Thank you.
Chair, we have 35 attendees and we can start.
Thank you.
Good morning.
My name is Bill Bergman and I will be chairing this morning's EBA hearings.
With me is our Vice -Chair Ismail Saeed, Thomas Holliman, our Board Member, and James Snell, our Board Member.
Also here is Hilary Emerson, our Attorney, and our Executive Director, Tanya Sunke.
Here's a virtual format. Be advised if proceedings are being recorded.
The video will be available by contacting tonyasunkett at phila .gov.
For the benefit of our court sonographer, 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 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 what we have in continuances today.
So number four, MI 2022 -006 -112 -4226 Otter Street, this case is continued.
We have one other request for continuance.
Number 10, MI 2022 -006 -163 -5805 East Worcester Street.
Michael McElhenney is the attorney.
Could he please come on?
And also Mr. Charles Richardson from Councilperson Bass's office.
Could he please come on?
Mr. McElhenney
They've been allowed to speak, sir
Good morning, this is Jason Hand
They've been allowed to speak
Can you hear me, Mr. Chairman?
I can, could you state your name, please
and spell for the court reporter
Michael McElhenney
M -I -C -H -A -E -L
m -c -i -l -h -i -n -n -e -y right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do we've received the request this morning a recommendation for a
continuance i'm waiting for the council person's office mr richardson
mr richardson you're available to speak can you hear me good morning sir could you state your
name and and please spell for the court reporter good morning mr chair charles richardson office
of councilwoman cindy bass room 508 city hall r -i -c -h -a -r -d -s -o right do you swear or for him
to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth mr richardson
i think we lost him he's still here chair i'm not i'm not sure what's going on with this audio
mr richardson
mr richardson if you're still in the audience please come back in or raise your hand
council will be with you in one minute yeah he came back he went out sir but
i think he's going to come back in
all right his hand is raised oh good thank you i'm back oh good good did you did you hear when i
do you swear from tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do okay um
miss emerson's going to read a letter and then we'll have a discussion
thank you mr chair this letter is um from a concerned community association
Dear Mr. Bergman, as reported by the FCDC, the coordinator.
Dear Mr. Bergman, as reported by the FCDC, the coordinating RCO for this appeal, there were no neighbors present from the impacted neighbors list.
Members of a concerned community association, RCO, heard and later reviewed the presentation by this applicant, along with representation from Bellfield area neighbors.
Although the nearest blocks to this property may be too distressed to render participation
at an RCO meeting, ACCA RCO feels that this proposed use affects too many areas of the
community to move forward without allowing input from other near -community stakeholders
who are extremely interested and concerned.
A request was made to the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass to support a continuance to allow
a greater scope of community members to communicate their thoughts and work with
this applicant. The proposed use of this property greatly will impact not only local
residential blocks, but also LaSalle University, Belfield Recreation Center, LaSalle Shopping
Center. Greatly impacted will also be daily traffic patterns to Central High School,
Pinnell Elementary School, and vicinity residents who communicate, sorry, who commute on Worcester
Street, Olney Avenue, Westview Avenue, and Ogons Avenue, making their way to I -76. This was
respectfully submitted from Sondra Broadus on behalf of a concerned community association RCO.
Counsel, I'm going to go to the council person's office. Mr. Richardson, do you have a position
with this uh actually this was the second meeting that they they held for this uh property uh they
came back at our request and nope showed up for for either of their uh meeting this time the last
time uh miss brotis and her group came on they had like i think about 10 individuals that might
might have been online excuse me and you know they they made whatever decision that they they
wanted to make. We're not supporting this request for a continuance. I'm going to leave it up to
the board to make that determination. I believe Ms. Inez Love, who was the coordinating RCO,
might be online at this point in time. And if she is, can she give some opinion as to what
should take place? But, you know, they've done what they needed to do. And a lot of the claims
in that letter are kind of overstated.
And, you know, like I said,
most of the folks that are involved with ACCA
live about a half a mile away from the location.
Central High School is about a half a mile away
from that location.
You know, just the things that were raised
were not actually things that should be considered
with regard to, you know, going to I -76,
which is over over a mile away or something like that is we don't have an opinion thank you um
council yes sir what's your position on this uh we would prefer to proceed today with the hearing
we did meet with the community twice and at the second meeting we actually worked with a concerned
community association to use their preferred notice of mailing that they say gets more people's
attention and easier to understand. We also posted the property with their notice. My client went
door to door. We did as much outreach as I've ever done on any project. And this, we agree with
community ACCA that this is a two of a distressed area, that we're not going to get that input that
we see in other areas. So we would prefer to proceed. We do have a letter of support from
Ms. Inez's coordinating RCO. Okay. So we're going to, we will proceed with this. We will be with
you, I guess, within about an hour or so. Okay? The case will go on. The case will go on. Thank
you. Are there any other requests for continuance? Ms. Ines Love had her hand raised. I have allowed
her to speak. Sure. Good morning, Ms. Love. Good morning. Could you state your name, please,
and spell for the court reporter? Ines, I -N -E -S, Love, L -O -V -E. Do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do we're going to go on with the case
okay well i can wait until we go all right when when you'll you'll get a chance to talk but we
are going to go on with the case okay thank you all right any other requests for continuances
um yes sir i have a mr gary murray with his hand raised i have a lot of him to speak at his time
hi sir could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
gary murray g -a -r -y -m -u -r -r -a -y right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth i do
i do what case sir we are with 5805 worcester
5805 through 11 east west yeah well that that case is going to be called in a little bit okay
yep thank you thank you you'll you'll hear when i call it okay
is there any other requests for continuance
sir mr stanley graham has his hand raised i've allowed him to speak at this time
good morning sir could you state your name and spell please for the court reporter
mr graham please unmute
mr graham please unmute yes could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
Stanley Graham, S -T -A -N -L -E -Y -G -R -A -H -A -M.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
What case, sir?
Worcester.
Okay, we're going to call that shortly, sir.
You're going to have to wait, okay?
Is there any other request for continuance other than Worcester Street?
Sir, I have Mr. Sherman Toppin with the same race.
I've allowed him to speak at the same time.
Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
I'd like to request to continue.
Just through the record, Sherman, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Oh, yes.
Sherman Toppin, S -H -E -R -M -A -N -T -O -P -P -I -N, and 1500 JFK Boulevard, Suite 1800 is the address.
All right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
In what case, sir?
And this is 808 North 46th Street.
And that's ZP 2022 -010878.
All right, let me share.
I'll be with you in one minute.
Hillary, did you see that number?
I'm sorry, Mr. Chair.
What was the address?
46th Street.
The chairman's.
Oh, number, that's number two.
Yes, the applicant is still working on the tax cert and will need additional time to accomplish that.
All right. So MI 2022 -006 -117, 808 North 46th Street, that case is continued.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Any other requests for continuance?
I see no further hint at this time, sir.
So number 14, MI -2022 -006 -085 -5519 North 4th Street.
We have no exhibits.
This is the first listing.
France Ulysse.
I did not see anything.
Okay, so MI -2022 -006 -085 -5519 North 4th Street, that case is continued. Mark must be tried.
And number five, MI -2022 -006 -093 -1036 Waverly Street, that case has been withdrawn.
we're going to go to our list
number one
MI 2022
wait you know what we're going to go to number 11 first I'm sorry
MI 2022
006 -115 -405
East Mount Erie Avenue
Angela Yonesa is the one of the owners.
We have a letter of support from the East Mount Airy Neighbors.
We see the owner in the audience.
Any hands?
Yes, sir.
Miss Yonesa has been promoted to panelists.
She will be rejoining shortly.
ANGELA YANESSA, A -N -G -E -L -A, last name Y -A -N -N -E -S -S -A.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you put your video on, please?
Thank you.
So this is for the erection of an addition above an existing detached garage structure.
For the resulting creation of two principal structures for single -family household living.
No changes to the existing principal detached structure, size and location as shown on the plan.
Whereas there's no more than one principal building is allowed per lot in the RSA 2 zoning district, but two are proposed.
And whereas the rear yard depth of 20 feet is required and there is zero feet proposed.
Our vice chair just has a few questions for you, okay?
Good morning.
Good morning.
have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits to proceed on this case five days in
advance of the hearing yes thank you please proceed and share your screen
excuse me share your screen oh i'm sorry
green button on the bottom there you go
okay so as you read we received the denial um just based on the
setback and proposing a secondary principal structure um the appeal
is to use for a home office. Sorry, I don't have a great order here.
The appeal was sent in just to say we're just planning to use for a home office.
The garage, as we did learn, was built not long after the home was built. So we did learn it
was prior to zoning code. And the designation of calling it a secondary principal structure
isn't, not quite sure that's correct. It's not planned to be, you know, really living
quarters. There's not going to be plumbing. It's just really solely for personal home
office use. Um, so this refusal along with the plan, uh,
why don't you show us the photos of what you have now? What's there now?
Yeah, show us photos of what you have there.
so current garage
is back here okay um so one floor it goes up to the alleyway on uh for the driveways on east
allen's lane and we did find in our deed that we technically have an easement eight feet into that
alleyway. And this is from our Ardley Street. We drive in on Ardley because we have the corner
property. And then show us now the plans of what you want to do. Sure. So this is from inside the
yard. This fence is where the view that I just showed from Ardley Street. We would just build
up one level um so that i could use for a home office uh the stairs would be on the exterior
inside the yard um so they wouldn't really be visible to other people um and it's not connecting
this space within the garage there was some concern of you know again the living space it's not it's
not planned for really adding actual living space it's just for office
And you have a letter of support, am I correct, from East Mount Airy Neighbors?
Show that.
All right.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Okay, questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, I have Mr. Lee Elsie with a hand raised.
I have allowed him to speak at his time.
Good morning.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Good morning.
This is Lee Elsie, L -E -E -E -L -S -E -Y.
Right.
Do you swear for him 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?
Are you a neighbor?
No, I'm actually the architect on the project.
I want it to be available in case there were any questions.
Thank you for calling in.
Anyone else in the virtual audience have comments?
Yes, sir.
Mr. Charles Richardson has his hand raised again.
I have allowed him to speak at this time.
Good morning, Mr. Richardson.
Just state your name.
You've already been sworn.
Good morning again, Mr. Chair.
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 508 City Hall.
Councilwoman has no opposition to this project.
Thank you for calling in.
We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the first audience?
I do not see any other hands at this time, sir.
Okay, Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
sarah bond philadelphia city planning commission s -a -r -a -h -b -a -n -h do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do proceed the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the existing residential single -family zoning the appellant has not shown
that the property cannot possibly be used in strict conformity with the zoning code and that
a variance is therefore necessary to enable the viable economic use of the property the city
planning commission recommends that the zoning board deny the variance. Thank you. MI 2022 -006 -115 -405
East Mount Airy Avenue. I vote yes. I vote yes. Thomas Holloman. My vote is yes. James Snell. My
vote is yes. Ishmael Shaheed. My vote is yes. Thank you for calling in. You have your votes.
Thank you so much.
All right.
We're going to go to number one now.
So number one is a resumptive hearing.
It's MI -2022 -005 -423 -9722 Wally Avenue.
And Mr. Ishmael Shahid will take over for this particular case.
yeah so jojo jose is the attorney this application is for the erection of an addition
including a front porch and a carport for one parking stop is exit parking to remain as
previously approved for single family house living household living size and location is
also shown on the application
plans. Is
JoJo available?
Yes, sir. They have been promoted to
panelists. They will be
rejoining shortly.
Good morning, sir.
Good afternoon. Good morning.
Please state your name and spell it for the record.
My name is Giorgio Joyce, J -O -J -O -J -O -I -S -E.
I couldn't really hear you, but did the court recorder get that?
I'm sorry, what did you say?
Yes, Vice Chair, I did.
All right.
Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Yes, I do.
All right. We're going to, this is a resumption hearing, so we're going to proceed on and hear
out the rest of the case. This case was first heard back on February 8th, and we had held the
case full until we heard more information from the community and registered community organizations.
Yes, so I attended the community meeting on the February 28th, and I do have the letter
from them, and I submitted that earlier when I received it from the committee.
Can I present that?
Yes, a little difficult hearing, but yes.
Okay, sorry, sorry about it.
So, Hillary, was this already received on our end?
I'm looking.
It looks like it was just sent within the last half an hour.
So we just, I think we just got it.
And it is a letter, it is a letter of support.
I guess we can go straight to questions in the virtual audience.
I guess we can go straight to questions in the virtual.
Yes, that was the only thing that we were not able to do last time is public testimony.
So we're going to go out to the public audience and see if we have any questions or concerns on this case.
Is anybody in the virtual audience?
Mr. Shaheed, I have Mr. Jack O 'Hara with his hand raised.
Oh, wait, you put it down.
Okay, now we put it back up.
I have a lot of Mr. O 'Hara, Jack O 'Hara to speak.
Good morning, Mr. O 'Hara.
Yes, good morning.
Please state your name and spell it for the court recorder.
Jack O 'Hara, J -A -C -K -O -H -A -R -A,
and I am the president of the Greater Boston Civic League.
do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I do please proceed
I uh I was late in getting the uh uh summary in and I uh I apologize to Jojo and you know
and and the chair but I did want to get on and confirm our support of his uh application
thank you so much is that it yes that's it sir
All right, thank you. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Do not see any hands at this time, sir.
I believe the planning commissions already made their piece on this, so we're gonna
hold one second, just gotta pull that one back up.
hillary is anything else before i move forward with the vote
uh no mr shaheen all right mi2022005423 9722 wally avenue my vote is yes yes
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Congratulations, sir.
Thank you so much.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We'll move to number three, MI 2022 -006088 -7203 -05 Edmond Street.
John Pack is the attorney.
There is a letter of non -opposition for the Taccone Civic Association with Proviso.
Mr. Peck.
Good morning, Mr. Peck.
If you are in the virtual audience, please raise your virtual hand and wait to be sworn in.
okay mr pack has been promoted to panelists you will be rejoining us
good morning mr pack
good morning hi could you please state your name and spell for the court reporter oh yes
my name is john pack uh j -o -h -n last name p -a -k right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do could you identify your client and their
relationship to the property okay uh my client's name is mr jonathan alvarado and he's the property
owner okay our vice chair has just a few questions for you sir good morning counsel do you agree to
waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate towards accuracy i do have you emailed into our
offices all the required documents to proceed with this case and exhibits uh five days in
advance of this hearing i have thank you please proceed and share your screen
Here, screen on the bottom, there you go, thank you.
Okay, so this is the refusal, well, good morning.
My name is John Pegg, and I represent Mr. Jonathan Alvarado, the property owner of 7203 -05 Edmund Street.
This matter concerns a refusal on an application.
This matter concerns the refusal on an application.
This is the refusal.
This is the refusal.
Mr. Alvarado wishes to erect a carport parking at the side of his yard.
And this refusal is due to the size of the carport.
it says here the residents of the carport with a flat or shed roof are limited to
10 feet in height and 25 feet in depth and he's proposing a garage with 13 .1 inch height and 45
feet depth and another reason for the refusal was the the location where it requires eight
feet of five yards is required and we don't have that here so let's do the refusal
this is the application that was submitted
i want to okay this is the proposed uh part part and the shaded area the crossed out area represents
the um purple and this is the uh the floor plan for the carpool
this is the d that shows the uh ownership of mr jonathan alvarado
mr pack let me see the photos okay yeah these are the photos this is the property and this
This is where the carpool, this is an older picture, if I may bring your attention to the newer pictures.
This is the residence and this is the parking area that he plans on putting the carpool at.
He's going to put the carpool right here, basically.
More pictures of the backyard.
There's already a curb cut there? Excuse me? There's already a curb cut?
He already parks there. Is there a curb cut in the street? Oh yes.
Now this is the uh the notice that was sent out for the uh the RCO meeting. The RCO meeting was
held on December 6th and we do have like you said we do have a non -opposition letter with six
provisals. This is the bulk mailing that went out. This is the certified mail to the adjacent
property owners. And this is the zoning notice posting that we put up there at the property.
Now, I want to bring your attention to the RCO opposition letter.
And these are the six provisals that they're recommending.
And I spoke to the applicant and he has no issues with complying with these provisions.
All right.
Questions from the board?
no mr chairman no chair
no mr chairman questions or comments in the virtual audience
do not see any hands mr chair by planning commission
thank you chair uh the comprehensive plan excuse me sarah bond
S -I -R -A -H -B -A -N -H -Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single -family zoning.
The appellant has not shown that the property cannot possibly be used in strict conformity with the zoning code
and that a variance is therefore necessary to enable viable economic use of the property.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board deny the variance.
MI -2022 -006 -088 -7203 -205 -Emmon Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
Use of garage for personal vehicle storage and maintenance only.
No vehicle pain.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes with Proviso.
If you know Shaheen, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with Proviso.
I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, proviso, Thomas Holloman.
I'm sorry.
Thank you. Thank you, Thomas.
Thank you, counsel.
Number six, MI 2022 -006 -111, 301 Washington Avenue.
Kenneth Falkenstein and Steve Anello are the attorneys.
letter of support from the Queen Village Neighbors Association,
letter of non -opposition from Councilperson Squilla.
Mr. Falconstein, wait a minute, I have Mr. Steve Anella, sir.
I will go ahead and promote him to panelists at this time.
Thank you.
thank you mr chair good morning could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
of course my name is steve anella s -t -e -v -e -a -n -e -l -l -a right um do you swear or
firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Could you identify
your client and their relationship to this property? Yes. So my client is Comcast Cable
Communications Management, LLC, through Mr. Ken Falkenstein at Comcast. The property is owned by
the Philadelphia Housing Authority, and we would be leasing a portion of a rooftop on a building
located on the property.
Hillary, do we have a
conflict with this?
Yeah, I would have
a conflict with it.
Yeah, all right.
So, Thomas,
could you do the
follow -up with this?
Isha will recuse himself from this.
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, Council.
Can you hear me?
Good morning.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Did you meet with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yes to all three.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Share this real quick.
uh does everyone see the pdf that's up we do okay awesome thank you um so as um was stated
um our property is 301 washington ave um and it's located in the rm2 zoning district
the applicant is proposing to place a wireless communications uh facility on the rooftop
top of an existing building located on the property. And let me bring up the plan real quick.
Right, so as shown on the plan, right here would be the tower in question and the two antenna,
which would be part of the equipment, would be located on the roof right here.
And then there would also be an equipment cabinet located next to it. So we are seeking a special
exception today as the special exception is required for wireless communications facilities
in the rm2 district um and so this uh this proposed use would be very you know minimal
impact it would just be the two antenna on this rooftop um the building itself let me
bring up a longer view of it um is a large residential apartment complex um
And it's pretty much the tallest building in the area.
There's also a penthouse, as you can see right here, that extends higher than the height of the antenna.
So this proposed use would have no negative impact on the surrounding community.
It wouldn't burden the public facilities in the area at all.
It would just be these two antenna on the rooftop.
and they also high -rise building right am i right uh correct yes that is okay okay all right um
questions from the board no chair
no chair
thomas
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any hands mr chair planning commission
thank you chair sarah bond philadelphia city planning commission s -a -r -a -h -b -a -n -h
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential multi -family zoning
the proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what might
normally be expected the city planning commission recommends that the zoning board grant the special
exception mi2022 -006 -111 -301 washington avenue i vote yes i vote yes thomas holliman my vote is yes
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel. You have your votes.
Thank you.
Number seven, MI 2022
Crams Avenue. Joseph Consul
is the attorney.
Recommendation of support from
the Central Roxborough Civic Association.
Good morning, Mr. Consul. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Sure. My name is Joseph Consul. That's J -O -S -E -P -H -C -O -N -S -O -L -E.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Could you identify your client and the relationship to this property?
Yeah. My client is Navy Real Estate LLC. The owner of that LLC, Danny Maitland, is on this call.
Okay, and our vice chair has just a few questions.
The refusal and stipulate to his accuracy.
Have you emailed all the required documents to proceed with this case and exhibits five days in advance to this hearing?
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Is my screen up?
Hi, everyone.
Joe Consul here for 253 Crams Avenue.
On my screen right now, just to give everyone some context, are two buildings, which each have two addresses in each building.
So what's in front of me right now is 251 and 253 Crams.
And over here is, oh, sorry, is 255 and 257 Crams Avenue.
So these two buildings, which are four different addresses, were built at the same time, which we believe was in the 70s.
And each of these four buildings was built as a two -unit property.
So, you have an entrance to the front unit and you have an entrance to the back unit of all four of these properties.
Here is the two -unit rental license for 251, just confirming that it has a two -unit rental license.
Here is the two -unit rental license for number 255, and number 257 does not have a two -unit rental license issued for it, but it does have two mailboxes, as you can see there, for front and rear, showing that it is, in fact, also two units.
So that's just some context. I'm bringing us back to 253. My client purchased 253 in February of last year. Similar to 257, they have two units, but they never actually pulled the two -unit rental licenses.
My client purchased it. He's been fixing it up. And now he's seeking approval for the two unit rental license, which it's always been two.
It's always been two units, just like those other three that I that I showed you.
So we went in front of the RCO to to. Oh, sorry. And we got their support here. That was just about a month ago.
Here's our proof of mailings.
Here's photos and plans of the property.
You can see some of the work that my client's done to spiff it up compared to how it looked
How it looked then, the property looks a lot nicer now.
the property looks a lot nicer now.
This is still being worked on.
We submitted the floor plans that were submitted for the rehabilitation permitting,
showing the layout of the property, the front and rear unit.
Here's a picture of the rear unit door, how it looks now or in its transition period,
but much nicer.
showing units A and B, water heaters, electrical meters.
You can see B is, in this photo, still quite old.
And then we have our other required documents as well.
The deed and such.
So the takeaway is we're seeking approval for this front and rear two -unit use
that was never properly legalized by the prior owner.
My guy bought it, and he's now seeking to legalize it
and make it nice, which he's already well
into the process of doing.
We have the RCO support, and I'd like to call my client
to verify my testimony.
Sir, could you state your name, please,
and spell for the court reporter?
Who is the client again?
It's Danny, D -A -N -N -Y, Maitland, M -A -I -T -L -A -N -D.
May I please raise your hand to wait to be sworn in?
Good morning.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Good morning.
My name is Danny, D -A -N -N -Y, last name is Maitland, M -A -I -T -L -A -N -D.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Proceed, counsel.
Good morning, Mr. Maitland. Did you hear my testimony right now about 253 Crams Avenue?
Yes, sir.
Do you agree with what I said and do you adopt it as your own?
Absolutely.
All right. Thank you. Nothing further aboard.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i don't see any further hints mr chair planning commission
thank you chair sarah bond philadelphia city planning commission s -a -r -a -h -b -a -n -h
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single -family zoning
However, the proposed use is consistent with documented prior use of the property.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance.
Thank you. MI 2022 -006 -110 -253, Crams Avenue. I vote yes.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Isma Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Council.
Thank you, Board.
