You're live. Thank you. Good morning everyone. My name is Frank DiCicco. I'm the chair of the
Zoning Board of Adjustment. I'll be participating in today's hearing along with our Board Secretary
Mr. Confessor Plaza and Board Members Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James Snell.
Board Administrator Tanya Sunken and Board Attorney Sharon Saleta are also in attendance.
For those of you who haven't yet participated in our virtual hearings,
I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect. First, we'll begin this morning's
session by reading a list of cases to be continued. If you believe any announced cases being continued
in error, we will give you an opportunity to respond. After reading the continuance list
and receiving any feedback, we will take any additional continuance requests or withdrawal
request. Then once we've confirmed which hearings are being continued, Mr. Plaza
will begin calling the remaining cases listed for this session. When a case is
called, we ask that attorneys representing applicants or other
interested parties in the matter identify themselves for the record. We
will then hear the appellant's presentation followed by any
presentation by attorneys representing other parties. Interested parties and
members of the public, not represented by council, will be given an opportunity to
testify. We will finally hear the recommendation of the Planning
Commission. At the hearing's conclusion, we will either vote the matter
immediately or hold it for discussion in executive session. Any case held for
discussion will be voted at the next scheduled Wednesday morning session.
Please note the following changes to the virtual format. First, we will be
administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
Second, for the benefit of anyone participating by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses
identify themselves prior to speaking or testifying. Third, we'd like to advise everyone
that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating you acknowledge your agreement
to be recorded. Fourth, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must
raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself. I'll repeat, for anyone
participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine
and then star six to unmute yourself. Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google
267 -270 -5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
And I'll repeat that again. To enter an appearance statement, call Google 267 -270 -5548
and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue. With that said, we can
begin. But before Confessor Plaza calls our first case, we'd like to announce the
following matters that are being continued. Calendar number 39065 -317
Spruce Street. Calendar number 39040 -350 West Oak Lane is being
withdrawn calendar number 39023 428 north 53rd street i have a notation sharon and tanya possibly
being withdrawn do we get any clarification i believe we are waiting for a letter to confirm
that but for now it should leave it as it continues yes okay so calendar number 39023
428 north 53rd street is being continued unless otherwise notified calendar number 39697
3895 Richmond Street, calendar number 39465 -9509, Whale Pump Drive, Whale, W -H -E -E -L,
Pump Drive. Case being withdrawn is calendar number 39407 -56 East Haines Street. Also being
continued are cases MI -2020 -000869, 2037 South 56th Street, MI -2020 -000777,
2035 South 56th Street and MI -2020
And MI -2020 -000871, 5536 Paschal Avenue, MI -2020 -000872, 5534 Paschal Avenue, is also being continued.
So at this time, we'll ask if anyone believes that a case was called in error.
to be continued or withdrawn, please raise your hand at this time.
Or if you wish to ask for a continuance or withdrawal,
please raise your hand at this time also.
We have a head up, Madeline Cartwright.
But Ms. Cartwright, you have an older form of Zoom.
so you're not able to talk.
I will promote you to panelists just for the audio to discuss a continuance.
Ms. Cartwright can you hear me I can see you Ms. Cartwright but I can't hear you
Is there a way maybe we can get her to call in by phone and hear what she has to say?
Yes can you call in by phone Ms. Cartwright and your assistant can you call us by phone?
Because we can't hear you it only shows that you have video.
Do you need the number?
Okay, if you want me to see if I can chat with her some kind of way.
yeah she can call hers is her um what i'm sorry her question in the uh q a box is why okay now
she's connected to audio hello hi good morning good morning good morning miss cartwright would
you please spell your name for the stenographer c -a -r -t -w -r -i -g -h -t and your address six three
the property address or my address property address four two eight north five three 53rd
street okay um that was a case we called to be continued why we're in a firm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes um there's a request to have the case
continued do you own that property i own the property and you didn't make the request for
continuous? I did not.
Karen, do we have any information as to who made that request?
I believe we did not receive exhibits by the five -day, by Friday.
Oh, okay. You know what happened is the CVA, is his name the CVA?
SRO, you know the community RCO, sent me his letter on Thursday
And as soon as I got it, I sent it.
I even called down there.
Ms. Cartwright, you were also required to submit a deed,
a copy of the refusal, photos of the property.
Yeah, I sent all that.
I sent all that.
I sent that before Thursday.
You sent it to my email address as well?
I had two email addresses, an email and a CC.
I sent it to both.
