S-I-O.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Counsel, are you representing that client?
I am, Mr. Chris Jurek, and we are withdrawing this case.
Thank you very much, Sheriff.
Thank you.
So MI 2022-005083, 1314-16 Marlboro Street, that case has been withdrawn.
Mr. Anastasio, we'll be back to you shortly.
Thank you.
We're going to go to our add-ons.
We only have one today, MI-2022-004-798-3964 North 7th Street.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
We're going to go to our regular list.
Number three, 2022-005-084-1029.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair.
This is Hillary.
I'm sorry.
Sorry, Vern.
Number nine, MI-2022-002-159-1944, Caster Avenue.
Justin Crick is the attorney. We do have, I believe, an RCO letter now in hand
in opposition, and we also believe the council person's office is in opposition.
Yes, Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. We just received the letter
of opposition from the council office as well as the RCO. Thank you.
Mr. Crick's been allowed to speak. Hi, Mr. Crick, could you state your name and spell for the court
reporter? Yes, Justin Crick, J-U-S-T-I-N, last name K-R-I-K. Right. Do you swear for him to tell
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Could you identify your client, please?
Yes, my client. Relationship to the property? Yes, my client's name is Arik Dayan, and he is the
record owner of the subject property at 1944 Caster Avenue. All right, our vice chair has a
few questions for you. Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes. Have you emailed in all the exhibits that were required
for this case five days in advance of this hearing? Yes. Thank you. Please proceed and
share your screen. Thank you very much. All right. Members of the board, we're here today
on a and an application uh are you able to see the the pdf at this time
we were now we don't okay let me do that one more time i apologize
um is this is this right now it's up thank you thank you very much all right so uh members of
the board, this is an application for essentially what is actually the legalization of a two-dwelling
unit residence in an existing structure. The property is located at 1944 Caster Avenue,
and a refusal was issued because the property is situated in an RSA 5 district,
which prohibits the use of more than one dwelling unit. As indicated here, the refusal is only
the use refusal and for two units in that structure. For a geographical background,
the property is located and fronts on Castor Avenue between Emerald Street and Glenwood
Avenue. It is situated in a row home configuration where the majority of the block, as can be seen
in this photo, is RSA 5 with commercial mixed use on some of the local corners.
um from a stand this exterior of the property is located uh as you can see it kind of fits in line
with the the remaining properties characteristics on the block um our frontage again is is situated
between two other homes and it is essentially the the owner of the property purchased the property
in late 2018, at which time it was represented and marketed as an RM1, as a multifamily dwelling.
This owner, Mr. Dayan, the applicant, had purchased the property with the intent of
living in the first floor space and renting out the second floor. However, due to employment
matters and change of situation, the applicant and owner is now residing or spends the majority
of his time in California. And after that situation happened, this was right around
the beginning of 2020. In early 2020, the applicant received the violation that the
property was not allowed to be used as two units. With his relocation to California,
He had an individual, a good friend, residing on the first floor in his place, and we have
since filed for the application for the legalization.
The interior characteristics of this building are such that the first floor basement area
is set up as one unit, though there is no dwelling and no habitation or sleeping in
the basement of that unit, and the applicant understands that and is prepared to accept
that proviso, and those terms have always been enforced with the parties that had resided
in the property.
But the property also is structured in a way that each unit already does have
But the property also is structured in a way that each unit already does have and has its own kitchen facilities and separate bath facilities.
As you can see in here, these are some pictures of the first floor.
The rear has the kitchen, dining room.
This is a photo of the bathroom of the first floor.
And I apologize for the orientation of this top photo, but there's an interior vestibule from when you come in from outside that has, you know, distinguishable separation between the unit on the first floor and then a stairwell to go up to the second floor.
floor. This is a photograph of the kitchen on the second floor as well as first floor
habitable space where the occupant resides and sleeps and so forth. The basement is used
for laundry and storage purposes only and also recreation. I believe that they may watch
some TV down there. And as you can see here, the second floor has its own separate entrance way
from that vestibule leading to the upstairs. Second floor bathroom is to the right.
And this applicant, I'm sorry, this tenant uses the one bedroom. Each unit is a one bedroom unit
and has that second bedroom that would be on the second floor as their common space.
This is a photograph of the second floor kitchen in existence and second floor hallway for this unit.
The applicant has provided somewhat rudimentary, but but essentially a sketch up of of how the property is broken down.
Again, the basement has only been used as laundry area, utilities, storage, and there is a bathroom in the basement and for some living space, but certainly no sleeping or habitation overnight.
The first floor is situated in that there's a dining area, kitchen, major main living room area where the applicant, I'm sorry, where the occupant resided and slept and almost more like a studio apartment in that sense.
And the second floor, we had that front family room. It has one bedroom, one bath and a kitchen situated in the rear.
We did meet with the neighborhood organization. We understand that they opposed the application.
However, we believe that given the characteristic of the property as it is situated for two dwelling units and that there's really been no detrimental impact in either congestion or complaints from anyone in the neighborhood about this use, we believe that the literal enforcement of the code would create a hardship.
The applicant, again, intending to reside there, I think would have been a little bit
different of a story, but due to his circumstances, was unable to reside there and then made do
with what was advertised or presented to him at the time of his purchase.
That is essentially why we're here today, to seek the legalization of this property.
And I have Mr. Dayan available to adopt my testimony, if that is acceptable.
Sure. Why don't we bring him on?
Mr. Dion, if you could raise your hand to be admitted.
Jason, did we see his hand?
No hands from Mr. Dion.
Mr. Crick, you are an attorney at law. We will officer of the court.
We will take your test.
My hand is raised, sir.
It is?
Mr. Chair, my hand is raised, yes.
He's going out to speak.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Arik, A-R-I-K, Dayan, D-A-Y-A-N.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Ismail, could you take this over, please?
Vice Chair?
All right.
Thank you.
Mr. Dayan, have you had an opportunity to hear my statements to the board this morning?
And were my statements true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
And would you accept the testimony that I have given to the board as if it was your own?
Thank you.
Thank you. Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions from the audience?
I see no further hands, sir.
Thank you.
Planning Commission?
Thank you.
Good morning.
This is Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Last name spelled H-E-G-A-R-T-Y.
do you agree to tell the truth and nothing but the truth yes i do proceed thank you good morning
Do you agree to talk?
board members uh in 2017 the zoning map was amended in this area from rm1 to rsa5
in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan property does not have
any history of legal use as a two-family dwelling and the we believe the applicant's claimed hardship
is self-created we further believe that the proposed use conflicts with the intent of the
rsa5 zoning district that was mapped by city council in 2017 and adopted to the zoning map
city planning commission recommends that the board deny the variance
Thank you. MI-2022-002759, excuse me one second. It's MI-2022-002159.
and then 1944 caster avenue thank you you can vote
okay i see it now uh thank you hillary uh my vote is no thomas holliman my vote is no
all right thank you thank you
hillary we're going to start back at number four or are we going to go to ten
um one moment let me just move my list here uh number three number three
1029 South 10th Street
MI-2022-005084
1029 South 10th Street
Vern Anastasia
Mr. Anastasia
will be rejoining as a panelist
good morning again
good morning counsel state your name and spell it for the court recorder
so it's verne v-e-r-n anastasio a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o
do you swear to tell the truth or nothing but the truth
i do i think i'm already under oath but yes okay state your company and your relation
i represent michelle ortiz who's the owner of the subject property
thank you uh i guess i can go right in and ask the other questions uh do you agree the way the
reading of the refusal to stipulate to his accuracy i do have you emailed all the exhibits in
our offices five days in advance to this hearing? Yes. Thank you. Please proceed and share your
screen. I've already shared my screen. It's 1029 South 10th Street. It's the corner of 10th and
Lee. The application is for the legalization of an existing three-family dwelling. The property
is now zoned RSA 5. However, there is a history of the property being a storefront on the first
floor with commercial mixed use moving forward. My clients picked up the property in the mid-90s
as a three-family dwelling. Each floor has one apartment. As you can see, the three electric
meters, each story is one apartment each. Here are the plans that were drawn by my clients.
to show the two-bedroom apartment, a back gate with a backyard for trash storage,
the second floor with all the rooms and their dimensions,
and the top third floor, which is a one-bedroom apartment.
We do have some photos of each floor.
I'd be happy to take a look at them.
I am entering photos of each floor into evidence.
We did meet, in fact, with here's a proof of posting of the notice. I also have attached the deed. Here's the letter that went out to the folks of the Bella Vista area. 109 individual households. This flyer from Bella Vista also was distributed.
This flyer from Bella Vista also was distributed, and it was rather well attended with three sheets of folks coming in and weighing in and offered unanimous either non-opposition or support.
it was completely unanimous and as a result they sent over a letter of non-opposition
which is right here and i do believe uh last night i forwarded but i do believe their office
did so independently as well a letter from council member mark squilla also supporting
this appeal uh given the history of the property because the property has a long history as a
multi-mixed use, cost is adjacent to other multifamily properties on both sides, not only
on the South 9th Street side, but if you cross League Street, a brand new building is going up
with more than 14 apartments right across the street. It sits on a corner and it's on along
South 10th. And in this particular neighborhood, the number of streets are where multifamily dwellings
are encouraged and preferred and because we have the support of both the rco and the council
member's office we respectfully request granting of this variance and with that i'd like to ask
michelle ortiz to raise her virtual hand mr ortiz please raise your hand they've been allowed to
speak sir hello please state your name spell it for the record uh michelle angela ortiz that's
m-i-c-h-e-l-l-e-a-n-g-e-l-a ortiz o-r-t-i-z and i'm sorry and on the record it's my mother and
my father who are the owners of the property who are here with me and i am helping them with
translations and Vern is representing um us and my mother is here with me her name is I'm sorry
can she get sworn in yes can we can we get your your mother on the record to spell her name her
name is um Epifania E-P-I can we get can we get her to spell that please sure E-P-I-F-A-N-I-A
Thank you
Council
Ms. Ortiz did you hear my presentation to the board today
We still need to get sworn in I'm sorry
Epifania needs to get sworn in
Yes that's correct
Ms. Epifania do you
Swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth
Thank you
Epifania did you hear my presentation before the board today
is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge yes and you adopt it as your own
testimony yes thank you I have nothing further questions from the board no Mr. Chairman
questions from the audience
I do not see any further answer planning commission thank you board member Ian Hegarty
for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission board.
In 2015, the zoning map was amended in this area
in accordance with recommendations from the comprehensive plan.
This proposed use is consistent with the prior documented use
and with the physical configuration of the building.
As we've seen in the testimony,
City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the variance.
Thank you.
MI-2022-5084, 1029 South 10th Street.
My vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Levera and Linda Palmer, my vote is yes.
And Mr. Thomas, can you vote again?
We didn't hear you.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
MI-2022-002759-4343 North 9th Street, Alaza Lazaz.
I'm back.
Mr. Chair we're about we're just starting number five yep number five yep I'm good
okay that person has been promoted to panelist all
do we see a hand
Do we see a hand?
The hand was raised.
They've already been promoted to panelists, sir.
Hello.
This application is for visitor accommodations at the second floor in the same building with single-family household living on the first floor.
The proposed use visitor accommodation is prohibited in the RM1 zoning district.
Have you been sworn in, sir?
No, not that I know.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Sir, can you just state and spell your name for the record, please?
My name is Alonzo Lyons, spelled A-L-O-N-Z-O, last name L-Y-A-S.
Good morning, sir.
Have you, have you emailed all the exhibits that were required in this case five days
in advance of this hearing?
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Hold on one second.
Let me share my screen button at the bottom.
Oh, I know where it said I was trying to exit out of my PowerPoint.
Can you see it now? Yes.
Okay. I purchased this home April 16th, 2021 as a multifamily property. And I live in a property
is split up between two different units who have two separate entrances. One is a fully,
fully furnished rental property on the first and second floor. And the bottom unit is a fully
furnished basement where I reside at. And my plan was to either rent the home out for long-term
rental or use short-term rental, which I'm required to have a limited lodging license
for Airbnb and or Vrbo. And this is my property. This is the front of the property where the
entrance for a short-term rental would be, which is completely separate from where I would reside
at. This is the street view, North 9th Street, connecting with West Cayuga Street, which is like
two blocks away from Roosevelt Boulevard. These are the floor plans that I've drawn up.
This is for the short-term rental. These are the specs of the property, the year it was built,
gas, two open parking spaces in the back, which I'll provide for renters.
These are the other specs of the property.
This is the inside of the home, which would be used for the short-term rental.
This is the zoner notice that I was said to have needed to post. Hold on, let me go back.
and that's the back area that will be allowed for parking so it doesn't disrupt anything that
goes on my block and that would be the end of the slideshow itself
yes i did on october 18 2022 and do you have a copy of that letter
yes hold on one second I provided it um but I can pull it up on the screen as well
do you remember what the vote was the letter of non-opposition okay okay
Mr. Chair this is Hillary I can confirm that we received the letter of non-opposition from Esperanza
thank you questions from the board no Mr. Chairman
no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
planning commission yes chair we have no folks okay i'm allowed to speak yes mr folks state
your name please and spell for the court reporter good morning cba board chairman bergman sloan
folks. S-L-O-A-N-E-F-S-N-F-I-R-O-L-K-S, Office of Council Member Ketzi M. Lozada, 7th District.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, sir.
I do so, sir. Thank you. Proceed.
The applicant, having met with the coordinating RCO Esperanza and receiving a letter of non-opposition, the council member does not oppose this various request.
The applicant having met with the coordinating RCO Esperanza and receiving
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair.
We have a hand raised from a number ending in 3550.
I will allow them to speak with permission.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
sir or madam if you're still there please unmute
then is raised but they're not unmuting okay thank you you have to press star six or star nine
star six to unmute yourself hey uh can you hear me i could you could you state your name please
and spell for the court reporter yes my legal name is aaron silverman a-a-r-o-n silver man
as it sounds do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
You have input for this case?
I mean, just as a listener and as, you know, I heard everything he said and the fact that he would be residing in the basement, has parking spots available in the back, would monitor any short-term rental or even long-term rental.
i'm a professional real estate agent so from my perspective professionally and as a neighbor in
the area i see absolutely no problem with what was proposed thank you thank you thank you for
calling in is there anyone else in the virtual audience i do not see any further hand hi planning
commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the city planning commission board members
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RECOMMENDS NO CHANGE TO THE RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY ZONING AT THIS LOCATION.
FOR USE VARIANCE, WE'RE LOOKING FOR HARDSHIP. WE FEEL THE APPLICANT HAS FAILED TO MEET THE
CRITERIA FOR HARDSHIP BY SHOWING THAT THE UNIT CANNOT BE USED WITHOUT A VARIANCE FOR VISITOR
ACCOMMODATION. IT IS SET UP AS A DWELLING UNIT ALREADY. AND SO THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
recommends that the board deny the used variants thank you mi2022 002 759 4343 north 9th street
i vote yes with proviso temporary variance expires 2-1-26 thomas holloman my vote is yes with proviso
ishmael shaheed my vote is here with proviso thank you sir thank you number six
MI-2022-005-154-4720-Mansion Street.
Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
Letter of support from the Ridge Park Civic Association.
Mr. Nockamson will be rejoining as a panelist, sir.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board, Alan Nockmson, A-L-A-N, the last name Nockmson,
N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in a relationship to this property?
Just one second.
Yes, my client is Roy Aronovich, and he should be in a virtual audience.
He is the member of the corporate entity that owns the property, which is VP4720Mansion, LLC.
Thank you.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Excuse me, I thought I was off mute.
Good morning, Counselor.
Do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Have you emailed all the exhibits into our offices five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thanks, Al.
Please share your screen.
Thank you very much.
Oh, good to me.
So this is 4720 Manchin Street, just as a housekeeping item, we will ask the board to hold this for a vote, we are waiting for an updated refusal.
there was a combinations made based on community input which included reducing the size of the
proposed curve cut and in order for the board to properly vote for this matter we need an updated
refusal so hopefully we'll have that within the next month and then the board can vote on it but
we would like to make our presentation now. So what you'll review today is the notice of refusal
that we currently have um again the the accommodations we made to based on community
input uh did not increase any refusals or create any additional refusals but again we just need
that updated refusal um you know to pursue this project uh by getting a zoning permit and building
permits uh we have correspondence from the ridge park civic association in that letter uh they will
You'll see that they, you know, acknowledge that we made some modifications to this project, and we'll go over those.
One of the refusals has to do with accessory off-street parking, and we have pictures of nearby properties, which are similar in nature to what we're asking for.
We'll review then the maps of the area, photographs of the property.
This property has, you know, it's a sole purpose entity, owned by a sole purpose entity.
But the parent company is Vich Properties, which is well known in the Philadelphia area for providing luxury single family homes.
And we'll review some of their work product on other projects so you can get a sense of what they plan to do here.
Then we'll go over the plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notice.
So we actually had two meetings with the community.
You'll see the meeting notice for the second meeting in which they actually voted for it.
But after the first meeting, we made, again, modifications to our project.
They were well accepted, and that's why we have a letter of support.
You'll also then see the application for appeal that we filed with the ZBA, our deed to the property,
showing that BP 4720 Mansion, LLC, is the owner of their property, and our Certificate of Tax Clearance.
In the virtual audience is Roy Aronovich, the member of the LLC that owns the property. And at the conclusion of my presentation, I'll ask that Mr. Aronovich virtually raise his hand, be sworn in, and then adopt my testimony as his own. And then obviously we'll take any questions from the board.
If there's any technical questions, we have Adam DeChant, his architect, available for questions.
So our notice of refusal, so this is an RSA-5 property.
We're not looking to increase density in any way.
It's actually a double-wide property.
We're just looking to make a single-family home with off-street parking, and we have two refusals.
The first of which, we have a balcony in the rear of the property,
um and according to the code any balcony needs to be at least 10 feet above the average grade
because we're in the rocksboro maniunk area uh you know they have you know sloped
uh uh you know properties and um the average grade is technically six feet uh 6.7 feet um
And, but in actuality, if you look at it from where we are in the rear, we're over 10 feet high. So again, the virtual audience, you can't sense my height, but I'm almost, I'm six feet, five inches.
So I appreciate the code provision to make sure that like balconies are at least 10 feet high, but there's no risk of anyone hurting themselves.
And the intent of this provision, too, is more so for front properties where you have a public right away, a sidewalk, where you don't want balconies too low from the ground to cause a hazard.
For those two reasons, you know, we asked the boards, allow us for this variance of the zoning code.
And then the second variance we're asking for is off-street parking.
Again, you know, parking's always at a premium in neighborhoods in Philadelphia.
it's you know it's not common to have a community actually in support of it but they are in support
of this we accommodated them by reducing the width of the curb cuts given where the property
is located we're basically at a cul-de-sac we're not affecting any on-street parking material
We're not affecting any on-street parking materially, and the community was in support of this project as a whole, especially given that this is a double-wide property that's being used for single-family.
And then you can see from the Ridge Park Civic Association, they make reference to three things in their letter.
We agreed to reduce the width of the curb cut and the garage.
They were appreciative of that. We moved the front door of our property. Originally, it was more on the sides, but they wanted something prominent in the front to have eyes on the street and a sense of community. We made that change.
And then the third change is we moved another balcony, which is not the subject of the refusal, from the rear of the property to the side.
That was more aesthetic. We're near a big park.
They thought it was more appropriate to have that balcony on the side, which we accommodated.
And based on that, they support our project as a whole.
And then, again, just to go to the heart of our variance request about the off-street parking,
It's not uncommon to have off-street parking in this part of Philadelphia.
So on the 4700 block of Mansion Street, you can see nearby off-street parking.
It's really 216 Hermitage, which is next door to us.
And then 218 Hermitage as well from Mansion Street.
You can see there's off-street parking.
And then you can see we're close by.
We intersect with gates.
So 240 Gate Street also has off-street parking for single-family use.
And then just, again, you can see from a map of the area, we're not increasing density.
This is RSA 5.
There's a big park here.
But this is where Gate is.
This is where Hermitage is.
So all the pictures we're showing you of off-street parking is close by.
But you can see we're kind of like at this elbow where, again, from a street's perspective,
We're not really affecting the on-street parking, given where we're located.
So I believe that's why the committee was in support of our off-street parking request.
And then this is just where we are from a Google Maps perspective as well.
And then as you can see, more of the park.
And then photographs of the property.
This is where we are, 4720 Mansion Street.
This is our hearing notice poster or proof thereof that we put up.
Mansion Street to the right of the property, Mansion Street to the left of the property.