All right, number eight, MI 2022 -006 -086, 504 -10 South 21st Street.
Melanie Lacey is the attorney.
Letter of non -opposition from the Center City Residence Association.
Applicant also provided a petition support signed by 37 neighbors.
Mr. Chairman, Ms. Catherine Missimer, as we joined as panelist.
Sure. Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Catherine Missimer. It's M as in Mary, I -S -S, I -M as in Mary, E -R.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and their relationship to the property?
Yes, I'm here on behalf of Ms. Ellen Danish. She's the owner of the property.
Okay, our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal to stipulate to his address?
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits five days in advance to our office?
I have. Yes.
Thank you. Please proceed to share your screen.
Thank you. Are you seeing my screen?
we do great thank you i'm here on behalf of miss ellen danish the owner of the property at 504 to
510 south 21st street we're here today with an application for the relocation of lot lines
and to legalize an existing non -accessory parking lot at the corner of naudane and 21st streets
i have with me today the property owner miss danish as well as our project engineer natalie
door as you can see from your packages this project has letters of non -opposition from
As you can see from your packages, this project has letters of non -opposition from the RCO, Center City Residents Association, as well as a pretty comprehensive petition of support signed by 37 near neighbors.
These lots front 21st Street, spanning from Trine to Nodane.
Ms. Danish and her family have resided at the home on 21st Street that's adjacent to this public parking lot.
When Ms. Danish purchased the property, she was also purchasing the lot as a separate lot.
There were spaces at that time that were leased to neighbors.
This application involves no new construction.
It seeks merely to legalize the existing condition.
As you can see from this existing condition plan on the top of your screen, there were originally three parcels here, and a lot line bisected the existing parking lot.
Our proposal is to create two parcels, one containing the home that's been in existence,
as well as one containing the non -accessory parking lot.
We provided several photos in your package. This is an aerial. This is the home that Ms.
Danish lives in, as well as the lot you can see here. This is what it looked like at the end of
year. And this is what the lot looked like in 1964. Historically, this lot was the non -accessory
parking lot for the Reinhardt Carpet Company. It's been a parking lot since that time,
almost 60 years. The site is presently zoned RSA 5, which makes sense and accommodates Miss
Danish's home, but does not account for the lot. The historic configuration of the parking
lot adjacent to the home in the corner doesn't necessarily permit what standards today would be
for a surface parking lot. For example, it does not allow for the requisite interior landscaping
that you would see on a typical surface parking lot that were proposed today. The lot's been a
fixture in this neighborhood for 60 years. Oftentimes, the community does utilize the lot
for community events and gathering space. The neighbors support Ms. Danish's request because
the lot has been a part of the neighborhood in this condition for many, many years. We met with
CCRA to review the proposal. They held a public meeting to discuss this application, and many of
the near neighbors did come out and show their support. As a result, you have CCRA's letter of
non -opposition, as well as the lengthy petition of support from the near neighbors. Again, the
two refusals generated by this application are, first, the use of an RSA 5 lot for non -accessory
parking and additionally the landscaping that cannot be accommodated given the size and
configuration of this lot. We believe this project will not alter the essential character of the
neighborhood as it's been a fixture here for almost 60 years at least. It likely predates zoning
and we are proposing to legalize the existing condition. We will not impair the appropriate
use or development of adjacent property and it will not substantially increase congestion in
public streets. This project will not be detrimental to the public welfare, as evidenced by our
letter of support and petition. With that, I would just ask Ms. Danish to be allowed
to speak. Sure.
Monty, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
They have not raised their hand yet.
Ellen, if you're listening, if you could raise your hand.
Ms. Danish, wait a minute.
Okay, Ms. Danish has raised her hand.
I have a lot of to speak, sir.
Hello?
Good morning.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Hi, I'm Ellen Danish, E -L -L -E -N -D -A -N -I -S -H.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Ms. Dienish, have you heard my testimony today?
Would you agree that it's true and correct?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, I have a Gail Gizmondi with her hand raised.
I have allowed them to speak at the...
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Hi, Gail Gizmondi, G -A -I -L -G -I -S -M -O -N -D -I.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am.
Proceed.
I live at 2106 Nardine, which is directly across the street from the parking lot.
And I just want to say I'm in favor of the proposal and that this lot is used for block parties and meetings.
And during the pandemic, we were able to clear the lot so the kids on the street could play.
Thank you so much for calling in and taking the time.
We appreciate your input.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Ms. Paulina Sajak with her hand raised.
Hi, good morning.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Good morning.
My name is Paulina Sajak, P -A -U -L -I -N -A.
s -e -c -z -a -k right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth i do and you're a neighbor i am a friend and a neighbor yes oh good okay so pushy thank you
i like my also friend and neighbor gail gizmondi just stated i am here in support um and in favor
of this project to be um approved um it is a beautiful space and we are lucky to have it in
our community. And that's, I wanted to say, thank you. Oh, all right. Thank you. Thank you so much
for taking on time to clone. We appreciate your input. Is there anyone else?
See no one else, Mr. All right. Planning commission.
Thank you, chair, Sarah Bond, Philadelphia city planning commission, S A R A H B A N H.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single family zoning.
The proposed use is consistent with documented prior use of this property and the proposed
dimensional variance is minimal and does not conflict with the purpose and spirit of the
zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance.
Thank you very much.
MI 2022 -006 -086 -504 -10 -S 21st Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Jane Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, appreciate it.
Number nine, MI 2022 -006 -116 -2126 North Percy Street.
It's a recommendation of support from the North Central East RCO.
The applicant also provided a petition in support signed by five neighbors on the 2100 block of Percy Street.
Sherman Toppin is the attorney.
Mr. Toppin, if you're still in the virtual audience, please raise your hand.
Our attorney has been promoted to panelist. He will be rejoining us shortly.
Thank you.
okay good morning mr chair members of the board can you hear me yeah just state your name for
the record please um you've already been sworn yes and i apologize i haven't changed my virtual
screen behind me but i'm going to change that so there it is that's better for me
Okay, my name is Sherman Toppin, S -H -E -R -M -A -N -T -O -P -P -I -N, and the address is 1500 JFK Boulevard, Suite 800.
Can you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
My client is Ghazi Abbotson. I'm sorry, these are, I have two. Hold on, let me show. Yep, Ghazi Abbotson, and he is the developer and representing the applicant for this particular application.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits to our offices to perceive this
case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Let me share my screen.
okay and do you see my packet in front of you
okay this property is 2126 north percy street this is our cover letter
if you went to the property today you'd see this as a vacant lot in the picture in front of you
this is my typical packet the refusal for this particular property is generally
for this particular property is generally dimensional for the most part.
dimensional for the most part.
Sherman, I...
Sherman, we don't see a vacant lot.
We see a walled -in building.
Oh, okay.
Let me go ahead.
I think we've shared the wrong.
Let me go to the right.
There we go.
There we go.
Okay, thank you.
There you go. That's a little better.
Yeah, I think you can follow me now, now that we see we're on the same page.
Okay, so this is 2126 North Percy Street, if you would go out there today.
Vacant lot, as you can see, and even behind it, if you look through the lot, you'll see there's many vacant lots.
Other vacant lots in this vicinity, this area, is in transition.
To the left of this picture is a property that is boarded and not occupied,
and to the right is a property that is in marginal condition.
So this is an area of pretty much endeavoring transition.
We have the refusals that are associated with this particular application are dimensional for the most part.
We have, as two units are proposed here,
we are looking at a small variance in the dimensional from the required 850 square foot.
The existing is 742, and that's one refusal.
The second is the maximum allowed occupied area,
70 % by code, we are proposing 84.
So slightly larger to allow for the units
on this relatively small lot to occupy each of these units.
Setback for the roof deck,
five foot setback is required and we're proposing zero.
In other words, the roof deck being flushed to the facade.
You have our deed here.
as you'll see we'll get past that and as we go further down past the deed our application
it communicates the same and it just speaks to the nature of that there's no change there's
it won't cause any additional hardship to parking we we discuss in our application that the
hardships that we perceive is not just economic in doing a single unit but as a matter of right
you can do the two units on that particular street we just need these dimensional items to
make the property more marketable this tremendous blight on the street and the surrounding streets
and it's very difficult to get projects to be accomplished on this street so here we are
Percy is located near the middle of the street as you saw in the initial picture it's bounded by
There's vacant lots immediately behind it and several on the streets associated with it.
Again, this is a picture of the lot as we speak.
Insofar as plans, the proposed structure will have two stories, well, three stories, I'm sorry.
As you walk into the first floor in this middle section, you will see that the first floor is a one -bedroom unit.
The lower level that's going to be dug down for this particular will have no bedrooms.
So the furnaces and the utilities are the only things in the lower level of the property.
As you move upstairs, it's a three -bedroom unit, and a roof deck is only available or accessible by the common stairways to the upstairs unit.
So three bedrooms up top, one bedroom down below is the proposed layout.
Now, the appearance of the building with these elevations, as you can see on the front, will be red brick straight up. Red brick is the dominant material of all of the houses facing North Percy Street.
So it will blend in with the existing community housing stock. And as you can see, we're proposing the roof dock deck will be on the front to the very front of the building with the pilot house set back as it should be.
The rear of the structure will have siding, and of course, that also matches with the kind of properties that are there.
And you can see again from this viewpoint on the plans, the immediate left of the property is a vacant boarded building.
And if you can look a little bit over, you can see two buildings over a property.
I think that's 2120 North Percy Street is already approved by this board for three stories.
And it is in all the new construction that is created in the vicinity have been three stories and have also had brick fronts.
For this particular meeting, we did post here's proof of our posting of the zoning board meeting as well as the refusal.
and we conducted a community meeting for near neighbors in fact in this particular property
and we conducted a community meeting for near neighbors.
In fact, in this particular property,
we conducted two the first one we did by zoom and the rco chair was late to the meeting and so
people who it was thinly attended maybe only two people from the community in addition to the team
and when she came on she didn't see the people that had come on who had waited about 20 minutes
for her to join however so we agreed to do a second community meeting which we did and in
that community meeting it was also not very much attended as I said this particular block has
over half of the housing stock has been either boarded or torn down and vacant so we had six
people there so what the RCO would desire that we do is go to the community do a doorknock in fact
we did as you can see by this picture 193 letters were sent out for these meetings these were the
addresses that we mailed for and even though there's 193 addresses to send the mail to about
half of these are vacant lots so we saw a lot of letters come back to us and but our proof of mailing
is here showing that 193 letters did go out through the mail and here's our certificate of
service of that for and our second mailing the RCO and and we agreed that we would do a
a second mailing and here's our certificate for the second mailing that went that was conducted
for this particular property and leading up to leading up to as we go through here sar
my verification of both of the rco meetings that were attended and that were conducted for this
particular case here's a tax cert and the what mrs uh ms kitchen wanted to do she's the rco lead
is to also do a petition support we went door -to -door on the north percy street and we got
um basically six more people to or five to agree to our zoning request to do this for the
and the letter from the north central rce rco showed a letter of support of the eight people
that attended between the two meetings and then only two opposed so that is our project
and at this point in time i'd like to bring on mr gazi advitson if he can be promoted
to adopt my testimony.
Mr. Adverson, please
update yourself and wait for the chair.
Could you state your name, please, and spell
for the court reporter?
My name is Kazi, G -A -Z -I.
The last name is Arasheven,
A -T -A -S -E -V -E -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, sir.
Do you see a counsel?
Yes, Mr. Adverson, have you been here
in the meeting listening to all that I've
testify to on behalf of 2126 North Percy Street? Yes. And have I left anything out or is there
anything you would add to what I've said as far as testimony concerning this zoning application?
Yeah, everything well said. Okay, and will you adopt my testimony as your own? Yes. Okay.
Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Chair. Questions or comments from the virtual
audience i see no hands at this time chair planning commission
thank you chair sarah bond philadelphia city planning commission s -a -r -a -h -b -a -n -h
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential multi -family zoning
the dimensional requirements of the zoning code do not create an economic detriment for the appellant
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board deny the variance.
MI 2022 -006 -116 -2126 -North Percy.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Jane Snell, my vote is yes.
H .M .L. Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, board.
Number 10, MI 2022 -006 -163 -5805 Worcester Street.
Michael McElhenney is the attorney.
We have a letter of support from the faith CDC and two letters of one letter of opposition
and one letter of recommendations concerning this property.
Chair, Mr. McElhenney is coming back in as a panelist now.
Chair, Mr. McElhenney is coming back in as a panelist now.
Good morning, counsel. We've already sworn you before. Could you just state your name for the record?
Yes, Michael McElhenney, M -C -I -L -H -I -N -N -E -Y.
Could you identify your client and their relationship to this property?
Yes, there are multiple owners here. The clients for this property are 5800 Worcester Street, LLC,
mazel tov development llc and point blank holdings llc these properties are jointly
owned i'm here with gary murray m -u -r -r -a -y jr as the representative for the ownership
our vice chair has a few questions for you sir good morning counsel do you agree to waive the
reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes. Have you emailed all the required
documents and exhibits in our offices five days in advance of this hearing? Yes, we did have an
issue with the tax clearance, which I did provide proof of compliance yesterday. Okay, thank you.
please proceed to share your screen
thank you members of the board the on the screen is my exhibit packet for the subject property
as a matter of the prerequisites our zba appeals at exhibit 12
our photos for the property showing the zoning notices posted and also i want to reference the
actual community meeting notices were posted as requested by the local rcos our notices are at
exhibit 14 including the form that was requested by the um community organization our deeds that
are exhibit 15 and i referenced the tax clearance we had balances but we paid off all the balances
prior to today's hearing and that is in the exhibit packet as well the since we already
We went through the letter of support from the RCO.
I'll just mention that that's at Exhibit 1.
And as reference, there were multiple attendees, other RCOs that attended, and not well attended
by the community, but multiple RCOs, and we did have two meetings, one in January 26th
and one March 9th, 2023.
The refusal is Exhibit 2.
my client is seeking to relocate lot lines to create one parcel from four existing parcels
at 5805 through 5811 East Worcester Street and for the erection of an attached structure
for multifamily household living the properties are all zoned RSA 5 so the request for multifamily
use is not by right and we're requesting a variance for that use and the proposed structure
is 45 feet high whereas 35 38 feet is the by right height limit
exhibit three is an aerial view of the immediate area around the subject property
and looking to the south the top of the property of the screen the photograph
is LaSalle University and the intersection of Alniv, Chouave and Worcester Street which is a
pretty busy intersection, the main intersection. Looking at photograph two, which is a closer up
view of the same image, you can see the subject property in the middle of the screen, the vacant
lots. To the north of us, again, it's LaSalle University, apartments on the corner at the
intersection of Chu and Alany and Worcester. Behind the subject property, we have residential
houses and the bellfield ball fields to the north which is the bottom of the photo there are several
vacant lots and then row houses immediately opposite our property to the west is the four
story building for the faith canon baptist church and their grounds which is a lot of open space
and then also to the west is the shops at la salle shopping mall that includes a fresh grocer
of Rite Aid to Dunkin' Donuts and some other commercial uses. The remaining photographs,
photograph four or page three of Exhibit 3 is a view from LaSalle University just showing
the main intersection of Worcester, Chu, and Alney Avenue as well as the multiple bus stops and
lines that run along this intersection and Alonyav obviously runs closely to the Alony
Transportation Center which is a few blocks going to the east so it's a transit oriented area
major intersection where, as the RCO referenced earlier, this area needs development and it has
major intersection where as the RCO referenced earlier this
not been well attended. It's a distressed area is how the RCO referred to it. And we're hoping to
fill in some quality development here. Exhibit four is the zoning map for the property in the
area. The property itself is in the middle of the screen, zoned RSA5. To the right side, to the east,
is the special purpose zoning for the ball fields to the west the left side of the photo is rsa1
but as i just showed the board this whole property is the shops at la salle's and the
the church building so not residential uses even though it's own residential across the street
turning to photograph or exhibit five which is the site photographs for the property
the properties themselves are on the east side of east worcester they are vacant lots
in the middle of the block to the north of us there's a three -story existing building that
is designed for a commercial ground floor use based off the entryway and the large window at
the front of the property, but it's currently not occupied. Farther to the north are several
vacant lots on the north side of Nedrow Street, and on the west side of the block is that Faith
Cannon Baptist Church building and property that I referenced, the four -story building,
and also the shops at LaSalle that takes up the entire west side of the block opposite the
property and turning to page four of the exhibit five is again the site the subject property
and then to the north or to the south of subject property heading towards LaSalle
on the corner at Grange Avenue is 5779 East Worcester which is a vacant building
missing doors and windows that needs repair next to that is the yellow building it's 577 East
Worcester which is set up as a triplex but again is not currently occupied and next to those
buildings is more abandoned vacant lot. At the end of the block at Conlon Street is a beer distributor
and on the south side of that intersection is an existing duplex at 5763 East Worcester and again
on the west side the opposite side is the shops at LaSalle, the Rite Aid and Shopping. I took a
photo from that bright aid looking to the north at the subject property and the block just to show
the street parking on the property on the immediate area and just general conditions.
The plan that my client proposes is does first involve a lot consolidation. The properties are
currently four separate lots that are 16 wide by 83 feet deep, almost 84 feet deep. And the proposal
is to consolidate those properties into one property that would be 5337 square feet and as
I mentioned these are not we do not own the corner property at 5801 or 5803 these are interior lots
that we would be consolidating the zoning plan is at exhibit 7 and I'll zoom in so we can see the
general request on the plan. So starting at the front of the building, looking at the overview,
it's a proposed four -story building for 18 residential dwelling units. At the front of
the property, we do a 12 -foot wide sidewalk, and then there's a five -foot setback. We are matching
the property to the north, the existing three -story building, to have that setback. In front of the
property we will have decorative planters and the front entryway will be on the corner closest to
Grange Avenue and LaSalle. The property was designed and I'll show the renderings. It's
designed to look as two separate buildings and the architect put in this little deck area to
separate break up the frontage and to create some outdoor space for some of the units.
The property itself, I'll note, has a five -foot side yard on both sides of the building.
So we brought the building in from the neighboring properties to create more light and air along the side of the buildings.
And the rear of the property has a full nine -foot rear yard plus a four -foot existing alley that creates about a 13 -foot buffer between any of the residential houses that would be behind the property.
And again, farther to the east is the ball fields.
So given that those properties are to the east, the sun would be rising in the east, setting in the west.
Any shadow that this building would be casting would not be negatively affecting any of the residents around there.
The properties on the west side of the block, as I mentioned, it's the shops at LaSalle.
The properties on the west side of the block, as I mentioned, it's the shops at LaSalle, it's the back side of the shops at LaSalle, so it would have no negative effects on the neighboring properties.
It's the back side of the shops at LaSalle.
The building does have a pilot house and roof access, but no roof deck, which is one of the points the neighbors did, we discussed with the neighborhood, the RCOs at the meeting.
We do have six bicycle spaces inside the property.
And there will be accessible units as well.
So let me pull up the actual rendering so you can see what the proposal looks like.
Exhibit 8 is the renderings.
As you can see, it looks like a brick building and then to the south looks like a separate building.
It was designed that way to break up the sight lines to appear as two separate buildings, but it is one proposal.
with the idea being a brick portion and then a portion in hardy board that concrete siding to
give some a breakup in the design we do have street lighting as part of the plan and we would
be including extra lighting as needed or wanted by the community and my client generally puts
security cameras and outside lighting other features outside the property we do have the
planters in the front of the building as well as a sitting area and there is a portion for
utilities Pico Vault that has to be kept open. The ground floor does have a recessed entryway
so the first floor will end up with three units and the upper floors will have five units each
And I'll note that the five -foot setback creates ADA accessibility and also a means to take trash out.
And on the north side, we have a privacy fence just for security purposes to keep the space between the buildings secure.
Turning to the front elevation, again, as I mentioned, to the south of the building, to the right of the rendering.
We do have that ADA ingress -egress and a means to take trash in and out of the building through commercial trash pickup.
And we have that security fence on the north side of the building just to have some privacy for the residents.
On the screen now, as part of this exhibit, is the cross -section of the building.
There is a cellar, but no living space down in the cellar. It is utility area.
The first floor has three units.
Floors two through four are five residential units each.
And the first floor does have that recessed entryway.
And if I can pull up next to the actual proposed floor plans, we do have four different types of units from studios, one bedrooms and two bedrooms in the design.
The first floor has that covered entryway leading into the building.
We have the common interior space, and it has been designed with an interior space for parcels and mail, the bike storage for the residents, and interior storage, trash storage for the units, which, again, can be accessed through the side yard and taken out to the front of the street as needed through commercial trash pickup.
All of the units on the first floor are ADA accessible, and one of my client's goals here is to have those units rented to people that would need that accessibility, especially in light of being right across the street from the fresh grocer and other amenities.
It allows a person to have easy access to the grocery store and other amenities that allows them just to walk to, not have to take transit or drive.
The one bedroom unit is approximately 530 square feet and the two bedroom, two bath units on the
first floor are good size at 820 square feet. Those units do have washers, all units have
washers and dryer inside the units. Full living room, dining room, kitchen space.
Floors two through four are mirror images of each other. They replicate as we go up.
we have a studio on each floor two through four which is the smallest of the units 458 square
feet and that's one bedroom one bath and each of the upper floors has two one bedroom one bedroom
one bath units and two additional two bedroom two bath units and I'll note that there is a stair
tower in the front of the building and in the rear to allow for ingress egress in the case of
emergencies. The rear of course leads to a large rear yard and the access alley at the rear and
also we have the side yards where residents can get out to safety if necessary to escape the
building if there was ever an unforeseen circumstance. As I mentioned at the beginning
As I mentioned at the beginning, the architect did break up the front facade to create that little balcony space, and that does allow the front one -bedroom unit to have outdoor space as part of their unit.
the architect did break up the front facade to create that little balcony space.
And by pulling the property off the property line five feet, these units will have light and air window accessibility that gets those interior units, it's just more quality living space.
One thing I do want to mention is we do have a request for additional height as part of this proposal.
the floor heights end up at nine feet as designed and the community did ask about that and that's
one of the things it provides better living space inside each of the dwelling units and the
additional height as I mentioned will not have any casting any shadows on the residential houses
behind us and it should have no negative impact it should just have a positive impact in terms
of living space and desirability of living in this development. At Exhibit 9, I did include
zoning archives for these parcels. The first exhibit, first page is 5805, and I just included
this to show that the property's been a vacant lot since back in 1976. The second page of this
exhibit is for 5807. Again, it's been a vacant lot since 1976. So you're going on over 40 years of
vacantness, abandonedness. And as the other RCO mentioned, it's a little bit of a
distressed area, especially these parcels historically. At exhibit 10, I included just
historic photos of these lots looking at the the photo from 1996 the first photograph you can see
5805 -07 have been vacant lots and there were deteriorating structures at 5809 and 11.