I am seeing a photo of the refusal that was received Saturday, and then there were additional
I am seeing a photo of the...
documents received on Thursday.
the letter from mr from the beautiful rcl um can i suggest that we put this back a case and if i'm
able to go through and verify that all the required documents are there that we move forward with it
we do that all right miss cartwright sharon's going to work to see if we can get you have
your case heard this morning all right thank you so much thank you anyone else tanya
that's all chair all right so uh confessor i believe the first case will be the garrick
garrick street case yes calendar number three nine nine seven five two three five six garrick
street 2356 garrick street attorney is vince defino
mr dofino you're out there yes i just promoted him to panelists mr dofino you can unmute yourself
share your screen as you wish and this is sharon saletta mr dofino submitted revised plans and a
revised plans for him this morning uh should the board vote to approve the appeal these are
plans, the changes
are plans that can be made by revised plans.
Mr. Dufino, you
swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. Okay.
And do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes. Thank you. Please identify
yourself with a record.
Yeah. Vincent Anthony
Dufino. That's D -E
capital F as in Frank, I -N -O.
2541 South
Broad Street.
Please proceed with your testimony, Mr. Diffino.
Okay, I'm trying to get the screen right over here.
I don't want to X that out, right?
Uh -oh.
So 2356 Garrett Street, the southeast corner, 24th and Garrett in South Philadelphia.
uh point breeze uh cdc is the uh is the actual rco this is a 750 square foot lot and it's zoned
cmx1 vince vince we're not seeing any of your uh exhibits okay yeah i'm gonna
you seeing them now yes okay yes but i would ask if you could right maximize thank you there we go
i got it now i'm cooking with gas all right so this is the property here as you can see it's
an abandoned property located at the uh southeast corner of uh 24th and garage streets uh this the
bigger side of the property is on 24th Street and this is the rear of the
property here and as you can see there's a there's a series of trees growing in
the alleyway which basically take up the whole almost a whole block I think
there's two or three trees down there and that's the back of the property
i'll go back
this is the uh surrounding neighborhood here i gotta turn it around
nicole i need my assistant to help me here but anyway this is the uh surrounding neighborhood
this is the property next door here it's a barber shop and it's a couple different
apartments there uh there's our property
and uh if you click on view you should be able to rotate it yeah nicole how do i rotate that i need
to rotate i need to rotate what do you hit control what do you hit control shift plus control shift
okay so this is the adjoining neighbor it's it's a it's a barbershop on the bottom and
it's it's a it's a barbershop on the bottom and a couple units on top there's
our the rear of our property here this is the Garrett Street side of the
property here as you can see there's the trees in the backyard that are overgrown
this is looking northbound from from south of the property
and this is looking northbound north of the property so that's pretty much the neighborhood
there uh basically our refusals are we're cmx one where we proposed originally one commercial
and two one bedrooms one on the second floor and one on the second third floor roughly 700
square foot i'll get to the plans for i'll get the original plan for you
this is the original plan of the flooring um i'll get you the elevation plan first though
and this is the here's the elevation plan
basically it's three floors one would have been commercial the second would be about a 700 square
foot apartment the third the same thing and there was bays on the front of the property
and the side of the property um and the neighbors had issues with a couple couple things number one
uh they had issues with the commercial unit um we met with the block we met with the the board
the board first like wanted the commercial unit and then they wanted us to meet with with the
block so we met with the block and the block vehemently it seemed vehemently
opposed the commercial use on the bottom for several reasons for several
reasons the neighbor that the nature of the neighborhood there's several other
stores in the area and parking is brutal in that area so this was the original
plan and then we met with the board on several occasions the board uh you know they were there
was intense discussions with the board the board was very cooperative with us that we were going
back and forth on a number of issues and uh basically uh what the board did is when we met
with the neighborhood we we discussed it and uh you know we ferreted out several of the issues
and their major issue one of our major issues was an affordable unit
uh committed to below market rate so uh tiffany white with kenyatta's office we're going to
discuss that we're going to make an agreement to have that done the second issue was rounded bay
windows on 24th street they didn't want the bay windows protruding outward so i had the new plan
for that and then to remove the bay on garrett street because they want to be able to look up
and down the block without having an issue with the bay protruding also there was alley trees
which i'll show you which i showed you from the picture but i could show you from a an aerial
shot so my client is agreeing to remove the alley trees and he has to hire an
arborist to do that the proper way so that we could free up people's backyards
from the overgrowth of the shrubbery and then the neighbors wanted to remove the
commercial space and have three residential units and then a new
sidewalk so we agreed with with everything there and we also agreed to
a height under 30 36 so we put it under 36 because what one of our major issues
was that they didn't want it they didn't want the bays they didn't want an
an overcrowding they wanted to fit into the to the neighborhood so we revised
the plans and I can show you the revised plans so here's the revised plans and
here you see the rounded base so it takes away a lot of the blockage over
here and on the front it's going to be flat there's not going to be any
there's not going to be any protrusion from the property of a bay.
there's not going to be any protrusion from from the property of a bay so we did that
let me try to get you
this is the aerial shot here and
You can see the two trees that are growing in the alleyways.