Examples of interiors that Vich Properties has done, and as you can see, it's really about high-end materials, and that's what they plan to do for this project as well.
and then our plans and drawings again we sure in groups we sure in the width of the garage at their
request and the curb cuts and we reoriented the front of the front door instead of being
on the side front door we did as a front front door to make it more prominent
and then in our drawings it's referenced exactly how we change these things about relocating the
front door reducing the width of the curb cuts and then these are just sort of simple floor plans
first floor you get up through a common well here's the garage but you know first floor you
get the front door you have a living room and a dining room and a pantry and lower level you have
basically a secondary living area and then the second floor you have a few bedrooms you have a
a few bathrooms, and then the third floor is the same.
It's a four bedroom, four and a half bath house.
And then we have a roof deck.
And then you can just see from the slope
of what's going on here.
You can also see from the prep and the materials,
like we circle where we made our changes.
And then you can see here, this is the refusal.
um we're at at technically six feet here for the average grade uh for this balcony here but we
actually have 10 feet 11 inches so technically from a height perspective if you just take the
actual height the distance between the ground level and where the balcony is it's 10 feet 11
inches but because the code provision goes based on average grade and because we're in more of a
sloped area we run afoul of that provision and then just our hearing notice we met with the
community on december 13th at 7 p.m at a well-attended meeting 93 addresses were notified
of this zoning proposal, list of the addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses, our application for
list of the addresses proof of mailing to those addresses or applications for appeal that we
filed with the cpa
or deeds of property showing that vp 4720 mansion llc is the owner of the property
and their certificate of tax clearance uh with that being said i would ask that
my client uh virtually raise his hand and um be sworn in
sir could you state your name and spell it please for the court reporter
court reporter did you did you hear that
could you do it one more time please sir yes sir no i i did get it thank you all right thank you
thank you do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes proceed counsel oh yeah yes mr aronovich uh can you uh you heard everything i stated today
yes and is it true correct yes and do you adopt as your own testimony yes thank you questions from
the board no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
do not see any further hands Mr. Chair okay Hillary will get a input from planning while
we're waiting for the report yes we will yes okay planning thank you Chair Bergman good morning
board members Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the existing RSA 5 single family zoning at this location the proposed
dimensional variance for deck height is well justified here by the unusual slope of the site
and the proposed deck we feel conforms to the purpose and spirit of the zoning code. With
regard to the use variance for front-loaded parking, we don't believe the applicant has
supported their hardship claim with evidence of unique physical circumstances or conditions of
the property. There's no parking requirement in this zoning district and accessory off-street
parking is not necessary to enable viable economic use of this property and so the city planning
commission recommends the board grant the dimensional variance for deck height but deny
the use variance for parking access okay so hillary we'll close this case is closed except
for when we hear from the streets am i correct um we will yes this this case is closed until we
receive uh except for um the receipt of the amended refusal at that point the board will vote
All right. Thank you. Mr. Chair, can I just make one point?
You can. Yeah, just in response. You're staying around anyway, so go ahead.
Just in terms of our request for a front-loading garage, it does make this project economically viable because without it, we would have difficulty selling this rather large single-family structure.
And I would say this, that the Roxborough-Manny Young section of Philadelphia typically is dead set against front-loading garages.
So by them actually supporting this project, it shows that this is a responsible use of the property.
Thank you for your additional information.
Thank you.
Number seven, MI-2022-005-184, 1624 Westmoreland Street, letter of opposition from Allegheny West Civic Association.
Councilwoman Bass has taken a position of non-opposition.
Applicant provided petitions in support signed by approximately 12 neighbors, along with two form letters of support from neighbors on Westmoreland Street.
Mr. Nockmson, could you identify your client relationship to this property?
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
I just wanted to note that we also received a letter of support from Swamp Poodle Neighborhood Parcels Association and affected RCO with three provisos, maximum two units, all trash stored indoors, and use of basement limited to trash storage and mechanicals.
Mr. Nackamson, identify your client, please, in relationship to the property.
Yes, my client is Tahana LLC, and in the virtual audience is its member, Han Wonk.
Okay, our vice chair has just a few questions.
Morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading out of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Have you emailed all the exhibits into our offices within five days of this hearing?
Yes. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
All right, so I'm here to present 1624 West Westmoreland.
During our presentation, we'll review the notice of refusal,
the correspondence from the coordinating RCO,
Allegating West Civic Association,
and as Ms. Emerson stated,
last night we received a letter of support
from another RCO, which we'll review as well. We made a concerted effort to also reach
nearby neighbors, so we have a petition and letter of support from them as well.
Then we'll review a use registration permit for this property. This property has a long history
of multifamily use. According to the permit that was issued some time ago, it actually
had a use of four units. We're only seeking three units under the circumstances.
But as the board can see that this is not a property that has has sole history of single family use.
Then we're going to review nearby recently granted multifamily variances so the board can see that it's not out of character for this community to have multifamily use approved by the community as well as the zoning board.
Then we're going to review nearby RSA 5 multifamily.
So in addition to the variances, again, if you walk by the property built or used as proposed, this property doesn't stick out like a sore thumb. It's something that fits more within the fabric of the area, as you can see by similar use of nearby properties.
Then we'll review maps of the area, photographs of the property, our floor plans, our RCO meeting notice.
It was a well-attended meeting of 24 individuals, but only two people voted during this meeting because those are the only two people that were within the affected area.
Everyone else was for another project.
So this was not a well-attended meeting.
That's one of the reasons why we circulated the petition and letters of support.
And I would gather that's why the council member's office also has issued their position of non-opposition to this project.
Then we'll review the zoning appeal or deed to property showing that Dahana LLC is the owner of the property and a certificate of tax clemency.
Because we do have some opposition for this project, in addition to my client, I also have, if the board feels appropriate, I have a contractor or my client's contractor who is going to state on the record the amount it would cost to renovate this property because this is a property in desperate need of renovation, which includes some structural issues that were discovered post-closing.
And then I also have my client's realtor, Brandon Mark, who would testify that based on a single family use, we could not justify sales based on how much it would cost to renovate this property and given how much my client paid for the property.
And because of that, there is a significant and sincere undue hardship under circumstances.
So our notice of refusal, again, this is an RSA 5 property. We're looking to do a three-family dwelling here. As you can see, in the past, as you know, in 1958 and for some time thereafter, this property was used as a four unit.
We're not looking to expand the building structure in any way, so we're not creating any other dimensional variances.
We're not trying to create a roof deck, which is disfavored in this neighborhood, and we're trying to responsibly use the property.
Now, we did meet with, again, the community, and unfortunately, it was well attended, but not for our presentation, but for another presentation.
in the meeting they acknowledged that you know this was a four-unit structure at one point
now it did have some single family use most recently so i do want to acknowledge that to
the board but again given the dynamics of this neighborhood how much you can either rent or
sell the property for as a single family and given the renovate significant renovation costs
it would be it would not be feasible to use as a single family and that's our own hardship
and then you can see that there were 24 people that attended the meeting and only two people
voted and those people were against the project but you can see that this you know again all the
coordinating rco does is report back what the community has to say and their position is to
state what the community has to say but there was another rco uh the swan poodle neighborhood
Parcels Association RCO, which is another RCO for this property, and they acknowledge that
And they acknowledge that multifamily use is appropriate under the circumstances.
multifamily use is appropriate.
In their opinion, two units is more appropriate than three units.
And they do have three provisos, one of which is to limit the amount of units to two units.
One is to store trash indoors, and one is no basement living.
We believe that the density that would be created is appropriate under circumstances for three units.
This is a rather large lot of over 1,500 square feet.
So we're not talking about a rather small lot.
And we think three units is more preferred than two units.
But we leave it up to the board's discretion of what they believe is the allowable or should be the allowable amount of units.
As far as the other provisor is trash stored indoors.
We have no objection to that.
No basement living.
I think I heard Ms. Emerson stated a little bit differently than what the community stated.
We would have no objection to trash storage in the basement, I think I heard, or something, for the one unit.
But we would ask that we would be allowed to use the basement for that first floor unit for those purposes and for storage in general.
and then you know again we made a concerted effort and you can see some of those addresses
that are on this block um are in support of this project and then i also had those same people
sign levers to support as well so it's really important for us to get the people that are
nearby uh to support you know to for the for the board to know whether or not they support the
project but you know again to acknowledge there are members on this block who are not supportive
as well. And I believe those were the two no's. But overall, the community supports it. And again,
we're not trying to convert a property that has no multifamily history. You can see from this
use registration permit in 1958, this was at one point a four-unit structure. And then this board
has come across multifamily requests in this neighborhood. And time and time again, they have
supported these variance requests. 3221-47 North 16th Street, which is around the corner.
3230 North 15th Street, which is around the corner. And then 1511 West Alligating Avenue,
which is around the corner, essentially. And then again, just to look at that block,
how it's being used, right? So we're 1624 West West Merlin. So you can see 1618 West West Merlin
is multifamily. 1615 and 1617 West West Moreland Street is multifamily. And then nearby around the
corner 3301 and 3303 North 16th Street is multifamily. And then again, basically the next
block over 1520 and 1522 West West Moreland Street are multifamily. And then 1525 West West
more than his multi-family and then maps of the area as you can see uh we're between 16th street
and 17th street and allegheny in ontario and this is from a google maps perspective and again
we have ample public transportation given the broad street and then this is the front of the
property uh so we're not a corner property there's two vacant lots to the right of us and as you can
see these properties in depths for native tlc for the interior which we understood at the time when
we purchased a property um but we'll see photos of like significant issues with the interior of
the property were only found after closing occurred but and here's our proof of posting
of the hearing notice and then this is west west morley street to the right of the property
west west morley to the left of the property and then these are the photos that my client took
uh even this week um but you can see there's significant issues with the property um and
originally my client and he's going to testify to this uh thought that this would be a you know
a simple like gut job in in certain portions of the property um but now it's going to be a full
job so and this is the interior from different areas you can see that the floor caved in
I believe this is the kitchen area. And this is more interior.
And then our plans and drawings, I'm keeping it very simple. Each floor has its own unit.
As you can see, the lower level is an unfinished basement where we're just going to store,
you know, the tenant will be able to store, you know, whatever they have. There's also a laundry
room down there for them um but this is a one bedroom one bath this is a two bedroom one bath
this is a two bedroom one bath and this is a one bedroom one bath
and this is a one bedroom one bath
and then january 17th we met with the community 83 addresses were notified of this meeting
list of the addresses proof of mailing to those addresses our application for appeal
showing that dana llc filed uh this app this is only appeal to the zoning board along with the
notice of refusal from the project information form or deeds of property showing that they own
your property. And then finally, our tax clearance certificate. While there's a balance here
showing up $1,842.14, it's for the 2023 tax year. And as the board knows, taxes in Philadelphia
are not due until March 31st of 2023. But for every other year, it has been paid. So we are
tax compliant. So with that being said, I would ask that Han virtually raise his hand. We can go
over some testimony with him. We can then have Mr. Lin, his contractor, testify, and then we can
have his realtor finally testify as well. Hi, sir. Could you state your name and spell for the
court reporter, please? Hi, my name is Hanlan Huang, H-A-N-L-A-N-H-U-A-N-G. Right. Do you
swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Proceed,
counsel uh yeah mr wong so for housekeeping purposes you heard everything i had to say
today yes is it true and correct yes and do you adopt as your own testimony yes okay so uh
first of all uh how much did you purchase the property for uh so we purchased it 75 000 with
a $10 wholesale fee. Okay. So you ultimately had closing costs of $85,000. Correct. Okay. And then
you, your intention is to hire Lucky Construction as the contractor for this property. Yes, correct.
And what was the quote you received for just to renovate it without any finishes? What was the
quote how much did you how much was the quote uh the quote was 140 okay and then how much do you
estimate and that's just for cost of of labor and materials right correct and then how much
would it cost for the finishing work for the property with all the additional things it will
costs closer to $200,000. Okay. So now we're up to already $285,000. So based on that,
if you were to hold this property, what would be your holding costs every single month that
you would have to pay? Around $1,800 to $2,000. Okay. So it's $1,800 to $2,000. And does that
include the real estate taxes and insurance you would have to pay? No. Okay. So Mr. Chair and
members of the board, I've reviewed the city's records. According to the city, taxes for this
year are $1,842. So that would increase the holding cost per month by an additional $150.
And that still doesn't include insurance. So at the base minimum, we're looking at around $2,000
a month in holding costs. You also are intending to hire Brandon Mark as your realtor, correct?
Yes. Okay. And according to him, and we'll hear his testimony, it's your understanding
that the property, if sold, at best would sell as a single family between $150,000 and $200,000
most right correct okay and then according to him and we'll have him testify that uh at most
uh you would be looking at rents at like 1250 to 1500 right correct okay so which is a lot less than
um what you know what your holding costs are yes okay so why did you buy so what changed from the
time that you bought the property that this became not feasible for it to be a single family
structure um so we bought this with intention uh we bought this with numbers based off like
previous construction uh material costs the interest rates were not as high as now and then
the conditions was a lot worse than we thought so having a single family um wasn't gonna work
Okay. Well, thank you so much. I would then ask that Mr. Lynn virtually raise his hand.
Sir, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Sir, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Sir, if you're in the virtual audience, please raise your hand.
Ready to be sworn in.
We'll see a Westchester hand raised.
the hand raised from uh 7588 fine bring them on
or madam please unmute and wait to be sworn in
hi state your name please and spell it
Hello?
Still have no idea.
R6, so I'll meet you still.
Hello?
Hi, state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter.
Joe, J-O-E, last name L-I-N, Lynn.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Mr. Lin, what's the name of your contracting company?
Lucky's Construction.
And how long has that construction company been in business?
About around 20 years.
And then did you provide a quote to Mr. Wong regarding renovation of this property at
1624 west westmoreland yes and how much was the quote for
for a single family uh dwelling would put it as a closing to 137 which is 140 okay
okay and what did that include that quote of 137 000 it was including the total labor and uh
building materials okay and that did not include the the finishing costs no no finishing calls no
hvac no sprinkler fire alarms and demolition okay and then you i don't know if you heard mr
wong's testimony he indicated that it would cost an additional sixty thousand dollars
of to finish the property does that sound fair and reasonable to you
uh right now yes and then by the time we are when we're starting to renovate the house it might be
more not than not less because uh the material price has already been uh skyrocketed so and
increasing by the day okay so the 200 000 is the basement level cost and it could go up to
to completely renovate this property yes okay um and you visited the property recently when you
and then you gave that quote
sorry uh could you repeat that you visited the property
yes and what's the condition of the property in its current state
it was uh worse than anticipated i didn't expect it to be uh i thought it was just like uh cosmetic
fixes but it seems like it's gonna have to be a full demolition okay i uh mr chair i think i'm
done with mr lynn i would ask that mr mark uh testify mr mark state your name and spell for
the court reporter, please.
Good morning. My name is Brandon Mark, B-R-A-N-D-O-N, M-A-R-K.
You swear or affirm, tell the truth, told the truth, nothing but the truth.
Proceed, counsel.
Mr. Mark, you're a licensed realtor in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, right?
Correct.
Okay. And who's your broker?
Premium Realty.
Okay. And then who do you typically represent as a realtor?
Buyers, sellers, renters, investors.
So you're familiar with 1624 West Westmore?
I am, yes.
So in your professional opinion, what would be the fair market value of this property as a single family as a renter,
based on what you've heard today and the estimate you've seen?
So I did comps just today and have them in front of me.
It would be fixed up around $200,000.
Okay, so $200,000.
Correct.
But it would cost what you've heard, $200,000 just to fix it up.
What you've heard, $200,000 just to fix it up.
Correct.
Correct.
And doesn't include...
And does it include the acquisition costs that my client incurred to purchase a property?
Correct.
And are there active listings for sale of similarly situated properties close by?
Yes. So there's currently two active properties of this of the same capacity and square footage.
They're both listed at one forty one hundred forty five thousand and one hundred fifty five thousand.
Those like I said, both properties are still active and listed since April of last year and October of last year.
Gotcha. And are there any, like, did you discover any sold properties in close proximity, which are similarly situated to ours?
The only sold property comparable to the one here would be 3324 North 16th Street that sold for $65,000 back in December.
So it sounds like there's really not much of a market for single-family homes for sale in this neighborhood.
No, considering the active listings since April of last year are still active on the market today.
What about rentals? So what did you discover in terms of rentals?
So in your professional opinion, if this was a single-family home, what would be the fair rental value of this property as renovated?
For the comparables that are available, there's two active and one that was rented.
They are all listed at $1,300 to $1,400.
Gotcha.
Which is a lot less than the $2,000 that my client would have in carrying costs.
Correct.
Well, thank you so much for your time, Mr. Mark.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, I have a Ms. Lucille West with her hand raised.
I have allowed her to speak at the time.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Lucille West, L-U-C-I-L-L-E, last name W-E-S-T.
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes I affirm that are you a neighbor I am two doors away from the property thank you proceed
okay first of all I'm not sure why he went back to 1958 for this property for zoning because
for over 40 years it's been a single family dwelling which there was a family with 15
children living in the property and the reason the property is for sale now this actually family
the house was burnt there was a serious fire in the property I don't know why the client would
not know that either that he's buying a property that he didn't know with such damage in it because
it's been that way since the fire also there are 15 apartments on this one block alone
and on his uh getting signing of the people on the block if you notice one of the people signed
twice on there also okay um there are only three actual single family houses on the block
and now um and especially because you're the zoning board in a four block radius with the
approvals around here there will be over 100 apartments in this four block radius from west
morland to allegheny 17th street from 17th to 16th from 16th back to west morland street also okay
um and what what we're seeing now is people are coming out of the neighborhood and buying up
these buildings around here and they're not taking care of these buildings that they are
actually purchasing and they're making money off the buildings but they're not upkeeping the
buildings not to say that this person that's buying this now would not but on this block
well we're going to we're going to concentrate on this property miss west
okay and that's why i'm stating this property is on this block which is a doorway
And that's why I'm stating this property is on this block, which is a door away from me.
And that's the history in this block, because the people, the units that are on this block now, no one that has brought all of those 15 apartments lives in any of those apartments or nor make sure those apartments are up kept.
All right. Thank you, Ms. West. We do appreciate your call and your input.
Is there anyone else in the vertical audience?
yes sir there's a hand raised from uh or they were they were hand they had a hand raised but
okay and sir there's a hand raised from 3552 okay fine sure
sir madam could you state your name and spell please for the court reporter
um yes this is adrian fernandez of the affected rco tuampudo neighborhood
possible association rco just for the record could you spell your name miss fernandez
yes um my first name is a d r i e n n e and my last name is spelled f e r n a n d e z
right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Please proceed.
We did review the area, and we've done a lot of work in the area with North Central Philadelphia, CDC, over one year.
Close review because the neighbor was pretty conservative, but there's about 1,000 apartments that have been added to that close area by variance within the last 18 months.
So we, with all due respect to the fact that the council office has been correcting a lot of the zoning based on complaints by neighbors, correcting a lot of the zoning to RSA 5 in the even wider area.
um we did agree to two apartments at this uh location in swampwood on tioga the buy right
which is single family house rentals are very successful in the area so we um with a compromise
asked for two units with three provisos um that that building is smaller than um many of the
Tioga buildings and also the 17th Street area, North 17th Street area near Lehigh, between Lehigh
and Allegheny, or Huntington and Allegheny in our neighborhood, where single-family three-story
houses rent very successfully as single-family houses. The realtor who testified with and for
the owner, both are not credible because it's hard to believe that someone would spend $85,000
dollars plus rehab costs to purchase a building with no hardship and not have an inspection to
know that there were structural damages which are material that's important I can't imagine someone
spending that kind of money for any type of investment that has material flaws and structural
damage or material flaws so we're asking four to three provisos we're asking also one of them
being a limit of two units, and if the board doesn't agree to that, hopefully you will
not agree to three units.
You heard the neighbor's information, which closely matched ours, and I don't think we
spoke unless she attended the many meetings at Tia Marie from North Central Philadelphia,
and I gave over the last 18 months in that region for the reason of overuse of the variants
in that area.
So we're asking that two units be approved or that the applicants use the buy right, which is to just rent the building out as a single family dwelling, which doesn't require a variance.
And single family house rentals are extremely successful in Swampoodle, Tioga, and all the areas around here.
They always rent out, and we get renters that stay in those properties for 10, 20, 30 years as renters with no problem because the absentee landlord problem is kind of reduced when we have a family, many times with two generations, a family with children and a grandparent who will stay there for a long period of time.
It helps us out, and it helps them out.