Those structures were torn down between 2004 and 2008 and they've been vacant lots
for over 15 years at this point. So again it's this is a long -standing vacant area that
is in need of development this project will bring a quality housing to a neighborhood where
close to the accessibility of the food stores and transit exhibit 11 i did include the planning
commissions 2035 plan just for the area and if i turn to page
the fourth page of this which is their zoning to advance the plan
the subject property is kind of above the j area and below the h area on the plan and
colored orange which generally means rm1 um the planning commission for the h area recommended
rm1 to encourage residential uses and the j area was to consolidate zoning and create a master plan
around the campus this is la salle university in the j area and we would submit to the board that
But this area should allow for multifamily use, especially in light of needing residential
dwellings in the neighborhood, having that transit accessibility, and the longstanding
blatant abandonment, this would be a welcomed use for the neighborhood that would be in
betterment to what has been there for the past 45 plus years.
With that, members of the board, I know I went a little longer than I normally do.
I would call Mr. Gary Murray to raise his hand.
Hi, Mr. Murray, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Murray's been allowed to speak, sir.
Gary Murray, G -A -R -Y -M -U -R -R -A -Y.
You swear for him to tell truth, told truth, nothing but the truth.
Proceed, counsel.
Mr. Murray, did you hear the statements that I presented to the board today?
yes i have and were they true correct and accurate to the best of your knowledge
yes and just and i'd like to ask you also as part of the community meeting process
did you personally go out to the near neighbors and door knock to advise them of the meeting and
your project yes uh myself and my partner um on multiple occasions i believe it was four times
that we went out uh to canvas the neighborhood to get some community input um just to see if there
were any concerns personally especially to those that were directly in the vicinity of the project
um which would be the streets that are behind it and adjacent to it and did you receive any concerns
i didn't receive any concerns um a lot of them were excited to to hear that the property was uh
potentially no longer going to be a piece of land vacant.
potentially no longer going to be a a piece of uh land vacant land with uh you know grass that has
to be maintained um with that being said mr murray would you adopt the statements that i put on the
board presented to the board today as your own yes absolutely no further questions mr chairman
questions questions from the board no no no so questions from the virtual audience but i want to
take faith cdc first inez love
miss love has been about to speak sir good morning miss love could you could you just
state your name again for and spell for the court reporter yes inez love i -n -e -s love l -o -v -e all
right and you do swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
Proceed.
You want to testify early.
Here's your chance.
Well, we had two meetings with this applicant, and neither one of them had community participation.
The first meeting, we had no one there.
And the second meeting, we asked that they would use the information from ACCA Volunteer to give them a flyer notification that would get the community out.
They agreed to do that.
They used that information.
But we still had no participation from the community.
We also had, at the second meeting, we decided that since there was no participation, that the RCOs would make the decision about whether to approve or to approve.
Faith Community Development Corporation agreed and approved the project.
And I think that we did, and they did everything that they could do to get the folks out.
Normally, we don't get a lot of people. I lived in that area all of my young life, and it's been kind of desolate for quite a few years, and I think this project might be helpful to bring that community back.
Thank you.
Thank you for standing on the phone and calling in. We appreciate your input.
Other comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair, I have a Mr. David Nolan with his hand raised.
I have allowed him to speak at this time.
Good morning, sir.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
My name is David Noland, S -T -A -V -I -D -N -O -L -A -N -D.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, sir?
I do, sir.
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am.
Proceed.
I'm a resident of the 2100 block of Cowan.
That's right off of Worcester, a block away from the development.
my family's been in this community
for over 40 years
and as a little kid
I've been playing on that lot
that he's developing on
we were
responsible for cleaning
that lot multiple times
I still don't know
Roger Ebert from Belleville
and we
we're happy to see some
development on that lot
that's been a bayonet for over 40 years well thanks sir thank you for your input and thank
you for staying on the phone calling it is is there anyone else in the virtual audience
yes sir mr stanley graham i have allowed him to speak at this time good morning mr graham could
you state your name again for the court reporter and spell it uh stanley graham s -t -a -n -l -e -y
g -r -a -h -a -m right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes proceed sir uh good morning ladies and gentlemen uh first of all i live i live on a
block of 23 2163 grange like the second house from the corner where they want to develop
first of all the house that's to the north it's like it's like a big apartment building right
there then the house that the uh the lawyer gentleman talked about that's on the corner
that house is still old there was a fire there but there is another big house next to it that is
that is getting renovated also so my concern is we already have problems with parking on the 2100
block of grain street so with 18 more units that's going to bring like 25 more cars
and and to me like i don't i you know i don't come out at night i want you know i want access
to my car i don't come out at night okay i don't i don't want to park my car you know on a different
place like fresh grocer or you know like and it's elderly people on the block my concerns is parking
you know like and there's elderly people on the block my concerns is parking that's my biggest
concern parking what about the neighbors you know with this the building the big building that's
right at Worcester and Grange that's that's look like it got maybe I don't know how many units in
there now you're talking another 18 units then you're talking another like a triplex or something
like that or Worcester Street like where's where's where are we going to park at like we lose our
parking behind us like that's my concern well well we appreciate you taking the time to call in and
we appreciate your input is there anyone else in the virtual audience yes sir mr charles richardson
i've allowed him to speak good morning mr richardson you you've been on several times
already today just state your name please you don't have to be sworn charles richardson from
in the office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass Room, 408 City Hall.
Councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance.
Thank you very much, Mr. Richardson.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, sir.
Ms. Allison Weiss has her hand raised.
I have allowed her to speak.
Morning, Ms. Weiss.
could you state your name and spell for the court report? Allison, A -double -L -I -S -O -N -Weiss, W -E -I -S -S.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes. Are you a neighbor? Yes. Not close, but nearby. I pass by that very frequently,
I go to the shopping center there, and I wish I had known about the meetings, because I, like I said, I go past, I go down East Worcester frequently, and I didn't see any postings on, at least on that side of the property, so I wish I had known, and I would have attended the meetings and been more involved to make it a better project, so thank you.
Thank you very much for calling in. We appreciate your input.
This area, just members of the board, I know Ms. Allison Weiss is part of Solo Germantown, which is not one of the RCOs for this property.
Thank you. We're aware.
All right. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair. Sarah Bond, Philadelphia City Planning Commission, S -A -R -A -H -B -A -N -H.
In 2019, the zoning map was amended to RSA 5 at this location in accord with recommendations from the Comprehensive Plan.
The appellant has not shown that the property cannot possibly be used in strict conformity with the zoning code
and that a variance is therefore necessary to enable the viable economic use of the property.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board deny both the dimensional and use variance.
Thank you.
M .I. 2022 -006 -163 -5805 East Worcester Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ismail Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number 12, MI -2022 -006 -113 -4692 Hawthorne Street.
Sherman Toppin is the attorney.
Letter of support from the Frankfurt Neighborhood Advisory Council.
Letter of non -opposition from Council Member Lozada.
Good afternoon.
Just state your name, Sherman.
Okay, yes, I'm back.
Okay, I was just getting myself logged in and unmuted in my video working.
Sherman Toppin, S -H -E -R -M -A -N -T -O -P -P -I -N, address, 1500 JFK Boulevard, Suite 800.
Do you identify your client and the relationship to this property?
Yes. My client is the owner of the property, owner and the member of the LLC. I believe, let's see, I'm looking at the names that are present here. Luca Bogdan is his name, and I don't see him immediately among the names here, but he was on as a participant.
our our vice chair has just a few questions for me sir yes good morning counselor do you
Good morning, Counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate
Counsel, have you emailed all the required documents that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have. I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay. Let me just make sure that my client is available to hear.
He was on earlier. I think he went off when we were doing some of the other hearings.
But I will share my screen now, and I believe you'll log on as I'm speaking.
All right.
So is my screen visible?
That's the screen we had originally before.
Proceed.
Okay, I'll go ahead.
This is the one with the walls and the vacant basement?
Yes. Let me go to the beginning.
Let me go to the beginning.
I have two screens on my computer, so I've got to make sure I know which one.
There you go.
All right. So you should be seeing Bonnie Investments, LLC.
And the property that we're here to talk about is 4692 Hawthorne Street.
This is a property that we are seeking legalization of the use, two units.
The only refusal that we have is to use this property as a two -unit property.
What I want to do, even before I go into my hearing, I'm going to come out one, and I'm going to show you the picture of the property prior to what you see in the picture in front of you is new stucco along the side and siding, which is an improvement aesthetically on the outside.
You also see a ramp that's developed on the property. This ramp is to accommodate a handicapped disabled veteran that lives on the first floor unit.
But let me just come out of this screen one second so you can see a picture.
I'm going to share a screen of a picture of what the property looked like prior to my client's
purchase of the property last year. So if you see this picture, do you see a red brick building?
Yes. Okay. So this is what the property looked like at the time that my client purchased it
last year in March of 2022. As you can see, it's a red brick structure. And notably, there are two
front doors. The front door of the first unit, this first lower front door closest to the street,
margaret street uh is the first unit that runs along the back and the second is the stairway
that goes up to the second unit so this is the condition and the configuration of the property
when my client purchased it from you know from the the previous owner and so let me go back to
my presentation just as a as a way of understanding where we where we are with all of this so
so let's go back so in our typical package the first exhibit we show is the refusal which is
only to use the property as to two as two units to basically legalize its current existing use
and its consistent existing configuration the deed of the property the deed there was an error
in the deed of the property so we put the whole chain of titles of all the deeds that preceded it
so that the board would know that my client is the legal owner, but the name of his entity had a misspelling on it.
And so there was, as you can see here, B -O -H -I, it's Bonnie, B -O -N -I, so the H should have been an N,
but my client is, of course, the owner of the property.
So as we go down to our application, simply to grant the use of agreeing to two -unit household living from a single family, the project information form suggests the same.
On the corner of Hawthorne Street and Market Street is where the property is located, as you can see here.
Most of the homes that are in this area, this area is a RSA 5 area.
most of the homes are either single or multifamily already and the immediate adjacent house immediately
to the left of the house of the property is a single family home but there are several on the
same block that are multifamily two units and all of all of the buildings in this street are two
story as this existing property is so as a way of looking at what's inside when you open the front
or this is the the the a unit this is the unit where the disabled veteran is currently uh residing
when you open the door you have a kitchen as you move down into the property there's a common
hallway with one bedroom um to your right and in the back is the second bedroom this is an exterior
door and then there is only one bathroom for the property handicap accessible here over the toilet
as well as in the shower and the widths in the hallways are also handicapped accessible.
In the second unit when you open the door you have a stairway going straight up
At the landing, there's a bedroom to your left and further in the back to your right.
at the landing there's a bedroom to your left and further in the back to your right.
It's got a simple kitchen, L -shaped kitchen in the front of the upstairs unit.
And there's only one bathroom in the upstairs unit.
As far as the layout of the property, we've already seen it visually, but here is the layout of it.
The basement has nothing in it, mechanicals.
I'm going to come out of this, I'm going to show you, and this is, I also omitted to share this one picture.
Let me stop to share and go in so that the board can see the, I'll go back and share this picture.
And this was the infamous earlier picture that the board saw previously.
And that's what the basement looks like, just four walls with mechanicals present.
And this is the reverse of that same room.
And all they've done is they basically have put the new mechanicals in the rear of the building.
So going back to the main presentation.
And as you can see, the layout of the existing conditions of the property reflect the pictures I've already shown to the board.
And for this particular meeting, here is a proof of posting on the properties, both of the property doors.
the refusal as well as the zoning hearing for this particular meeting we sent a notice to
the members and to the neighbors that live uh in the near vicinity of the property according
to the code 134 letters went out to the affected area beyond and around the property and these
are the addresses our certificate of mailing is here and our verification that we've had this
RCO meeting as well, our tax clearance. And in the meeting, we did receive support from the
Frankfurt NAC, the Neighborhood Advisory Committee, and the members of that board did
supply to this board a letter of support for our variance. So at this time, I'd like to bring on
And if Mr. Bogdan is in, he should be in the presentation by now, hopefully I can bring him in.
If he could be advanced as a panelist so that I can have him authenticate my testimony on his behalf at this time.
Bogdan, if you're still in the audience, please raise your virtual hand.
Mr. Bogdan?
yes he just texted me and said that he can see me so i'm hopefully he can um he can make that uh
please i'm just texting him to have him to please raise his hand i know he's listening
hello all right could you state your state your name please and spell it for the court reporter
Hi, my name is Bogdan Luca. My last name is L -E -U -C -A. And I'm the owner of...
And what's your first... Go one more time. What's your first name again?
Bogdan. B -O -G -D -A -N.
Okay. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Yes, Mr. Bogdan, if you could please, were you here to watch and to listen to the testimony that I gave on your behalf, on behalf of the project at 4692 Hawthorne Street?
I did.
Okay, and was it true and correct and proper?
Is there anything you'd like to add to it, or is it pretty much what I've already testified to?
I don't want to add nothing so far.
okay great and would you accept my testimony as your own had you been able to testify in that way
yes i accept questions from questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman no no mr
chairman and council just for the record there's always been two front doors yes yes okay all right
and questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no other hands mr chair planning commission
thank you chair sarah bond philadelphia city planning commission s -a -r -a -h -b -a -n -h
in 2012 the zoning map was amended to rsa 5 at this location in accord with recommendations from
the comprehensive plan the appellant has not supported their hardship claim with evidence
of unique physical circumstances or conditions of the property the city planning commission
recommends that the Zoning Board deny the variance.
MI 2022 -006113
M .I. 2022 -006113 -4692 -4thorne Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, thank you, members.
And number 13, MI -2022 -005 -365, 4001 -203, Kensington Avenue, Augusta O 'Neill is the attorney, letter of support from Council Member Squilla, letter of support from Impact CDC.
Just coming back in as a panelist, sir.
Good morning.
Good morning, counsel. Could you state your name, please, and just spell it for the record?
Sure. My name is Augusta O 'Neill. That's spelled A -U -G -U -S -T -A. My last name is spelled O -N -E -I -L -L.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
Sure. My client is MCB Real Estate. They are the equitable owner of the property at 4001 -03
Kensington Avenue. They have the property under an agreement of sale.
okay and our our vice chair has just a few questions sure good morning counselor do you
agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to a zag receipt i do thank you have
you emailed all the required documents and exhibits that are required to proceed with this case five
days in advance of this hearing i did thank you please proceed and share your screen thank you so
much. Sorry, I shared the wrong screen. There it is. Okay. Thank you so much, members of the board.
As stated earlier, my client is the equitable owner of the property that is located at 4001
Kensington Avenue. Just to orient the board to the location, up on my screen is an aerial map
showing the property. The property, as you can see, is located off of Kensington Avenue
and Worrell Street. It is west of the Frankfurt Creek. You can see that the creek runs right next
to the property. This property was currently the site of a Walgreens. As you can see from
these pictures, the Walgreens has since been abandoned, and it is a site that has a lot of
trash and graffiti. This is just another view of the building. But it's currently vacant and
therefore has become a bit of an issue for the neighborhood as far as nuisance. So our proposal
is to redevelop the property and put up a 150 ,000 square foot five -story self -storage facility and
make some significant improvements to what is currently at the at the property. And so in your
exhibit package, I provided some renderings showing what my client intends to build at this location.
This is a rendering just showing, you know, the nice building. These renderings were created by
JKRP, our project architect, who's also with me here this morning. Another rendering just showing
different perspective of the building. It was included in your package. And not only are we
improving this vacant site and putting up a nice new building, but we're also going to be doing
some significant landscaping, as you can see from the landscaping plan that was also provided in my
exhibit package. We're going to be providing a few rain gardens, which are going to be flanking the
building on either side. And so as a result of doing this, this landscaping, we are able to
reduce the impervious coverage that's at the property. Currently, the impervious area at the
site is 90%, but with all of these rain gardens and the landscaping, we were able to reduce the
impervious area down to 58%, which Planning Commission commended us for when we went through
CDR process on this application. This property is zoned CMX3. The proposed use as a self -storage
facility is not permitted by right in the CMX3 zoning district, which is one of the
reasons that a refusal was generated on this application.
We feel that this use is appropriate for the area because it is largely surrounded by
some industrial uses, which again, I'll pull up my aerial map, just showing that there's
quite a few auto sales near this building. So again, we feel that the, given the context and
the surrounding uses, we feel that the self -storage would be an appropriate use. And I would like to
note that we're not asking for any dimensional variances for the building itself because we have
built what is a CMX3 compliance structure. So again, just going back to the refusal,
built what is a CMX3 compliance structure. So again, just going back to the refusal,
as you can see, the other refusals that were generated by this application relate to bicycle
and vehicle parking. Due to really an anomaly in the code, there are an excessive amount of
parking spaces that are required with this use. The code requires that we have 75 vehicle parking
spaces with three accessible parking spaces along with it, as well as 15 parking spaces.
We're proposing 10 parking spaces, one accessible parking space, and six bike spaces.
The reason that we feel that this is an adequate amount of parking is based on the operator's
experience that this is a very low impact, low traffic use. I'm sure anyone who's on the board
and has a storage facility knows that you're not visiting your unit every day. You're going there
occasionally. And so for that reason, we feel that a lesser number of parking spaces is appropriate.
The bicycle spaces, we just don't need as many as the code requires because, again, most people are
not going to bike up to this storage facility to either drop something off or pick something up.
We did meet with the affected RCO on this project, the Impact Community Development
Corporation. We met with them back on November 30th. As a result of that meeting, we did receive
their unanimous support. And I would like to just note for the board that in their letter of support,
one of the things that they also noted was, as I just stated, this building is a bit of an eyesore.
And so they appreciated the fact that we're going to be adding safety, beautification, value, and
jobs to their community. So again, they were in full support of the application. And just to
briefly go over some of the variance criteria. The proposed development is going to restore the
property from what is an eyesore and again an abandoned building that's attractive for
nuisance activity. It's going to be an improvement to the existing condition. This is consistent with
the character of the neighborhood, particularly the context that includes quite a few commercial
businesses. In comparison with some of the other uses that are surrounding us, this is going to be
an improvement because it's going to be a much less trafficked use. As I said before, self -storage
facilities just don't generate a lot of pedestrian or vehicle traffic due to the nature of the
business. Again, the proposed development is not going to cause any congestion in the streets for
the reasons that I just referenced. It's not going to increase any kind of danger of fire or
endanger the public health whatsoever. And it's not going to then substantially or permanently
impair the use of adjacent properties that are in the neighborhood. So as I said, with me this
morning is Devin Gray from JKRP. He's our project architect. Should anyone from the board have a
question for him? I also have with me Mr. Ryan Whitmore. He's with Lancor. They are an engineering
firm. So to the extent that anyone has any questions about the plan, he'd be happy to
respond. And with that being said, I would like to call forward my client, Mr. Dan Schabel.
Could you please state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Daniel Schabel, D -A -N -I -E -L, Schabel, S -H -A, B as in boy, E as in Edward, L as in Larry.
right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do proceed counsel thank you good morning mr shabell did you have an opportunity to
hear my testimony this morning i did and was everything that i said to the board true and
accurate yes and would you like to adopt my testimony as your own yes thank you so much
thank you members of the board i am i am available all right questions from the board
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission?
Thank you, Chair.
Sarah Bond, Philadelphia City Planning Commission, S -A -R -A -H -B -A -N -H.
In 2017, the zoning map was amended to CMX3 at this location
in accord with recommendations from the Comprehensive Plan.
The appellant has not shown that the property cannot be used in strict conformity with the zoning code
and that a variance is therefore necessary to enable the viable economic use of the property.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board deny the variance.
Thank you.
MI 2022 -005365 -4001 -03 -Kentington Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you, counsel, you have your votes.
Is there anyone in the morning session whose case has not been called?
Mr. Chair, I do not see any hands.
Okay. Thank you, everyone. A lot of cases done. See everybody at 2 p .m.
Excuse me, Nikki, can we pause the recording?
You can begin, Chair.
Good afternoon.
My name is Bill Bergman and I will be chairing the 2 o 'clock CBA hearings.
With me is the Vice Chair Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, Thomas Hallamann.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our board member, James Snell.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also here is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and our executive director, Tanya Stunkett.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.
The video will be available by contacting Tanya Stunkett at philo .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 an appearance statement, call 267 -270 -5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question and answer box on the screen is not for comment or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken.
Let's look at continuances for the two o 'clock list.
Is there anyone requesting a continuance for the two o 'clock list?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
This is Jason Hand.
I do not see any hands raised for continuances at this time.
I have a few withdrawals for the two o 'clock list.
Number one, MI 2022 006 085 4011 Meriden Street.
That case has been withdrawn.
Number two, MI 2022 001 374 4812 Knox Street.
that case has been withdrawn. And number five, MI -2022 -001 -761 -3518 G Street,
that case has been withdrawn. Are there any other requests for withdrawals?
Once again, sir, I do not see any hands raised.
Thank you. And also, case number nine, MI -2022 -002 -208 -744 North 4th Forty Street. I vote to dismiss this case.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is to dismiss this case.
James Snell, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you.
We're going to go to our add -on list.
Case number one, MI 2022 -003 -671 -2032 West Tioga Street.
This case has been withdrawn.
Number two, MI -2022 -003 -682 -2030 West Tioga Strait, this case has been withdrawn.
Number three, MI -2022 -002 -233 -5607 -13 Germantown Avenue.
I vote yes with provisos.
I vote yes with provisos.
Temporary special exception expires 4 -1 -26.
Assembly and entertainment use limited to the second floor.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Snell, my vote is yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, yes with provisos.
Thank you.
Number four, 7078 Lincoln Drive, MI2023 -001438.
The parties in this appeal have agreed that the applicant slash property owner has established a vested right in the subject zoning permit.
due to the non -refundable payment to housing trust fund as work done in reliance on the
subsequently issued building permit. As a result of this agreement, the board is granting this
appeal on the sole grounds that the appellant property owner has invested interest in the
subject zoning permit. The board is not rendering a decision on whether the removal of the trusses
constitute a demolition under the zoning code, and was thus outside the scope of the issued zoning permit.
I vote appeal granted.
Thomas Holloman, appeal granted.
James Snell, appeal granted.
Ishmael Shahid, appeal granted.
Mr. Shahid, can you please certify that you watched the video of the hearing?
Yes, I've certified that I watched the video of this hearing, and I am fully aware of all
that's going on with this case.
Ishmael Shahid, appeal granted.
Number five, MI 2022 -005 -983 -2106 North 9th Street.
This case was waiting on a letter from the North Central East RCO.
It's received in a letter of support.
I vote yes.
Thomas Tolman.
Thomas Tolman.
Thomas Tolman.
My vote is yes.
James Snell.
My vote is yes.
James Snell.
My vote is yes.
Mr. Chair, Mr. Shahid wasn't present for this case last week, so it's just you, Mr.
Holloman and Mr. Snell.
Thank you.
Number six, Mr. Shahid will handle this number, this case.
vote only
one second just so I can read it into the
you also got a certify again
so sure
number six
It's MI -2022 -006049, 3334 North 17th Street.