So they'll be removed also.
And my client met vigorously with the nearby neighborhood,
and he had petitions signed somewhere on here.
so we have we have petitions of all the adjoining neighbors and he actually went out to the block
on the night of the neighborhood meeting so that they could have computer access
and to to the zoom meeting with with the rco who was uh by the way very cooperative very
on to detail and you know we basically had about 10 encounters with the rco prior to
our meeting with the neighborhood so that we were in line with what they wanted also so
basically that's it now there's also one more refusal which was a um the setback required was
nine foot and we propose four i don't think they have it they don't have an issue with that
because they they know that the apartments have to be a certain side size
so basically do you have any questions for me so what is what is this is for a triplex
originally originally it was for commercial space and two residential two residential
And we were fine with that, you know, that purpose.
And then the neighbors wanted the, they wanted it all to be residential.
And so is it for three units then?
Yeah, it's three units.
Five grand is for three units.
And one of them will be affordable.
Market rate, below market rate.
What is the square footage of those units?
Do you need to serve approximately 700 square feet?
All right.
All right.
Do you have any witnesses you need to put on, Mr. Dufino?
No, I would just, Admir's here, if you could come in and wave, put your face on.
um i don't do you see it do you see admir here or
the owner yes yeah you want to you want do you want to get him on the record yeah
admir velko could you please spell your name uh my name is admir velko a d m i r and last name
and you heard my testimony yes and you adopted as your own yes okay thank you
hold on do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes yes yeah we heard your testimony okay excuse me um this is sharon saletta i'm sorry i got
called away for a moment mr dofino are you saying that you were changing the plan from
the originally proposed vacant ground floor commercial space with two dwelling
units above to an entirely residential use? Well that's what we were we were
okay we were okay with the vacant commercial but the neighbors want the
residential units there so yes. I understand that but that's a that's a
different application you're changing the number of units and you're removing
the commercial space in a cmx1 district you would need a new refusal from lni for that
yeah i was i was thinking of that but uh the neighborhood was dead resentful against a
commercial bottom floor what sharon is saying if you're going to do three residential requires
another refusal that's why i asked that you the application as i read it was the commercial space
and two -family dwelling but you're removing the space the commercial space and now you're going
to three -family that's why i asked that question mr dofino it wouldn't require starting another
um appeal you would keep the same appeal number but you would have to submit a letter
appeal you would keep the same appeal number but you would have to submit a letter requesting
that you be authorized to submit an amended application to lni and they will then issue
an amended refusal i can explain the process to you offline but okay there will be another step
thank you so sharon we we will have to hold this correct yes and it would be hard to give a
specific date on this because you don't know how long it will take just for we could ask Mr.
Dufino to contact us when he has the amended refusal. Will it be attorney moving party or
just hold? You can do it attorney moving party that's fine. All right is there anyone else who
wishes to testify on this matter if so please raise your hand.