And that's pretty much everything that we have to offer about the property.
we appreciate your input is there anyone else in the virtual audience
um yes sir mr charles richardson has his hand raised i will allow him to speak
mr richardson hi good morning state your name please and spell for the court reporter
charles richardson r-i-c-h-a-r-d-s-o-n office of council
Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass Room, 508 City Hall.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
As mentioned, the Councilwoman is not opposed.
In hearing the compelling information from the neighbor and also receiving the information from a swan poodle,
we are supporting two units at the location, and since it is on the table and it's being
left up to the board, that is what the councilwoman is going to support, two units with the provisos
that have been mentioned. Thank you very much. We appreciate your call. Anyone else in the
virtual audience? I see no further answer, Mr. Chair. Mr. Nockamson, I sense you wanted to say
something so could you guys i always do i saw you're ready to go so could you just give us
a two minute so there was a lot going on i just wanted to make sure that everyone spoke and then
i figured i would you know respond uh so first of all this my client did buy a burned out shell
but they didn't anticipate the amount of structural issues that were discovered post-closing
um interest rates have gone up construction costs have gone up i mean these are things that
they did not really anticipate um you know again the reason why i had this thorough presentation
is to really show you the undue hardship that would occur if this was left as a single family
um we need that three units is appropriate under circumstances it's a whole the square footage of
the lot is over 1500 square feet but as always we defer to the board to decide what to do but
it would be devastating as a single family. Thank you. Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RSA 5 single-family
zoning at this location. However, as we've seen, the proposed use is consistent with the documented
prior use of the building. City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the variance.
Thank you. MI-2022-005-184-1624 Westmoreland Street. I vote yes with proviso. Only two units, trash stored inside, basement for mechanicals and storage.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you.
Mr. Nackamson, please stay on. MI-2022-002-378-3701 Clifford Street. This is a resumptive hearing.
Hillary, are we okay with it? Enough for a vote?
Do you want me to summarize the letter into the record that we received?
Why don't we do that?
Yes, so we were holding this.
Is that okay, Mr. Nackamson? We have a letter.
And then Mr. Nockimson can respond.
And then we need to hold this because we actually need other members to view the video of this in the prior hearing to vote.
So we received a letter of support from Strawberry Mansion Community Development Corporation that serves the coordinating RCO in this matter.
They had a number of provisos that they discussed with the developer at a meeting that occurred on January 25th.
um they included a fire ladder for the third floor unit a trash management plan
um trash receptacles being stored in the side or rear of the property not under the front porch
um working with the local residents um with trash and other issues um and they also noted
that strawberry mansion community concern was in attendance with the meeting um so that that is
the summary of the letter um mr knockers and i assumed you received a copy of the letter as well
i did okay did you have anything you wanted to respond to i mean we we have no objections uh to
the provisos i don't know what would be an enforceable proviso uh that would attach to
zoning permanent at the very least no trash uh stored underneath the uh well no trash stored
underneath the uh the porch i think it's a enforceable proviso um but i leave it to the
board to decide which ones are enforcement which ones are not all right so the only one other thing
i didn't i did see i heard 3701 clifford street and i saw that pop on my screen it's actually
31 of seven. Yeah, I thought I was going to mention that because that would take us to West
3107 clever yeah i i i thought i was going to mention that because
Philly 3700. OK, so where are we? My apologies. That was my error. No, that's OK. This is closed.
Right. And we will look to vote on this next week. Is that OK, Hillary? Yes, that is fine.
Next week at 930. 930 next week. We'll vote on this, Mr. Knockamson. Yeah. Thank you very much.
Thank you. I'll see you later today. Oh, boy.
All right. Number 10, MI 2022-005-109-769 North 39th Street.
Darwin Beauvais is listed as the attorney.
Letter of Opposition from Mantua Civic Association.
Council Member Gauthier is taking a position of support.
The applicant has also provided a petition of support signed by approximately 77 neighbors.
Mr. Bovee.
Mr. Bovee?
There he is.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter, sir?
Darwin Bovee.
That's Darwin, D-A-R-W-I-N.
Bovee, B-E-A
U-V as in victory
A-I-S as in Sam
I am located
at 1500 Market
Street and I
represent the applicant
the Mount Vernon Manor
Swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth sir
Yes I do
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to
his accuracy? I do. Have you emailed all the exhibits five days in advance to this hearing?
I have. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen. Yes. If we could also promote
And Alden Bly, our architect, and Mr. Michael Thorpe, who is the executive director of the CDC.
Mr. Bouvet, this is Hillary.
Just a quick question.
Is Mount Vernon CDC the owner of the property under Mount Vernon Manor Incorporated?
Okay, thank you.
No problem.
I'm just trying to find the right screen here, Mr. Chairman.
There you go.
You can indulge me for a moment while I deal with some technical difficulties here.
There we go.
All right, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, as I said, my name is Darwin Beauvais,
and I represent the applicant here at 769 North 39th Street. As it stands, it is an application
for use variants for partial demolition and construction of an office space with three
apartments. These apartments will be affordable units dedicated and marketed to the surrounding
area in the Mantua neighborhood. With that said, as I mentioned earlier, we have Michael Thorpe here,
who is the executive director, and we also have Alden Bly here, who is the architect.
Now, just what we have submitted is a total of 16 exhibits, and they include the refusals,
our tax clearance deed, our appeal, the drawings, as well as a memorandum of law and the prior zoning history, as well as petitions of support and photographs.
So the essence of our of of our of our application centers around the building itself, which is why we believe we have an actual hardship.
If I can show you what our intentions are as we go to the site plan.
go to the site plan we're looking at a building that will total three stories in the front and
two stories in the back with the rear yard and we are in our intention is to have commercial office
in in the let me just go to the commercial office on the first floor with the two apartments
upstairs so that's what we're looking at that's our intention now if we can i just want to jump
to the end of our exhibit package so you can actually see the photos of what's there now
To the right is the building.
This structure has been around for over 60 years.
And as this is, look at, and now the building's
on the right of the screen.
And it has been abandoned or rather it's been blighted and shut down for at least 25 years.
So the and the purpose of the CDC, their sole mission is to improve the Mantua area.
So they decided to take it upon their own to purchase this building and with the intention of moving their offices there and to have affordable housing, affordable units above.
Look at additional photos.
And that's also photos of our posting. Here's how it looks inside. It is truly blighted. Throughout the years, people have come in and taken what they believe could be resources for their own homes and projects.
But all in all, this building has been shut down and unused for several years, and this application is looking to change.
So at this time, I want to go back to our renderings, and maybe if we can get our architect to describe the program, that would be great.
What's the history of the building?
The history of the building?
Oh, let's go to Exhibit 13.
Thank you.
history of the building the building has always been commercial use with apartments
okay but we what it has been this is a permit from 1964 showing that was a grocery store
that is the last memory that we have of of the neighbors they remember the grocery store okay
And there was three apartments. But wait, there's more. This is the entire zoning file. As you look through it, here is a permit from 1957, describing it as a grocery store with four units.
So there's always been multifamily there. There's always been commercial activity at that building, and the building is still standing. So if we can now get the architect to speak.
Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Alden Bly, can you raise your hand?
So you can be recognized.
Is he there?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
So let's go to the manager then.
So if Michael Thorpe could raise his hand, he can.
Mr. Thorpe, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Michael Thorpe, M-I-C-H-A-E-L, last name Thorpe, T-H-O-R-P-E.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Absolutely.
Proceed. Yes, I am the executive director of the Mount Vernon Manor CDC.
Proceed.
Yes, I am the executive director of the Mount Vernon Mass.
We have been in existence since 1978. We own about 159 units of affordable housing
in the Mantua area. Our primary focus is the committing or the creation and protection
of affordable housing within the community as our community is transitioning so quickly.
About three years ago, our board of directors, we have an issue of our place where we rent a
location. This particular property, I grew up in the neighborhood. I'm 58 years old. And this has
always been a store. We used to call it Whitey's. And so the opportunity came up for us to purchase
this building to also make some significant repairs because the building was falling down
significantly. And so we replaced all of the choices and secured the building up where there
were significant dilapidation over the building just being vacant for so many years. We also worked
to continue with our communities or our organization's mission, which is from this
office space, we have a NAC contract, which we provide critical services to the community.
I won't lie about motherfucking shit. Y'all, you got me fucked up.
Whoa, whoa. What is this?
so um again we provide critical services we have a contract with the office uh or the division of
housing and community service where we help people with their tax returns their real estate taxes the
rent rebate and a number of other service we also distributed food we distribute food on a weekly
basis. And so we're just trying to move our office location to this particular building
at 769. So you'll see on the side entrance that at the back of the property, folks will be able
to enter into the second and third levels where we have affordable housing. The properties are
designed at PHFA standard to accommodate the sizes and for the apartment with the amenities
that PHFA will fund for folks that may have housing vouchers or need Section 8. They need
a place to stay within our community. There's no changes to the building as a whole. This is
an existing property that has
been within our community.
We have been working
with some of our other external
partners just to help us to support
and advance this mission.
We did meet with the community
and we have been
we went
back out and
had them sign letters
of petitions for
folks that did not attend
the original RCO
meeting
You know, and there are just so many people that are in support of this particular project because we have a direct service that we are providing to the community, and we have been doing that.
We've had a NAC contract and providing those services since 2015, when we actually became a CDC.
All right.
Thank you, sir.
um Mr. DeBovey do you I think he's explained pretty well what what he wants to do there
yeah as well as you yeah but I I just want to just add right because we did uh receive a letter
of opposition and I understand and I wanted to respond to that because also part of our package
we have a petition of support and and and with that they they and I wanted to bring up
uh the uh what the letter uh from the rco um i think they titled it the letter of explanation
whereas they actually admitted that there were 15 people at the rco meeting and no one asked
us questions okay no one i think i started off by saying you you you put a petition in with 77
the neighbors. Yes. And I want the board to understand that because we do know that the CDC
has been around for such a long time, has been doing work, right? And the fact that we had this
And the fact that we had this RCO meeting that had no questions, and it was done virtually, and juxtaposing that with the fact that we got 77 signatures.
RCO meeting that had that had no.
I understand.
So thank you.
So we clearly submit that we do have the support of the surrounding area.
I do believe that there was something amiss at the RCO.
We can explore that should the board chooses, but at the end of the day, we do know that the community will be happy for a project like this.
This is bringing back something that the community has seen for over 60 years, albeit it won't be a grocery store, but there will be commercial activity.
And it also has the fact that we have residential that's there, which is still continuing with the intentions of the overall intention of the current zoning.
And we believe the fact that the structure exists in this particular configuration, we cannot create a single family home structure.
Therefore, that's the essence of our hardship.
So questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair.
We have Ingrid, last name ending in V.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Hi, my name is Ingrid Bernadette Weich, but I go by Bernadette, B-E-R-N-A-D-E-T-T-E, Weich, W-Y-C-H-E.
Right. Do you swear or affirm the whole truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed.
While I was at the RCO meeting and there was voting on the project, there was near about, I say 75% of the people said no.
So my question was, was there any questions why that anybody would say no to this project?
Nobody answered me.
Nobody gave any explanation or anything.
I voted for it because I lived in this neighborhood all my life.
And I know the store, S. Whitey, was always deemed commercial, and it was Cartman's on the second and third floor.
You're in favor of the project.
Yes, I am.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call in.
We appreciate that.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair.
We have Andrew Goodman.
Good afternoon.
Good morning, Mr. Goodman.
could you please state your name and spell for the court reporter good morning andrew goodman
g-o-o-d-m-a-n here representing office of third district council member jamie gaudier room 586
city hall you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do proceed
thank you thank you members of the board i'm here to testify in support of this applicant
and asking if the board grant the requested variance um i think there are i wasn't at the
rco meeting so i can't you know can't um you know hypothesize on on that and what transpired but we
do think this is a unique circumstance that's worthy of unique consideration you know the
reasons that the applicant already identified about the kind of clear historic use and setup
of this building is you know certainly the biggest one and um we weren't we weren't the district
council office when the remapping of this area was done. But having now worked in a council
office for three years and seeing how the neighborhood remappings get done, there's
often an inventory of corner commercial uses and seeing whether or not they're occupied or vacant.
So my educated guess is that the explanation for the remapping is probably just because it
was vacant at the time of the remapping, not a clear and direct criticism of corner commercial
use. We try to encourage it whenever possible. And we're grateful that, you know, that in this
situation, that it would be kind of reanimated and reactivated in the way that it is. And, you know,
as a nonprofit office, we don't think it would put any kind of undue burden on adjacent flocks.
And for those reasons, we support the granting of this variance.
Thank you, Mr. Goodman. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
thank you mr goodman anyone else in the virtual audience
hello sir this is jason hand again i do not see any hands at this time thank you very much
planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning
commission board members in 2017 the zoning map was amended in this area in accord with
the recommendations from the comprehensive plan and with the support of the community
this proposed use is clearly consistent with the documented prior use of the building and with its
existing physical configuration city planning commission recommends that the board grant the
variance thank you mi 2022 005 109 769 north 39th street i vote yes
thomas holloman my vote is yes
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes thank you thank you council thank you mr chairman
Take care.
So number 11, MI 2022-005-195, 1331 North 2nd Street, Parcel B.
Henry Clinton is the attorney.
Letter of support from South Kensington Community Partners.
Mr. Clinton will be rejoining as a panelist, sir.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Henry Clinton.
Hi, Mr. Clinton, spell your name, please, for the court reporter.
Sure, Henry, H-E-N-R-Y, Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, your relationship to the property?
Sure. My client is Kumars Karamaiti, K-U-M-A-R-S, Karamaiti, K-E-R-M-I-N-A-T-I, and he is on the call.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, I do, Mr. Shahid.
Have you emailed all the exhibits required for this case five days in advance to this hearing?
All the exhibits except proof of tax payment, which was forwarded yesterday.
So now all the exhibits are in hand.
Thank you, Mr. Clinton.
And please proceed and share his screen.
Mr. Chairman, is that visible?
It is.
All right.
Again, good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Henry Clinton on behalf of the applicant, which is 1330 Pale Forb, LLC.
As I said, Mr. Caramides is on the call, and he's the principal of that LLC.
see. Table of contents containing exhibits AA through A10, which I ask be admitted into the
record. Appearance statement and the refusal. So this is a request for a front-loaded garage
on a street that has no on-street parking, on a street that has existing garages on it,
and on a street where the back end of the properties to the east also have curb cuts
and are used for parking we're not asking for any relief with regard to height open space or rear yard
we do have an rco letter of support as the chairman referenced earlier
and just to give the the chair and the board some perspective uh this uh was a property that went
from Pale Forb Street to 2nd Street.
2nd Street is in the background here
and the property was subdivided.
So that's why before the board,
it's listed as 1331 North 2nd Street, Parcel B.
We are Parcel B.
Parcel B is actually 1330 Pale Forb Street
where my cursor is.
So as the board can see,
there are other garages on the block already
on that side of the street.
You can see there's no on-street parking.
vehicles are popped up halfway on the curb, halfway on the street. And then also the rear of the
homes to the east, you can see that there's driveways leading to the back of their home
for parking. So there's a number of properties on the block that already have curb cuts and parking
because, as I said several times, there is no on-street parking. And this is a view of Palthorpe
Street, 1330, looking southbound. You can see to the left the numerous curb cuts
for parking to the rear of the property,
to the east.
Our zoning notice,
some other parking on the street,
getting existing curb cuts.
The plans are relatively straightforward.
It would be a four-story property,
no basement.
There's some elevations
of what the property will look like,
uh where my cursor is on the left side of the of the plan and in terms of the floor plan we have a
where my cursor is on the left side
of the plan.
garage on the first floor uh some office space mechanical here on the first floor moving to the
second floor we have the living area dining kitchen third floor is a one bedroom master
and then to the fourth floor there's two bedrooms and access to the rooftop deck
a lot of brick on the front we did make some changes to accommodate some of the wishes of
the community group but there was overwhelming support because of the lack of parking on the
street i don't want to belabor the presentation mr chairman but basically we are in a situation
where we are not going to take a parking spot from the street because frankly there's no spots to
take we're actually going to take a car off the street and put it on an indoor parking space
we're not altering the essential character of the neighborhood there's numerous curb cuts on the
block we are not affecting either adjacent property light or air as i said there's no issue
with regarding the height of the building or the open space or the rear yard and i believe that
we're in harmony with the general tenants of the code and certainly we're in harmony with what the
wants and desires of the community group as evidenced by their letter of support with that
I would rest my case, ask my client to adopt testimony, and also entertain any questions
from the board or from the virtual audience. Okay. Client's name again, sir.
Mr. Karmadi, can you raise your hand, please?
I'm going to have to speak. Hi, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court
reporter sure good morning my name is kumars karamati first name k-u-m-a-r-s last name k-e-r-a-m-a-t-i
right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do proceed mr karamati were you on the call uh when i just presented your project on pail
pail forp street yes i was and if you had the opportunity to testify would you adopt my
testimony as your own and as true and correct i would thank you very much questions from the board
no mr chairman no no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
chair there is a hand up from mr matthew mitten allowed him to speak at this time
hi could you state your name and spell it please for the court reporter
hi my name is matthew litten m-a-t-t-h-e-w-l-i-t-t-o-n right you swear affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes are you a neighbor yes actually sir i just
moved in we just bought the house uh settled on december 30th all right okay okay proceed
I live in 1328 North Path of Thorpe Street.
We just had a question.
Me and my fiance were wondering how in concern with our work, we're freestanding townhome at the moment.
The previous owners had applied siding to our our home.
Will there be a surveyor to come out to make sure our our property is in accordance with what the state has on record for our marking of our land?
because we had a representative of the builder come out to us and actually
passively kind of tell us, you know, if we're on their property,
they're in all rights to dig into our side.
And we just want to make sure there's no complaints.
I think, and our council will correct me if I'm wrong,
I think those kinds of issues are licensed inspection issues and not a
zoning board issue. And I know you, you know,
have concerns for it, but I think you'd really be better off taking it up with license and
inspection and not the zoning board. Hillary, is that correct? Yeah, anything related to
the property lines and surveys, I mean, those are private issues, but also the streets department
can get involved in terms of doing surveys and that sort of thing, but construction safety
is for L&I.
Well, we appreciate your call.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Board members, Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
In 2017, the zoning map was amended in this area
in accord with the recommendations from the comprehensive plan.
We don't believe the adequate hardship has been presented in this appeal.
the appellant did not provide evidence that accessory off-street parking is necessary
to enable viable economic use of the property. Accessory off-street parking is also
uh to enable viable economic use of the property um accessory off-street parking is also not a code
requirement in the rsa5 district so this refusal is a result of the appellant's decision to include
off-street parking in this development accordingly the city planning commission recommends that the
board, deny the variance. MI 2022-005-195-1331 North 2nd Street. I vote yes.
Thank you, counsel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Number 13, MI-2022-005-146-4952-D Street. Rachel Pritzker and Brandon Savin are the listed attorneys. Letter of support from new 42nd Ward RCO and letter of non-opposition from Council Member Lozada.
Mr. Saverin's panelist, sir.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning.
Could you, just for the record, state your name and spell it, please?
Yes, my name is Brandon Saverin.
That's spelled B-R-A-N-D-O-N.
Then S as in Sam, A, V as in Victor, R-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
My client is Versailles Ventures, LLC.
That is a sole member LLC led by Vladimir Versailles, who is here to adopt my testimony today.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good morning, Counselor.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, I do.
have you emailed all the exhibits five days prior to this hearing uh yes
thank you please proceed and share your screen thank you very much mr vice chair
okay um good morning um members of the board so i am here to um present an appeal for variances
for 4952 D Street, which is shown on the zoning map on your screen. This property is a block below
Roosevelt Boulevard in the 42nd Ward at the corner of D and Ruscomb Streets. This is a relatively
recent, I think within the last couple of years, photograph of the exterior of the building showing
both of the frontages. This is a corner property again, as you can see. I will come back to some
additional photographs in one moment. Let me first take you through the refusal and actually
tell you a little bit about the client. So as far as the refusal, as you saw in that photo,
there is an existing chain link fence that my client is no fan of. But in order to replace it,
he needs a variance, which is one of the variances that we're seeking today. So this application is
for the removal of that existing fence and for the erection of a new fence to be six feet in height
and for change of use throughout the existing structure to two-family household living.