I would like to first certify that I have read and reviewed all the material associated with this case.
And I would like to move straight into the voting process.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman.
Mr. Chahee, I'm sorry, there are revised plans that were, yes, were requested as a proviso.
You can read that into the record as well.
Thank you.
Hold on a second.
Can you just see that?
And then also we want to add the proviso to that because we're going to grant it.
The proviso, I don't see the proviso of Hillary to read in.
It's revised plans, one page, stamped by ZBA March 22nd, 2023.
Revised plans, one page, stamped by ZBA on March 22nd, 2023.
My vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes, with proviso.
Thank you.
We're going to go to our main list.
Number three, MI 2021 -005.
MI 2021 005069 610 Locust Avenue. Shante Tager is the attorney.
Letter of support from 12th Democratic Ward.
They've been reintroduced as a panelist, sir.
I'm here.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Shanti Tager, S -H -O -N -T -I -T -A -G -E -R.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and their relationship to the property?
So my client is Rock Simcha, LLC.
They own the property.
And Mr. Shahid has a few questions for you.
Certainly.
Good afternoon, Counsel.
Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Have you emailed into our offices all the required documents and exhibits to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I emailed everything except for the certificate of tax compliance.
um apparently uh rock did not have a um registration on the city's website because
they pay their taxes via mail um so i advised my client to register uh i sent in um some other tax
documents uh this morning um showing that they were up to date on their taxes and i got a reply
from um miss uh saletta saying that that would be sufficient for now uh if the board uh so desires
and is so inclined to grant the relief they can make the submission of the tax certificate a
condition of that and i'd certainly be willing to do that and get that tax certificate to
compliance as soon as i can grab it from the from the website okay please proceed and share your
screen okay um i sorry this is my first philadelphia zba hearing so i wasn't um didn't
know too much about if if i direct you guys to the different uh exhibits that that i had and you had
that in front of you or if i need to share the screen and do it share the screen to do it sir
Okay. I'll try to see if I can do it that way.
Is there a green button on the bottom? Green button?
Is that share screen?
Yeah, certainly.
Screen one.
Actually, go to screen two.
Share.
And you can see just the empty screen right now?
It's...
We see now a bunch of files.
Okay, perfect. I can just pull the exhibit straight from here.
Okay, so the first exhibit I'll show you is just the plans.
These are the plans that were submitted to L &I originally.
So the property is a 1 ,908 square foot vacant lot.
It's located in the RSA 3 district.
The lot is existing non -conforming in that it is 1 ,908 square feet, whereas 2 ,200 square feet is required.
It has a width of 19 feet and one inch, whereas a 25 -foot width is otherwise required.
There was previously on this property a semi -detached dwelling that we learned was destroyed by fire.
the remaining semi -detached homes on the street each have three foot by one foot side yards
whereas the zoning ordinance in place now requires eight foot side yards
and we presume because they're all twins on this in this small section that the that the
house that had previously existed that burned down also had that three uh three foot one inch
side yard and basically what the property owner and the application is requesting for the board
is just a dimensional variance to allow for a single family semi -detached dwelling with the
three foot one inch side yard whereas an eight foot side yard is required by the variant or by
the zoning code. The proposed residence would be 16 feet wide as opposed to an 11 foot by one inch
width that would that the ordinance would specify. So with this 16 foot wide single family detached
residence it would it would match the other the it matched the side yard.
um it would match the other uh the it matched the side yards of the other uh homes that are
on the property and if uh if you if the board is so inclined I can show you an aerial view of the
other um of the other uh pictures on the property let me see you where it is it's a nine I think
so here's the here are the other twins that are right there and as you can see this is our property
and it's missing uh obviously it's vacant this is the companion twin on the other side
so they each have these three foot one yard uh three foot one inch side yards right here
and we're really just wanting to build another house that maintains a three foot one one inch
side yard and uh i i there is a the project architect is online today it's mr michael cole
um he would be able to answer any technical questions for you and i'd be happy to take
any other questions from the from the board at the time uh why don't you have your client here
uh well mr linietsky is the principal he's he's not present today no okay all right so you're
enrolled to the court we'll take your testimony yeah um questions from the board
no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman all right um questions or comments
from the virtual audience? Yes, Mr. Chair. I have Mr. Charles Richardson again. I have allowed him
to speak. Sure. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Mr. Richardson, after you've been here numerous times
today, just state your name, please, and you can start talking. Okay. Charles Richardson,
Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bastring, 508 City Hall. Councilwoman has no opposition to granting
this variance thank you very much is there anyone else in the virtual audience
no further hands mr chair planning commission thank you chair bergman david fecto f -e -c -t -e -a -u
with the city planning commission do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth yes sir i do proceed thank you sir the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the single family zoning at this location the proposed dimensions are consistent with adjacent
properties and with the surrounding neighborhood so the proposed dimensional variance is in keeping
with the purpose and spirit of the zoning code the city planning commission recommends the board
grant the dimensional variance thank you mi 2021 005069 610 locust avenue i vote yes yes
with proviso. Revised plans
one page, stamped by CBA
March 22nd, 2023.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you.
Okay. Number six, MI -2022 -006 -987 -1682 North 54th Street.
Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
No RCO letter at this point.
Am I right, Hillary?
One moment, Mr. Chair.
see that is correct we do not have an rco letter for this one at this time right
uh good afternoon mr chair members of the board alan knockamson a -l -a -n last name knockamson
n -o -c -h -u -m -s -o -n do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth i do could you identify your client and relationship to this property uh yes my client
is HHS Realty LLC. They're the owner of record of the property. And in the virtual audience,
I have Hussein Hussein, its member. Okay. And Mr. Shaheed has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? No, I actually, well, yes. I object in the sense of we originally, we applied for four
units if for some reason the refusal says three but we did it by way of her revised plans understood
Understood. Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits into our offices to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits into our offices
Yes, I did.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Hi, so I'm here to present 1682 North 54th Street. In my presentation, we'll first review the notice of refusal.
I had a placeholder for correspondence from the Hestonville Civic Association, I believe, when I was transitioning into the virtual.
As a panelist, I heard the chairman state that there is no letter from Hestonville Civic Association.
That is correct.
We met with them at a certified RCO meeting on the 14th.
They asked us then.
They didn't take a vote.
They asked us to meet again with them this past Monday.
They didn't take a vote.
informally, not in a certified meeting. We agreed to present and hold for vote so we can have
another meeting with them. The only objection I would have is they sent a letter to the ZBA,
I believe, this afternoon. I believe they're asking for more than what is required of us
as an applicant. They're asking us to notify SEPTA, the school district of Philadelphia,
as the tangle title representative of the city
and making sure that all of them are notified
of our meeting and are present at our meeting.
They're also asking us,
and then that letter also includes a proviso,
where they're asking us to replace
an entire city block of sidewalk as a proviso,
but that goes to the merits of it.
So, I mean, there's a lot of interesting requests of us.
We will meet with them. We want to meet with them in another meeting, but we would ask that, you know, we would be able to respond to whatever letter they provide us, but we would ask that they take a vote.
And we would ask that the board give us a date certain for a resumption hearing to respond in contact.
So the next.
Mr. Nockamson, this is Hillary. I just want to clarify because we did receive a request to amend the refusal in this case from your office.
So we thought that this would need to be held for an amended refusal.
Are you saying now that you want to do, that you would like this considered via revised plans?
Yeah, that was my understanding.
From the beginning, we indicated that this should have been for four units rather than three.
And it was our understanding that we could do this by way of revised plans.
Okay, because we did receive a request for an amended refusal.
so that's why i was for this so that's why i was a little confused no i actually we can look at it
that way yeah i looked at i talked to mr goldberg from our office i i indicated to him that you know
given that we spoke previously of what the proper solution to this would be simply revised plans by
indicating on the plans themselves that this is a quadplex that would be sufficient okay that that
is fine okay and i assume that was what was presented to the community then right it is for
units that is correct okay all right thank you you're welcome yeah so we provided them whatever
the board's seeing now we we showed uh the community as well so we have the revised plans
that we showed the community uh this you know we have nearby properties with a multi -family history
maps of the area photographs of the property or plans and drawings or rco meeting notice for the
certified meeting. There was no notice for the meeting that took place a few days thereafter.
Our application for appeal, our deed to the property, showing that HHS Realty LLC is the
owner of the property and our certificate of tax plans. Again, in the virtual audience is Hussain
Hussain, its member. So the notice refusal is this. This is an RSA 5 property. It's a rather
large property it's 1565 square feet and you'll see from the zoning map um there is a diversity of
of multi -family use um in or zoning in the area and multi -family use in particular
we're on the commercial corridor um and given the large size a lot we think it is in character to
ask for this to be a quadplex uh and you'll see from the refusal there was a mistake saying that
we were seeking a triplex, but we're seeking to amend or to rectify the situation by way of
revised plans. We did meet with the Hestonville Civic Association at a certified meeting on
March 14th. Again, they didn't take a vote. You know, they were asked to meet informally with the
group again. They didn't take a vote. They asked us to hold, you know, to present and to hold this
matter so they can we can meet again and we hope that they will take a vote um this is our
they can we can meet again and we hope that they will take a vote um this is our uh revised proviso
plan again all we're saying is we wanted an additional dwelling unit to four units
and this is the revised site plan where on the site plan is set itself says four units that's
the only change that we made everything else from a dimensional standpoint is the same and then this
is nearby properties with a multi -family history so this is our property and these are all these
other properties close by, which have a history of multifamily use. And you'll see from the
pictures that we're in the middle of pretty much a vacant city block. And then this is the
zoning map for close by in the area. So while we're RSA 5, you know, there's RM1, there's CMX 2,
there's purple. I don't remember if it's IRMX, but it's definitely not RSA 5. So again,
And what we're asking for is not out of character.
And you can see we're on a commercial corridor where there are,
we're close by to a commercial corridor where there's commercial use,
which we're hoping to help support that commercial use by the increased density.
And this is photographs of the property.
As you can see, we're in the middle of a city block that is vacant.
And, you know, again, this is proof of our notice posting.
But what has been asked of us from the community by way of the recent letter we received from them, they want us completely re -sidewalk an entire city block, which we can't do for multiple reasons, including the fact that, you know, it's not on our property, most of it.
And then they're also asking us to clear all the trees within this vacant city block as well, which we have no problems, obviously, removing the trees on our block, our portion of the block, but we can't remove trees from, you know, land that we don't own.
And then this property has been vacant, and this block has been vacant for a significant period of time.
Google Earth goes as far back as 2007.
So we found a picture in July of 2007, which shows that this has been a vacant land for some time.
And then this is North 54th Street to the right of the property, North 54th Street to the left of the property.
And then these are our plans and drawings.
Of particular note, we're not seeking any dimensional variances.
This is a 1565 square foot lot, significant in size, and, you know, we're falling well within the parameters of dimensional requirements of the zoning code.
All we're trying to do is put a three -story brick flat facade quadplex in the middle of this log.
and then you know simple floor plans we have four units but first unit is in the unit one's in the
front unit two's in the back then we have uh and those are by levels and then unit three is in the
front on the second floor unit four is in the back on the second floor and they're also by
units and units three and four have access to the roof as well through a roof deck access structure
and then we met with the community on march 14 2023 72 addresses were notified of this meeting
list of the addresses proof of mailing those addresses our application for appeal showing
HHS Realty LLC is the applicant's notice of refusal project information form or deeds of
property showing the HHS is the owner of the property and our certificate of tax clearance
while it says $111 .98 is due that's for 2023 taxes which are not due until later this month
with that being said I would ask that Mr. Hussain virtually raise his hand be sworn in and then he
can adopt my testimony as its own and we'll be more than happy to take any questions from the
board thereafter. Do we see a hand raised? No, Chair. Okay. Mr. Nockamson, you're an officer
of the court we can take your testimony thank you questions from the board from the board
no mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no handshare planning commission thank you chair bergman david vecto city planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends a change in the zoning to residential multifamily at this location
under the proposed zoning
pardon me under the proposed zoning uh three between three and four dwelling units would be
between three
allowed by right so the city planning commission recommends the board grant the use variants okay
so hillary we'll we'll close this just for information from the board from from the rco
yeah alan um would i'm not sure how soon you are you and hestonville are planning to meet again but
Should we hold this for maybe 30 days for another meeting and a letter?
Can we put a specific date?
So let's say, do you have availability the April 26th meeting just to hopefully just have a letter?
Yeah, that's fine.
We can hold it until April 26th at 2 p .m.
And we will vote it at that time based on the information that we received from the RCO and any response from yourself.
the record otherwise is closed. Thank you. Okay, thank you.
So number seven is next, and we're going to also combine that with number 10. So seven is MI 2022
006692 -150 South Independence Mall. And number 10,
Number 10 is MI -2022 -006 -507 -150 -South -Independence -Mall.
Number W, Ronald Patterson is the attorney.
We have support.
a letter of non -oppositions from Council Member Scuola,
and we also have non -opposition from Society Hill Civic Association with Proviso.
Mr. Patterson is for joining us, the panelist.
Good afternoon, Mr. Patterson.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Sure. Good afternoon.
Ronald Patterson, P -A -T -T -E -R -S -O -N.
Do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Sure. I represent the owner, operator, and developer of the property, which is 150 Philly LLC.
And principal here today is Peter Dolbermont.
Okay. Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel.
do you agree to waive the reading of the of the refusal and stipulate to his actions yes i do
have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits into our offices
to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes i have
thank you please proceed and share your screen thank you
you can see my screen we can great thank you so this case or case as you mentioned regards 150
south independent small west it's actually the public ledger building as you see here which
spans 6th street to 7th street and chestnut street 10 sampson street it's a 10 and 13 story building
having a mix of residential
dwelling units, commercial
on the first floor, restaurant
to downtown reception room,
club, we'll call it, hotel.
The cases, there's two cases
consolidated briefly. One is
for a small addition on top of the roof area
here, and the second is to
reapprove an underground
parking garage that would be
accessed off of Sampson Street, as I'm
denoting, and then exiting
on 7th Street.
I think we know
what the building looks like, and just to give you some kind of context here.
Samson Street, this is important because you'll see this is where we enter for the garage.
So as I mentioned, two -story addition atop the 13th floor and to re -approve in an underground parking garage.
It's located in the CMX 5 zoning district along with eight special control overlays.
I'm going to start with the roof addition, which is 006868 zoning application.
On the 13th floor portion of the building, we're proposing to construct a three -story addition,
two of the stories which are occupiable with the third being a roof deck element.
The purpose is to create 48 additional single -family residential dwelling units.
The purpose is to create 48 additional single -family residential dwelling units.
The building is designated as an historical building, and the addition and its design were vetted, added, and approved by the Philadelphia Historical Commission.
As you'll see and hear shortly from architect Plato Maranakos, great detail was exerted
in a design to match the height of the cornice and height of the Curtis building which is
adjacent.
It's a similar building and the design has turned out to be consistent with the character
and context of the area.
Second here, and we'll go through to some more detail, but this is the idea, this is
our building, this is the Curtis building.
The refusal letter for this edition regards dimensional issues.
Really it's what I call, it's the sky plane or bulk rule, let me pull up the refusal.
The building code calls it lock covers, but in general, as you increase the height of the building, you need to step back the building.
As you get into taller buildings, it creates a wedding cake effect.
The rule is that you can occupy the ground floor and 100 % of the lot up to 85 feet, and between 85 feet and 100 feet, then you can only occupy 50 % of that foot plate.
The current building conditions, because the building was built in 1927, the coverage is 76%.
It's an existing condition, which is an existing but legal non -conforming structure, thereby creating a hardship to develop any addition to the property or update the property.
Secondly, there's the Independence Hall overlay, which applies, which states that no building in the hall area can be constructed, altered, erected, etc., if it will exceed 45 feet in height.
The building is already at 270 feet.
The new addition is only two stories on the existing roof,
but it clearly exceeds this as we are adding a small addition.
But the hardships do exist that prevent any addition with respect to this overlay
that would allow us to viably expand and use the property.
The current FAR is 881%.
Our 27 ,900 -square -foot addition would increase it to 928%, and under CMX -5, we're allowed 1 ,200%, so we're way below the allowable.
The applicable code provisions stunt any possible expansion to use the available FAR, and that's kind of why we're here.
Not being able to utilize its FAR and its potential is a hardship created by the zoning designation, the code, the location of the building, its prior use, and its existing conditions.
Yet, we believe the addition, as you'll see, complies with the spirit and the intent of the overlay, as you will see how it is designed and was approved by the Historical Commission, so it creates no visual impacts at all on the Independence Hall area.
And with that said, as for this and for the parking requirement, which we'll do after this, there's no objection from the Society Hill Pacific Association.
And with that said, if you could promote Plato Maranakis, who's our architect, we'll take you through some of these plans briefly.
He's been allowed to speak, sir.
Hey, sir, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Yes, Plato Maranakis, Jr.
I'm at 107 South 2nd Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19106.
Just for the record, could you spell your name, please?
I'm sorry, P -L -A -T -O -M -A -R -I -N -A -K -O -S.
Sorry about that.
No, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
yes i do proceed counsel thank you um what's your connection with uh the project or the architect
yes i am and uh so obviously you're familiar with the property and you've drawn and designed
these plans correct that's correct and you've taken them through and obtained the approval
from the philadelphia historical commission with respect to the addition and the parking
yes with respect yeah i'm i'm i'm trying i'm having technical problems with my screen right
now i'm trying all right i can go back and no no it's all right let me i apologize uh
All right, I can go back and...
No, no, it's all right.
I apologize.
Hold on.
Join us, the panelists.
You're getting promoted to panelists now.
Oh, thank you.
Sorry.
You can hit the green button now.
Yeah, I know.
I'm sorry about that.
I'm trying to do a couple of things at the same time here.
Okay, here we are. Sorry about that.
Okay, before we proceed, Plato, you've heard my presentation so far.
Would you agree that it's true and accurate?
Yes, I do.
And would you adopt it as if you were your own?
Yes, I would.
Okay, thank you.
So right now we're on the building addition.
Could you take us through what the design is, what the no impacts are,
and what comments and concerns the Historical Commission?
I will. Our design was sensitive to the historic context of Independence Hall. Our neighbor to the south, the Curtis building, completed a two -story addition.
And our design on the ledger follows that setback. If you can look here, the ledger is here, the Curtis addition is here, and then our public ledger is additions here.
during the historical review and subsequent approval a lot of work design work was done
to minimize the design impact on the independence mall area so this is sort of like a an example
you're standing in front of uh independence mall you're looking at the mall at the at the
independence hall obviously and then you see in the background the curtis kind of popping up and
in our addition popping up as well, but also setback. We also took a lot of care in, I'm
going to flip around some of these. This was the old drawing of the public ledger building,
the Trumbire drawing. And one thing we worked with historical is to try to follow the column
lines from the bottom to the top so this kind of comes out from the building but kind of fits in
with the building too we took a lot of care with the materials of the building especially with the
hand rails that make them not reflective so that you couldn't see the sun hitting it so like i'm
sorry so we would use like an aluminum picket rail and some of these materials limestone panels
and stuff to kind of keep it less reflective so when the sun hits it you wouldn't see it shining
on top of the building so there was a lot of back and forth with it historical and they were a great
resource and i'm glad to work with them so i know it's a lot of details about the design but
you know as it applies and it affects zoning is is it your opinion that the historical commission
view this as that it would have no adverse impact on the Independence Hall area?
That's correct. Yeah, I'm sorry. Yeah, that's correct. Because we said it back, if you look
at, we did a laser scan. So this image is a laser image that scans the roof. So basically,
our proposed addition is in line with the Curtis. So we are very sensitive to that. So when you
go down, when you look at the
street level, like here's
the street level from Chestnut
Street looking up on the corner,
you can't really see the
addition at all. It doesn't really have
no impact.
So are you aware that the Curtis
Building had received a similar variance
for their addition years ago?
Yes. And would you
agree that
this addition, you know,
for other
reasons and purposes complies with the spirit and context of what the Independence Hall overlay
is really meant to accomplish? I believe so, yes. Okay, thank you. Anything you want to add on this
particular refusal before we move the parking? No, I'm clear. I'm good. Okay. Any questions from
the board if they have any questions all right if not you want to you want to put up the um the
parking claim yes okay i'm gonna mr chairman i'm gonna you know a separate opening for this but
briefly and then take a plato through of this testimony so the second uh refusal regards parking
So the second refusal regards parking and see if I could.
You don't have the refusal to eat, Plato, or otherwise I'll put it up.
Well, I'll go through it.
So we'll just keep that up.
So the building, as we saw in the overhead, and Plato, you can point to it,
has what we'll call an existing port co -chair in the middle of the building.
which is accessible through by off of Sampson Street,
which is currently being used for deliveries
and loading and trash, et cetera,
and then exits out on 7th Street.
In 2017, this board granted approval
to create a parking garage in the cellar of the building.
It was a counter number 29071.
And at that hearing, the board approved my application
to create 211 spaces which was later requested to reduce to 197 spaces and it was a valet type
of arrangement where the cars would be dropped off at this open area to Port Cochere and drivers
would then take it into the basement and park both tandem and stacked and then up uh stacked
vertically on on lifts um drivers did not park their cars at that time um you know due to other
For a lot of reasons, financing and COVID intervened, that project was not started, and unfortunately, and subsequently, a zoning permit was then terminated because it wasn't used within three years of the approval.
So hence, we really are reapplying for this underground garage, but we believe redesigned even in a better configuration.
it would still be valet. The refusals regard issues that are inherent in existing configuration
conditions of the basement and also inherent in valet parking garage arrangements. For example,
there's a dimensional standard refusal for minimum aisle width. You know, aisle widths always arise
in valet parking garages or parking lots really not applicable as the car owner is not driving.
There is a refusal for not providing a van accessible space adjacent to the entrance,
which I'll go through in a minute with Plato. So with that said, Plato, you just heard my
presentation and testimony would you agree so far is true and accurate yes i would and would
you adopt as if it were your own yes i would okay so could you show us where the um if you
have the site plan where the ada parking is the next yeah the next uh go down to the the next
site plan the next page down yeah i think that one yeah yeah okay so if you could just show the
board where the parks, sorry, the cars would enter off of Sampson Street. Take us through
what a car would do here. Okay, so Sampson Street here is at the top of the page. Basically,
they would come into this entrance. The gate's down right now, but they would, you could drive
through this lovely arch and basically go in here. And that's an open area to the sky?
Yeah, it's open to the sky. This is covered. This portion is covered. And then there's stacked reservoir spaces because the valet will be parking cars. And if a car is not ready to get parked, there's eight stacked cars here for reservoir parking as a kind of, as a holding area in case, you know, if it gets, yeah.
If I can interrupt you, so the first two refusals say that there's no van accessible space adjacent to the entrance, and then the second says that the spaces are adjacent or behind the entrance.
You know, the fact is that nobody is parking their ADA car in an ADA space here, correct?