here i have petra gamble miss gamble you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in
okay thank you good morning miss gamble uh your name and address please
good morning my name is petra gamble my address is 2305 federal street philadelphia pa 19146
uh do you swear in a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes I do thank you please proceed I just wanted to go on record saying that I am
one of the members of the coordinating RCO Point Breeze CDC and we are in
support of the project thank you very much appreciate it anyone else anyone
else to testify if so please raise your hand I have chair a caller with the last
three digits 855 you can unmute yourself and speak to this case before the board
good morning chairman and board my name is albert little page a l b e r t l i t t l e p a z e
i'm the president of the plain breeze community development coalition um mr little page mr
a little bit i know you were wrong yesterday do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth love me god thank you please proceed i am just wanted to make a
correction to mr defino's testimony he said tiffany white it was it wasn't tiffany white who uh
we're doing the affordable requested affordable unit it was actually tiffany green who is rco
with concerned citizens um so i just wanted to make sure that that was a matter of correction
for the record um and without any other uh when we look forward to it we have to be revisiting on
the uh the next refusal but we also are in support of what the community's desire was
to support this particular project and thank you mr chairman and the board have a great day
everything so noted thank you anyone else we have brandon strauss brandon you can unmute yourself
and wait to be sworn in. Brandon when you get on please spell your name for the stenographer give
us your name and address. E -R -A -N -D -O -N -S -T -R -A -U -S. Brandon? Uh yeah I just wanted to say that I
your address oh sorry my address uh 1424 south 24th street you swear and affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you please proceed yeah i just wanted
to say that these revised plans look uh like something that's going to please the neighbors
uh i live directly across from the property and i've been in contact with with several of my
neighbors asking what their thoughts were so i just wanted to say thank you for making these
changes and we hope that the project will go smoothly i am concerned about what kind of
construction noise is going to be happening and in what time frame so if that's something that
can be addressed in this conversation i would appreciate it well the guidelines are i believe
no construction prior to 7 a .m in the morning and i don't know if it's six seven to six p .m or seven
to somebody could help me with that there there are certain guidelines for construction and what
are the dates of construction that we're looking at i you'll have to speak to the uh uh the uh
property owner and his and or his attorney about that because they don't know yet they're going
to have to go back in and address the other refusal so i think it would be hard for them to
to to give you a definitive date ballpark i i'm not in the ballpark so we'll have to discuss that
with mr dofino and his client all right thank you i appreciate it thank thank you
that's it chair you can proceed okay thank you calendar numbers
that's it chair you can proceed okay thank you calendar number three nine nine seven five
two three five six garrett street attorney moving party
okay mi 2020 001108 510 east hayne street
Justin, you've been promoted to panelists.
You can unmute yourself and share your screen as necessary.
Good morning, members of the board.
Good morning.
Justin, you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
And do you swear in the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record.
Yes, my name is Justin Crick, K -R -I -K. My address is 1500 JFK Boulevard, Suite 630, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19102.
i am here on behalf of the applicant haynes street holdings and the applicant is applying
for a variance to adapt the current use of the property at 510 east haynes street as well as
the the adjacent properties to it for the relocation to turn the vacant land into a plumbing
supply warehouse. Just a little bit of background for you. This matter has basically been approved
by the board in January 2019, but due to a slight expansion of the already approved variance and
expansion of the land area, the applicant made some changes to the size and location of the
buildings on the property. So we're here basically seeking similar approvals to those which have
already been granted. I will direct you to the to the screen with the the outline on it and as you
can see the refusals that were the summary of the refusals are that number one this wholesale
distribution with the accessory office for the plumbing supply warehouse is prohibited. This is
an RSA 5 zoning classification. We have refusals for parking spaces the required amount being 22.
we've proposed 12 bicycle parking is three and we've proposed zero another
refusal is that there are multiple buildings on the same lot and I'll
describe what those two buildings are momentarily and then we have a rear yard
required setback that is nine feet but we have not proposed any however on the
plans I will show you that there is somewhat of a setback that can be viewed
that way. Skipping past the refusal and the application as well as the deed, I'm going to go
to first to the original plan that was presented. This was the prior plan. If you take a look at
this area, this is 510 East Haynes Street. This existing two -story building at the time was not
owned by the applicant, nor was this street formerly known as Eli Street. So this is the
prior application with one building here and a shed building over here for supplies and so forth.
The new application expands on this bottom corner of the site plan because the owner has acquired
510 East Haynes Street as well as the street formerly known as Eli Street through the courts.
So therefore we've expanded the size of these two buildings and rearranged a few of the
items in the parking area which generated these refusals. We have met with the RCO,
actually several RCOs on this property and project, and we do have a letter of support
from them in the file. We also have a letter of support from the adjacent neighbor to the,
to the, it's not the south, but to the other side of what was Eli Street, it's a church.
so essentially what we're talking about here is on this plan we don't we don't believe that the
the number of parking spaces is necessary and that that the variance would be appropriate because
this is a this is not a like a home depot sort of plumbing supply this is a plumbing supply for
contractors and we don't expect to see heavy traffic flow of people in and out for their
everyday shopping similarly we don't expect that there's a requirement for bikes other than
potentially for employees because we don't see anybody uh coming to the plumbing supply warehouse
and riding away with with pipe on their shoulder um the need for the two buildings again is one
So the need for the two buildings, again, is one is the main building in a warehouse.
is the main building in a warehouse
The other, the shed building, is open on three sides.