The property in terms of zoning is currently permitted such that this floor and this floor
are commercial spaces. This was last permitted for and used as a barbershop on the bottom level
and the middle floor was for offices and storage. The top floor of this building was historically
one apartment unit with three bedrooms and a kitchen and bath. So just to go back to the
refusal to finish that out, basically our two refusals are for the fact that we would like
the replacement fence to match the existing fence in terms of height because that is what all four
corners in this location have. So we'd like to keep a six-foot fence for security. That's two
feet too high under the zoning code. That's a dimensional refusal. And then the use of the
building, which is really to convert it from a mixed-use building to a two-unit building,
that's not permitted in the RSA 5 district. So real quickly, just to tell you about our case,
My client, Vlad, is a young man who bought this property when his stepfather unexpectedly passed away from COVID in the height of the COVID crisis.
His stepfather and mother owned the property.
And in fact, Vlad lived there with them as a child on that top floor that I mentioned from 1993 to 1999.
The family moved right across the street around.
The family moved right across the street around 1999, but retained this property as an investment property.
So it's been in their family for decades at this point, 30 years.
The Vlad then actually worked in that barbershop that I mentioned as a teenager.
So that barbershop closed, Vlad estimates, around 15 years ago, and there has been no commercial tenant in that space since.
And that space, as I mentioned, is most of the building.
So the building was highly underutilized when the barbershop closed with only the third floor apartment remaining in active use.
The building has no history of single family use since at least 1961, having gone through the zoning archive and just to show you one permit, there are various permits evidencing mixed use in the archive.
This is the most recent one of Ladd's stepfather pulled this in 2001, basically just traces what
I've already called out, one apartment on the top floor, an office in the middle floor, a barbershop
on the bottom. So let me just spend one more second on that photo and then I'll move on to
floor plans. As you can see here the bottom level has a couple direct entrances, one on the corner,
one on the middle of the Ruscomb Street side. And then the second floor has a direct entrance
to D Street with stairs where my cursor is here. So plenty of access to the building.
There was a change in the proposed layout of the building since we filed our appeal. And why is
that. So unfortunately, the building suffered catastrophic flooding after we filed our ZBA
appeal due to a nearby water leak. So that just exacerbated the situation, which is that this
building now requires basically a full gut. Not even that top floor is really usable in its present
form. So I wanted to call that out very carefully and take you through the floor plans because
that was not the case when we filed our appeal. So our appeal paperwork and our memo of law does
not mention that. It sort of assumes that the third floor is still in good condition. It is not.
So moving on, here is the letter of support that we have from the RCO, the 42nd Ward.
and I'll just briefly read through it because it actually does a good job sort of summarizing what
our proposal is. So as I mentioned, the owner, Mr. Versailles, purchased the property from his
parents in 2020. The property was zoned as a single-family dwelling slash commercial property.
Just moving on a little bit, the upstairs consists of a three-bedroom unit and downstairs would be
a two-bedroom open concept unit. There will be separate entrance exits for both units with
motion lights around the property. The fence would not only provide security, but would be
aesthetically pleasing. He would use a property manager, his brother, to oversee and manage the
property, who organically would have a personal interest in ensuring the property is well
maintained and up to code. This is Mr. Vladimir's first investment property, and he expressed
with passion, his desire to revitalize his neighborhood and community, not only by enhancing
this property, but by starting programs that give back to the community and continue to invest
further. So in summary, my client is not a developer by trade. This is someone who needed
to take over this property after a family emergency and following the flood I mentioned
is doing his best to stabilize it and put it back in active use. And we feel that the proposal,
which I'm going to show you now on the floor plan, is the minimum necessary relief. We also
have a letter of non-opposition from the Office of Councilwoman Lozada, which is shown on your
screen now. So here are the proposed floor plans. Essentially, the ground floor would be its own
unit. So this would have that corner door that I showed you would remain, would serve as sort of
an emergency exit from one of the bedrooms. And that's why it's important to have a security
fence here since there's direct access into someone's bedroom. Although of course this
would have new door hardware, you know, be double locked, et cetera, et cetera.
etc, etc. But it's important to have a second means of egress. So we'll have two bedrooms in
But it's important to have a second means of egress. So we'll have
I love it.
that bottom unit, and the entire basement is basically above ground, rather. A living area
in the middle with an open concept kitchen and one bathroom, and its own washer dryer down there.
And then this is the middle floor. Because of the damage that occurred, even on the upper floors of
the building from that flooding. We're now proposing to combine the middle floor and the
upper floor into one apartment. So we're not being greedy and going for a unit on each floor.
The sort of final floor plans here have no bedrooms on that middle floor and basically
use the front of the building as a walk-in mudroom and a living room with a very large kitchen. So
then the bedrooms would be on the top floor of the building. So that would end up being a three
bedroom, two bath unit. This is a rendering that my client paid for. It shows the extent of the
fence and what he would like the building to look like after renovation construction.
So this is the corner showing, excuse me, the other three corners of our street corner,
pardon me um here's what i just wanted to say quickly about the surroundings um so uh three
of the four corners of our intersection were formerly commercial um like our like our building
was on the on the bottom two floors but none of them are commercial today so having putting
commercial use back in this building would be out of context and the neighborhood association was
not in favor of that idea. Further, putting new commercial use in our building would probably
require a variance because Ellen and I would likely say that our prior zoning permit had lapsed
because there's been no commercial down there for over a decade. So without the desire of the
community or the practical ability to do commercial downstairs, the minimum necessary relief is to turn
that downstairs space into a second dwelling unit. That's what we're proposing. I have worked
with Vlad on the acquisition of this property and financing for construction. I can tell you that
his lender that he has lined up would not be willing to lend for construction here if this
was either a single family home or a commercial with one apartment. The two units is basically
what was necessary to enable this property to attract construction loans.
And I'll just quickly mention, there is another two-unit, I believe, with a commercial, so two-unit
plus a commercial, at least per its permitting, directly next door at 4951 Boudinot Street.
There are also duplexes elsewhere on our block at 4901, 4923, and 4928 D Street.
and my client was able to gather over 100 form letters from community members in support of
his revitalization proposal. The last word I'll have is just on the fences and that's why I have
this image in front of you. As I mentioned, all corner properties in this location have very
similar chain link six foot fences for security purposes. So although it may be irregular to have
a fence as the one we're proposing on a corner property. It's replacing one that's already there.
It's in context with the corner. The RCO is relieved, in fact, that we're going to have one.
And it is a hardship to require only a four foot fence as with minimal effort,
it can be jumped over. It really doesn't serve an adequate security purpose. But at least our
fence is semi-transparent. So it's not as though we're building a wall there. It's going to be
like a cast iron, quite an upgrade over what's there now. So I will stop sharing my screen and
ask that Vladimir Versailles raise his hand and be promoted to adopt my testimony.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Hello, everyone. My name is Vladimir Versailles. That's V-L-A-D-I-M-I-R, Versailles, V-E-R-S-A-I-L-L-E-S.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth is nothing but the truth.
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Vlad, were you able to hear the full extent of my testimony this morning?
Was it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Would you therefore be willing to adopt it as if it were your own testimony?
Yes. Okay. Thank you very much. And just stay on in case the board has any questions.
Okay. Thank you very much. And just stay on in case the board has any questions.
Before I give it to the board, the fence is for security purposes?
Yes. That's right, Mr. Chairman. And I can bring that rendering back up.
No, I mean, I saw it, but it'd be strictly security purposes.
Yeah. In consultation with the RCO, we created that rendering. I don't want to cast shade on
the neighborhood but again all four corners on this intersection have a situation all right
questions from the board no mr chairman ish no mr chair questions or comments from the virtual
audience i see no further answer mr chair planning commission thank you chair bergman
Ian Haggerty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. Board members, the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the existing RSA 5 single-family zoning at this location. The proposed
use for two dwelling units is consistent with the existing building layout, which includes two
separate spaces, and the proposed fence height variance is minimal and does not conflict with
the purpose and spirit of the zoning code. City Planning Commission recommends that the board
Thank you.
MI 2022-005-146-4952 D Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Howell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you very much.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose 930 AM class cases have been not called?
Mr. Chair, I do not see any hands.
Okay. Thank you, everyone. Be back at 2.
Thank you.
Good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's ZBA hearings. With me is Vice Chair Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Our board member, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Our board attorney, Hillary Emerson, is here, and also Lakeisha Dandy, our ZBA hearing supervisor.
Before we begin, here's our virtual format.
The proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at phila.gov.
Benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548. Leave your email and the address
of the property in question. And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for
comments or testimony. Any comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken.
Let's look at continuances that we have for this afternoon.
Number three, MI 2022-005-080, 1529 Reed Street. Is the owner of the property Alex Klein present in the audience? Or the attorney for the property?
good afternoon mr chair this is jason handed and not seeing any hands raised at this time
so mi 2022 005080 1529 reed street that case is continued are there any other requests for
continuances. Once again, Mr. Chair, I do not see any hands. Okay. I have a few cases that do not
have exhibits. Number five, MI 2022-005.
Number five, MI 2022-005-076-510-16 West Pike Street.
I do not have any exhibits for that.
Joseph Consol is listed as the attorney.
No hands for that case, sir.
Okay, so MI 2022-005-076, 510-16 West Pike Street, that case is continued, Mark must be tried.
Number six, MI 2022-005-087, 1035 South 7th Street, I have no exhibits for that.
Tim Train is the owner applicant, first listing.
no hands for that case i have this sir so mi 2022 005087 1035 7th street that case is continued
And number 10, MI 2022-005-111-219 Mannheim Street, 6th Street Management is the listed owner. No exhibits, first listing.
no hands raised for that case either okay so MI 2022 005 111 219 Mannheim Street
that case is continued we're going to go to our add-on list
number one mi 2022 004 550 180 weston canon number a i vote yes to that thomas halliman my vote is yes
Thank you.
250 bybury road i vote yes to reconsideration and rehearing thomas holloman i vote yes to
reconsideration and rehearing my vote is yes to reconsideration and rehearing thank you to our
regular list. Number one, MI 2022-005-069-115-East Huntington Street.
Feldman is the attorney. Letter of support from NARA Square, Community Alliance.
Letter of non-opposition from Council Member Lozada.
Mr. Feldman is coming back.
Sure, thank you.
Good afternoon.
Hi, Mr. Feldman.
Hi, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
Yes, Brett, B-R-E-T-T, Feldman, F-E-L-D-M-A-N, 1835 Market Street, Suite 1400, Philadelphia
Pennsylvania, 19103. Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Yes, I represent 1115 East Huntington Limited Partnership, the landlord,
and Project Home founder, Sister Mary Scullion, as the tenant.
Okay. Our vice chair, Mr. Shahid, has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
There's a revision of plans, sir, where we've removed one of the signs. It's a projecting sign, which generated one of the refusals.
So with that correction, the refusal now would be accurate.
okay great have you emailed all the exhibits in five days in advance to this hearing
uh yes yes please proceed and show your screen great thank you i'll proceed
uh yes yes please proceed
okay again um brett feldman 1835 market street uh represent uh probably best known uh project home
in this application and this is an application at 115 East Huntington Street. These are the
exhibits 1 through 17, which we've previously sent. I'd ask that they be incorporated into the
record. With me today is Janet Stearns, Senior Vice President, Real Estate and Asset Management
Project Home. I'd ask that she also be promoted to a panelist, Larry Arney from Project Home as
well, and Daniel Kaiser, our project architect from Cecil Baker and Partners. I've asked that
all three of those witnesses be promoted. I guess I'll get right to it. This is a project that the
board saw and with the community support, non-opposition approved back in 2019. This is
a building, the former school of nursing at the Temple University Hospital Episcopal campus.
When we came before the board in 2019, it was a vacant building. And we, at that point,
we're beginning to respond to the opioid epidemic in our city and obtained approval for 62 beds,
units of housing in that facility for recovery housing. And we've been working very diligently
now in the last couple of years to get to that point. This is the project overview, which is
EPID 2. And let me just go to some of the other documents. That's the letter of support.
to situate the board probably the best way here's what the building looks here's what the building
looked like under construction beautiful beautiful building needed a tremendous amount of work
these are the construction pictures and as you'll see these are the views this is what it looks like
now it's it's basically done um tremendous uh renovation that was done that's the inside the
outside um the posting photos and uh to give everyone a sense of where we are here are the
renderings and this application is regarding uh accessory signs primarily wayfinding signs that
are needed because the property is owned rm1 which allows almost no signage at the property
And here's the challenge at the location. Here is the campus that we're on, the Temple University Episcopal Hospital campus. We are this one building here within it on a campus that is ported by North Front Street, Lehigh, and East Huntington Street. Here is us down here.
And the application is seeking accessory signage in excess of what's allowed in RM1, which is almost nothing that's allowed in RM1.
The building has four different sides, four different entrances.
And because of the nature of the building, we have a number of different folks who come to and from the building.
Project HOME, as they've done with many of their other projects in Philadelphia, is looking for
some accessory wall signs on the building itself. And I'll just take you to those materials.
Probably the best way to follow it is, you know, here's one of the views, and here are some of the
signs that are very consistent with Project HOME's sign packages. This is in the rear of the
building, sign here, sign here. This is another view from the north side, the end of Amazing
Mercy, Project Home. What we're trying to do with the signage is to make sure that there's
no confusion regarding our building versus all the other Temple University buildings that
are on this campus. There's another view from the south, the signage there. Here's from
the west. And I can go right to the actual sign plans, the exhibit tab in seven.
Here's a key plan, showing the showing the signage that's that we're proposing.
a total now of 10 signs. There were originally 11 signs, as I mentioned.
a total now of 10 signs there were originally 11 signs as I mentioned we had a projecting sign that
we removed here are here's the details of those signs and on each side there's this projecting
sign which at exhibit top 7 we passed up a revised plans form which we've now removed that sign so we
actually now went from 458 square feet to 408 square feet I can go through each of the individual
signs if the board would like, but primarily the signage is needed because of the four sides,
because of the wayfinding to make sure that there's no confusion on this building versus
folks going to other of the many other buildings. Mr. Feldman, we understand that. Great, great. So
I will stop with that now, but we just again wanted to thank the community and all the different
partners that have helped to bring this project to now fruition, basically. And this is the last
step, this important signage. Yeah. So why don't we have your testimony adopted by somebody from
the... Sure. Ms. Stearns, Janet, are you out there?
She's been a nod to speak. Yes. Yes. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court
reporter? Yes, I'm Janet Stearns, J-A-N-E-T is my first name. My last name is Stearns, S-T-E-A-R-N-S.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. Proceed. Yes. And Ms. Stearns, you've heard my testimony regarding the project,
what you're offering at the site, and why we need the signage? I have, yes. Yes. And
Do you adopt it as your own and true and faithful?
Yes, I do.
Great.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I would just add that at Exhibit Tab 7, we have revised plans.
I know.
I have that.
Just wanted to make sure we're going from 11 to 10 signs.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Was there anyone in the virtual audience, Jason?
No, there's no further answer.
All right, Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair Bergman, David Fecteau, F-E-C-T-E-A-U, with the City Planning Commission.
You swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Yes, sir, I do.
Proceed, please.
Thank you, sir.
Chairman and members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential multifamily zoning at this location.
This is a current single-room residence.
The applicant has shown that the dimensional variances for the proposed signs, while not strictly necessary to continue the use of the building, match the character of the remaining buildings on the larger hospital campus.
With the removal of the projecting sign, the City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the dimensional variances.
MI 2022-005-069-115 East Huntington Street.
I vote yes, proviso. Revised plans, two pages, stamped by ZBA, February 1st, 2023.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Ishmael Shahi, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thank you, Mr. Fellman.
Great. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sure, sure.
Number two, MI 2022, 005-067-814-22 South 11th Street.
Sean Whalen is the attorney.
Letter of support from the Hawthorne Empowerment Coalition.
he's coming back again as a panel okay sir
good afternoon chairman hi mr well could you state your name please and spell for the court
reporter certainly sean whalen w-h-a-l-e-n right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes i do could you identify your client in relationship to this
property? Certainly. The client is the equitable owner 814-22-S11th OCFLLC. Okay. Our vice chair
has a few questions. Certainly. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, counselor. Do you agree to waive
the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes, I do. Have you emailed all the
required exhibits into our offices five days in advance to this hearing yes thank you please
proceed and share your screen thank you very much
Thank you very much.
All right. Hopefully you can all now see my screen.
You're seeing an aerial pictometry photo from the city's website of 814 South 11th Street.
It is the entirety of this corner here, right in between Webster Street.
You can see the large school right here. Here's South 11th Street and Christian Street right here.
This is an approximately almost exactly 9,000 square foot square at the corner here.
It has been a long time. This might be a better image of it.
There's an existing building on it right here.
This has been a long time auto body shop that the owner is retiring and leaving and closing his doors.
you can see the rest of the block here. These are almost entirely single-family homes. There
are a few rentals and multifamily, but almost entirely single-family homes. The same is true
across the street from on Webster, fronting along Webster, I should say, across the street from the
school. And in every direction, you get the same sort of attitude of this single-family
residential neighborhood. We did meet with HEC. In fact, we met three times with HEC
before getting a resounding letter of support. The first time we met, we presented generally,
and they appreciated the project and kind of, you know, it was for informational purposes only.
They wanted us to proceed. They liked the non-commercial use at that location,
and they wanted to see us continue with the townhome use we then presented again that was in
october in december we presented again with the full uh the full package showing uh what i'll get
to in just a second our 10 10 proposed townhomes with a center drive aisle and uh ultimately they
They asked us to come back because the RCO had a number of pedestrian related concerns, primarily focusing on the students leaving and going to that school every day.
With regard to our drive aisle, we adopted and made, and you can see that this is the heart of the HEC letter of support.
And you can see that they felt that the townhomes would, quote, fit in well with the look and feel of the surrounding homes, that they would, quote, will open up on-street parking that was previously unavailable, and that they would provide on-site parking off-street for all the homeowners.
And then finally, those safety concerns that I was describing, I will outline them, but we included a gate at the drive aisle, mirrors, a speed bump, extensive street lighting, and sidewalk delineators similar to what you would see in an ADA ramp so as to offset and identify the drive aisle coming out.
so what you can see here again that block that i showed you is entirely rsa5 these are all
single family homes the same is true here there are some multi-family and single family homes
mixed in at the corners which are rm1 these cmx1 properties are not commercial currently they are
residential this whole block just to the north of us is the school and these cmx2 parcels are
really holdovers for, you know, when everything was remapped recently for long-term commercial
users. So again, here is, this is the property right here. You can see it's generally
parked in with cars along the whole way. Notably what the RCO really appreciated is
there is some curb along the current property, but almost everything is essentially driven over
as one giant curb cut along all three sides. So the auto body office center itself and two bays,
three bays rather, are set back on the property and you have these cars that are coming and going
all day. And you actually have this, you know, configuration here, which really blocks a lot
of traffic. The community was interested in getting that re-dealt with. All of the utility
poles and whatnot will be put underground. And essentially the area that you're looking at right
here will become the new drive aisle, but it will be a single curb cut. And so all of this curb cut,
and so all of this curb cut you have hundreds of feet of street frontage that are now basically
you have hundreds of feet of street frontage that are now basically
Thank you.
used as a single curb cut all of that will be returned as on street parking to the neighborhood
with our proposal so again you can see the auto body center to the left
even on the right you can see the single family nature of the property
and then kind of the largest building in the in the immediate neighborhood is this school
um this is just looking south from the property again you can see the kind of consistent single
family residential neighborhood this is immediately across the street on south 11th
so our plan is to again here's south 11th street we would have two-way ingress and egress
for a single drive aisle off street garage parking for each of 10 townhomes five fronting
on Webster, and five fronting on Christian. Here's a rendering of the project. Again,
something to note, the project's buildings will be 44 feet. However, in working with the RCO,
we've set back and slanted the fourth floor roof, so it's virtually unviewable from the pedestrian
access. We've also taken, at about almost exactly 33 feet, this cornice line matches the general
height of all the properties going down the street, which was something that the RCO really
liked and appreciated. They also enjoyed that we have full frontage here with actual activated
rooms in there and windows. So the rear half, basically, where my cursor is back, you'll see
the cars go in. The rear half of each townhome on the lowest level is two-car parking.
But then we do have, you know, front doors with full rooms that people could easily use as offices or living rooms or whatever they want, which activates the streetscape.
Again, here's just an overview so you can see where this is active.
And the only thing I will highlight here, I guess this is the best image to do it.
You can see we added this delineator here for the pedestrians.
These will also be essentially pedestrian rumble strips is a better way to describe them.
Again, these are sort of the bumpy nature of sidewalk that you see at ADA accessible corners.
We added a gate here to keep cars from going in and out too quickly.
And we're also adding a speed bump in here.
And in this lower corner, you can see we have extensive lighting going up and down.
The other thing that we worked with the RCO on is we have three current street trees going in for sure along Christian, two more along South 11th, and we are just waiting to confirm with the city being able to put in additional street trees based on whatever the underground infrastructure is.