It's dropped off, and the valet then takes the car.
So we believe that these refusals are really not relevant.
So the next one has to do with reservoir spaces.
we're required to have five we're providing four but the refusal also says that the proposed
reservoir spaces are behind the valet pickup point if you could just address this and maybe
it's because we changed the configuration of the flow of the traffic well yeah the valet office
is here where it says valet there's a then the ramp because it's an existing building and the
columns are where they are we had to get and then we also had other mechanical systems we had to
And then we also had other mechanical systems. We had to get the ramp in and it kind of takes a turn. I'm sorry for moving. So basically it comes down and it comes down into the space. So that was sort of the reason why we couldn't have the stacked before right next to the valet.
get the ramp in.
Yeah, but I think the original plan had reverse traffic flow, so you would actually drop off at the valet and then move upward to where the stacked spaces are.
But now that the traffic comes in off of Sampson Street, they actually do hit the stacked reservoir spaces, correct?
That's correct, yes.
Okay, so anyway, we believe that with this design, that it would create no adverse impacts on public health, safety, welfare, and especially traffic.
The plan was reviewed and approved by Street Department, although we'll get another review when we apply for a building permit.
And it's important to note if the board looks at the letter of non -objection from the Society Hill Civic Association that we have an understanding and agreement to pursue the design further.
It's clearly written in the letter.
So with that said, I have no further questions.
Plato, if the board has any questions.
But if you want to relinquish your screen, I'll put up some other exhibits while the board's having a discussion.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Yeah, I have a quick question.
Counsel, is that a Keystone building or is Keystone Curtis building?
a keystone is a curtis building
okay yeah not our building
any other questions from the board no chair
questions from or comment from the virtual audience mr chair i just have a quick question
for mr patterson um mr patterson in in reviewing the records on this property i noticed that it's
separated into five condominium units but i was unclear based on the records that i found where
the division was and it's my understanding that this is for a particular that the this particular
or this the um refusals here are for a particular condo unit or at least it seems to be that way
based on on the deed yeah it's it's kind of so Plato you're still here so the the condo unit is
this l -shaped portion here of the building yes is that correct yep okay great and so the building
is in a u -shape we have this particular l part here that's what we're here on okay great and
and the the garage portion is similar l -shaped but below it's not an l -shape it actually occupies
most of the basement um but there's another portion of the basement that's occupied by the
other condo i think there are four condos the we occupy one and then there's the wawa and then
there was another i think um the vita and then uh the the office portion okay so but this condo
includes obviously this l -shaped part of the building and then the part of the the parking
or the part of the basement that you're developing is the parking garage that's correct okay um
mr patterson we need to include a proviso to clarify that this is that these are particular
because the the refusal all has the just the 150 south independence mall um number w address but
these would be this is e1 is it am i correct correct correct okay okay so what would you be
comfortable if the board was granting to include a proviso just to clarify that
since the refusal doesn't specify okay thank you and if the board can see this is the relevant
language from um society hill letter so we're going to further look at safety measures for
the vehicles yeah you already have some for that right hillary you wrote up uh yes i i i did um
write up something that the board can adopt based on that that's 10 right um yes that's number 10
that's the second the second case right okay um planning commission
thank you chair bergman david dekto with the city planning commission the comprehensive
thank you chair bergman david dekto with the city planning commission the comprehensive
plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed use zoning at this location the building
onto which the addition is proposed is already legally non -conforming under the terms of the
independence mall sub area of the center city overlay the addition will not significantly
increase these non -conformities so the city planning commission recommends the board grant
the dimensional variances the proposed parking variances are not required to enable the applicant
to make use of this building so the city planning commission recommends that the board deny the
parking variances okay um hillary wrote vote vote these one at a time yes mr chair because there's
a separate request for proviso for the parking
so number seven mi 2022 zero zero six zero six six nine six nine two
150 000 small w i vote yes i vote yes thomas hallman excuse me mr chair could you
include a proviso indicating um that this applies to unit e1
So this applies to unit E1, is that okay?
Yes, that is fine.
Tom Toliman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Number 10. MI 2022 -006 -507 -150 -South -Independence -Mall -W. I vote yes with Proviso.
limit to you wait wait let me let me get the proviso out first limit to unit one is that
right hillary e1 e1 e1 yes and then app applicants to install safety measures at the
7th street exit as permitted by the streets department
Thomas Holliman my vote is no James Snell my vote is yes with proviso
Ishmael Shahi my vote is yes with proviso thank you
thank you thank you Mr. Chairman members of the board
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
So number eight, MI 2022 -007 -530 -909 -15 North 2nd Street.
Adam Laver is the attorney.
Letter of non -opposition from Council Member Squilla.
Letter of support from Northern Liberty's Business Improvement District.
And also, a letter of support from Northern Liberties Neighborhood Association.
Would provide those?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Hi. Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court reporter?
Yes. Adam Laver, L .A., V .A .S. and Victor, E .R., Lank, Rome, 1 Logan Square.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
Could you identify your client in the relationship to the property?
Blankrome represents North Bull and its corporate entity, Spare Time Inc.,
which is the tenant, the sole tenant of the subject property, 909 -15 North 2nd Street.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to his accuracy?
Good afternoon, Mr. Vice Chairman. Yes, I do.
Have you emailed all the required documents to proceed with this case five days in advance
of this hearing?
Yes, Mr. Shahid.
Thank you. Thank you, counsel. Please proceed with sharing screen.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman and members of the board, on the screen before you is the subject property,
commonly known as North Bowl. As I mentioned, the corporate entity is Spare Time Incorporated.
I'm here this afternoon with the principal owner of North Bowl, Oron Daskal, O -R -O -N -D -A -S -K -A -L.
And as I mentioned, the North Bowl takes up the entire subject property.
It really is a beloved institution in the Northern Liberties neighborhood.
It really is a beloved institution in the Northern Liberties.
You can see some photographs here.
It is a bowling alley restaurant located along North 2nd Street.
Just to the left is the Chess Cafe Catering Hall that many are familiar with as well.
That is a separate property.
On the screen now are existing approvals.
The last Zoning Use Registration Permit is dated June of 2019.
This permit provided for a three -year temporary permit, which expired on November 11, 2022.
This is why we are back before the Board today.
In our application, the present application, we sought to permanently approve the prior
Zoning Board of Adjustment approval.
The board, there is on the record a finding of hardship, particular to this property and particular to the very nature of this application.
Once again, though, there was a temporary approval, and that's why we're back again.
My client had sought to convert the temporary approval to a permanent approval.
However, the coordinating RCO, NLNA, requests that the approval be renewed for three years only as
temporary. And if the board is inclined to grant the requested relief, the applicant, Mr. Daskal,
does not object to the community's request that this remain temporary.
Here you can see some photographs regarding the outdoor area, which is the subject of the
application in warm weather months north north ball has previously obtained the temporary approval
to use the small accessory parking lot for outdoor bocce dining a seasonal bar etc and
the creative use of this space has has truly been embraced by the community at large
You can see some photographs of how the whole community has enjoyed this outdoor space,
which really became even more relevant through the worst periods of the pandemic.
The renewal of the existing approvals would allow North Bowl the full seasonal use of
the parking lot from April 1st through October 31st, the warm weather months.
There is a full package of support from the community with provisos, as I mentioned.
The project has been reviewed by Councilman Mark Squilla, by Northern Liberty's Neighbors
Association, Northern Liberty's Business Improvement District, and Near Neighbors.
The first letter up on the screen is the NLNA support for the three -year temporary variance
with provisos similar to what the Zoning Board had previously granted.
The second letter is from the Northern Liberties Business District, which has some very complementary language attesting to the reputation of North Ball in the community.
The third letter is from Council Member Squilla, which echoes the Coordinating RCOs letter.
And in addition, here is a letter from a near neighbor attesting to the support for the
continued seasonal use of the outdoor space.
Here Mr. Chairman and members of the board is a plan showing what has previously been
approved and what we're requesting be renewed if you will for use of the outdoor space during
warm weather.
the notice of refusal indicates that the north delaware avenue overlay requires zba approval
for extension of the assembly and entertainment use that's prohibited by the overlay and this
board has previously found hardship related to this very matter which we seek to renew for three
years the extension of assembly and entertainment would be otherwise prohibited the request before
the board is in response to neighborhood requests for outdoor component and that speaks to the
granting of relief being appropriate this is an existing use the operational information has
previously been on put on record with the board and with the rco there are no issues regarding
the operation the extensive extensive review with the coordinating rco and the support of neighbors
speaks to relief being appropriate in this instance. The variance sought 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 extensive
of support on record, and the variants would represent the minimum variants necessary.
and the variance would represent the minimum variance necessary to afford relief just for
this specific area in front of the subject property. The grant of variance relief will
not increase congestion in the public streets, danger of fire, health safety, or otherwise,
and will not unduly burden transportation, water, sewer, school park, or other public facilities.
Mr. Daskal is with us, and we would be happy to answer any questions the board may have.
Is he raising his hand?
Mr. Daskal, would you kindly raise your virtual hand so that Chairman Bergman may ask you some questions?
He's available, Mr. Chairman.
He's going to speak, sir.
Yeah, my name is Oron Daskal.
Could you spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Sure can.
that's O -R -O -N, last name D like David, A like Adam, S like Sam, K -A -L. Right. Do you swear or
affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Daskal. Have you been present for the entirety of this virtual
hearing before the Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment? I have. And would you adopt and
affirm the testimony that I've offered as your own. Yes, I will. Thank you. Questions from the
board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Chair. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair. My Planning Commission. Thank you, Chair Bergman. David
Decto with the City Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends no change in the
commercial mixed -use zoning at this location. This is a continuation of a temporary use.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board approve the proposed variants for an
additional three -year period. Thank you. MI 2022 -007 -530 -909 -15 North 2nd Street. I vote yes
with proviso. Three -year temporary variance expires 4 -1 -26. Maximum of 60 people in outdoor space.
Outdoor space in use from April to October, only with games stopping at 10 p .m. Outdoor music
must end by 10 p .m. Sunday to Thursday and by 12 a .m. Friday and Saturday. Maximum of eight
outdoor music performances per calendar year and indoor live music must end by midnight.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso. James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso. Thank you counsel. Thank you Mr. Chairman,
members of the board have a good afternoon.
Okay, I think, let's see here, that was eight, nine, number 11, MI 2022 -006 -429 -5777 East
Worcester Street, Alan Nocklinson is the attorney, letter of support from the Concerned Community
Association, the affected RCO, with proviso. Letter of support, Belleville Neighbors, with a proviso.
Letter of support from FAFE CDC, with proviso.
All right.
So, Noxon, you've already been sworn. Just state your name for the record.
Alan Nockmson, A -L -A -N, last name Nockmson, N -O -C -H -U -M -S -O.
And can you, would you identify your client relationship to the property?
Yeah, my client is the owner of Record Quest Trust Company, and its representative is in the virtual audience, Angelo Adams.
Okay, our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Have you emailed all the required documents to proceed with this case
five days in advance of this hearing? I have. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Well, I would say we're going to go over 5777 East Worcester Street.
As you can see in the front of this presentation packet, there are four electrical meters here.
this existed prior to our purchase of this property so there's one for the common area
and one for each of the three existing units that we purchased with this property so we'll
that we purchased with this property so we'll review the notice of refusal and you'll see that
review the notice of refusal and you'll see that
the reason why we're here is because this is not an arm one property um if it was we we would not
need these proceedings you're fading out a little bit could you alan we're having a hard time hearing
you oh can you hear me now yeah yeah you're a little closer yeah please sit up closer can you
hear me now yeah we do all right great um so we're going to review the letter of support from the
faith community development corporation that was the coordinating rco there are some provisos i
would like to discuss um we did receive a letter i think it was last night from uh acca and i
believe mr chairman you stated that there was a third letter from one of the other rcos i'm not
in possession of that letter i don't fill their neighbors yeah i believe you said it was a letter
of support with provisos i'm not familiar with that letter than the provisos but we'll just
review the two letters both both letters that we just received i believe today are two units
each okay yeah we'll discuss that um then nearby rsa uh multi -family properties are mls listing
which actually was this property was advertised as a three unit it's currently configured as a
three unit our maps of the area photographs of the property in the surrounding area our plans
and drawings, RCO meeting notice. We've had a well -attended meeting with the unanimous support.
Applications for appeal or deed to the property showing Quest Trust Company as the owner. In the
virtual audience is Angela Adams, who will adopt my testimony at the conclusion of this presentation,
and then also our certificate of tax clearance. So this is an RSA 5 property, but it's rather
large it's almost 1400 square feet and what we're just trying to do is legalize uh this structure
when my client was um in the process of trying to obtain rental licenses and other permits he
was discovered that uh this use uh was not legal at the time so that's why we're here today we're
not changing the physical structure inside and out really we're updating but we're not changing the
building structure in any way uh we have a letter of support uh from the faith cdc uh there are
three provisos with respect to that so the first one is no basement living we have no issue with
that because no one has access to the basement um so we would agree to that proviso second proviso
is no roof deck installed well we're not changing the physical structure of this property and we're
not proposing to erect a roof deck access structure so we would have no issue with that proviso and
then the third proviso is trash to be stored on the outside of the property so the first floor
unit has access to rear they will store their trash outside the the units on the second and
third floors there are ventilated trash rooms or trash closets that's where we restore the trash
there but um you know that's our response to number three so we have no issues storing trash
in unit one in the rear of the property outside and have ventilated trash closets for units two
and three but as you can see uh there were you know unanimous support of this project
um eight people voted um some people um refrained from voting including obviously the ownership team
and clean myself. And I believe ACCA may not have voted either. Now, they did send a letter
last night about this. So, you know, we're across the street from a shopping mall. And, you know,
so it's a commercial corridor. So having multifamilies not have character for what you
would expect. And I think they would even agree to that. They're requesting to only have two units.
Again, it was advertised as three units. We're not changing the density of this property in any
way. And we would request that we allow to remain at three units because otherwise it'd be cost
prohibitive to completely change the layout inside this property. And then it's not of character to
have multifamily units nearby. So 5763 East Worcester Street is multifamily. 5749 East
Worcester Street is multifamily. And then it was advertised to us as three units. And as you can
see here, it said three kitchens. So this was a three -unit structure when we purchased it. It
was advertised as a three -unit structure. And unfortunately, my client wasn't as familiar with
the rules and regulations with respect to zoning. And that's unfortunately why we're here today.
And then the zoning map, as you can see where we are, it's an RSA5 property. There is R &1
across here and across the street is rsa5 but that is actually a church and a shopping center
and a shopping center as well so i think some of the zoning classification this neighborhood may
as well so i think some of the zoning classification in this neighborhood
be misclassified and then photographs of the property again as you can see we have four meters
here this wasn't installed by my client this existed at the time he purchased it one meter
is for the common area and one and then the other three meters are for each of the units themselves
and then this is the notice poster uh showing proof that we posted the property uh prior to
the hearing this is east worcester avenue to right of property east worcester avenue to the left of
the property and then our plans this is just a site plan again we're not changing the physical
structure at all we just wanted the board to see the site plan and then this is just our floor
plans. Again, no one has access to the lower level, the basement. So we have no issue having
a proviso, no living in basement. So if you come in here, first floor unit, first floor is unit
number one. You go up a flight of steps, that's unit number two. And then if you make a left,
and if you make a right, unit number three is a bi -level, which is, you know, right here,
It's the living room area and kitchen, and then there's a bedroom, two bedrooms on the third floor.
Again, we're not changing the physical structure at all.
We met on February 16th.
123 addresses were notified.
List of the addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses.
Our application for appeal showing that Quest Trust Company was the applicant.
or a deed to the property, showing Quest Trust Company as the owner.
And then there are Certificate of Tax Clearance.
The only thing is it's showing a balance of 21, 79, 49,
but that is because of 2023 taxes.
They're not due until March 31st.
I believe my client has since paid those taxes,
but not relevant to our discussions for my client's tax compliance,
at least as through March 31st of 2023.
With that being said, I would ask that my client, Angelo Adams, virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
I'm allowed to speak.
Sir, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Angelo Adams, spelled A -N -G -E -L -O. Adams is A -D -A -M -S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir. Proceed, counsel. Mr. Adams, you've heard everything I had to say today about your zoning matter. Yes. Is it true and correct? Yes, it is. And do you adopt it as your own testimony? Yes. Thank you.
Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Chair. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
yes sir i have mr charles richardson with his hand raised i have allowed him to speak at this
time mr richardson just state your name please sir charles richardson office of councilwoman
cindy bass from 508 city hall councilwoman has no objection to granting the variance
thank you very much is there anyone else in the virtual audience
um yes sir miss um inez love she has her hand raised i've allowed her to speak at this time
miss miss miss love you've already been sworn once today just state your name and you can start
testifying inez love uh faith community development corporation with coordinating rco for this
project. There was a discussion mention of two units, but we did not discuss or ask that those
units be reduced to two. The folks that were voting at the meeting, they agreed to the units
and they also approved it. The information that ACCA has given to you was a meeting that they
had individually after our coordinating meeting okay um thank you for uh taking the time to call
in and we appreciate your input is there anyone else in the virtual audience
no sir there's no further planning commission thank you chair bergman david fechto with the
city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single
family zone at this location the proposal for three dwelling units is not the minimum needed
to afford relief under the zoning code, the proposed multifamily on a single -family zone
block is out of character and not in harmony with the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board deny the use of the zoning code.
Okay. MI 2022 -006 -429 -5777 East Worcester Street. I vote yes with provisor. Use of basement limited storage and mechanicals. No roof deck and trash stored outside the building.
MI 2022.
James Snell, my vote is yes, with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with provisos.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
I want to go back to number four.
Let's see, here's a four.
Yeah, there it is.
MI 2022 -009 -184 -780 South 2nd Street.
Michael Mattione is the attorney.
This is a resumptive hearing.
And Vern Anastasio is also the attorney for the Protestants.
Mr. Mattione will be coming back in as a panelist.
Thank you.
And Mr. Anastasia will be rejoining his panelists.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Mattione, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Sure. Michael Mattione, M -A -T -T -I -O -N -I.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I'm sorry, Vern, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Vern 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.
I do, sir.
So this is a resumptive hearing, and our schedule here shows that there will be a presentation by counsel for the Protestants.
Then we'll take public testimony, planning commission recommendation.
Mr. Chair?
Yes. One quick comment before Vern starts.
I did, I just want to make on the record that we presented a bunch of supplemental exhibits, including a memorandum of law, some plans, the lease amendment and extension, another supplemental report, another letter from award leader, some photographs, support emails, and the photo showing the posting of the zoning notice for this year.
Thank you.
All right.
And Vern, you had supplemental submissions too, right?
I did. They have been submitted to the board, to Ms. Emerson, and I'm going to be presenting them this evening, this afternoon.
Fine. Okay.
Thank you.
Who's your first witness?
I want to start, Mr. Chair, just by a brief summary, and then I'll get into the three witnesses really quickly, and then a brief promise.
Thank you.
This is a case in opposition to the zoning appeal of 780 South.
second. We have over 100 and some odd pages of exhibits. Of course, the packet includes
not only a cover photo and the refusal, letters of opposition from immediate neighbors, from
Councilmember Mark Squilla, from the QVNA. We have photos that evidence the rear door
and rear window side door and side window being used um in opposition to the proviso that prohibits
it we have a list of l and i violations we have signatures of all immediate neighbors in
opposition we have um evidence of uh difficulty getting into the restaurant if you are a lay person
and a letter of legal brief in opposition to the variants.
This is one of remind the board and everyone who happens to be here today
that financial considerations shall not be considered a hardship
in analysis for zoning relief, generally speaking.
Applicants' location was conditioned on no takeout window and no takeout door
in a decade -long agreement between the community RCO and the applicant that was attached as a
proviso to the current permit that they're using. Popular restaurants often outgrow their original
spaces and have to move to larger spaces. The property size and narrow sidewalk, we will learn,
have not changed in the 10 years that they've been operating.
There are not unique physical conditions to create a hardship.
There are not unique physical conditions to create a hardship.
The applicant...
The applicant does not own the property, nor do they need to renew their lease.
There are larger places along commercial operators that would welcome a takeout restaurant.
If they renew the lease, they create their own challenge.
They create hardship.
We have an overwhelming majority of emails in opposition.
Those that are in support are actually from folks who reside far beyond the immediate area.
Of the initially submitted signatures, three signers live on Fulton, only three on the 700 block of 2nd Street.
One of them is a tenant in the subject property.
Another is a fellow restaurant owner.
The opponents submit signatures of at least 10 immediate residents in opposition, takeout, opposition from the QVNA,
and opposition from Council Member Mark Squillow.
We submitted an additional email of opposition from Mr. Vince Papali,
again, recognizing that everyone supports the restaurant,
but they just don't want the takeout classification.
The applicant does not need the variance for a takeout restaurant, by the way,
to carry out orders for customers.
And granting the variance will allow the landlord to replace Royal Sushi with any takeout restaurant, like a steak shop akin to Pat's and Geno's, which obviously nobody in the immediate area wants to see, considering what they're already dealing with.
and let's look at some of the stuff that they're already dealing with uh traffic congestion
a block of rights of way uh lots of folks congregating on the sidewalk noise again
not even being able to get out of there um that there uh there are five ways uh we have additional
photo evidence. And I'm sorry, it's
sort of on a slant, but you'll be able to see if you look
through the exhibits that there is a lot of sidewalk congestion,
a lot of sidewalk noise, exactly, and even without
or with the sidewalk seating. It's the takeout
window and the takeout door, which were explicitly
prohibited in the provisos that granted
the variance for them to operate initially a decade ago that is causing the problem today.
And we're just going to submit this and enter it into evidence as you see it.
With that, I'd like to call my first witness, Mr. Ito, who is the applicant, appellant, I'm sorry.
Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
So please raise your hand, your virtual hand, the way to be sworn in.
Do we see him?
Mr. Chair, I am not seeing him in the virtual audience, unfortunately.
He's Mr. Mattione's client, Mr. Chair, so I'm assuming he would be present.
I don't believe Mr. Ito's present. We have David Frank and Justin Holden, who both testified at the last hearing.
David is both a principal in the restaurant and the owner of the property, and Justin Holden is the manager of the property.
They are both present. I believe Jonathan DeWitch is also present.
Mr. Udo, I believe, is working at the restaurant.
And I'm sorry, the name of the manager again, Mr. Mattione?
Justin Holden.
May I please call Mr. Holden just very briefly?
He was subject to cross -examination last time, Mr. Chairman.
Well, he wants to call him as a witness.
Well, I don't believe this will be long.
Very quickly.
Mr. Holden, please raise a virtual hand.
He's been allowed to speak, sir.
Mr. Holden, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Mr. Holden?
Doug, can you hear me now?
Yes, we can. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Justin Holden, H -O -L -D -E -N.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed to Mr. Anastasio.