It is not an enclosed space, and it's just to house some of the larger plumbing supplies and piping.
You can also see from the picture right around this side, these are train tracks that run along,
septa train tracks that run along the property.
And there is a grassy area between the parking lot, but that's just not considered as rear space for us.
uh we have pictures of the property and over uh an aerial view right here of a street view so you
can see the size of the property we're talking about just shy of one acre of land and this is a
basic general satellite view of the picture of the property we have posted the property um well sorry
that picture is a little bit too big but we have posted the property with zoning notices on both
frontages and this is a better uh indication of what the property looks like from the street
level we believe that this is the highest and best use for the property and that there's a
hardship existing because the the property does not have a desire there are no desired developers
willing to develop this into residential land and for those reasons we would like the board
to grant the variance application i do have mr hecht lee hecht is on the call and he is the owner
of the entity applicant if there are any questions from the board i would ask him to adopt my
testimony please get please uh get your client to uh testify okay if the board could uh unmute him
or admit and unlock his am i unmuted yes you uh yes you are okay please state and spell your name
and your address for the record lee hecht l -e -e -h -e -c -h -t address is 126 executive drive ambler
pennsylvania 19002 and you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth yes i do uh mr hecht uh you you are the sole member of haine street holdings llc correct
That's correct.
And have you heard my testimony to the board today regarding this variance application?
I have.
And do you accept my statements and adopt them as your testimony?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
Anyone else wish to testify in this matter?
If so, please raise your hand.
no hands are up chair thank you planning commission mr chairman david effecto f -e -c -t -e -a -u
with the city planning commission david do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth yes sir i do thank you please proceed mr chairman and members of the
board this property is indicated for industrial and commercial mixed use on the city's comprehensive
plan we do not believe the proposal will pose a negative impact on the surrounding area
accordingly we have no objection to granting this variance
thank you um calendar number i'm sorry mi -2020 -001108
510 east hanes street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
my vote is yes thank you confessor could you hold off for a couple minutes
sharon's got to go over something with me i'll be right back with you you've got it
thank you members of the board
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
thank you for that confessor we're going to go with number five
after that uh that'll finish the 9 30 list we're going to go back and do
a case for
I'll give you all the information when we're ready
North 4th Street
and then 53rd Street
Ms. Cartwright's case we'll go back to that
let's do number 5
at Brentwood Road and then we'll go to the other
you got it calendar number
Brentwood Road
Northwest 72nd Street
Attorney is Leo
Leo, good morning, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
And do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you. Please identify yourself for the record.
Certainly. This is Leo Mulvihill, M -U -L -V -I -H -I -L -L.
Address is 2424 East York Street, Suite 111, Philadelphia 19125.
I'm here today for the applicant, Jerry Hogger.
Jerry is on the line. I will be asking him to testify at the end of the
presentation today.
So members of the board, I'm seeking to share my screen at this moment.
Are you able to see that members of the board chairman? Thank you. Yes. So members
of the board, we're here today for a single -family home that my client Mr.
hoggard picked up seeking to do some renovations to it and essentially as a result a couple refusals
have been triggered we have full support from the community after several community meetings
so we'll just go through the details and for the purposes of this record i'll go through my
packet as well i have the refusal appeal and product information form at page one
area zoning map at page six deed for the property at page seven tax clearance at page 13 zoning
notifications at page 15 or rco letter of support page 21 photographs of the property at page 23
and then floor plans of the property through the end of the packet as well
looking at page three of the packet members of the board we're now looking at the refusal
the application as i stated was for the erection of a one -story addition that an existing single
family home we got two refusals in this case one is for minimum front setback in this zoning
district which is rsd1 it's required 35 foot setback we're proposing two feet 42 .42 feet
the reason that it's so small members of the board is essentially we're seeking to build an addition
to a garage on an existing driveway that comes closer to the street so that's that first refusal
the second is for the side yard width and again with the construction that garage we end up as a
smaller side yard we're located directly next to the park and I'll indicate that when we get to
the photographs of the property as well along with the area zoning map just proceeding through the
packet members of the board what we're looking at now is the area aerial view of the property to the
What we're looking at now is the aerial view of the property.
To the top, we see the area zoning map, RSD1.
At the top, we see
The property itself is indicated in purple.
That green area to the south of the photograph, that's the park that's immediately next door.
You see my client's property where I'm circling with my mouse cursor at this point.