We're not allowed to determine that for ourselves.
So, we have an extensive list of refusals, but essentially they all result from the change of use from commercial to residential.
So the very first one is that you have to have 30 feet depth of commercial use. The community agreed and noted that commercial use of this property is not really supportable or appropriate. We're actually only three blocks off of Broad Street and two blocks north of Washington here.
So there's extensive commercial corridors in two of the directions immediately away from this property.
And there's, you know, whatever commercial has been in this immediate area has been failing and flagging of late.
So our first refusal is to basically not provide any commercial.
The next three refusals all deal with parking requirements when you have a commercial use next to a residential use.
Obviously, these refusals are appropriate, but they're only triggered because we're not putting in the commercial use.
it would not be appropriate to put in any of the commercially required screening or landscape buffering or additional requirements where we're going to have, you know, standard residential layouts with first floor parking in row homes.
In order to add the first floor parking and not have that go underground and be able to really activate the street frontage, that's where we generate the one height refusal.
that's where we generate the one height refusal. The maximum occupied area and the minimum rear
yard depth, those are both triggered because, again, if we subdivided these lots
instead of making them into one PUD, we would meet the requirements because we would have rear
yards. But the way the zoning code looks at a PUD, planned unit development with 10 homes
on it, we are not providing a rear yard because that would basically be where the existing
building is now.
And then finally, I would note, we did submit a very slightly revised plan.
We're incorporating everything the RCO wanted and obviously had full support of the RCO
after three meetings.
We did add a second parking space.
We were able to get that into one of the homes that only had one, which the neighborhood
wanted and we reduce the height from 45 feet down to 44 feet and we have a new zoning plan
revised plan one page so with that unless the board has any questions I will call Ori Feibush
Mr. Feibush could you please state your name and spell for the court reporter
Good afternoon, Ori Feibush, O-R-I, last name F as in Frank, E-I-B-U-S-H.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Mr. Feibush, you're here on behalf of the equitable owner, correct?
And did you hear all of the testimony that I provided in this case already?
I did.
And do you believe it to be true and correct to the best of your information, knowledge, and belief?
And would you adopt it as your own?
I would.
All right.
Is there anything further?
Questions from the board?
All right.
And I believe, finally, Scott Woodruff, the architect for the project, is on to adopt my testimony.
Scott, state your name and spell for the court reporter, please.
Scott Woodruff.
S-C-O-T-T-W-O-O-D-R-U-F-F.
You swear, affirm, tell truth, hold truth, nothing but the truth.
Receive counsel.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Woodruff, you're the project architect, correct?
And did you hear all of the testimony that was already presented in this case?
Yes. And do you believe it to be true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
I do. And would you adopt it as your own? I would. Thank you very much.
Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience? Mr. Chair, I have Ms. Kiana Thompson with her hand raised. I have allowed her to speak.
Sure. Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Hi, Kiana Thompson, K-I-A-N-A, Thompson, T-H-O-M, P-S-O.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I am the principal of the Academy at Palumbo High School, which is next.
Oh, okay, sure. Proceed.
Thank you. I was not able to attend the community meeting, but I'm just wondering
how my students traveling to and from school especially during the construction phase would
be impacted and also during evacuation drills where that area is one of our evacuation points
we have 1200 students in grades 9 through 12 so we use all four sides of the building to
evacuate, and if that is a construction zone, we have to do monthly evacuation drills, and once
it's residents, I'm wondering how we would be impacted. Boyle, do you want to comment to that?
Certainly, I can address that, and then I'll let Mr. Feibus or Mr. Woodruff jump in
as necessary. The construction period will be about 18 months, you know, start to finish once
once shovels hit the dirt. So this will be a relatively short-term thing, but obviously we
want to make sure everybody's safe. We will keep Webster Street clear. One of the benefits of this
property is that with its size, we are able to stage without closing off the immediate streets
and build out from the rear coming forward towards South 20th. So we can keep Webster Street
completely clear for the students. There's also this is a very wide sidewalk built.
Um, there's also, this is a very wide sidewalk built here. I can, um, so I don't see the dimension on here, but it's a very wide, uh, we're, we're making basically a very wide sidewalk here.
And like I said, I already walked through the delineations to make sure that that would also be a place appropriate for students to be able to walk out and, and safely be off the street.
um however i will say that you know we would uh certainly welcome to meet with miss thompson
and uh maybe dr thompson i i apologize if i messed that up and you know get her input on our safety
plan and be able to work with her uh going forward to make sure that you know we're not blocking off
any kind of exit or egress for any emergency situation. Thank you. And also, you mentioned
the parking. Parking is a major struggle for my staff. And you said this would open up on-street
parking. Do you have any idea if it's only for the residents to be able to park there all day?
Because right now I have teachers who have to run out every two hours. The only reason I get a spot
is because my engineer who gets here at six in the morning puts a comb out for me um so will it
make more of a headache or less for us uh so that was one of the biggest issues with the community
it will make less of a headache for you uh all of the on-street parking will be open to uh anyone
you know anyone in the public trying to park uh the only parking that will be limited to the
individual townhome owners will be the individual parking garages that they have in their rear that
are accessed off this drive aisle that you can see. And that actually, that will take all of
the townhome cars off of the street so that they're not parking on the street. And then it
will open up all of the on-street parking for any of the public who are going to use it.
the community we've already agreed to support the community they're they're hoping to have a
a redesign of this block along south 20th right now to allow for additional street on street
parking you know that that obviously is something that has to play out but you know the entirety of
christian street here will add on street parking spaces and that will not be for individual town
home use at all so council excuse me this is commissioner shaheed if i'm not mistaken the
school is a part of the fabric of the community have they not been met with prior to this um
hearing uh we we did reach out to the school and we served the school as we were were required um
as you heard miss thompson was not able and uh i did not hear any represent representatives from
the school at the multiple meetings but we did have three public meetings and we are certainly
interested and willing to meet with um miss thompson going forward to make sure that the
school is is accepting of the uh the evacuation plans and and sort of safety features that we've
added i don't know what the process is but there was a letter taped to the door one morning um but
I never got a personal request for a meeting.
Yes, okay.
So just here, I'm recommending that we hold this
until they meet with the school
because of the fire emergencies.
Well, let's finish up.
Well, Mr. Shahid jumped there.
I was going to suggest that given the process, zoning, even assuming we get the zoning approval
today, the process does not go into the ground on Monday.
There's an extensive period of getting the building permits and whatnot in which we would
be able to meet with Ms. Thompson.
However, I would be more than happy to have the board close the record and hold for two
weeks so that we could meet with Ms. Thompson. We certainly, we think we designed a great project
with, you know, extensive community support. And we'd like to make sure that Ms. Thompson
feels a part of that and that the school is certainly part of that. And so we'd be happy to
have the board hold its vote so that we could meet with Ms. Thompson in the next couple of weeks.
Okay. I hear that. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, I do not see any further hands.
By Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman and members of the board.
Thank you, Chair Bergman and members of the board, David Fecto, with the City Planning Commission.
David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in the commercial mixed-use zoning at this location.
There is no unique physical condition or circumstance in this lot to prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
The applicant has not shown that the proposed use and dimensional variances are needed to enable them to derive value from this land.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board deny the use and dimensional variances.
So the record's going to be closed. We will vote on this in two weeks, and the principal and Sean and Mr. Finebush could get together in this next two weeks, and the only thing we're going to take testimony on is the result of the meeting, okay?
Certainly. Chairman Bergman, do you mind if I do a quick response to the Planning Commission?
Well, sure.
you know i think obviously but i i wholeheartedly disagree with the planning commission's position
on this point i went through the unnecessary hardship there was a significant change in
this neighborhood which was identified by the community i mean not even just us they were the
ones who really pointed out that all the commercial has gone from these blocks and that no commercial
use is appropriate. They did not want to see first floor commercial with 20 plus apartments
above, which is what the CMX2 commercial development would be. The community did not
want to see that. They were not interested in empty storefronts, which is what they're already
faced with. And as I already set forth, this is a single family residential neighborhood.
And again, as the community noted, the CMX2 designation for this property individually is sort of a silo, and there are a few of them for decade-long existing businesses.
so we believe that with you know the unnecessary hardship there's no detriment to the public health
safety or welfare and it's certainly the least minimum variance in getting away from you know
the 20 plus apartments over what would be vacant commercial space that the community
did not want and they were very happy when we were coming to them with townhomes
so thank you very much i want to hear you and hillary you you're comfortable with this hillary
i just wanted to um clarify mr chair are you asking for a resumption hearing or
are we just holding the record i think i think i would want to close the record
the only thing we would have is uh a report back from the the meeting between the school and the
the developer okay so maybe what we should do then is close the record except for
a letter from mr whalen and and from miss thompson verifying that the meeting was held
and then we can vote that's fine yep all right and just before just before we jump off um miss
thompson so that you don't have to do so on a public record uh my phone number is 215-622-7402
that's my direct line so you can reach out to me and we can set up that meeting at your convenience
in the next week or so thank you thank you everyone excuse me chair i'm sorry to interrupt
but uh mr eric stern has his hand raised okay sure
could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
my name is eric stern e-r-i-c-s-t-e-r-n right do you swear for him tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth i do sir proceed uh i live at the property on webster
street that is uh directly adjacent to this proposed project the one that's probably most
impacted by by it um and i wanted to echo what mr whalen said about the community um and their
their uh thoughts on this project i'm in agreement with this project because the developers generously
agreed to do work on my house necessary to provide me with adequate protections, comfort to me and
my property, so I won't suffer any negative consequences. So I'm in agreement with the
project. Thank you for calling in. We appreciate your comments. Sure. Okay. Sean, we're all good?
We are all good. We will meet and send in the board a letter. All right. Thank you.
um no okay wait a minute here
i'll be with you in one minute let's see here
1323 okay oh okay and mr well is back here am i unfortunately for you you're stuck
Oh, okay. Mr. Whalen's back here.
I think unfortunately for you, you're stuck with me.
005078, 1940 Wharton Street.
Sean Whalen is the attorney.
Letter of support from the Point Breeze Community Development Coalition.
Mr. Whalen, could you identify your client, your relationship to the property?
Of course.
Sean Whalen, W-H-A-L-E-N.
I'm here as the attorney for the owner of the property, which is 1940 Wharton Street, LLC.
Mr. Shahid has a few questions.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed all the required documents to proceed with this case five days in advance to this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you very much.
So you were going to get a one-case break from me, but you continued that one, so you're stuck with me.
Here for 1940 Wharton Street, you can see it.
It's got the blue dot on it right here.
It's a long, vacant lot right at the corner of – this is Wharton Street and 20th Street.
We are three short blocks or one long block on the north side off of Point Breeze Avenue, kind of the major commercial thoroughfare through the neighborhood.
And this project may seem familiar to everyone because we originally brought, I guess about a year ago, a request for a single family home.
the community did not want the single family home that we had proposed there and I'll get
into those reasons why so in working with the community we resubmitted a new application for
a triplex which was resoundingly supported certainly there were some questions I don't
want to suggest that there weren't but supported by the immediate neighbors and here's the the page
from Mr. Albert Littlepage as the president.
So here's where we are.
This is an RSA 5 project or a property rather.
You can see there's some RSA 5 here,
a lot going down this way.
You can see there's a lot of RM1 all around it.
And all of this ICMX has actually been fully built out
as residential as well.
One thing to note up front is, again, just going through the public zoning records and rental licenses of this neighborhood, of this block, the Wharton Street blocks over to Point Breeze, south one block, and then going over to south 19th, evidence is about a 50-50 split between single family and multifamily uses.
And those multifamily uses are actually significantly higher than, or generally higher than even three units. And I'll show some photos there. So the community was really very comfortable with this. They felt that the triplex really fit in with the fabric of the neighborhood, given what the existing makeup is of these blocks.
um so the first project that we we thought we would do which would be the least minimum variance
was you know a single family house here uh there was going to be a one car parking off the off of
south 20th there's actually significant bus traffic that goes north on south 20th and right here at
the corner, which I'll get to in a couple of my next slides, is the current bus stop. So the
community really pushed back to anything, the single family house and any kind of parking or
additional change to, the house, the single family house was also going to front on, it was going to
be built width wise and front on South 20th. So in working with the community, you know, as closely
as we tried to. We've actually fully redesigned the building to now have the frontage on Wharton
Street. That also we all or I should say we also supported there's now going to be a full bus
shelter built at this intersection right here on this corner adjacent to our property. The
neighborhood had a bus stop there and they really wanted a full shelter. So that has not been
constructed yet, but it is in the works with the city. So here you can see that this is the lot
right here, and this is actually the bus stop right here. So this is where the shelter is going.
And this is actually the bus stop right here. So this is where the shelter is going to be.
Here's a rendering of the building that we're going to build.
This is dimensionally by right. So we have one refusal, which is to build a triplex instead of a single family house.
and what you can see is these are all actually this block right here immediately is largely
multi-family again there's sort of a 50 50 split of triplexes and higher and limited lodging
and you know single family as evidenced by the the public records
um so then if you look uh this is looking north on uh 20th you have the corner store here
this here you can see even right at the corner there's another triplex there's another triplex
right here you you've got the multiple electrical evidence there this is just going down the other
direction. And again, here's the frontage. Now, one more thing that leads to a difficulty here
and a hardship and as to one of the further factors that needed to be considered, this lot
is actually 18 and a half, 19 feet wide. In order to build a single building, you're actually beyond
what standard dimensional lumber allows. So you'd have to go to specially engineered lumber.
I know that it is not solely indicative of or substantiating of a variance. However,
the economic impact that this board, I'm sure, is aware of what lumber prices and construction
prices have done in the last year and a half. When you go from standard lumber to fully engineered
lumber uh you know those those get even more exponentially increased so there's a there's a
severe financial detriment in trying to build a single span here um
so again this is duplicative here are you can see
this is immediately across the street you have a multifamily
single family multifamily multifamily multifamily uh going down the block
um here is i'm happy to get into it in more depth but here's the zoning plan of what will be built
again it's uh dimensionally there's a full rear yard um there's only one thought i was going to
it already only one refusal here which is to use the property as multi-family household living
three units instead of the RCA5. Again, this is a situation in which the neighborhood,
not only did they not want the single family, which would upset that intersection. Let's see
if I can go back to it too. So upset this intersection of the pedestrian walkway there.
One of the major concerns in this neighborhood is affordability and diversity of housing. So even a single-family house at this location with no parking is north of $600,000 new construction at this time in the market. With parking is even significantly more.
So the neighbors, not only did they ask us to not build a single family house and interrupt that North 20th Street side, they really wanted a diversity of housing.
And so we are building two two bedrooms and one one bedroom.
These are going to be built as condos, not as not as apartments.
And the sale prices are going to be they're going to range based on the unit from the two hundred thousands to the three hundred thousands.
um so this was something that was very important and very exciting to the rco was that we were
going to be offering this this diversity of of for home for sale ownership as opposed to
even just more units which they were fine with the triplex but but we're very much excited by
the condos you know so there there was a full redesign here as i've already walked through
And I don't need to belabor the there's a significant change in this neighborhood from single family RSA five development, which the community did not want and showing the hardship of building that.
And as I already described of building a single family house there, the public health, safety and welfare is satisfied because it.
The public health, safety, and welfare is satisfied because it fits in with the community, which is, you know, as evidenced by their support.
It specifically is building of a bus shelter. It's protecting the public transit bus stop that they have.
And, you know, as to a least minimum variance, this again comes into play with community support and in working with the community for the past year.
the original plan was rejected by the community. So they wanted ground up construction of a vacant
lot with affordable units. And if you only put in, they actually liked a triplex instead of a duplex,
a duplex would lead to much more expensive units and would lead to very large three bedrooms or
standard four bedroom units which would be much more expensive and not give the community that
diversity of affordable housing that they were hoping for and so again with a two bedroom or two
two bedrooms and one one bedroom the community was very happy that that would keep all of the
prices in the twos and three hundred thousand dollar range for the condos so with that i'm
I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
Otherwise, I would-
You don't have your testimony adopted?
I'm sorry, Mr. Berger?
Is your client here?
Oh yes, Tim Lilley should be on.
Okay, Mr. Chair-
Hi, could you state your name
and spell please for a court reporter?
Mr. Chair, I have a call-in user with their hand raised.
To allow them to speak.
Understood.
hi uh tiffany green concerned citizens appoint breeze hi hi tiffany could you state your name
and spell for the court reporter please uh so so chairman just just as i know i'll i'll i'll get
to that let her let her testify go ahead certainly sorry miss green okay all right um my testimony
is he's correct could you state your name for the record and spell it oh sure no problem
T-I-F-F-A-N-Y
G-R-E-E-N
Right. Do you swear, affirm,
tell truth, told truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Does she?
Yes, he did come back in June of
2022 with a
single-family home and garage. And at
the time, we just didn't want the garage. We thought
the single-family home was fine.
They made it very clear
that they could build by rights
regarding the three-story
rooftop deck, which they were correct.
We can't we can't oppose that. But we didn't want to go to the garage here because 20th and Wharton, the 17 bus, as you know, go into the city and go down Market Street.
So it's well used. OK, so at that particular point, they withdrew.
Now they come back with when they found out that the community was not supporting that.
They come back with the three condominium triplexes, which at this point feel that this is a self-imposed hardship.
there's no unique anything physically unique why he cannot build the code as they made it very clear
they could build by right a single family home would be in line because if you get 2010 wharton
street that's that was new development all single family homes across the street um and so and and
with the three um if you're going to talk about in terms of prices and lumber and everything well
let's talk about when you're changing uh the zoning classification from a rsa to a triplex
with three condominiums, we're talking about when he's saying price point of possibly over
$800,000. Well, when you go down to the BRT, I know that he's
bringing up about the lumber. BRT, the first thing the city used is recent market sales
to reassess people's houses. So if we're going to talk about
economic impact, changing this variance from a single family home, which might be a
$400,000 or $500,000 home, to three condominiums is
quite. We asked him over and over, would you do an affordable unit? He refused.
we went into some other thing about some low-income, low-cost condominiums.
We're asking the board at this point, you know,
we want to maintain the stability of our community,
and as many single-family homes we can maintain is good,
because also three condominiums may not be, everyone would not have a car,
but at least two out of the three might have more cars,
and as you can see, that area is already packed, you know, packed full,
and right where the bus stop is.
So we're asking the board to just maintain-
Ms. Green, let me ask you a question.
Were you at the RCO meeting?
Yes, I was.
And we have not had-
Everybody was asking him about these condominiums.
They refused to budge on having an affordable unit.
They're saying their price point was in affordable units.
I know, but let me ask this.
Did the community group, did the Point Breeze Community Development Corporation vote in favor?
I don't have access to the vote.
I don't have access to the vote.
We've been going forth at this point back.
We've been going forth at this point back and forth.
I'm not having access to the vote.
We've asked.
So we're not even sure.
The vote came out six to three.
So we're not even sure if they were nearby neighbors or not or whatever.
So we're discussing this from, is there a requirement for a variance at this particular point?
I don't know.
Three condominiums is quite a bit.
We like to see single-family homes maintain the, you know.
Thank you very much for calling in as you. I appreciate it.
I appreciate that. Thank you.
All right. Thank you. What's the name of your.
It's Tim Lilly. And if Tim Lilly can't be called, Ori Feibush can also jump on who's ever available.
Chairman Bergman, if I if I could, I would.
I'll share it with the screen just because it was called into question.
um this is the vote sheet from point breeze cdc uh there were 11 attendees miss green was one of
them she raised her concerns at that time uh there were nine people who voted on the project
the meeting was run by mr little page um who's the long longstanding i thought he was the president
you know he's listed as the director of this meeting um he determines who votes and who doesn't
vote the uh there is a support um you know the position for support is listed and uh you know
taxes uh are not relevant to the zoning determination um you know i i'm happy i do
represent clients with regard to taxes so i can get into that if the board has any questions
and the tax is not the issue however the uh the last issue that i would raise about affordability
um the all of the units as currently priced are are well below 80 percent ami um we did state
that you know all of the units will be uh you know i will say lowercase affordable housing
these not not officially defined uh you know pha affordable housing um and you know look we don't
know what the what the market is doing at the moment they're all going to be listed well below
80 percent ami based on what they are now uh and could be as low as 60 percent of ami based on how
the market works a lot of that comes into account with regard to uh interest rates and and things of
that nature and what the lending market works um because everything is based on how much of
the person's monthly salary you can you know have the payment be um so let's see if i have
your testimony adopted by someone. Yep. I think Tim Lilly is there. It's me, Sean, Ori Feibush.