Mr. Anastasio. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And for the record, Mr. Chair, I did submit Mr. Ito's name as a list of witnesses five days in advance. So just for the record. Mr. Holden, thank you for getting on the stand at such short notice. How long have you been manager of the restaurant in question?
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And for the record, Mr. Chair, I did submit Mr. Ito's name.
um about two and a half years okay and how long do you believe uh as far as you know how long has
the restaurant been in operation prior to you joining since 2016 okay in the time that you've
been there has there been any interior changes to the property or the layout or the size
or the space inside the property?
Yes, we did make some changes
at the start of the COVID -19 pandemic
that kind of facilitated our required use
or required switch to more of a takeout -based model
in the initial lockdown period.
So the interior space, did it grow?
or was it this uh how did it change um we changed the use of some space in the back of the restaurant
near where the window um that is currently not in use uh what we would like to use um to make that
area have some refrigeration have some shelving we did lose some indoor dining capacity in order
to do that um but so uh just re re you know rearranging refitting an area of the restaurant
which we did talk about in december um to facilitate like uh being able to do takeout service
okay so you rearranged and you you repurposed existing space but the space in and of itself
the size and the shape that hasn't changed since the time you've been you started working there
Is that right? The space itself hasn't expanded or shrunk. Is that right?
We have not gained or lost any space inside, no.
Okay. Has the sidewalk that surrounds the property been altered in any way since the time you've worked there or since the time that you know of that the property's been operating as a restaurant?
Not that I know of.
Okay. And there was testimony or at least assertions given that at some point prior to the March 2020 pandemic, the business was operating at just north of 60 hours per week. Is that accurate still?
And there was subsequently a reduction to just 20 or so hours per week post -March 2020.
Is that right?
At least that's where we stand now.
Literally, it was less even.
It was even less than 20.
Okay. As a manager, you know, as someone who's involved in the business on a regular basis, did you or anyone that you know of anticipate a reduction in revenue when cutting hours by two -thirds?
I don't think that was honestly much of a consideration. We were always kind of looking to operate in the maximum that we could.
It just so happens that this is sort of where things fell based on our, you know, like the available labor pool and the kind of quality of life that we feel is now required to offer people in our industry, which is completely different than it was three years ago.
COVID has changed it, you know, 180 degrees.
um so yes i think if you asked us at that time would we expect a reduction in revenue um we
would say yeah logically you could expect that but it wasn't a driving factor or really consideration
we were dealing with kind of unprecedented times and we were looking to operate as much as possible
understood so it was a foreseeable consequence
would you would you categorize it as that reduction in revenue from 60 plus hours to 20
plus hours a foreseeable consequence that there may be some reduction in revenue yeah of course
if you ask me that at the time we were doing these reductions I think you know you would
you would probably assume that but like I said it was not a not much of a point of debate at that
time. So I can't think of what we were saying exactly back then. Understood. Prior to March 2020,
Understood. Prior to March 2020, you closed at 2 a .m., is that correct?
you closed at 2 a .m., is that correct?
Considerable amount of business done after 10 p .m. with regard to liquor sales, is that right?
Yeah, I would presume.
And what time do you close now?
Either 10 or 11 p .m. based on the day of the week.
So currently in 2023, you're losing anywhere from three to four hours of liquor sales every night, is that right?
yes okay and in addition to any late night bar dining going on you've lost those rep that revenue
as well is that right yeah okay all non -takeout all within the restaurant is that right
you wouldn't be taking out liquor right correct yeah okay do you know if you if the lease has
been renewed i believe it has okay do you have a signed copy of the renewal um i think michael
included it in the exhibits um i don't have it in front of me okay very well uh i have nothing
further thank you thanks for your time on such short notice i appreciate that yeah my pleasure
Mr. Mattione, you have any questions?
I have no further questions, as I believe all those questions that Mr. Anastasio just asked Mr. Holden.
He also asked him in December.
Thank you.
Vern, who's your next witness, please?
Greg Damas, please. Gregory Damas.
Hi, Mr. Damas. Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
my name is gregory damis the last name is d as in david a m as in michael is you swear or affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel thank you mr damis uh
you live within just a couple feet from the restaurant in question is that right that's
correct and you were there uh prior to 20 march 2020 when they operated 60 plus hours a week is
that right? We've owned this property for over 20 years. Okay. So you felt the impact when they
were there operating at 60 plus hours a week. Is that right as a sit -down restaurant? I am very
aware of the activity and the impact of the business. Okay. Thank you. And since they've
curtailed their hours down to 20 -plus hours and changed their business model.
How has that impacted you as someone who lives right there?
Actually, as a neighbor, we are happy because it's a very popular and busy restaurant.
And to have people leaving at 2 o 'clock in the morning out of a bar in a residential neighborhood,
it can be disturbing.
and difficult to be here. So, the cut in the late night hours, I think, is welcomed by most of the neighbors.
But what about the takeout portion that they've decided to operate?
When they first started the takeout, you know, the pandemic was hot and heavy,
And the people were lining up on the sidewalk on their side, standing on their exes, mask on.
And there seemed to be a lot of confusion about where to actually pick the food up.
And we were supportive in the respect that we would actually help people because the place, you know, had three doors.
So we would help them and point them to the rear door at that time.
And we weren't really opposed to it because we understood what the situation was.
So during 2020, all of 2020, all of 2021, much of 2022, you certainly understood that this was one of the many food and beverage establishments in the city of Philadelphia that needed to operate under sort of extraordinary circumstances.
Is that right?
That's correct, yes.
And therefore, you were aware of the prohibition on the side window and the side door as conditions preceded on them receiving their original use permit for a restaurant. Is that right?
Absolutely. When this restaurant wanted to open, or at least when they applied,
The restaurant wanted to open, or at least when they applied, for the addition on the back of the building, I was involved with Queen Village neighbors and the immediate neighbors in working with the owners of the building, and I believe that was 2013.
And they wanted to reopen the building and expand the building to the full footprint of the property.
We were very concerned as neighbors about them expanding.
They wanted to have open windows and do like a glass enclosure and that kind of thing.
And so we worked with the owners and their attorney, and we hacked out a proviso that the windows would be inoperable and the back door would only be used for an emergency exit only.
Objection. There's one problem, Mr. Chairman.
they entered into they entered into a proviso that says in part the proposed proposed side
door on the new addition is for emergency exit use only and we'll have an opening alarm installed
and there is confusion here because there is a rear door on the building that existed
and has existed since at least way way way before this came to the board that door is still there
that door is used. There was a proposed door that never got built that was the subject of
the proviso in 2013. That door never got built. That was part of the addition. And there is
confusion here with respect to that. There is a rear door in the building that is used,
that is presently used. They use it for ingress and egress. They have trash come out of there.
They have employees go in and out. And that has always been there and always been used.
There was a proposed door in 2013 that was never built that had a limitation on its use, but that door was never built.
So, yeah, I just, it just to me.
Mr. Anastasia, do you want to respond to that?
I could respond to it by continuing to ask the witness questions, of course.
Mr. Damis, was it your understanding that, and everyone's understanding, that there should be no side door used for takeout activity?
correct objection objection because that's not what the proviso is about
whether the door exists or uh or if it's an old door or a new door i believe it's was the all the
parties understanding that no door or window on fulton street would be used for takeout business
is that right mr damas that's correct and by the way that blue door was not part of the original
plan that was installed after the addition some years later it wasn't part of the original
proviso and so by adding the blue door and an extension onto that back area where they keep
the trash that's the new back door as far as i'm concerned if that door that door mr chairman has
been there way before we have photos if there's two doors behind there because they or or one
other door. They built that connection with the little glass hood afterwards without permits. That
was not part of the original permit process. Mr. Chair, I think we're talking about a difference.
It's a distinction without a difference. I think QVNA, the near neighbors, the bottom line is
my understanding is this activity on the side, period. The witness is saying he believed that
they could not use the door or the window and that's his that's his understanding right and
that's and that's attached to the permit and that's how they've been operating until the
pandemic hit is that right mr damis that's correct because the restaurant owner didn't
use that rear door for takeout prior to the pandemic did they no they didn't of course
they didn't because they knew that it wasn't permissible is that right correct objection how
does he know what the owner knew in the ghost we spoke with the owner about this multiple meetings
my objection all right all right please proceed thank you mr damis anything else before we we
wrap on on your testimony um yeah 12th street and 2nd street are um residential streets there's
nothing commercial for a block in either direction this is the only commercial property it was zoned
residential up until about five or so years ago and then it was upgraded to a cmx1 um there are
historic houses on fulton street and on second street um there's no parking for meters there's
for meters there's no loading zones there's no place for the cars to go other than to stop in
there's no loading zones there's no place for the cars to go
the middle of the street or in the intersection and and to get out of their cars and get their
food people it's a very popular restaurant we know the food is great people come from all over
all over the city and suburbs and they drive in they have nowhere to go and the people that are
the foot traffic they're sitting on the four but there's so many people waiting for food
and for so long there's four benches on the side of the building those four benches exist so that
patrons that are waiting can can wait for that that door that blue door we're talking about
is less than 30 feet from my front door while people are hanging around and the cars are running
They're looking in my door. I can't open my windows. The noise, the traffic, the horns beeping.
Last week, the police had to be here because of the Uber delivery driver who just wouldn't stop blocking Fulton Street.
It's just an ongoing nuisance.
Thank you. And for the record, you support the sit -down restaurant to remain as it is without the take -out activity. Is that right?
Absolutely. I'm pro -restaurant there and in many other places. Yes.
Thank you. And the permit that they're operating under with the provisos that prohibit the take -out window and door, you would be willing to continue to support. Is that right?
Absolutely.
Thank you. I have nothing for you.
Mr. Mattiani. Mr. Chairman, may I share my screen? Sure. I'll be happy to.
Thanks. Okay. Mr. Damas. Yes. Yes. Okay. I noticed in the QVNA letter they did say
that isn't it correct
that there's no prohibition
on them having takeout
at the restaurant.
Isn't that correct?
That's correct.
Just want to make that clear.
Let me go down.
By the way,
there was no application
for takeout at the time,
which is why it's not there.
And as was stated last time,
it was not part of the program
that they had envisioned
when they opened the original restaurant.
So this is the plan that was presented in 2013, correct?
And as you can see, you had a row of windows.
And you had a door.
You had a door.
And you also had another door in the back, correct?
Right.
And the proviso was respect to this door
because these doors have always been here.
Isn't that correct?
That's not true.
In the very rear of the building used to be a garage, so that's the stucco part of the building, and you can see that juts out, and that's an old garage that was built and then added to the restaurant at a later point.
That silver door you see is the door that they're using that now exits to the blue door.
Since they changed the plan and they didn't add the door where it was, it shouldn't change their arrangement with us.
I mean, if they would have moved it three feet off to the east or west, it wouldn't have changed the plan.
So by moving their exit door to the rear of the building, it shouldn't change their arrangement with the neighborhood.
Isn't it correct that this door has been here, this second door, has been here since at least 2011, as shown by the photograph?
This was not subject to the proviso.
The proviso specifically dealt with the new proposed door along with the windows right here.
Correct.
But they moved the door to the back, Mr. Mattione, let me answer.
That blue door that you see in the back is the new door.
Because they didn't add it where they had it on the plan, let's put it this way.
They changed the plan without coming to us.
So where does that put your client?
So that means that the assumption is that they move their door to the side rear, which is where the blue door is, and that should be the same plan.
these are the plans you have to have a back door they moved it they moved it down 20 feet
it's the same thing okay okay let let mr matty only ask your questions and mr domas
It's the same thing.
Okay, let Mr. Mattione ask your questions.
Mr. Thomas, when you look at the plan for 2013, it is incorrect that there were going to be two doors on the Fulton Street.
One in the middle, which was the new door, and the rear one, which is the existing door that has been there for a long time.
Isn't that correct?
By the way, the one in the middle was there, and it's still there.
it's a peach colored door and it's not operable at this time but that door was there
and they made it inoperable because they closed over it on the inside
okay so they they changed the plan because they changed the plan should not give them
the right to do whatever they want sorry no and they're not seeking to do that i had one other
one other
yeah that's true your picture doesn't show the blue door
the blue door is here
this is the back door
they have covered doors and the doors behind it
this is where the proposed door was
right here
no the proposed door
no because that is not the proposed door
that is a different door
if we go back to the plan from 2013
you will see
let me find you will see that the the pink door is over here in the existing building
the proposed door was in the addition when you go down to the photo you will see
you will see that the addition has no door on it there is no door on the addition and that's
where the proposed doors there is a door here hidden by the telephone pole that goes to nothing
as you said it is blocked off on the inside and you don't know that there's a door there you only
see it from the outside this is where the door was so because it was never built that door was
never built is there a question is there a question here yes that's the question i have no further
let me just look at one thing mr chairman um i just have one other question isn't it also true
that you only recently moved into the property at 784 south second despite having owned it for
more than 20 years. I object. That's not relevant, actually. I believe it is. They're there now.
It's true. Okay. And we've been here before. So we've been in and out of this place.
I'm trying to. Okay.
And I have no further questions, Mr. James. Thank you. There's a brief redirect. Mr. Damis,
You do live at the property in question, right?
Correct.
And you did personally circulate petitions in opposition and secured the signatures of just about everybody on your block.
Is that right?
That's correct.
In opposition.
Correct.
Was the – and just to clarify, because, you know, blue door, pink door, it seems like a red herring to me.
Was the purpose and spirit of the proviso to prohibit takeout service on Fulton Street, be it a door, be it a chute, be it a pink door or a blue door, was the purpose and spirit of the proviso by the RCO to prohibit takeout service on Fulton Street?
Objection.
I don't know how he can know what this proviso, what the RCO intended.
He negotiated it.
So here's where we're going to be.
He can give his opinion.
He negotiated the deal.
He would know what the purpose of the proviso was.
Let him answer the question.
The idea was we did not want the neighbors on Fulton Street to be disturbed with the noise coming from the restaurant
by the back door or the windows being operable any time during opening hours.
That was really the idea.
Regardless of where those doors were or what color they were,
it was the activity that everyone was trying to limit.
Is that right?
Correct.
I have nothing further.
I have one final witness, Mr. Ian Toner.
Thank you.
mr toner has been about to speak okay hi mr toner could you state your name and spell please
for the court reporter yes ian toner i -a -n -t -o -n -e -r right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth nothing but the truth yes proceed counsel thank you mr chair very briefly mr toner
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Very briefly, Mr. Toner, can you please explain your expertise and your bona fides as an architect and designer?
can you please explain your
Sure. I'm an architect based in Philadelphia. Been running our office for 13 years, and we've worked on projects all over the city.
Thank you. And you have been, have you taken on many projects as with restaurants, interior layout, interior design?
Okay, very good. Well, did you get an opportunity to look at this applicant's plans of the interior layout of the restaurant as it now currently exists and any associated photos?
Yes, I did.
Okay. And you understand that the applicant is here today because they would like to be using takeout service on the side of their building. You do understand that, is that right?
Okay, and based on your expert opinion, as a designer of food service industry and restaurants and architect, could the applicant use the existing interior space to accomplish the very same goal that they have today?
Do you mean to have takeout in a different part of the restaurant?
Could they use the interior part of their restaurant for both sit -down and take -out service without having to use Fulton Street as prohibited by their proviso?
Yes, I believe so.
Okay, very well.
Would they be the only small restaurant in the area that you know of that does both take -out and sit -down from their main dining room?
I KNOW I MEAN MOST RESTAURANTS AREN'T ON CORNERS SO THEY ALL GO THROUGH THE FRONT IF THEY DON'T
HAVE A SIDE IF THEY MOST OF THEM DON'T EVEN HAVE AN OPTION FOR A SIDE EXIT SO MOST OF
THEM ARE USING THE FRONT FOR TAKE OUT UNDERSTOOD THANK YOU VERY MUCH MR. CHAIR I HAVE NOTHING
further. We do very short summations. I just want to see if Mike has any cross. Okay, Mike,
you have cross for that. Just one quick question for Mr. Toner. Sure. Wouldn't it be better as,
well, Mr. Toner, did you hear or see or read the testimony of Jonathan Deutch from the last
hearing, our restaurant industry expert? I read his report. I did not see a recording of his
testimony. And I read the report that he wrote as part of your exhibits from the previous
presentation. Thank you. And wouldn't it be better if you had the takeout restaurant portion right
by the kitchen where you have better storage and food service and food safety and everything else
rather than have to walk it all the way through the restaurant, as Dr. Dewich said in his testimony?
well i don't disagree that it's more convenient to do it that way um but it's not that it's
it's not impossible to do it other ways and most restaurants do no further questions mr chairman
thank you thank you you want to have public comment mr chairman before
summation? I'm going to do public comment, but I thought, well, all right, we can do it.
Questions from the, well, let's do questions. No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience? Mr. Chair, we have a Ms. Jane Merrines with her
hand raised. I have allowed her to speak at this time. Sure. Hello? Hi, could you state your name,
please and spell for the court reporter uh jane mary lee m -e -r -r -y -l -e -e -s like sam
mary lee all right do you swear from tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
Who's she?
The dreaded door
Has always been there
Alright
Just to make that clear
I live at 206 Fulton Street
Directly across the street
The restaurant
It has been used
recently but you know my windows are closed and so forth but what i wanted
you know, my windows are closed and so forth.
But what I wanted to really mention and to stress
is the fact that if the restaurant is granted the takeout,
then if they move, anybody can use it.
It goes with the property.
And that can't happen.
Thank you.
Another thing was, and it's escaped me for a minute, the chaos of the driving.
Last Friday, we couldn't get into the street because of a big white car.
I guess it was an Uber or something.
And that happens often enough to be irritating.
Other than that, I agree pretty much with Greg.
The restaurant is great.
It's the people that hang around are very loud and sometimes boisterous.
Okay, bye.
So Snow Nose, thank you for taking the time, Colin.
We appreciate your input.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
I have Martha Morowitz with her hand raised.
I have a lot of her to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
My name is Martha Morowitz.
That's M -A -R -T -H -A -M -O -R -O -W -I -T -Z.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
I would just like to state that given the prior testimony,
it would appear that all of the neighbors are in opposition to the restaurant's take -out window.
The neighbors can speak for themselves.
She can't speak for them, Mr. Chairman. All right. So would you do, would you just give me your
comments, not other people's thoughts? So tell me. Well, I just wanted to let you know that that is
not a universal opinion. There are many people in close proximity. Mr. Chairman, she can't speak
about the other people. Okay. All right. Okay. I will, I will, I will limit my comments to myself.
Sure. You'll have to forgive me. I'm not a professional testifier. No, no, no. Just tell us what you think.
In any case, I live almost directly across the street from the restaurant in a historic building. And I was sorry when the pandemic hit that everybody had to shut down.
But I was thrilled when they opened up to do takeout because then we could continue to use them as a resource in the neighborhood.
And our fear, my husband and mine, is that if the restaurant is not allowed to use the takeout window,
that they will go back to their late night hours and everything that was happening prior to the pandemic
in order to make ends, not even make ends meet,
but make a profit as they should be able to.
So that is my comment.
I'm hoping that they will be able to continue
with the takeout window
and then operate under more reasonable hours
and continue to service the neighborhood.
Thank you for your call and your input.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, I have a Mr. Daniel Orr with his hand raised.
I have a lot of them to speak at this time.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Sure. My name is Daniel Orr, last name O -R -R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I live across the street from Royal Sushi. I'm a near neighbor.
All right, proceed.
So I would say it's a great restaurant. My wife and I ate there 36 times last year,
but their takeout window is a noise and traffic nightmare for the neighborhood.
And there's nothing that they've said that entitles them to a variance.
um you know the to obtain a variance the app cannot show unnecessary hardship and the variance
is in public interest and the singer versus philadelphia zoning board case is directly on
point here um it's so i would just urge the board to consider that case it's 29 a3d 144
the commonwealth court decision um i'd also just point out that you know that the near neighbors
the rco and you know council member esquila um have all come out in written opposition to this
So from what I can see, there's really no basis in fact or law to grant this variant.
Thank you for your input, and we appreciate you calling in.
Is there anyone else?
Yes, sir.
A Chutati Psunteranon with their hand raised.
I have allowed them to speak at this time.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Hi, my name is Tutatipsun Taranon. I am the chef owner of Kaliyaki Restaurant.
Hi, my name is Chutati Psunteranon.
I am the chef.
Hold up, hold up, hold up. Could you spell your name for the court reporter, please?
My name is Tutatipsun Taranon. Let me spell it for you.
C for Charlie, H for Hotel, U for Uniform, T for Tango, A for Alpha, T for Tango, I for
India, P for Paul.
Family name, S for Sugar, U for Uniform, N for Nancy, T for Tango, A for Alpha, R for
Roger, A for Alpha, N for Nancy, O for Oscar, N for Nancy.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I am. I live in Queen Village. My address is 743 South 3rd Street.
As a neighbor and a chef owner of a small business that serves the ethnic food, food of our culture,
and I survived the pandemic by the takeout,
and I have to pivot by have the separate takeout window to reduce the congestion of the customers
and prevent the spread of COVID -19, which is still around.
I am here to support the use of takeout window for Royal Isakaya.
As so many families in Queen Village, Royal Isakaya take a big part in our community,
providing high -quality food service since the day they opened.
restaurant is part of the community and should be able to find the way restaurant and neighbor
should be able to find a way to support each other and royal isakaya brought the diversity
to our neighborhood jesse ito is national recognized chef with his talents and the
way he uniquely presents the food of his culture takeout window will help decrease
the congestion in the dining room and create the flow of the service
As a chef and a restauranteur, I would strongly urge the board to be kind of consider approval of the permit.
Small restaurant has been heard deeply from the pandemic, and we should all be supportive to our neighbor and small business.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call in and your input.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair, we have Breit.
What do you have?
Mr. Breit, you can unmute yourself.
Yeah, my name is Brett Feingerts.
Could you spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Yeah, Feingerts is F -E -I -N -G -E -R -T -S.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I live at 235 Catherine Street, which backs up to 244 Fulton Street.
Goes block to block.
Are you in favor of the project?
uh i i am in favor of supporting royal izakaya's takeout window okay um i i live on fulton street
um is the street frequently blocked yes it's blocked all the time whether royal izakaya is
open or not um so i i i find it hard to to blame them for that i i think it's a combined contribution
of the majority of the people and businesses around there, Amazon deliveries, the postal
service mail, Uber drivers, construction projects, and sometimes just quick stops.
So you're in favor of the project, am I right?
Thank you for taking the time to call, and we appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Eleanor Ingersoll.
Ms. Ingersoll, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, it's Eleanor Ingersoll, E -L -E -A -N -O -R, Ingersoll, I -N -G -E -R -S -O -L -L.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am.
Are you in favor of the project or against it?
In favor.
Where do you live at?
I live at 311 Monroe Street.
We appreciate you calling in.
Thank you very much.
I have been a resident of Queen Village for 24 years.