Mr. Feibush, you've already been sworn. Just state your name for the record.
Of course. Ori Feibush, F as in Frank, E-I-B-U-S-H. Proceed, counsel.
Mr. Feibush, you're here on behalf of the owner of the property and developer of the property?
Yes, sir. And did you hear all the testimony that was already presented in this case?
I did.
Do you believe it to be true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
And would you adopt it as your own?
I would, yes.
And is there any other point that you believe needs to be made for the board that's not
duplicative?
I would just share that this has been a new slot for the neighborhood for a long time,
and this will fill in the block in a way that has really been sought after by many, many
neighbors here.
uh i i've lived in the point breeze neighborhood uh for the better part of uh i guess 15 16 years
and it certainly has been a vacant lot that predates that so uh i think everyone myself
included is excited to hopefully see some type of development occur on this point thank you
questions from the board yes mr chairman proceed there's a uh how many curb cuts are you requesting
Mr. Holloman, we are requesting zero curb cuts. There will be no impact to the curb
cut whatsoever. That was part of the large request by the neighbors that they did not
want any curb cuts. They didn't want that single family house with the parking coming
off 20th. And that was part of the agreement was to maintain the public pedestrian right
of way without any curb cuts whatsoever and what my second question is what's why do you have the
height exceeding the required height uh so just to be clear we do not have a refusal for height
we are not seeking any additional height we will build below 38 feet which is the allowed height
in the neighborhood and i'm happy to bring up the refusal just to be clear um
I hope you can see it on your screen right now.
i i hope you can see it on your screen right now i've just pulled up the refusal
I've just pulled up the refusal.
We have one refusal for multifamily use.
There is no request for additional height
and we're building by right in all ways dimensionally.
Okay, thank you.
Certainly, thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have another call-in user with the hand raised to allow them to speak.
Please press star six to unmute yourself, sir or madam.
No, I was just following up.
It was just me stating that we do support a single-family home here, okay?
We did not say we did not support development at that property.
Yes, it has been there a lot for a while, and we do support single-family home.
But the thing about it is, at this particular point, we feel that he states that below 80 AMI, what, below 80 AMI as far as the city would be $170,000.
And you have not, you will not, you're not selling that at $170,000, are you?
Is that what you're saying?
And then so we're not, and we're not, we're not dealing with that.
We're not the totality of the price range.
if you're going to bring in about lumber and supplies
and Lella and I are going to allow you to talk about that
then we should have the right to talk about the tax impact on this too
and that's the point I want to
thank you for your comments
anyone else in the virtual audience
no further answer
planning commission
thank you chair Bergman
and members of the board
David Vecto
city planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the residential single-family zoning at this location. There is no unique physical condition
or circumstances of this 1186 square foot lot that would prevent it from being used in conformance
with the zoning code. We also note that the promised bus shelter is located in the public
right-of-way and so cannot be tied to the issuance of a zoning permit. The City Planning Commission
recommends that the board deny the use variance. There's been a lot, Mr. Whalen, there's been a lot
of testimony. I'm going to take this back to the executive committee next Wednesday and we'll vote
for it at 9 30. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. We'll vote it. We'll vote at 2 p.m.
on this one. Oh, 2 p.m. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. All right. Thank you. And Chairman Bergman,
I'm remiss. I forgot one point for the height for Mr. Holloman's comment. We did agree with
the community to, so as the chair knows, you can build to 38 feet in height, and then you build a
parapet wall above that for your roof, so it actually goes up to 42 feet in height. We agreed
to remove that additional height to try to even further reduce the impact of the height on the
block. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you very much. Number seven, MI 2022-005-112-905
South 9th Street. Mike Gumbel is the attorney for the owner. Janet Stetschman. Letter of non-opposition
from Bella Vista Neighbors. Letter of non-opposition from Councilman Squilla.
Mr. Gumbel is back in as a panelist, sir.
Hi, counsel, could you please state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Good afternoon, chairman and committee members.
Mike Gumbel, M-I-K-E-G-U-M-B-E-L.
Right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
could you identify your client the relationship to this property my client is janet deckman and
she is the owner of the property individual and our our vice chair ismail shaheed has a few questions
good afternoon counselor do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal instead to its accuracy
we do have you emailed all the exhibits that are required to move to proceed with this case
five days in advance to this hearing we have thank you please proceed and share your screen thank you
are you able to see that yes we're fine okay um good afternoon again my name is mike gumbel
i'm representing janet steckman who's the owner of 905 south 9th street this property is located
in the 9th Street Market area, a couple doors south of Christian. This is one of the visitor
accommodation variances that we're seeking for short-term rental of the property.
Here you have the refusal, and the only refusal is for
Here you have the refusal, and the only refusal is for the visitor accommodations.
There are no construction or anything other than an actual use variant that we're seeking for this.
The property itself has commercial on the first floor, which is currently a dog grooming business,
and then there's a single apartment on the second and third floor, so it's a bi-level apartment.
The property has been owned by Ms. Steckman for a couple decades now. It's been in the family. And there's a tax clearance certificate posting.
So several years back, I actually represented Ms. Steckman as a realtor trying to lease this property out.
and we had difficulty trying to find typical long-term tenants because of its location in the
market. Some of the issues that we encounter are the noise from the market on a daily basis,
the trash, the traffic, and so it was very difficult to try to get this rented out as a
long-term rental. At that point, her son and her decided to try to do a short-term rental and do
Airbnb, which they've done for the last several years, and as you can see, they've got almost 200
reviews for this particular property, almost five stars. So they've done very well with it.
And it's been an excellent addition to the neighborhood in that your typical Airbnb guest
is somebody coming in from out of town who's a tourist who wants to see the area. And really,
there's no more iconic area in Philadelphia than the market itself. And so this is a great
marketing opportunity for the market, for the businesses in the market. They have
partnerships with several of the businesses to be able to provide some of the local items and
flair from them to the tenants that are coming to stay at the apartment. Miss Steckman also is the
owner of Anastasia Seafood, which has been a longtime occupant of the market itself, formerly
at 9th and Washington, and now several doors up. So her family has been involved and is intricately
involved in the market and seeing its success uh this venture for them has uh done very well
and it's something that they would like to continue to do and for that reason we're seeking
the variance uh to convert this to visitor accommodations and short-term rental uh while
keeping the first floor unit as commercial would you want to have your testimony adopted by your
client yes please i'd like to promote janet stephman
please raise your hand if you're still in a virtual
could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
they're waiting for the razor hand mr chair
deckman
Janet she told me she was in the room all right mr. Gumbel you're you're an
officer of the court we will accept your testimony I'd like to proffer that
testimony as exciting questions from the board no mr.
questions or comments from the virtual audience
no further hands mr chair planning commission thank you chair bergman and members of the board
david vecto city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the commercial mixed use zoning at this location there is no unique physical condition or
circumstance of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning
code. The city planning commission recommends that the board deny the use of variance.
MI 2022-005-112-905 South 9th Street. I vote yes with proviso. Temporary variance expires 2-1-26.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
thank you counsel yes we're proviso thank you thank you thank you all take care okay number
eight mi 2022 005086 1600 west gerrard avenue melanie lacy is the attorney um
Um, letter of support from United Neighbors Alliance Civic Association.
This will be returning as a panelist, sir.
good afternoon mr chairman members of the board my name is melanie lacey that's m-e-l-a-n-i-e
last name l-a-c-e-y i'm with claire harrison harvey in bransburg 1835 market street suite 1400
philadelphia you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do could
you identify your client and relationship to this property yes i'm accompanied by kane patel who is
a member of LCB Ventures LLC doing business as Liberty Grounds, as well as Sal Guerrero from
Boxwood Architects. Our vice chair has a few questions. Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree
to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed all the
required exhibits into our office five days in advance to this hearing? I have. Thank you.
please proceed and share your screen okay are you able to see my screen yes yes okay wonderful
okay um as mentioned um by the chairman uh we met with well first of all this this application
relates to um property located at 1600 west gerard avenue um and i will get into the reason
for relief in a moment. So we met with the United Neighbors Civic Association in person on November
9th, where the project received overwhelming support. They submitted a letter of non-opposition
dated November 17th. And we are here seeking special exception relief for a proposed special
assembly use at 1600 West Girard Avenue. So the establishment is called Liberty Grounds,
And it's a restaurant bar with mini golf and other recreational games, duffel board, ping pong.
And these recreational games are classified as special assembly uses.
They were previously approved back in 2019.
I'm currently showing you the prior approval under permit number 1005925.
And this took place right before the pandemic.
Thankfully, Liberty Grounds has done quite well in spite of the odds, and we're here today because they're seeking to expand the existing use within a neighboring vacant commercial unit next door.
So here is an aerial showing the location. It's at the corner of Westward Avenue and 16th Street, North 16th Street.
here is outside of the building exterior. It's behind these gray bay windows and the space that
they're seeking to expand within are these two below these brown bay windows that I'm hovering
over if you can see my mouse. So they would expand from this area all the way down
to the corner below the civic sign. And the civic are the apartment residential units
upstairs of the commercial units at the ground level. This is another image of the exterior
and the intersection. So I'll show you the expansion area. So this is the interior of
expansion area. And it's been unoccupied since the building conversion. The building was previously
the former hospital building, and it was converted, as I mentioned, into the civic
apartments with commercial space at the ground level. Here are additional photos of the vacant
space in its current condition. And I will show you photos of the existing establishment next door.
So as mentioned, mini golf, games,
and dining space. And they do have private rooms that can be reserved to host events.
Here is a key plan and I'll have to zoom out. So this is this existing sit down area. This
is the expansion area on the first floor and then this is the existing sit down area and
game room in the basement. It's bi-level.
and here is the floor plan for the showing the expansion area as well as the existing
and here is the floor plan for the
i will tell you a little bit about um liberty grounds before um we go into the relief being
sought um they currently employ 25 to 30 people including waiters bartenders hosts dishwashers
line cooks, and they provide a platform for local breweries, and their food is locally sourced
for their menu of Asian fusion cuisine. The majority of patrons dine in, and a very small
fraction of sales relate to takeout and delivery. And Liberty Grounds is open Tuesday to Sunday
and closed on Mondays. Weekdays, they close at 11. Friday and Saturday close at midnight. Sundays,
they close at 9 p.m., and they've never had any noise complaints. They're committed to
keeping the interior and exterior of the establishment clean and litter-free and they
often host charity events, sporting events for local teams and offer event space as mentioned
for private parties. Their Sundays are actually designated as family-friendly hours. So in
conclusion, the special assembly use won't be any more negatively impactful for the surrounding
area than any other special assembly use along this portion of the West Girard Avenue
corridor it's been amenity an amenity to the apartments above it as well as the greater
neighborhood and it will continue to operate as a restaurant recreational and private event space
the project has overwhelming community support as you can see from this letter and it's the
application satisfies the standards of a special exception so with that i'll ask that you promote
my client, Kanae Patel, to adopt my testimony.
Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Hello, can you hear me?
Hi, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Yep, Kanae Patel, K-A-N-A-Y, Patel, P-A-T-E-L.
Right, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Okay, thank you.
Did you hear the testimony that I provided to the board this afternoon, Kinnick?
And do you affirm that my presentation was accurate?
Do you adopt the testimony as your own?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Do not see any further.
Hi, Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman and members of the board.
David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed-use zoning at this location.
The applicant has shown the proposed assembly and entertainment will have no more of an impact than such a use would be expected to have.
And so the City Planning Commission recommends the board grant the special exception.
Thank you.
MI 2022-005-086-1600 West Sherrod Avenue.
I vote yes.
My vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, counsel.
So number nine, MI 2022-005-081-2860 Kensington Avenue, number TC435854.
Alan Nicholson is the attorney.
Letter of support from IMPACT, letter of non-opposition from Council Member Lozada.
Coming back in as a panelist, Cap.
Thank you.
good afternoon mr chair members of the board alan knockamson a-l-a-n last name knockamson
n-o-c-h-u-m-s-r-n mr knockamson you've already been sworn could you identify your client a
relationship to this property yes uh the client my client is the property owner tl kenzo llc
And then the virtual audience is Lenoit Cherniak, who is the member of that organization.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, Mr. Nackamson. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Have you emailed all the required exhibits that are needed five days in advance to our office?
Yes, I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
um so this is a very straightforward project at 2860 uh kensington avenue uh we're underneath the
l um and we're helping support the commercial corridor through the development of this property
alan could you come a little bit closer you're you're kind of sure can you hear me better yeah
All right, cool. Yeah, so this is a pretty straightforward project. We have a vacant lot on the commercial corridor, has been for some time. It's irregularly shaped, and we're asking for a few de minimis variances here. So we have the notice of refusal, which we'll go over.
We have a letter of support from Impact CDC. While I was transitioning over to, as a, as a panelist, I heard there may be another letter that I haven't received. Is there another letter that the ZBA received with regards to this project?
Ms. Maxon, you may be referring to the letter of non-opposition from Council Member Lozada.
Okay. Yeah, the councilman was non-opposition, sir.
Okay, great. Thank you. So we also have councilmatic support. So with regards to the refusals, we're going to address them. We're going to look at nearby properties with more than 75% lot coverage.
We also have support of the neighbor to the left of us and right of us on this commercial corridor, maps of the area, photographs of the property, our plants and drawings, our RCO meeting notice, we had a well-attended meeting, our application for appeal, our deed to the property showing that TL Kenzo LLC is the owner of the property, and our Certificate of Tax Clearance.
Again, in the virtual audience, Illinois Terniak, the member of this LLC, at the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask that he virtually raise his hand.
He'll be sworn in and he can adopt my testimony as his own.
Our notice of refusal.
So this is a CMX2 property.
We're looking to put an attached dwelling, we see an attached structure with a roof deck, two roof deck access structures.
a commercial property on the ground floor and four dwelling units above uh we have a refusal
first for the heights which is a misnomer um this is cmx two and a half property we're allowed to
have a building height of 55 feet we do have a building height of 55 feet but because of where
the roof deck access structures are situated the height of the roof deck access structure is
counting towards the height of our building but as you will see in the presentation materials
to the roofline. We're 55 feet high. The second refusal is the maximum occupied area where 75%
is allowed and we're proposing that a little over 95%. This is a property that goes street to street
and is irregularly shaped. So we're trying to have active eyes on the street from both sides
of the property, which is also important to this section of Philadelphia. We're in the Kensington
section of philadelphia from a safety perspective it makes sense to have almost full lock coverage
here and um it's not out of character either to have you know lock coverage that exceeds
the zoning code requirements as you'll see in our presentation and then the final refusal has
to do with the fact that in the rear of the property uh we have an indentation of approximately
a foot, a little over a foot on two sides. One to help us, you know, we'll have a landing area
for people who are going to get out from the rear if necessary. So that helps us. The second
indentation has to do with the landing, essentially an exterior landing for the trash removal. So it
would make it easier than to have a door opening to a public sidewalk. Plus from an architectural
point of view, we thought we'd add some architectural interest by having these
two indentations. So these are de minimis requests that we
would ask the board to approve. And then here's the letter
of support from the coordinating RCO
in PAC CDC.
And then my understanding, again, is the district council member also has
a letter of non-opposition for this project. So
Addressing specifically the lot coverage issue, we did an analysis of nearby properties to look to see which properties, if any, had that ran the power of the zoning code requirements.
As you can see, it's a decent amount, especially on the Kensington Ave corridor.
You can also see our property and you can see the fact that we have been in a regularly shaped lot, which makes it difficult to conform to the zoning code.
Plus, we wanted to have eyes in the street, not just on Kensington Avenue.
plus we wanted to have eyes in the street not just on kensington avenue but east cambria so we
we had as much log coverage as possible to accomplish that task for safety purposes
and then 2864 that's next to us and 2858 that's next to us on kensington avenue each signed
the letters to support and support this project and then there's the zoning map as you can see
we're not asking for any used variances. These are all dimensional variances, and you can see
from the irregular shape of the lot, it's really difficult to conform to Philadelphia zoning code
from a lot coverage perspective. And then just maps of the area. Again, we're on a commercial
corridor. We're underneath the L. So by activating this property, it has many benefits to this
commercial corridor. And then photographs of the property. As you can see, this is a vacant lot.
you can see the L right here, or at least the structure of the L. We try to, again, always show
that, you know, proof of posting. So here it is from this angle from Kensington Avenue, and then
the other side on East Cambria Street. And then as you can see, like this property has been a
vacant lot for some time. So the picture that we got as late as July of 2015 shows it as a vacant
lot from kensington avenue and it's a vacant lot showing today as well as back in july of 2015
it has a vacant lot and then this kensington avenue to the right of the property again here's
the underbelly of the owl kensington avenue to the left of the property cambridge street to the right
of the property and as you can see like many properties on cambridge street goes to because
it's a public street, go to the front of that property, and then Cambridge Street to the left
of the property. And then our plans and drawings, again, we have a structure that will fit well
within the commercial corridor and help support the commercial corridor. We're not just providing
a commercial space, but much needed residences that will help support the commercial corridor.
And then this is just from the Cambridge Street side.
As you can see, these are the indentations, which are the subject of the refusals.
Just trying to give a landing in architectural interest, though, for the residents who can access the property from the rear.
And then this is where we're going to have the trash room, again, to give a landing rather than taking the trash out and you're on the public sidewalk.
I'll just give a little bit of a landing so for right-of-way purposes and then this is another
view of our property from Kensington Avenue and from East Cambria and again same thing from East
Cambria and then this is just our site plan as you can see if you add up the numbers we're at 55
feet high this is a good elevation which shows the commercial space on the ground floor
and there's a unit on each floor as well and as you can see where the roof deck access structure
is situated because it's situated at the rear that's where the refusal is coming in for the
height because they're counting the top of the roof deck access structure for height purposes
and then this is just floor plan showing uh our property the commercial component takes the full
ground floor with you know obviously stairwells in the front and the back from the front from
kensington as well as east cambria and again floors two through five are two bedrooms
each of them have two bedrooms uh and two baths and in particular each have its own
trash or ventilated trash room and they actually have a trash sheet as well so we really want to
make a responsible trash management storage and removal plan
so we met on December 14th with the community 153 addresses were notified
list of the addresses proof of mailing to those addresses our application for appeal
showing that TL Kenzo was LLC as the applicant, notice of refusal, project information form,
deed to the property, showing that TL Kenzo LLC is the owner of the property,
and then finally our certificate of tax clearance showing that my client owes no real estate taxes
with respect to the property. I'm going to unshare my screen. I want to ask that Mr.
attorney act virtually raise his hand
uh virtually raised his hand
could you state your name please and spell for court reporter
hi my name is leonard chernyak and the spelling is l-e-o-n-i-d-c-h-e-r-n-y-a-k
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do proceed counsel yeah mr chernyak you heard everything i had to state today regarding your
matter i did and is it true and correct it is and do you adopt it as your own testimony
i do thank you questions from the board no mr chairman
no mr chairman thank you questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no other hands mr chair planning commission thank you chair bergman and members of the board
david fecto city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
commercial mixed use zoning at this location given the configuration of the lot we would
argue that the relief from the dimensional variances of the code is warranted the proposed
transparency at the rear of the lot is likely to benefit the public realm on east cambria street
so we believe that this should be taken into account when deciding on the merits of the case
the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the proposed dimensional variances
thank you MI 2022 005081 2860 Kensington Avenue number TC435854 I vote yes
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number 11, MI 2021, 004-829-5604-06 Utah Street.
Adam Laver is the attorney.
um councilwoman bass is not opposed to the granting of the variance
two letters of support from neighbors and a letter of support from the 12th ward
democratic committee rco with one enforceable proviso
yes good afternoon chairman bergman members of the board
Hi, could you just state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Adam Laver, L-A-B-O-Z-N-V-T-R-E-R, Blancrome, L-L-P, 1 Logan Square, Philadelphia, 19103.
Do you swear or affirm and tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Blancrome represents RFC Holdings Group, LLC, the owner of the subject property.
our vice chair has just a few questions good afternoon council do you agree to waive the
reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy good afternoon mr vice chairman uh yes
i do have you emailed all the required exhibits of yes five days in advance to today okay yes
Proceed to share your screen, and please show your video.
Thank you.
Chairman Bergman and members of the board, as stated, we represent RSC Holdings Group, LLC.
With me today is Ryan Tieford, T-E-A-F-O-R-D.
Lieutenant Tieford is well known in this community.
He is a member of the Philadelphia Police who started his career in the 14th District in Germantown.
And he is now a lieutenant.
In addition to being a well-respected member of the force, he is known in the community.
And it's very nice to have that background going into this type of case.
Also with us today from core design architects is Matt Elson, the architect on this project.
We have submitted an exhibit package with 17 exhibits to counsel for the board.
However, I'm not going to go through all of those exhibits.
The application before the board, as stated, is supported by the coordinating RCO.
RCO, and Councilmember Bass stands behind the community offering her non-opposition.
The photograph on the board shows the subject property here at the rear of Utah Street at
the curve.
I'm going to go through a few photographs to give you a further sense of the property.
I'm going to go through a few photographs to give you a further sense.
Here you see the property on the left-hand side of the screen.
Again, the curve coming around Utah.
And here, a view from the property looking down the street.
Ryan purchased the property about 13 months ago.
here is a zoning map once again showing that curve and the subject property outlined it is
zoned rsa5 single family it's subject to the eighth district overlay within one block of
the property as members of the board can see there's a surrounding mix of cmx1 and icmx
zoning. I'm bringing up now an aerial photograph. And again, to orient you, it's this mass of
trees as we're looking at a vacant lot. We are on a short loop street. This is an atypical RSA 5
property. It's 5,208 square feet in size, whereas adjacent properties on Utah Street, and I'm using
the cursor to indicate the adjacent properties, are approximately 750 square feet in size.
This is an atypical location on an interior corner with minimal street frontage. There's
very limited potential for subdivision, for example. Due to the location of the subject
property on the bend in the street, the property has relatively little frontage. The frontage on
Utah is only about 36 feet. Historically, the site was home to horse stables going back
many years, and the property has been vacant and unimproved for many, many years now. At the time
of purchase, the property was illegally being used for short dumping purposes, unfortunately,
and neighbors have reported that it was an escape route from Utah out to the rear where there's
commercial for drug dealing activities. Immediately upon purchasing the property, Ryan had the site
cleared of garbage, and he's been working with interested neighbors since that time regarding
the proposed transformation of the site. With just the 36 feet of frontage that I mentioned,
and with a 16-foot-wide minimum code requirement for lot width, only two single-family dwellings
would be permitted on this very large lot pursuant to the code. This would be completely
out of scope and scale with the existing 750 or so square foot Utah street homes. Due to the
severely constrained street frontage, single family use by subdivision or otherwise is just
impractical. Here are some additional aerial images that I'd like to share with you. And again,
to orient the board, I'm showing in that bend in the street the massive trees where the subject
property is located. Adjacent uses at the rear of the property where the cursor is include a
Philadelphia Fire Department firehouse and retail sales along a busy commercial Cheldon Avenue.
Utah Street, however, is residential. There are neighbors who are invested in residential living.
and we've worked with them. From a planning perspective, the development team believed early
on that multifamily at this site provides a very appropriate buffer between the commercial activity
that I showed you to the rear and the single family along Utah at the front. Here's another
photograph taken. You can see advanced auto parts here in the foreground. You see the fire station,
the subject property right here in between that retail commercial, the commercial uses,
and the residential along Utah. The original zoning application called for a three-story,
12-unit property. However, we've worked very closely with the community over several months,
also took input from the Planning Commission in revising the proposal before the board.
Here's a conceptual rendering of what I'll discuss with you.
The project has been revised to nine units with three on-site accessory parking spaces
accessed off of Utah Street.
Parking of course is not required and providing parking actually creates a refusal.
Here is the updated notice of refusal.
Number one, RSA 5 single family does not permit the proposed multi-family use.
Additionally, due to Ryan's responsiveness,
Additionally, due to Ryan's responsiveness to the community in providing off-street parking, an additional refusal was generated.
The site does not have access to a rear street or alley. It backs up to the fire station and the commercial.
Therefore, this generates an additional refusal for the front parking, de minimis in nature, due to the unusual location, again, on the short loop street.
I'd also like to set forth for the board that the floor area of the proposed dwelling units is comparable to the floor area of the existing single-family homes on Utah Street.
uh alternatively in an rm1 context as would often be seen in site straddling commercial at the rear
and a transition to single family 11 residential units uh would be permitted on a site of this
size if zoned that rm1 transitional once again mr chairman and members of the board
Ryan is proposing nine units and parking for three cars at the site.
The revised site plan is submitted to the board is up in front of you, showing nine units in this three-story property, three off-street parking spaces, six indoor Class 1A bicycle spaces.
The elevations reflect the three-story nature that I mentioned.
The proposed plans honor the surrounding scale of the neighborhood.
The overall height of what you see before you is proposed at 30 feet 9 inches, well within the RSA 5 scale.
No roof decks are proposed at this site respecting neighboring homes and the nature of the community.
You also see cast stone and brick, brick cornice, cast stone lintel, speaking to the high quality of materials proposed.
Moving to the floor plans. At the first floor off of that bend on Utah Street is a pedestrian-scale
entrance, as you saw in the conceptual rendering. Three parking spaces, including handicapped
accessible, indoor trash storage, indoor bicycle, Class 1A bicycles, handicapped accessibility on
the first floor fitness facility and in the purple color here is one unit on the first floor
at the second and third floors we have a typical for you uh are four apartments per floor the total
number of apartments as presented in the unit matrix materials submitted to ms emerson and the
board uh call for four one bedroom one bath units five two bedroom two bath units again meeting the
size of other homes along the street. This is built by the proposal that comes to you from
a member of the police force, and he's really gearing this towards workforce,
which is appreciated by the community. The 12th Ward Democratic Committee has recognized the
reduction in unit count, the addition of off-street parking, indoor trash storage, the placement of
bicycle parking indoors for security purposes for their request, lighting and security, and in
addition to that, a commitment to supply information and education to tenants regarding
the mass transit options that are a vital part of the Germantown community.
There are additional expressions of near-neighbor support as submitted to the board and in the package shared with you.
Mr. Chairman and members of the board, the authorization of variance relief will not alter the character of the neighborhood or district or be detrimental to the public welfare.
The proposal fits into the surrounding neighborhood as evidenced by the collaborative process that led to the refined proposal before you with the direct involvement of the organized community.
The proposed variance would represent the minimum variance that will afford relief and will represent the least modification possible of the regulations at issue.
We spoke about the limited street frontage. We spoke about the square footage of the proposed
units and how they relate to the neighboring homes. The grant of variance relief will not
substantially increase congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire or otherwise
endanger the public health safety or general welfare. Based on the recent history of this
property redevelopment at this location uh will be transformative and for the better
this will not inversely affect transportation or unduly burden water sewer school park or other
This will not adversely affect transportation or unduly burdened water, sewer, school, park, or other public facilities.
There are no environmental issues.
Ryan is available to raise his virtual hand.
We have the architect available, and the full team is pleased to answer any questions the board may have.
Why don't we adopt your testimony with the owner?
Thank you.
Ryan Tieford, would you kindly raise your virtual hand to be sworn in?
I'm about to speak.
Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Good afternoon, everyone.
My name is Ryan Tieford, R-Y-A-N-T-E-A-F-O-R-D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Lieutenant Tieford, have you been here for the pendency, the entire pendency of the presentation in this matter?
Yes, I have.
Were you able to clearly hear the statements that I made on the record?
Yes, I was.
And would you adopt and affirm them as your own?
Yes, I do.
Thank you, sir.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Thomas?
Thomas?
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Ms. Cheryl Smith with her hand raised.
I have allowed her to speak at this time.
hi miss smith could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
cheryl smith c-h-e-r-y-l smith smith do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor no i'm um 12th word rco okay good thank you
Okay. I just wanted to weigh in on Mr. Laver's comments that Mr. Teeford, he worked with the community. He knocked on doors. He incorporated the neighbors in cleaning up the property and keeping the property clean.
He offered them his phone number. He worked very hard to bring this project to a neighborhood that, for my purposes, needs something there that was vacant.
And even after he cleaned it up a few times, people kept dumping on it. He had it cleaned up again.
And he was very, very available to myself and to the neighbors and the neighbors that attended.
And his meetings were his meetings were in person.
We actually met on the property during COVID and because it was such a spread out area, we were able to basically see everything that he was trying to do.
and he made all those concessions that the neighbors were looking for.
So I, you know, I think that the neighbors thought that it was a good idea
because at this point it's just been a terrible sight for them.
Ms. Smith, thank you very much for calling in.
We appreciate it.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No further hands, Mr.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair Bergman, David Fecto,
City Planning Commission, Mr. Chairman and members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends
no change to the single-family zoning at this location. The property is configured with relatively
little street frontage for its size, which presents a physical hardship. Given the lot area of roughly
5,000 square feet, we believe a more appropriate variance would be for four dwelling units.
Accordingly, the City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the variances
with the condition that no more than four dwelling units be permitted.
Mr. Laver, do you want to respond?
Whether you look at the property itself under the RSA 5 zoning district with 5,208 square feet or RM1,
And the proposed nature, Mr. Chairman, of these units, ranging from 642 square feet up from there, all within the same amount, 700, 800, et cetera, really is in keeping with the scope and scale of the immediate surrounding area.
And for that reason, and with the investment of the near neighbors, we believe that this is a very.
And with the investment of the near neighbors, we believe that this is a very reasonable proposal that meets the zoning code.
Thank you. Mr. Holloman, are you on?
Mr. Holloman?
So, Mr. Laver, I think I'm going to have to hold the vote until next week.
um i only have one other board member that's on do we have our alternate still
is was he listening in i believe he's still on the line okay here we would be grateful as
possible mr chairman but i defer to you okay is our alternate one yes he is chair the baron here
chairman okay so just so you know lebron leonard palmer is an alternate that we're using from the
planning commission so mi 2021 004 829 5604 to 06 utah street i vote yes with proviso interior trash
storage, and per mended refusal, dated 10-8-22.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
LeBaron Leonard Palmer, vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, Mr. Laver.
You have your three votes.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Have a good afternoon.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience from the 2 p.m. group that was not called?
Okay, so we're going to take a five-minute break.
You want to come back and we're going to go through the 3.30 list, okay?
Okay, Jeff.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
How are we doing?
Mr. Thomas, are you back?
Yes, I'm back.
Thomas, good.
Court reporter, are you available? Yes, ma'am. I'm here.
port reporter are you available yes ma'am
Okay, Chair, and we are already recording, so we can start our 3.30.
Start recording.
Yeah, we are already recording, Chair. You can start. Thank you.
Good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's meeting.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid. He's here. He's here. Our Board Member, Thomas Holliman. Thank you. Our Board Member, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chair.
And also working with us today is LeBaron Leonard Palmer from Development Services.
Also present is our board attorney, Hillary Emerson, and Lakeisha Dandy, our ZBA hearing
supervisor. Before we begin, here's our virtual format. Be advised to proceed as you're being
recorded. By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. The video is available
by contacting TanyaSunkett at phil.gov. For the benefit of our court stenographer,
we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying. If you're
participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to
unmute. To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548. Leave your email and the address
of the property in question. And finally, the question answer box on the screen is now for
comments or testimony. Any comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sumkin.
Here's our continuances for this afternoon. Number two, MI 2022-005-152-1324 North 15th Street,
that case is continued. Number six, MI 2022-005-194-6106 Oxford Avenue, that case is continued,
attorney moving party. Is there any questions relative to those two cases in the virtual
audience good evening mr chair this is jason hand i do not see any hands raised at this time
okay thank you um we also is there any other requests for continuances
once again answer no hands okay so case number one mi 2022
222-005-148-8501 Tarsdale Avenue. That case is withdrawn. And I still have a case that's
no exhibits. MI number three, MI 2022-005-175-400-Gilham.
first listing we don't do not have any exhibits
john fang is one of the attorneys
no and a person question does not appear to be in the virtual audience this evening sir
There's no questions? No hands? No, sir. Okay. So number three, MI 2022, 005175, 400 Gilham Street. That case is continued. It was the first listing.
We're going to go to the list now. Number four, MI-2022-005-172-180 Green Lane. William O'Brien is the attorney. Recommendation support from the Maniunk Neighborhood Council. And also, applicant has two letters of support from near neighbors.
Mr. O'Brien.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. O'Brien, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
William O'Brien, O-B-R-I-E-N, on behalf of Joseph Gijunis, G-I-D-J-U-N-I-S.
Right.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. Our Vice Chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all of the required documents five days in advance?
Yes, I do.
Can you proceed with this hearing?
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
my screen is being shared can you see it it's up it's up yeah great so the refusal is on the
screen now this is for 180 green lane it's uh uh right in the heart of maniunk uh on the steep
one of the steepest hills in Philadelphia. It's a corner property. It is currently zoned as a
two-family dwelling. Several years ago, in 2014, the owner began operating his photography business
out of his home. He believed that that was permitted. He received a violation notice and
filed an application to legalize his home-based business, and that is why we're here today.
152 notices were sent to near neighbors about the RCO meeting and this hearing.
Mr. DeJunas also informed his immediate neighbors of this hearing and the request he was making.
The RCO meeting was held at the next page, page three, shows its unanimous support for the grant of the variance.
The neighbor across the street, Northlake Community Center,
of all respect, the community center that was founded in 1936.
Krista Widener, the executive director, sent a letter in support.
That is part of the package on page four.
The immediate neighbor, the other half of the semi-detached structure,
also sent his letter in support.
This is the building.
That's the view from Green Lane. It's a three-story structure.
The next picture is looking towards Green Lane, showing the side of the building.
And another view from Green Lane looking back.
These are interior photographs showing the area on the first floor that is being used
to support the photography business.
This is, here's the front door.
It's off of an enclosed porch.
This is an area that is used by some of his associates,
Mr. Jejunis' associates.
It is used for editing photographs,
editing videos, scheduling things with clients.
No client comes to the office.
There's no photography or videography that's done in the office.
The next room on the first floor is the owner's office that he uses, again, for client contact, administrative matters, and scheduling.
And then the room after that is the kitchen of the first floor, which he and his associates use for coffee and lunch.
I included the zoning archives. As I said, the current use was granted by VARIANCE in 1986. It's a two-family dwelling. It is still configured as a two-family dwelling.
And the prior use that was granted by VARIANCE was a doctor's office on the first floor and a one-family dwelling on the second and third.
um i don't know that i have much more to offer um be happy to ask answer any questions
why don't we have your testimony adopted mr o'brien uh i could ask mr dejunas to raise his hand
i'm here hi could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
yes joseph gijunas j-o-s-e-p-h last name gijunas g-i-d-j-u-n-i-s as in sam
right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Yes, I do.
I see counsel.
Mr. Juggins, did you hear the testimony that I just offered to the board about your business and your home?
I did.
Was it truthful and accurate?
Yes, it is.
And do you adopt it as your own?
Yes, I do.
Questions from the board?
no mr chairman no mr chairman mr chair i just have a quick question mr o'brien is this the
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman.
property being configured at or will be used as two-family household living plus the office or
the office replacing one of the dwelling units well the configuration as i indicated uh has not
changed uh it is still configured as a two-family dwelling the first floor is complete with the
kitchen full-service kitchen that has not been dismantled in any way and a bathroom so under
existing pennsylvania law a non-conforming use is abandoned if there's if there's a demonstrated
intent to abandon and that is usually shown by changing the configuration of the non-conforming
uh use so as i said nothing here has been the configuration has not changed it is still
configured as a two-family dwelling it's just that two of the rooms on the first floor are being used
to support this home-based business so in that particular department he has his office too is
what you're saying yes he uses the i can this is the office that the owner uses on the first floor
to support it and then his associates use this area the first room off the front door uh to edit
and uh to edit photography the rest of that first floor is also apartment living yes there's a
kitchen and a bathroom and okay hillary is that good uh i think i believe that's fine yes thank
you all right uh questions from the virtual audience
no further hands mr planning commission it's uh ron bednar city planning first name ron
r-o-n last name bednar b-e-d-n-a-r you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
but the truth i do proceed ryan while this uh property is currently indicated for residential
on the city plan given the documented use history we have no objection to the granting of the
variance thank you mi 2022 005 172 180 green lane i vote yes thomas holloman my vote is yes
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes
that's your votes mr o'brien thank you thank you mr chairman may i'm excused yes you can
have a great day all right number five mi 2022 005 118 27 13 east huntington street
mr knockamson is the attorney we have letter of opposition from old richmond civic association
letter of opposition from council member squilla the applicant provided a
petition signed by 38 people in favor
we were joining as a panel sir okay
good afternoon mr chair members of the board now right mr knockams you already been sworn could
you identify your client relationship to this property? Yeah, it's 2713 E Huntington Street LLC
and the virtual audience is Diana Abdo Rockmonova, who is the member of that LLC.
And our vice chair has just a few questions. Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive
the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy? I do. Excuse me. Have you emailed all
the required exhibits five days in advance to this hearing oh yes we have thank you please proceed
and share your screen thanks all right so i'm here to present 2713 east huntington street
we'll go over the notice of refusal the correspondence from the old richmond civic
association i'll note that it was not a well-attended community meeting only three
individuals participated in it um you know we'll in exhibit four i'll skip over we made a concerted
effort to to meet members of the community and we have a petition which was well circulated and
signed by members of this community uh we'll also view uh nearby multi-family variances this board
has granted on east huntington street maps of the area where you'll see that this is not solely a
single family street. You'll see that there's commercial nearby as well. Photographs of the
property in the surrounding area. Of particular note, you'll see photographs of the interior of
this property. Similar to my presentation this morning, unfortunately, when a client
Unfortunately, when a client or someone purchases a property, when they do further due diligence and given the situation with dilapidated properties, they discover more issues with those properties.
or someone purchases a property, when they do further
And here is a similar situation in addition to the fact that we have exorbitant construction material costs that have gone up over the years, plus rising interest rates.
it just would be not it would not be feasible to to make this a single family uh house and we'll go
over that uh we'll review the plans and drawings uh our rco meeting notice or proof of mailing that
notice uh again not a very well attended event only uh or meeting only three people voted and
you'll see uh their reasoning why they are not in support of this project or application for
appeal or deeds of property and their certificate of tax credits. At the conclusion of my presentation,
I would ask that my client's corporate representative adopt my testimony. We'll go
into a little further testimony or confirmation of some aspects of it regarding how much my client
has paid for it, how much it would cost to convert this or to use this single family home versus
is how much she can sell it for or rent it for. In addition, I have her contractor as well,
Kadir Sesla, a licensed contractor in the city of Philadelphia and in Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
who will confirm the numbers that he gave her, which we'll rely upon. So first things first,
this notice of refusal, 2713 East Huntington Street. This is an RSA by property. It's
rather large in size from a lot size perspective, 1,190 square feet. So we're not talking about
a tiny lot here. Originally, my client was looking to simply renovate this property.
But then she discovered that there were issues with the foundation where whether it's single
family or multifamily, she would have to demolish the building structure. And it just would be
cost prohibitive to make this into a single family. But the proposed use is a demolition
of the property and two household family living. Again, you'll see from maps of the area and the
surrounding area that it's not uncommon what we're asking for. And then we did meet with the
old Richmond Civic Association. It was an in-person meeting. Sometimes with these in-person
means it's more difficult for people to get there nowadays um but again they stated from you know
three people voted only uh not in support of it uh the you know their reasoning had nothing to do
from a zoning related standpoint uh it was a it's a simple letter but we'll focus on uh papers uh
sentences two and three they believe the residents who did both they believe it was it will attract
residents who are not invested in the neighborhood we are looking to make these into condos so i'm
not sure what what they mean by that um again our intention is to sell these units and to have a
diversity of housing where uh people could afford housing uh in this neighborhood um and they would
become residents invested in the neighborhood this the last letter the last sentence the letter said
they also worried that the demolition the existing property will create problems for their own
property and structure next door whether it's single family or multi-family unfortunately given
the the integrity issues with the building structure nothing this property can't be renovated
um and it's going to have to be torn the building structure is going to have to be torn down
um and you know we try to discuss that with the residents giving them some comfort trying to make
them an additional insured giving more information but um i don't know if they understood and maybe
in the virtual audience now um what we're trying to do and you know how it would be no different
whether it's a single family structure or a two unit dwelling uh again only three individuals uh
voted um at this meeting which had 20 attendees there were other projects there there's a one
only one other project there uh which was obviously you know so 17 other people were
for this other project only three people were for our project uh so clearly there was not much
interest from this community regarding our project and then just give me an example of uh multi-family
structures in close proximity this property on salmon street is a half a block away from us at
2672. As you can see, the zoning board granted a similar two-family dwelling there under calendar
number 2878. Also, I was part of a project on that same block at 2653 Salmon Street, which was
an eight-family dwelling, which the board also granted multifamily use there.
which the board also granted multifamily use there.
So there are multiple instances close by of multifamily.