I ate at the previous restaurant, La Barola.
And when Royal Itzakaya opened, it was actually frustrating because you could not call in a takeout order.
You had to go into the bar, order there, wait for it, and take it away.
Like some of the other comments we've heard today, it was such a relief that they were
open, able to open so quickly after the pandemic started, and do so in order to
able to open so quickly after the pandemic started, and do so in an orderly fashion.
When you go to order, you get a timestamp that tells you exactly when to come and pick it up,
and it takes literally two seconds to arrive, get your order, and leave. Because by that time,
you've already paid, so there's no waiting there to do it. Everything is done online, again,
extremely orderly. And actually, I was late one time, and they were not happy with me.
So there's that. And the idea that the pandemic has forced businesses to create new business
plans to survive, and that includes food delivery and food pickup. And the idea, again,
also to echo what was previously said, that the idea that not allowing this window would stop
any kind of food delivery would be um a fanciful wish because it's the way it is done now there's
still plenty of people that are not comfortable going into restaurants and they're not comfortable
without getting their food delivered to them um benches that i am almost done the benches that
you see outside are are put there in order to keep people off of stoops as if they're waiting
for food if they're early and to keep them off of neighbors' properties. Again, the time to take
out is very orderly, very thoughtful, and they cannot manage how the pandemic has changed
clients' expectations for their food. Again, nationally recognized.
All right. We've heard that. Thank you very much. We understand where you're at.
I just want to say that the idea that this is a nuisance is an extreme word with negative
connotations that are not warranted here, and that's where you're hearing support for this
project, for this variant. Thank you. Is there anyone else in a virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair. Ms. Kate Hinchman has a hand raised. How many more hands do you see,
Jason? She's the last one, sir. Okay, thank you. Hi, could you state your name,
please, and spell for the court reporter? Sure, it's Kate Hinchman, H -I -N -C -H -M -A -N.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I actually am the closest neighbor.
I have a wall that's adjacent to the restaurant.
I'm at 778.
Are you in favor or against this project?
I'm against them continuing to do takeout.
Can I make another comment?
Because I'm not sure how closely you guys know the neighborhood.
but respectfully for the lady or a couple of people that have called in if you're at third
and monroe you're several blocks away um those of us that have to travel on fulton street and
on second street several times a day are the ones that are impacted not someone that lives
third and monroe well thank you very much for taking this time to call in okay um
how about your final wrap -ups here or do you I think I yielded Mr. Mattione for his
his wrap -up and then I'll quickly do mine thank you thank you Mr. Chairman and thank you members
of the board for listening to this case extensive testimony presented by the applicant both today
and in December has clearly established its right to the requested removal of the proviso and
variants to allow it to use the window in the rear of its building for pick -up and take -out
service. Prior to the pandemic, Royal Izakaya operated seven days a week, 63 hours a week,
until 2 a .m. Since being able to reopen, it is only able to operate five days a week, 27 hours,
until 10 p .m. weekdays and 11 p .m. on weekends. In addition to the dramatic reduction in operating
hours, Royal Izakaya faces increased costs for payroll and food of more than 100 percent,
and its profit margin is now less than 15%.
Testimony showed that without the takeout service, the business is not profitable.
These changes all occurred after the pandemic and continue today.
Royal Izakaya has shown a change in circumstances necessary to have the proviso prohibiting the use of the rear window removed
and has also met the requirements to be entitled to a variance to operate a takeout restaurant as set forth in the zoning code.
As shown above, Royal Izakaya presented testimony showing that the conditions when the proviso prohibiting the use of the rear window
or implemented have changed, entitling it to have the prohibition lifted.
It has also shown that it meets all the requirements of 143038E of the zoning code
and should be granted a variance for a takeout restaurant,
specifically to permit it to provide and utilize a pickup takeout window
on the western side on Fulton Street.
Testimony of Jonathan Deutsch, a restaurant industry expert,
and Justin Holden, general manager of the restaurant,
established that the denial of the requested variance would create an unnecessary hardship.
The testimony showed that there are unique physical hardships, including the long and narrow property,
The testimony showed that there are unique physical hardships, including the long and narrow property, the inability to have outdoor dining, both a sidewalk cafe and street area prohibited, which is necessitated by the narrow sidewalks, fire hydrant, utility pole, and location on the corner of Fulton Street, conditions that are peculiar to the property and not created by the general zoning for the area and only impact this property.
the inability to do it, and the inability to do it, and the inability to do it.
Those physical circumstances limited the ability to utilize the property in a productive manner
without the requested variance to permit the takeout service through the takeout window.
The variance will not alter the character of the neighborhood where the property has been
used as a restaurant since at least 1933.
As shown by Dr. Deutsch, the takeout window will ease congestion and reduce patrons congregating
on the streets outside of the restaurant because of the prepaid time pickup use only of the window.
No orders may be placed at the window.
The alternative of having takeout food sold through the front door of the restaurant will increase congestion and force people waiting for tables in the restaurant to wait outside and make service difficult inside the restaurant.
In addition, there is a lack of adequate storage area for pickup meals at the front of the restaurant, making it difficult to service the takeout customers from the front of the restaurant.
There is tremendous neighborhood support for the application with more than 100 individual
support emails received and forwarded to the board acknowledging that the approval of this
application will not change the character of the neighborhood. The hardship cannot be cured with
a dimensional variance. All the other requirements for a variance are also met. The variance is the
minimum variance required allowing limited window service for pickup of orders and reducing
congestion in the area necessitated by the unique physical circumstances of this building. The
variance is in harmony with the purpose of the zoning code to promote growth and economic
development by allowing a long -standing business to remain viable in changing times.
As was demonstrated by Dr. Deutsch, excuse me, the variance will decrease congestion in the public
streets, especially in front of the restaurant. The variance will not injure adjoining properties,
but will reduce crowds congregating on the corner of 2nd and Fulton Street and bring eyes and ears
to Fulton Street, helping reduce crime. Since no construction is proposed, the variance will have
no impact on light and air to adjoining properties.
The granting of the variance will not adversely impact
the plan for the area.
This is a longstanding commercial use being used
for that longstanding commercial use.
The variance will not create any environmental damage.
This is the same use as been here since 1933.
For all of these reasons,
we request that the proviso be removed
prohibiting use of the window
and that the variance to permit the takeout service
should be granted.
And if this board is inclined
to grant the requested relief,
the applicant will agree to provisos, including a five -year temporary variance and to stop
utilizing the takeout window one hour prior to closing of the restaurant. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Mr. Anastasio. Thank you. Mr. Chair, there's been a lot of testimony,
both myself and Mr. Mattione have submitted very large briefs and lots of exhibits,
But at the end of the day, the question is, should this sit -down restaurant be allowed to operate and become a takeout restaurant?
That's it.
There is overwhelming evidence, photograph and otherwise, and testimony of current traffic, congestion, noise, and negative impact.
And you've heard that testimony from not folks at 3rd and Monroe or 3rd and Fitzwater, folks who live right there.
A large majority of the immediate neighbors right around that property have all testified one way or another that this takeout operation is currently with the side window and side door causing a problem.
The physical condition of the property, of the sidewalk, of the dining room, that hasn't changed.
It's been the same way for the last 10 years, and they've been operating for the last 10 years.
Nothing has happened to the inside or the outside of that property that all of a sudden changed the game for them.
The only thing that's changed is their preference.
Instead of working 60 -plus hours like most folks in the industry, they want to work 20 -plus hours a week.
That's a preference, and a preference that this board is not able to grant relief based on.
Ian Toner, who is an architect and a designer of many restaurants, he looked at the plans
and he testified very clearly that there's absolutely nothing prohibiting the owner of
the restaurant, the operator of the restaurant, from doing exactly what they do today from their
dining room. Nothing. In fact, most restaurants don't have the benefit of being on a corner with
the side window and side door. They were lucky that the immediate neighbors supported their use
of that in opposition to the prohibition during the most worst of times, you know, the COVID
pandemic. They availed themselves to their neighbor's goodwill. They availed themselves
They availed themselves to their neighbor's goodwill. They availed themselves to the paycheck protection quarter million dollars. They did whatever they could to survive, and that's fine. But now it's 2023. And I have to tell you, I tried to get a reservation for Friday night for two people. I told it was booked.
so then i tried uh for the 31st of march i told it was booked then i tried for april 7th
i was told it was booked then i tried for april 14th i was told it was booked and you can't
actually make a reservation beyond the 14th because they only only open their books for
four weeks in advance so to come here today and say that there is some sort of economic hardship
when you can't get a seat at the restaurant for the next month
and they won't even open their books for me to dine or for you to dine in May
is a bit of a stretch.
There's zero evidence or testimony that supports any sort of hardship.
All the case law that appellant uses in their brief
point to physical conditions at or in the property that precipitates relief.
There's no change in physical condition here.
In this case, it doesn't exist.
The only thing that exists is preference, a preference to use the side door, a preference
to use the side window, preference to work one third the hours they used to work instead
of working 60 or even 40 hours a week.
No, they don't want to do that.
They prefer to do it this way, a preference to avoid using the dining room for takeout, a preference to stay in a space that maybe they've grown out.
You know, that happens.
After all, there's no evidence that they've even tethered themselves to a lease renewal.
The immediate neighbors continue to support the sit -down restaurant, and they will.
They simply don't want the noise, congestion, and traffic that a takeout restaurant will bring with it.
And the prima facie evidence of these negative impacts are all submitted to you today in my exhibits, which I now move into evidence.
And with that, I have nothing further. Thank you.
Thank you. Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
The Comprehensive Plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed -use zoning at this location, given the restaurant's established use and its proximity to a commercial district.
The City Planning Commission recommends granting a temporary variance that provides those for a maximum of five years and limited hours of operation.
Thank you, and thank both attorneys.
Thank you, Mr.
2022 -003 -184 -780 South 2nd Street.
I vote no.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is no.
James Snell, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called on the 2 p .m. list?
I see no answer, Mr. Chair.
Let's take a five -minute break, and then we'll come back,
and we'll finish the 3 .30 list, okay?
Everybody, five minutes.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I am ready, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, John.
How are we looking?
We're looking good, Chair.
Everybody back?
It's time, Mr. Snow.
I'm here.
Snow, I'm here.
I'm here.
Okay, here we go.
We're ready.
Okay, and the recording is live, so you can begin, Chair.
Good afternoon. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this 3 .30 hearing list for the ZBA.
With me is our Vice Chair, Ishmael Shaheed.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holliman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our Board Member, James Snell.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our Attorney, and our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken.
Here's our virtual format. Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded. A video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at philip .gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are 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. All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sumpkin.
Let's look at our continuations that we have on this list. Number three, MI 2023 -000094
for 3251 Fox Street.
That case is continued.
Number four, MI 2022 -006 -210 -4619 -21 Lancaster Avenue.
This case is being continued.
It was not posted properly.
Is Robert Espinalo in the audience?
yes he's been allowed to speak sir okay sir could you state your name and spell for the
court reporter hello hi could he is roberto there yes yes roberto uh state your name please for me
and spell for the court reporter this is the interpreter speaking i'm on the line as well
Okay, good. Could I state your name, please?
My name is Stephen Aubain, and I'll be the interpreter.
All right, spell for the court reporter, please.
Stephen, S -T -E -V -E -N, Aubain, A -U -B -A -I -N.
And do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Roberto, please state your name and spell for the court reporter.
Roberto, por favor, diga su nombre y dele tráelo para la corte.
Roberto Espinal.
R -O -B -E -R -T -O -A -I -S -P -I -N -L.
S -P -I -N -L.
So Roberto, R -O -B -E -R -T -O -A, Espinal, E -S -P -I -N -A -L.
Thank you.
Property, the property was not posted in the proper way to announce the zoning notice.
So we're going to have to continue the case.
And what I would recommend is that he gets a hold of the audience, have someone, if he has to interpret for him with the audience, and find the proper way to get ready for the case, okay?
But we're going to have to continue the case.
Así que debido a que la propiedad no fue publicada en la manera correcta para la zonización, así que usted va a tener que hablar con las personas de la audiencia que la puedan interpretar para poder hacer esa orden correctamente.
Ok, está bien.
Y por esa razón le van a dar continuación.
De acuerdo, gracias.
All right, thank you.
And thanks to the interpreter. So MI 2022 -006 -210 -4619 -21 Lancaster Avenue, that case is continued. First listing. Thank you, interpreter, and thank you to your client there.
Is there anyone else with a request for a continuance for this afternoon's hearing?
I have Mr. Jeffrey Young with his hand raised.
uh mr young we've already announced that your case has continued hi yes um good afternoon
mr chair um i received an email um at about 4 12 uh from mr charles richardson saying that they're
going to um withdraw their reconsideration and rehearing requests i'm just want to um make
yeah so we're going to continue it and and and uh and uh our our attorney will straighten
everything out, okay? Okay, thank you so much. We're aware of that. We just want to make sure
we'll do it later. Thank you. By the way, thanks for calling in. We appreciate it.
Any other requests for continuance? I don't see any further. I have one case, number five,
MI -2022 -006 -212, 5428 -30 North Beachwood Street.
Kenneth Clark is the applicant.
There's no exhibits.
This is the first listing.
I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair.
Okay, so number five, MI -2022 -006 -212, 6428 -30 North Beachwood Street.
That case is continued, was first listing.
We're going to go to our list.
And number one, MI -2022 -006 -209, 5120 Marion Street.
Henry Clinton is the attorney.
we have a letter of support from faith cdc who is the coordinating coordinating rco
and a letter of non -opposition from solo germantown
mr clinton good afternoon mr chairman mr clinton i don't think i've sworn you yet did i have no
not today okay uh could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
Sure. Henry Clinton, H -E -N -R -Y, Clinton, C -L -I -N -T -O -N.
Right. Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and the relationship to this property?
Sure. The principal of the LLC, which owns the property, is Annat, A -N -A -T, Madar, M -A -D -A -R, and she is on the call.
Okay. And our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Certainly.
Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do, Mr. Shahid.
Have you emailed all the required documents to proceed with this case obvious in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Shahid.
mr chairman is that visible enough it is that's fine all right uh good afternoon again mr chairman
members of the board henry clayton on behalf of advanced enterprises llc principal of which is
anad medar who is on the call and the architect is michael cole cole he was also on the call
This presentation contains my table of contents AA through A10.
The request is for a two -family dwelling in a zoning district, which is RSA 5, which is indicated for single -family.
This is a long, vacant lot, as I'll show you from the photographs.
It's a large lot. It's a corner lot. It has ample air and light for two dwelling units.
And it has the support of two community groups, the Faith Community Development Corporation, as well as the 12th Ward.
And we also have a letter of non -opposition from Solo Germantown.
But I will walk through the project and explain it to the board in detail.
So this is the first RCO letter indicating overwhelming support, nine votes in favor, none against, from Faith Community, as well as the 12th Ward.
A second letter is from Solow Germantown Civic Association.
Their letter is a letter of non -opposition.
And both community groups have asked for certain changes, which I think that we're accommodating
with our plans, and I'll explain that to the board when I get to the plans.
So this is the photograph of the neighborhood.
Marion Street is, as my cursor indicates, goes right to left.
Then Ashmead Street goes top to bottom.
This is a corner lot.
And if you look in this quadrant of the neighborhood, there's really not one vacant lot.
And this lot has been vacant for some time.
I really couldn't estimate how long it's been vacant, Mr. Chairman.
But my understanding, it's been for some time.
And I think one of the reasons for that is, you know, to build a single -family home of this size on this corner was extremely difficult and really is an economic hardship.
My clients have proposed a two -family dwelling, simple layout, direct layout, two bedrooms, one bath for one apartment, two bedrooms, one bath for the other apartment.
This is a ground -level view looking directly at the vacant lot.
And as you can see, the homes to the right of the vacant lot, they have some detail. They have a porch on the first floor and a nice bay on the second floor. It is a three -sided bay with some nice corners work.
And one of the things the community group wanted from my client was that if you're going to come in and ask for a two -family dwelling on this vacant lot, we'd like to see it match the context and the architectural style of the other properties on Marion Street.
And we've been able to do that.
We've also eliminated a rooftop deck, which we had at one time, realizing that this neighborhood, again, I really didn't see any rooftop decks.
And again, we're trying to keep in the contextual nature of the community that we want to be part of.
This photograph just shows our postings as required by the board.
And now I'll get to the plans.
This is just the site plan indicating that, again, it is self -evident, a corner property.
It's a rather large lot, and the property will have an ample rear yard.
We're not asking for any relief with regard to height or open space or rear yard.
This is simply a request for a use variance.
Floor plan, I'll go from left to right, excuse me, from right to left, starting with the basement.
On the far right, the basement will have a living room and a kitchen as well as a half bath.
You come to the first floor, and again, you can see our bay that's going to be protruding on the front, and when I show you a cross section of the building, you'll see that the front elevation does conform with the other homes on the block.
On the first floor, we'll have two bedrooms and one bath, and then that floor plan repeats on the second and third floor, living and kitchen on the second floor, and then two bedrooms, and we were able to put two baths on the third floor because we don't have this stairway situation, which cuts into our usage on the first floor, and again, there is no rooftop deck.
There was a short balcony off the rear for the third floor, but there is no rooftop deck.
This is a side view, and I'd like to just concentrate on the side view to the left, indicating that we do have a protruding porch.
On the side of the building, facing Ashmead, it's going to be completely brick, no paneling or steel paneling of any type.
And you can see on the third floor, there's a small veranda or deck leading off the rear of the property.
Looking at the elevation on the right -hand side, this is the front elevation.
Again, you can see the three -sided bay, again, trying to keep in context with what's on the block already, an enclosed porch with two pillars and a roof enclosing the top porch.
An enclosed porch with two pillars and a roof enclosing the top porch, the front porch rather.
The rest of the documents are pro forma documents that you would usually see in a presentation such as this.
Tax certification, our application for repeal, and the zoning area, the zoning map, the deed indicating ownership.
Our notice letter to all the community groups indicating that we mailed out 157 letters, not to community groups, excuse me, to community members, and basically encompassing most of the properties within earshot of the subject property.
So, Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, we have a situation where we have a long vacant lot, not really viable for single -family construction.
Two -family dwelling has been accepted by the community, actually supported by two of the three community groups.
And the third community group is in non -opposition.
We don't have any issues with regard to height, rear yard, open space.
We're in harmony with the block because you're trying to keep the front elevation.
contextual with the rest of the block.
We're not impeding anyone's light or air, any adjacent properties.
And with that, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to see if my client can...
Mr. Clinton, let me ask you a question first.
What's the rest of the area look like relative to multifamily?
Let me go back to that.
Let's go back to the aerial photograph.
In this immediate vicinity, Mr. Chairman, these are single -family, but because this is a corner
property and it has ample light and air, it really cries out for a two -family usage.
Anything on the other side of the street?
Mainly single -family, Mr. Chairman.
Okay, thank you.
Ms. Medar, can you unmute yourself?
they've been allowed to speak hi could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
yes good afternoon anat madal hi could you spell your name please a -n -a -t -m -a -d -a -r right do you
swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes sir uh miss
Medora, have you heard my testimony?
Have you won the entire call when I presented your project?
If you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as Shulham, correct?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Henry, one other question. Is there any other three -story properties in the area?
On some of the corners, I believe this property here is a three -story.
And directly across the street, I, that is, that, this appears to be three, but Mr. Chairman, I think it's a two -story property.
Thank you. Thank you. Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Sir, Mr. Charles Richardson has his hand raised. I have a lot of him to speak at this time.
Aye, Mr. Richardson.
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Bass, 508 City Hall.
Councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance.
Thank you.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
No, sir, that's it.
Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning, first name Ron, R -O -N, last name Bednar, B -E -D -N -A -R.
Do you swear to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
This property is indicated for residential use on the city plan or adopted district plan
and recommends no change to the existing residential single -family zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances
or condition of the property that would prevent it from being used in formative code.
Therefore, we recommend the request for variance not be granted.
MI -2022 -006 -209 -5120, Marion Street, I vote no.
Thomas, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
well that's three votes
Henry that's the three votes
thank you Mr. Chairman
thank you
M .I. 2022 -006 -196 -2214, Martha Street.
MI 2022
Alan Nockleson is the attorney.
Recommendation of support from East Kensington Neighbors Association.
Letter of non -opposition from Councilman Squillip.
Mr. Nockleson, will we be joining as a panelist, sir?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Alan Nockleson.
Great.
Just state your name.
That's fine.
could you identify your client in relationship to this property oh yes my clients are samara
talking and joseph uh troianni uh the owners of the property i think mr troianni is in the
virtual audience who will 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 i do have you emailed
all the required documents and exhibits enter our office five days in advance of this hearing?
I have. Thank you. Please proceed with your screen. Thank you.
A very straightforward project at 2214 Martha Street. This is in the East Kensington section
of Philadelphia. When we purchased the property, it was advertised as a triplex. My clients actually
want to convert it into a duplex and decrease the use. This property is not too far off from
the commercial corridor on Frankfort Avenue. My clients actually live nearby as well and
have, you know, not only support within the neighborhood through the RCO with the letter
of support, but also council member Mark Squilla with the letter of NOLA position. So during our
presentation, in addition to that, which is exhibit two, we'll also go over the notice of
refusal. The MLS listing showing that it was advertised as a triplex or multifamily in nature.
Maps of the area, photographs of the property, our plans and drawings, our RCO media notice,
our application for appeal, our deeds of property, and our certificate of tax clearance. Again,
virtual audience are the property owners, and I would ask that one of them to virtually raise
their hands, get sworn in, and then answer three questions so they can adopt my
testimony as their own. All right, so notice of refusal. So this is an RSA -5 property,
and, you know, again, all we're trying to do is essentially legalize the use of this property as
a multifamily structure. When they purchased it with three units, they thought it was more
appropriate to make it into two units. There is also a request to put a roof deck at the rear of
the property, but that doesn't create any other type of variance request or refusals. The only
refusal we're dealing here with is the use because this is another safe liability so we met with the
east kensington neighbors association at a well -attended meeting and you can see overwhelmingly
uh 18 people voted in support of this project
um then we also reached out to council member mark squilla's office uh and uh they uh you know
So they were also in non -opposition to this project, given the overwhelming community support.
And then the MLS listing here, where does this say?
Oh, right here.
If you look right here, it says it's multifamily property that's being sold or advertised as being sold.
So it was advertised as multifamily.
And the clients thought it was multifamily.
It was only when they started going to do the permitting that they understand it was not the case.
You can see here where we are in the neighborhood, there is a mix of RSA 5, CMX 1, IRMX, and RM1 in this portion of the neighborhood.
We're right off of Trenton Avenue, which is one that is not commercial in nature, but somewhat.
But you can see that where we are, we're a block and a half away from the commercial corridor, which is Frankfurt Avenue.
And then photographs of the properties, the properties in desperate need of rehabilitation and restoration, and that's what my clients hopefully plan to do, to make this into a duplex.