And then you can see my client really made a concerted effort.
So we have 33 addresses, one of us.
And you can see that we really did try to focus on the affected area.
So addresses within a 250 square foot radius.
And we have 32 addresses that signed in support of this project.
And then these are the underlying petition with those signatures.
And then maps in the area, you'll see from the Google map perspective a little bit better.
But East Huntington is not solely residential.
There's a charter school that's across the street.
You'll see here, there's a shopping center close by, a couple blocks off.
And then you'll see also that we're not that far from the 95 Okra Pass.
So this is not strictly a residential neighborhood.
And, you know, because of that, we're asking.
And you can also see Salmon Street here where those multifamily structures I discussed previously.
So this is not strictly a single-family area.
And then you can see from here, there's a big shopping center here. There's a shopping center here. There's the school here. There's a business across the street. So East Huntington is not just solely a single-family area, and there's close-by multifamily as well.
and then photographs of their property as you can see here this is the building structure
unfortunately it's going to have to come down one way or the other just the issue is my client's
not going to afford to build anything here because of the marketing conditions here's the proof of
posting up for today's hearing and then i just want to give you context here this is east huntington
across the street as you can see here this is the charter school and then east huntington to
left of the property and then just give me your photographs of the interior of the property as
you can see there's this is a property that has been vacant for some time
and then my client is uh you know a developer that focuses on putting together a nice product
I always like to give examples of bathrooms, kitchens, things like that.
So you have an idea of what hopefully you'll be looking at once this project is complete.
And then our plans and drawings.
We have no dimensional variances here.
And we're very mindful of keeping in line from a dimensional standpoint with the character of the neighborhood.
so we're not trying to overuse the property anyway even though we can build 38 feet in height
we're only trying to build 30 feet six inches there's also a breezeway here that gives the
benefit of garbage storage and removal from the back to the front of the property so that's a
responsible way for trash storage and management and then again it's simple floor plan there's
two by two by level units unit number one is on the first floor and lower level unit number two
is on the second and third floors and then again this is our hearing or community meeting notice
136 addresses were notified only three people showed up to this community meeting but we've
received over 30 signatures within that 136 addresses and these are the list of the addresses
addresses uh proof of mailing of those addresses and then proof of email to uh the coordinating
RCO and other parties that were required to send notice to and there are applications for appeal
that is sent that was filed by 2713 East Huntington Street LLC along with the notice refusal
the project information form of deeds of property showing that they are the owner of the property
And it proves that they owe no money. Well, they owe money, but for 20, 2023, which those taxes are not due until March 31st of 2023. With that being said, I would ask that Diana virtually raise her hand.
Can I ask the question first? On the side of the street, 2713 is on. Are there other multiple family houses?
No, there is not, Mr. Chair. But I did see that in 2016, this same board granted a duplex for 2727 East Huntington Street on January 12th of 2016 under calendar number 25869.
under calendar number uh 25869 i looked at atlas it didn't i'm not 100 sure that building structure
was built there's no rental licenses but this board under similar circumstances did grant a
variance uh and there is a commercial property next door to us uh or at the corner and next to
us there's a garage all right all right thank you you're welcome you got your owner there coming
So, Diana, can you virtually raise your hand?
And if you're still in the virtual audience, please raise your hand and wait to be sworn
I know I spoke to her earlier today.
I know that it's a 3.30 listing.
So is Kadir Cecily in the virtual audience?
he's the congeneral contractor yes he's raised to send i've allowed him to speak
could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
but dear cesley k-a-d-i-r-s-e-s-l-i
okay do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do sir proceed counsel uh yes mr cesley um you're a licensed uh contractor
in the city of philadelphia as well as the commonwealth of pennsylvania right yes and what's
the name of your company rs23 llc okay and you had a chance to visit the property in question
yes i did okay uh and my understanding originally the project was supposed to be a renovation
project is that right yes that's right i been to the property with diana and they wanted to do
renovation in there and we've been to inside and unfortunately the roof was damaged and then it was
vacant for a really long time so there was a lot of water damage and it make a big damage on the
structure and it was really building old times and then the foundation of the property was not
really good so it needs to be a lot of work done in the structure so based on your estimate how
much and and because of the significant foundational issues um the building structure has to be torn
down is that right yes uh it was because it's really dangerous so it's always safer to knock
it down okay so what's the estimated cost to demolish the property as well as building a
single family house there it's approximately like two hundred ninety thousand dollars and
this is not including my fee it's just the built okay what so we make it easier what what would be
like all in uh if you had to you know give a price today 320 000 okay so 320 000 um i don't think i
have any further questions uh from mr cecily i do know that my client is trying to get on
so i think she would she try one more time jason brandon i have allowed her to speak sir okay
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
I think she's muted.
Diana, you have to unmute yourself.
Hi, can you hear me now?
Hi, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
diana abdurakmanova d-i-a-n-a last name a-b-d-u-r-a-k-h-m-o-n-o-v-a
do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes proceed counsel all right thank you um diana um we just heard from mr cecily
that it would cost $320,000 to demolish the current building structure and to erect a new
one. Is that correct that he conveyed that to you? Yes. Okay. And how much did you purchase
the property for? We purchased the property with all the closing costs included, rounds up to $213,000.
dollars. Okay. So between those two costs, the $213,000 as well as the $320,000, we're at $533,000.
Now, Diana, you're also a licensed realtor, right? Correct. Okay. So in your professional opinion,
Correct.
So in your professional opinion, how much would you be able to sell a single-family home at that location if constructed the way you intend to?
how much
So based on all the comps in the area, ground-up new construction, the sale value is approximately mid-400s to 500s.
Okay, so which exceeds the amount of money that you would have spent on construction as well as the acquisition.
Now, in addition to that, you also have had carrying costs over the time period in which you've been dealing with this issue, right?
Yes, so because of the structural damage to the property, we had to do the foundation.
We had to reinforce the foundation because when we purchased the property, it was purchased at a mortgage sale.
We were not allowed to enter the premises prior to the purchase.
Once we acquired it, we had an engineer that surveyed the property who told us that we need to reinforce the foundation in order to stabilize the structure.
Aside from that, the roof had a huge leak, which ended up leaking over to the property on the right side, which we also had to patch up just to prevent further damage to the property.
In that case, it created a lot of damage to the framing of the house.
And in the photos, you can see the floors are significantly tilted because the house sagged on one side because of the foundation, plus everything else is highly damaged due to the water leak.
So I guess my question was more so financially, how much money have you spent in carrying costs and maintenance for this property since purchasing it?
Since the purchase, $25,000.
All right. So from $533,000, we're up to another $25,000, which is $558,000. Now, if you sold it
for $500,000 in property, you would be running a deficit, but then you also have to pay a realtor,
right? Correct. We would have to pay commission. So even if you were the realtor, you still would
have more likely not a realtor on the other side, which you have to pay commission. Yes.
So even 3%, you're at $15,000 more. And you also would have to pay closing costs, which includes half of your transfer taxes.
Yes. Even if I forfeit my commission, we still fall underwater.
Yeah. So there's no way that you can sell this house without losing a lot of money. Is that correct?
Correct.
okay what about renting the property um how much would you be able to get from renting the
property if you built it as a single family as a single family three bedroom three bathroom
it's 2500 maximum a month plus including carrying costs which is maintenance and taxes that and
insurance that we will be inquiring as well so you can get a rent of 2500 if you built it the way
you would need to, how much would your carrying cost be to do that per month?
Per month? I'll tell you right now, one second. Monthly carrying costs will be around $800.
How much?
$800 monthly.
No, I meant like the cost of acquisition, the cost of construction. How much would you be paying
in mortgage payments and everything per month if you're buying if you're renting it for $2,500
what are your carrying costs I don't have that number available
okay but is it more than the $2,500 it's more it comes out more okay um I think when we spoke
you indicated there was a number of like $3,200 when you did the numbers plus there would be the
insurance and taxes, which would be an additional $500, right? Yes. So it would be like $3,700
as your monthly maintenance for that property. And you can only rent it for $2,500. So you'd
be running a deficit every single month if you had this as a single family. Yes. And you base
these numbers on your review of the multiple listing service? Correct. For both rental and
and purchases right rental and purchases and with other projects that i have done in the philadelphia
area well thank you so much i appreciate your time all right thank you questions from the board no mr
chairman no mr chairman what should your comments from the virtual
no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
do not see any further hands mr chair planning
planning commission
sorry ron bednar city planning properties indicated for residential use on the city
plan or adopted district plan recommends no change the existing zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances that
would prevent it from being used in conformity with the code. The proposal does not represent
the least minimum relief therefore we recommend the request for variance not be granted.
MI 2022-005-118-2713-East Huntington Street, I vote no.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no. Thank you. Thank you, counsel.
Number seven, MI-2022-002-549-3460 J Street.
Sean Ward is the attorney.
Letter of support from IMPACT.
Letter of non-opposition from Council Member of Lozada.
Back in as a panelist.
uh my apologies mr chair my uh phone started ringing off my hip uh as the as i was being uh
up you know uh upgraded to a panelist uh sean ward on behalf of the applicant my name is spelled s-h-a-w-n
last name w-a-r-d address 331 east street road trivos pa 19053 do you swear affirm and tell
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i certainly do could you identify your client
and their relationship to the property uh i'm sorry chair this is the uh i got cut off is this
tioga or j street this is j street okay all right i represent 3450 j street llc which is the owner
of the property known as 3460 j street subject to this calendar number mi 2022 002549 and present
with me today, I have George Groves, that's G-E-O-R-G-E, last name Groves, G-R-O-V-E-S,
a representative of 3450 J Street, LLC. All right, our vice chair has just a few questions.
By all means.
yes good afternoon counsel do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy i certainly do have you emailed all the required exhibits into our office five days in
advance to this hearing yes i did thank you please proceed and share your screen thank you very much
Mr. Chair, can we confirm my screen is shared?
It is.
Okay, excellent.
I have submitted my typical exhibit and summary of relief.
Again, I represent 3450 J Street LLC for the subject property at 3460 J Street LLC, which as a side note, there was a subdivision.
The original property was known at 3450 and we subdivided it and now it's known as 3460 at the aforementioned calendar number.
However, we filed an application for the creation of four tenant spaces for business and professional offices and a personal services, which is a salon, together with the accessory storage at the basement on the same lot with all other previously approved uses.
The application resulted in two refusals, business and professional office and personal
services are not permitted in the district, so we seek the use variance today, and that
use variance today. And that is all referenced in Exhibit A1, which is the Notice of Refusal.
is all referenced in Exhibit A1, which is the
Hang on a second. All right. A2 is the ZBA Application of Appeal. A3 is the Project
Information Form. A4 is Proof of Ownership. And A5 is the Proof of Tax Clearance, all of which
required with the application and appeal process. A6 is a site plan. A7 is a key plan and use
schedule. A8 are the photographs, including postings, subject property, and street views.
Most importantly, I would submit A9 as the letter of support from Impact CDC, which is the assigned
RCO. A10, if submitted, would be a letter from Councilman Squilla. I believe that's his district.
I did not receive personally a copy of that letter, but I am counsel.
Counsel person Lozada. Oh, I'm sorry.
And we have a letter of non-opposition. Oh, excellent. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And very briefly, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm going to talk. Yeah, we do have a letter.
I'm sorry. She's on both your cases. We do have a letter of non-opposition.
Excellent. Thank you so much for noting that on the record.
As far as the relevant zoning history, the redevelopment of this corner has gone back to 2017, where we were granted a permit for the erection of an attack structure 60 feet high with 18 dwelling units.
In 2019, it was the relocation of the lot lines, as I mentioned earlier, separating 3450 from 3460 J Street.
In 2019, a permit was issued for 24 dwelling units and a vacant commercial space at the first floor.
In 2021, we came back with a daycare center at the first floor and basement.
In 2021, another unity of use for 3450 and 3460, together with 1046 Tioga Street, was permitted.
And then in September of 21, we received approval for the sixth floor addition together with, again, the vacant commercial space at the first floor and basement because tenants had not been identified.
So A-12 is the zoning map and A-13 is the aerial photo.
So, again, just moving through the exhibits, again, the property is zoned RM1 and I2.
The refusal was dated in March of last year for the property at 24 J Street.
And, again, it resulted in two variance refusals.
Business and professional office are prohibited, again, because it's RM2 and I2.
And the other use proposed personal service, a physical fitness gym, is prohibited in the district.
We submitted with our packet the application of appeal, the project information form, and of course, my transmittal letter.
Here is a copy of the deed recorded October 31st, 2019, for the property at 34 J Street.
Moving on, tax clearance.
Again, taxes are paid through 2022.
As Alan represented in his past presentations, these taxes are not due until March 31st.
However, the majority of the taxes have been paid, as you can see, a credit for $5,280, and there's a balance of $354 due and owing.
With regard to the site plan, this property is bounded by East Tioga at the top of the plan and J Street at the side of the plan.
When we look at the floor plans, we're speaking of four units that have previously been designated on the ground floor, but now we are seeking the variances for these four units.
C1A, C1B, and C1C, I believe, are the business professional offices and C2.
I believe, are the business professional offices, and C2 is the personal services, the spa, I mean, the physical fitness center.
So in our application, we also included a key plan and schedule.
So again, C1A, C1B, and C1C are for office use, business, and professional, together with C2, which is the personal services.
I'm sorry, it's a salon.
There you go.
The others have been, they're existing previously approved uses.
So we're not here about the other uses.
This was a posting.
Everybody still seeing my exhibits?
This was our original posting for the hearing, which was continued.
This is the subsequent posting for today's hearing.
As you can see, it's located on the front window of the site.
Here is a photo of the building in question from the Tioga Street view.
This would be a picture from the corner of J Street, which is going from bottom center, upper left, and bottom center, upper right, representing J Street and Tioga.
Tioga. This picture just represents a walkway in between 3460 and what is now known as 3450 J
Street. Across the street, Mr. Chair, is 1100 East Tioga, which is the subject of the next
hearing, I believe, which my client
has since acquired, and
I just gave this for reference as to what it appeared
back when we were granted a variance to
extend the beer distributor out to the street frontage.
Okay. We also have
a view of Tioga Street to the west.
This is the Scanlon Playground, well-known in the Irish community, I might say.
And again, Tioga Street facing east towards Kensington Avenue, and you can see the elevated
Frankfort Market line.
Again, the Tioga Beverage, which has since vacated, sold the premises to the same principal of our owner on this project.
Here is the letter of support from Impact Services.
As you can see, it's dated September 22nd.
Unanimous support due to our meeting on 9-21.
And then not to belabor, but attached from here on in are all of the zoning permits evidencing the zoning history.
This here is the zoning map.
As you can see, our property, which is shaded with the RM1, is adjacent to the I2.
2 over here on RM1, this corner is 1100 East Tioga, which is subject of the next application.
But variances have been granted along with permits for the use of those properties.
This is a Google Aerial. Prior to construction, as you can see, it was a vacant lot.
Scanlon Playground is located across the street.
Tioga Beverage, the 1100 East Tioga Street is located right across the street.
So basically, this square was subdivided from the entire parcel.
This is now known as the J Street loss, which is 3450 J Street, and we are 3460 J Street, however, owned by same applicants.
That is all I have to present to the board at this time.
If the board has any questions.
your owner with you do you want to yeah i would ask that george groves a representative of the
owner uh be allowed to speak sir could you state your name and spell it please for the court reporter
george groves g-e-o-r-g-e-g-r-o-v-e-s right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the
Right. Do you swear, affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth?
whole truth nothing but the truth yes sir
Nothing but the truth.
Yes, sir.
Proceed, counsel.
George, have you heard my representations to the board this afternoon?
Are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
And are they true and accurate?
And you adopt them as your own testimony?
Yes, sir.
Awesome. Thank you very much.
Questions from the board?
no Mr. Chairman no Mr. Chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
I do not see any further hands Mr. Chairman I'm planning commission
it's Ron Bednar city planning the property is currently split zone for residential and
industrial use on the city plan the adopted comprehensive plan recommends a change in the
zoning for this property to industrial and commercial mixed use under that recommend recommended
zoning the proposed business and professional offices and personal services would be
would be permitted as of right therefore we recommend that the request of fairness be granted
thank you mi2022-002-549-3460 j street i vote yes thomas holliman my vote is yes
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes thank you thank you council stay i'm right here i 2022 005089
1100 east tayoga street mr ward again we also have a letter of support from impact and a letter
of non-opposition from council member lazada could you please identify your client and the
relationship to the property. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Once again, for the record,
my name is Sean Ward, S-H-A-W-N, last name Ward, W-A-R-D, attorney for applicant. My address is
331 East Street Road, Trivos, PA19053. And present with me today is George Groves,
g-r-o-v-e-s representative of the property owner
our vice chair has just a few questions excellent
do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy
yes i do mr vice chair thank you uh have you emailed all of the required exhibits into our
offices five days in advance to this hearing. Yes, I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Before I do that, I am remiss. I did not congratulate you on
your elevation to vice chair last week. And I wish you all the
success.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman and members of the board. Again, I share my
typical exhibit packet which you wait a minute am i sharing and can you see it that's that's a 1100
tioga yeah yeah we're good okay thank you you know remotely you never know
I thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Again, this is my typical exhibit packet always submitted to the board. I represent 1083 East Tioga LLC, which owns the property at 1100 East Tioga at today's calendar number.
However, we are here for a permit for a sit down restaurant in an existing structure.
Unfortunately, the property is zoned as RM1, multifamily residential, and therefore a variance is required.
A2 is the ZBA application of appeal.
A3 is the project information form.
A4 is the copy of Proof of Ownership, the deed.
We have proof of tax compliance.
A6 is a site map.
A7 is a floor plan.
A8 are photographs of the subject property, aerial views, street views.
Most importantly is the A9 RCO letter of support from Impact CDC.
I inadvertently labeled this as Councilman Squales District.
But I would ask that the district council letter that has been previously submitted to the board be marked as a tent.
With regard to relevant zoning history, I was involved in this property, not back in 1980, but there was a variance granted for a beard.
Not back in 1980, but there was a variance granted for a beer distributor at this site.
Back in 2013, I successfully brought an application to the board with the support of the community for a one story front addition to a beer distributor.
However, that use has vacated and my client has purchased the property.
understandably because he's got the
large development right across the street.
A-12 is the zoning map and A-13 is the
aerial photo.
So not to belabor the point, let me
again, tax clearance were paid through 2020.
There is a balance due for
2023, which is not due yet until March 31st.
The property
is located at the corner of East Tioga and Chase Street.
The aforementioned case, which we just presented, was directly across the street.
With regard to the floor plan, I am, Mr. Chair, going to revert this sideways.
because it's it'd be easier to
uh so basically a brazilian uh themed restaurant uh we have the front entry there is seating for
36 patrons there is a hostess and cashier counter located directly behind that and
And behind the seating area is the kitchen, obviously with the ranges and all the accessories.
There is a due to the construction of the building.
There is a small elevation up to where the office would be.
And in the rear, there is an employee restroom so as not to interfere with the patrons and
guests.
well sorry
this is the current front of the uh property uh the yellow paint has been since removed
and and covered with a gray primer until the uh owners and operators at a restaurant decide on
exterior accoutrements, as you would say.
Copy of our zoning poster for today's hearing.
This is a Google aerial
of the subject.
Again, it had been painted in the yellow paint.
This is my client's adjoining property across the street.
As you can see here, this is the front of the property from Google.
A view of the side from Google, again, referencing the gray primer just to get rid of the yellow color paint, which I believe some found garish.
this is the um impact rco uh zoning uh rco letter dated january 13th unanimous support
and our meeting was held on january 12th and then this would just be another uh aerial view
of the property again we own the property across the street across the street is scanlon playground
And that is all I have.
So why don't we have your testimony adopted again?
One more time.
All right, George, are you available?
Hello.
Yeah, George, you've already been sworn, so just you can testify.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
All right, Mr. Groves, you've heard my representations to the board this afternoon?
And you have thoroughly reviewed my exhibit packet and the plans as submitted, correct?
Are you true and correct?
Do you adopt them as your own testimony?
Yes, sir.
Very good.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no other hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission?
Sorry, Ron Bednar, City Planning.
While the property is currently indicated for residential,
on the city plan, given the documented use history,
we have no objection to the granting of the variance.
Thank you.
MI 2022-005-089-1100 East Tioga Street.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, I vote yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Members of the board, have a great evening.
Thank you.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose 330 case has not been heard?
I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair.
Thanks, everyone.
A lot of good work today.
Thank you.
I appreciate what everybody did.
have a good night all right good job good job thank you thank you good night everyone thank you
good night good night