Proof of posting for the hearing today.
And then you can see here, this was in the basement, but you can see there were four meters here, one for the common area and one for each of the units.
They only want to make this into a duplex, not a triplex.
And also you can see multiple gas lines here in the basement.
So again, this was configured as a multifamily structure.
They thought that they can simply reduce the unit count from three to two.
And when they were going through the permits and approvals with the city,
they discovered this was an RSA -5 property and they had to go through this process.
Martha Street to the right of the property, Martha Street to the left of the property.
Martha Street to the left of the property. And then our plans and drawings, pretty straightforward.
And then our plans and drawings, pretty straightforward.
You can see there's a bi -level unit on the first floor and the lower level. Unit number two
is on the second and third floors, and there's a loft area. So the third floor is an extra high
ceiling, which has a loft area where there's a laundry facility for unit number two. The laundry
facility for unit number one uh is in the lower level
and then this was a well -attended meeting we met on february 8th
at 7 pm 131 addresses were notified of the meeting
these are listed the addresses
proof of mailing to those addresses or applications for appeal that they filed
with the ZBA, our deed to the property, showing that Joseph and Samara own the property.
And our certificate of tax planning, showing they owe no money to the City of Philadelphia
with respect to real estate taxes.
So with that being said, I would ask that either Joseph or Samara virtually raise their
hands.
Alan, is there other multifamilies in the area?
Yeah, I mean, we're right off of Frankfort Avenue.
So we're blocking the half away.
And you can see like from the zoning map,
there is a mix between CMX1 and RM1 and IRMX.
Okay, thank you.
Mr. Joseph Troiani has his hand raised.
I have allowed him to speak at this time, sir.
Hi, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Joseph Troiani, J -O -S -E -P -H, last name T -R -O -I -A -N -I.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Mr. Troiani, you heard everything I had to state about your zoning amendment.
And is it true and correct?
Yes, it is.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
See no further answer, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission?
Ron Bednar, City Planning.
The property is indicated for residential use on the city plan.
Given its documented use history, we have no objection to the granting of the requested variances.
Minimum two units only.
Thank you.
MI 2022 -006 -196 -2214 Martha Street.
I vote yes.
Proviso.
Minimum two units.
Or maximum two units.
I'm sorry.
Thomas.
You're breaking up, Tom.
James Thomas Thomas Holloman my vote is yes with proviso thank you
James Snell yes with proviso thank you Ishmael Shaheed yes with proviso thank you sir
number six mi 2022 006 231 2644 braddock street steve masters is the attorney
we do not we do not see a letter yet from east kensington neighborhood association maybe council
has it councilman squall sent a letter leaving this decision to the board since he did not have
the rco letter applicant has a provided a petition and support signed by 24 neighbors
most many of them in the 2600 block of brodock street mr masters a good afternoon mr chair and
members of the board steve masters s -t -e -v -e m -a -s -t -e -r -s from the law firm of just laws
i represent the property owner david vega okay you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth i do our vice chair has a few questions
good afternoon counsel 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 in
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits that are needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we did.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you. And we apparently there was a typographical error on an RCO letter that was for the case.
it's it indicated it was for the case that we just heard with Mr. Nachamson but it is for our case
so we're in the process of of getting that um added to our exhibits but I'm going to share
screen and show you what I have so far. Okay. So this case is a trip down memory lane, so to speak.
this is a property that received a variance from the zoning board way back in the 1940s,
and it has always been consistently used as a triplex. But during COVID, when our client bought
the property and then was in the process of renovating it just to just to update it because
it was in quite bad shape um the there was a lag um you know his ability to get contractors and to
have the work done so because of the of the challenges of covid three years elapsed where
the property was not being used there were no tenants because it was in the process of getting
renovated. And for that reason, the 1940s zoning variants expired. And so we're here
to, it's not really fair to say that we're here to legalize a triplex. We're here to basically
restore the historic variants that has never left the property up until COVID. Many things over the
years probably were challenges to that block um and to all life in in the united states and we
were talking world war ii all kinds of things happened in all these intervening decades but
covid was the one that was that dealt the blow against this variance so the refusal here uh
because the property is zoned single family is is just one variance for uh for the multi -family
um in um exhibit two we have the petitions um in support from the near neighbors um and you see
that they're all literally all up and down um the this block of braddock street so there's 12
on this page and there's another 12 on this page and and they're they are almost exclusively
the very very closest neighbors uh to this property in exhibit three um we have the site plans
um and um there over covetous as i said um there there was um the the the the property was was
updated just in terms of of um more of just improvements you know for renovations there
were no changes to the floor plans or to the configuration um but it it was a need it wasn't
badly in need of a renovation and that's what Mr. Vega did. So here we have the elevation drawings
and I believe the only new features were some siding that was put on one of the sides of the
building and here we have the floor plans. So in the basement there is no dwelling units it's just
for storage and utilities on the first floor we have oh there's one bedroom and on uh the second
floor we also have uh we have two bedroom unit and then on the third floor uh we also have two bedrooms
i'm sorry the the drawings that i just showed you were the
were the demolition plan drawings and now these are the the uh the the drawings um after the
renovation so again uh the basement just the mechanicals the first floor we have uh two
bedrooms um and all the proper fixtures and and kitchen area the second floor also two bedrooms
And the third floor, we have another two -bedroom apartment.
uh and the third floor we have another
Finally, this is another view of the elevation drawings.
And then the photos.
So here's the building when it was under the renovations.
we have um this is the entrance into the building with the first floor common area
this is the second floor apartment facing the front room to the right
second floor with the stairs going up to the third floor
third floor living area and front bedroom
same floor and apartment but this is facing the back of the apartment
third floor living area behind um bathroom in the third bedroom
first floor apartment entrance to the right and the front bedroom
there is um a large multi -family building on the on the corner of braddock street um
Candidly, most of the homes on Braddock Street are single family, but this building, as we
said, was historically and consistently a triplex from the 1940s.
Here we have our zoning posters.
So, the zoning in this area here, this is where the large group of multifamilies is
an RM1 zoning.
This block is single family and we're right in the middle of the block.
This was a variance granted in 2018 for 2618 Braddock, which was the other single -family
zone structure that was permitted to be multifamily. This was granted a variance for a duplex
in 2018 and then here we have um the historic uh variance for for the property we're here for today
um you can see um the timestamp here is march 10th of 1942 and uh the zoning board at the time
granted um a change from one family to three family and uh it it has remained that way for 80
years, except for the intervention of COVID.
In Exhibit 5 is our tax clearance.
Exhibit 6 is the deed for the property.
Exhibit 7 is our application for an appeal.
And our basis for hardship is that the Zoning Board granted the variance in March of 1942 for a conversion from a one -family to a triplex.
Eighty years later, the variance recently expired because the last tenants moved out and the property became vacant.
The property cannot be converted into a permitted use of single -family without extensive reconstruction.
And it also is it is supported strongly from the neighbors, so there's no negative impact on the public interest or or on the character of the surrounding properties.
is. Exhibit eight is our project information form. Exhibit nine was our RCO letter in which
we explained the historic variance to the neighbors and we included a copy. And this
is our proof of mailing to 164 households. These are the addresses that the mailing went
to, we, um, going to, so this meeting summary, um, we just received, uh, a corrected copy
We just received a corrected copy that instead of 2214 Martha Street, it should say 2644 Braddock Street.
that instead of
The vote, let me go to the email first.
So we had an email from the day after the RCO meeting from the leader of the RCO, Mr. John Theobald.
We inquired of Mr. Theobald what the vote was and when we would receive an RCO letter.
And this is what he wrote to us on February 9th. He said the vote was 15 in favor, 12 in opposition. EKNA's position letter will reflect the community vote.
And the letter that we now have shows you that there were 15 in support and 12 in opposition. And the position of the RCO is in support.
uh right as we were as you were calling my case i apparently received the more corrected version
of the letter um and so i will attempt to to uh bring that up on my screen but i don't want to
to delay or to pause you know the proceedings just for me to do that okay
um at this time i would like to call um our client david vega to um to adopt our testimony
sir could you raise your hand and state your name and spell for the court reporter please
uh hello can you hear me yes okay uh my name is david vega uh last name is spelled v -e -g -a
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do proceed counsel um good afternoon mr um did you hear my testimony this afternoon
um do you agree with it and do you adopt it as your own yes is there anything else that you
wanted to tell the board about um the situation of of how the variance got uh got got to be
delayed and abandoned uh yeah it actually well the the property actually got um vacant i chose
to make it vacant a couple years before COVID. And at that point, that's when I tried to fix
the place. I ran into some roadblocks. And when COVID came around, I wasn't able to get the
financing I needed to complete the project because I want to do it right. And that's what
delayed the process. And then I didn't realize once the use gets discontinued for a certain
amount of time, you lose the variance. I wasn't aware of that. I probably would have kept the
tenants in there and left it in that condition if I knew that. But I thought it was in the best
interest of the community to fix the place up. And it's also in my best interest to fix the place up.
And the reason why I want to keep it a triplex is because it's the best and the most maximum
use of that property. And when I bought it, it was under the condition that when I bought it,
was of triplex already um that's why i bought the property in the first place all right thank you
very much um mr chair i do now have the corrected rco letter for you to see so i'm going to share
my screen again thank you all right so this is now uh the corrected letter uh this is uh from
East Kensington Neighborhood Association, you see I highlighted the address
of our property. They are in support, and the vote
is 15 in favor of 12 opposed. There were 27 attendees.
All right. Questions from the
board? No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
i have a miss uh mr patrick blake with his hand raised i have a lot of him to speak
sir could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
sure my name is patrick blake p -a -t -r -i -c -k -b -l -a -k -e do you swear for him to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor i am i live two houses to
the left of this building okay uh i'm just curious when the last time i've lived in this house since
i bought this building in 2013 and there has been believe me when i say significant you know
flipping and reconstruction on the street some of it good some of it bad um the all of the
apartments being put in at the end of the street where there was a vacant warehouse was not ideal
the tenants that have populated it now, I would say, they don't really respect the neighborhood
or the street. And I'm just afraid that now, as far back as I can remember, there was no one in
this building that they're now saying only because of COVID has had no one in it. As far as I can
remember, there's been no one in there. And I just think that having another multi -unit plopped right
in the middle families on both sides of it you know it just seems counterproductive to
And it just seems counterproductive to the direction that the neighborhood has been going.
the direction that the neighborhood
I'm surprised to hear that, you know, after the meeting that it was actually an in -favor vote because I know that everyone that I was there with from the block was a no vote.
And I never even saw that petition that was shown earlier.
Like, no idea where that came from.
So that's all I'd like to add.
All right.
Thank you for taking the time to call, and we appreciate your input.
is there anyone else in the virtual audience i see no further answer mr chair planning
uh this is ron bednar city planning the property is indicated for residential on the city plan
given the documented use history re -recommended request advance be ready thank you mi2022
006 -231 -2644 Braddock Street. I vote yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snow, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Number seven, MI -2022 -006 -2003 -115 West Cumberland Street.
Alan Notkinson is the attorney.
Letter of support from the adjacent neighbor, 3117.
Letter of non -opposition from Strawberry Mansion Community concern with provisos.
Mr. Nockleson, just state your name, please, and if you would identify your client in a relationship to the property.
Yes. My name is Alan Alckmson. My client is Josh Gleinchen, the owner of the property.
Okay. 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?
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thanks.
All right, so we're here to present 315 West Cumberland Street, which is in the Strawberry Mansion section of Philadelphia.
we'll review the notice of refusal um the letter of non -opposition from the strawberry
mansion community concerned the coordinating rco which includes some provisos which we'll discuss
we have a letter also of support from the next door neighbor the property owner most directly
impacted by this project is in support of this project we have a zoning board of adjustment
revised proviso plan form completed and i'll explain why uh the property history as well
you'll see from the public records that this was a multi -family structure with a bar
on the ground floor so we're removing the commercial use and we're using
it less in a way than its documented history uh we have an example of a nearby recently
granted multifamily variance project that this board recently approved. Maps of the area,
photographs of the property, our plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notice along with
proof of mailing of that notice, our applications for appeal that we filed in the ZBA, our deed
to the property showing that Mr. Kleingen is the owner of the property, and our certificate of tax
clearance. Again, in the virtual audience is Mr. Kleingen. First thing is our notice of refusal.
This is an RSA by property. We're merely putting a two story structure with no basement living. It's being built on a slab. So each floor has its own unit. It's a corner property. We have a responsible trash management plan where, you know, garbage will be stored in the rear.
and we that's part of what our proviso is about there are no dimensional variances for this
project we have a letter of non -opposition from strawberry managing community concerned
they have the following provisos vented trash storage inside second floor unit we have no
objection to that external grounds maintenance with twice a week commercial trash pickup we have
no objection to a proviso with commercial trash pickup locks on outside trash enclosures we have
no objection to that. I don't know if that's an enforceable proviso. Sufficient safety building
lighting. We agreed to put lighting along the perimeter of our building structure. You'll see
that from our rendering. Again, don't know if that's an enforceable proviso. Fire ladder, second
floor. So we indicated to the community that we would install Jacob's ladders.
so we indicated to the community that we would install Jacob's ladders to the lintels on the
second floor unit so again don't know if that's enforceable but that's our intention of putting
that on there and then building counters which I don't think is an enforceable proviso but my client
will agree to do that and then this is just the letter that you know the form letter that was
signed by the next door neighbor and support this project as well and then this is our revised plans
We added an additional fence opening in the rear for trash storage.
So we have a specific opening in the rear of the property, as you can see right here, where it's gated up.
So each, because this is a corner property, each of the unit owners can go in the back, open this double gate that's going to be locked, and put their trash in the rear.
So it's not just that the first four -unit occupant will be able to store the trash in the back.
Both of them will.
So we felt it was important enough that we put it on our site plan, and we are asking if the board is so inclined to grant our variance, they would grant it with the proviso of the revised plan.
And then the history of our property, as you can see, 3 ,115, it says two units, and I actually think it may say a third, like rooming unit, plus a bar, but all we're trying to do is two units.
So, again, the documented history of this property is anything but, you know, single family, and we're asking that we allow for two units, where two units plus a rooming, I think, plus a bar has been used for this property in the past.
And then this board recently heard in this past summer a similar request around the corner from here at 2564 North 31st Street, where we had a property with a corner property with a documented history of multifamily use.
And under similar circumstances, given that history of multifamily use and given there was a corner property, this board granted a multifamily structure here.
And I believe this one was three units.
Oh, no, it was two units.
No, I said three units.
And this is just a map of the area.
Again, we're in the Strawberry Mansion section of Philadelphia.
We're at the corner of West Cumberland right here and Napa Street.
And then this is just from a Google Maps perspective to see where we are in the neighborhood.
And then photographs of the property.
it's currently a vacant lot this is from the west cumberland street side this is the zoning
hearing notice posting just to show that we posted both the cumberland street side as well
as the napa street side and this property has been a vacant lot we can only document as far
back as 2009 but for almost 15 years this property has been a vacant lot uh and then this is the from
the North Napa Street side. And then again, just another picture from Google Earth showing in 2009
it was a vacant lot. As you can see here, this is a two -story block. So what's also very important
to my client is that this property would mix well with the other properties from a height
perspective. And I think that was helpful in terms of getting community support as well.
We wanted to, this is West Cumberland Street
to the left of the property,
North Napa Street to the right of the property.
But you'll see it's a two -story block,
North Napa Street to the left of the property.
So what we wanted to do was to mix very well.
And you can see, like,
we had a more historical look to this property,
you know, with the brick and the cornice lines
and the height and the scale,
we really wanted to mimic what is in the neighborhoods.
And this is just renderings from different angles.
and then it was important for the community to see from a night perspective
what the property will look like and again the lighting throughout the building facade was
important to the neighborhood because you know to make sure that it's a well -recorded one and
it wouldn't be deemed a nuisance and then this is just our site plan again no dimensional variances
and our site plan has been updated for a trash enclosure that's that's available to each of the
unit owners, which is going to also be locked up, so it's not going to be a nuisance in the
neighborhood either. And then this is just the elevations from different angles on Napa Street
and Cumberland. And then this is just our floor plans. Again, we have no basement living because
there's no basement. It's built on slab. And this is our RCO meeting notice. We met with the community
on March 13th.
And 203 addresses were notified in that meeting.
The addresses are here. Proof of mailing to those addresses.
The addresses are here, proof of mailing to those addresses, our application for appeal showing Mr. Klingens the applicant, along with the notice of refusal and the project information form, deeds of property showing Mr. Klingens the owner of the property, and our certificate of tax clearance.
It technically shows a balance of $699 .90, but that's for the 2023 tax year, and taxes aren't due until the end of the month.
With that being said, I would ask that Mr. Kleinjan virtually raise his hand and be sworn in.
Mr. Kleinjan, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
That's Josh Kleinjan. Can you hear me now? Yes.
It's K -L -E -I -N -J -A -N. It's the last name Kleinjan. First name Josh, J -O -S -H. Josh, J -O -S -H.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Mr. Kleinstein, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning matter.
That's correct.
Is it true and correct?
Yes, it is.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Thanks for your attention.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chair.
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no further answer mr chair planning commission ron bednar city planning this
property is indicated for residential use on the city plan our adopted district plan recommends
no change the existing single family zoning at this location applicants hardship is not
supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or condition of the property
that would prevent it from being used
in conformity with the code.
Therefore, we recommend the Crescent Variance
not be granted.
MI 2022 -006 -200 -3115 West Cumberland Street.
I vote yes with provisos.
Revised plan, one page,
stamped by ZBA on March 22nd, 2023.
Also, commercial trash pickup two times a week.
Interior trash storage for second floor unit.
Ishmael Shahi, my vote is yes, with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes, with proviso.
That's three, Mr. Nakamura.
All right, thank you.
Have a good night.
Okay, thank you.
Have a good night.
Number eight, MI 2022, 006194, 319 to 25 North 11th Street.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
No RCO letter.
Meeting was held 214 -23, Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation.
verne you've already been sworn today so just state your name and if you would identify your
client relationship to the property uh yes uh my uh verne anastasio and i represent arts across
genres and the principal echo vola soprano okay and our vice chair has a few questions
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Counselor.
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
I want to first share this one document because I believe the Chairman said you were not in receipt of a letter from the RCO.
This is a meeting summary from Philadelphia Chinatown Development Corporation, and this is, in fact, a letter of support with everyone voting to either support or non -oppose the application.
We met with them on the 14th of February, 6 .30 p .m., with 23 members in attendance.
So please make note of that, Mr. Chair, and I'll enter this into evidence.
If Ms. Emerson needs it, I'll forward it again to her.
thank you very much you're quite welcome and then we let's get to all right sorry about that
let's get to my binder if i can
I can. You see that? Is it up? We do. All right. Awesome. Thank you. 319 -25 North 11th. The space
that we are discussing is recognized as basement, the basement space, the basement level. That's
the way it's recognized for the lease purposes. Application is for assembly and entertainment
it on the same lot with other various uses this in fact is the space that we're discussing at the
basement level will be the main stage area and some offices uh a bill code door area for
bringing in equipment we've got some side salons and studios and we've got additional
studios off the side here with a main uh restroom and some laundry as well this is the property in
question i'll pull out a little bit so make it easier for you to see and box popula is already
here right down the street is the underground arts uh this is an already an event space that's used
on a regular basis for artists and different events.
As you can see, here's underground arts over here.
Here's the property in question.
Vox Populi is already identified as being a part of the space.
And this will just further bring arts and entertainment to that particular area.
We did, in fact, I have a tax cert, by the way,
and the lease. We did, in fact, meet with the neighbors. We have 55 individual households
that were mailed. Again, over 25 folks in attendance. The space is a safe space for
artists and artisans. It'll be open exclusively from 7 p .m. to midnight, Friday, Saturday, and
Sunday, primarily for jazz, classical, comedy, and drama. And the neighbors requested two times
weekly private trash removal if the space is being used to its full potential, which we do
hope, in fact, it will be. That's about it. I want to introduce my client, Echo Vola Soprano. Please
raise your hand, Echo, so that you can be recognized for the board.
Yang Vola had their hand raised.
Do I have a lot of them to speak?
Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Yang Vola, Y -A -N -G -V -O -L -L -A.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Counsel, proceed.
Thank you.
Ms. Vola did you hear my presentation to the board this afternoon? I did, thoroughly. Is it true and
accurate to the best of your knowledge? Yes. And do you adopt it as your own testimony? I do.
I have nothing further, Mr. Chair. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience? Yes, I have Mr. John
mr john strubel with his hand raised i've allowed him to speak
hi could you state your name sir and spell it please for the court reporter
uh yes my name is john strubel j -o -h -n -s -t -r -u -b -l -e do you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth is nothing but the truth yes i do are you a neighbor in the area uh i am a direct
uh neighbor we live uh caddy corner they are in on the northeast corner of levington wood and we are
on the southwest corner okay machine sir all right i'm a little baffled uh we did write a
letter up from cald hill neighborhood association i'm also representing the cald hill neighborhood
association i'm on their zoning board we uh their zoning committee and we sent a letter
I copied it to Mark Squilla. I also copied it to Vern. He did not mention that to you guys today,
but in that letter, we basically supported what they want to do there, but we want to have
provisos. The provisor, as Vern mentioned, would be the hours of operation, and we'd also like to
have that proviso. The applicant would have necessary security people to keep the noise
down at certain times and work with a landlord to make sure that there's no trash buildup on the
street. This neighborhood is a IRMX, which sort of sounds like it might need to trouble. We have
sort of sound like it might lead to trouble we have industrial and residential mixed together but
industrial and residential mixed together, but we see a new one.
we seem to be working pretty well so far but that's what I like to see on on the vote that
I like to see those provisos added thank you okay Mr. Chair Mike uh we acknowledge the Callow Hills
letter uh because they weren't the uh coordinating RCO we did not submit submit it however we
appreciate their support my client agrees to work with them with their provisos obviously those
provisos are uh not enforceable by this board but uh they certainly my clients certainly will work
with them in making sure that uh their concerns are met uh as she will with the pcdc is there
anyone else in the virtual audience who has comment then no further hands mr chair okay
Planning Commission. This is Ron Bednar, City Planning. While this property is currently zoned
for industrial residential mixed use on the city plan, the proposed use will have no more of an
impact than would be expected to have given its specific location. Therefore, we recommend that
the board grant the special exception. Thank you. MI 2022 006194 319 to 25 North 11th Street.
I vote yes with proviso. Use limited debasement unit. Thomas Tollamick, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with Provisor.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you all.
Have a good evening.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose 330 case has not been called?
I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair.
Thanks, everyone.
We've done a little later today, but we've got a lot of work done and a lot of large cases.
I mean, the case in Center City, adding additions to that large building in Center City, and
And, you know, the restaurant case took us a little bit longer, but I appreciate everybody's
help and it was really a good day.
Thank you.
Thanks.