It's essentially at the intersection of 72nd Street and Brentwood, and is that corner property indicated right here.
from this overhead shot we can see where i'm indicating with my cursor an existing driveway
that leads to a one car garage this is where the new garage will be built members of the board
and it will be closer to the street which triggered that refusal however if you notice
because this property is located directly next to the woods it won't be interfering with anyone's
sight lines it won't be interfering with anyone's use enjoyment light or air on their property at
all just going to be a little bit closer to the park that's here
paging through the deeds at this point members of the board in fact what i'll do
i'm just going to pop this at a full screen so i can get to the photographs of the property members
um what i'm showing at this one before i get to the photos everybody
the letter of support from the rco it was a joint meeting between the two local rcos
uh it was a republican rco and the democratic rco as you can see we had our meeting that was
held virtually on june 23rd 2020 at 6 p .m
we had six members voting in support one in non -opposition
what i'm showing now members of the board is page 23 of my zoning packet which is the area
photographs of the property itself
up to the top right here where i'm indicating with my cursor this is 72nd street directly in
front of us this is the woods and park area that's off the left single family homes are off to the
right to the bottom left this is brentwood road members of the board to the right is the subject
property itself at the corner you can see the zoning sign that i originally posted at this
property for our first hearing which was scheduled for some time ago i believe back in february
going to page 24 of my packet members of the board we can see the subject property itself
currently a one -story home the upper right hand photograph members of the board again
a photograph showing the one -story home. We seek to build an addition, which keeps it under the
maximum height. It will be two stories at that point, five bedrooms, to allow for better use
of the property itself. As the home itself being one story, having no basement is a little bit
small. As Mr. Hoggard wishes to move his family in, they just need that additional space to make
it more habitable and useful for them. On page 25, we can see additional photos of the postings
with the zoning signs for the rescheduled hearings.
Page 26, we see more of the same.
Members of the board, I'm now showing Appendix 1,
which is the overall zoning plan.
Zooming in on this, we can see exactly
what our refusals are for, as I discussed earlier.
This is the three -foot give or take setback from the street
because we are constructing this new three -car garage
along the existing driveway.
The area off to the right where the property line
is indicated here on this plan,
this is the woods and park that I've previously discussed.
So this is our refusal here for the front setback.
Here, where I'm indicating off to the right,
this is our refusal for the side setback.
We're not interfering with anybody else's use
or enjoyment of the property whatsoever.
This is the elevation of the property.
Zooming in on this so the members of the board
can see the overall height.
we're only going to 32 feet 8 inches which is keeping in mind with the other
houses that are in the area while there are some one -story homes or a number of
two and three -story homes in the area as well we're not planning to go any
taller than any of those it's a side elevation this is showing the new
constructed proposed three -car garage there's a balcony at the back of the
house that we're proposing as well again not interfering with anybody else's use
for enjoyment of their property. This is the floor plan of the first floor with a proposed
three -car garage. The existing driveway would be directly located next to that. We have multiple
bedrooms on the ground story, a handicapped accessible restroom, large kitchen area, dining
and family area, a rear terrace as well. Going to the second floor, we again have one, two,
three bedrooms available on that nice walk -in closet large bathroom
three bedrooms available on that, nice walk -in closet, large bathroom, larger living area towards
the middle, recreation area study, and then a nice deck at that second story. This would be the roof
of the proposed three -story garage off to the bottom right. Members of the board, my client
seeks to live here with his family. They just need to do these improvements to the property so they
can all live there comfortably. My client is currently on the line, so Jerry, if you're still
there, if you wouldn't mind please raising your hand so you can be unmuted. You will be sworn,
and then I can ask you a couple questions.
can you hear me mr hoggard are you there yes i'm here okay perfect mr hoggard uh will you please
state your name spell your last name and give your address for the record i'm jerry hoggard
first name jerry j -e -r -r -y last name's hoggard h -o -g -g -a -r -d current address 116 east montgomery
avenue unit 313 rmoor pa 19003 now mr hoggard uh the chairman's going to swear you in thank you
Mr. Hoggard, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
All right, Mr. Hoggard, you've heard my testimony today?
And you're the owner of 7200 Brentwood Road?
And I'm correct, you're going to be moving there as your primary residence?
Do you have anything you'd like to add to my presentation today?
And do you otherwise adopt my testimony as your own?
Yes, I do.
Thank you, Mr. Hoggard.
I have nothing else for you.
members the board we're happy to take any other questions at this time any
questions from the board no no anyone else wishes to testify in this case
please raise your hand
no hands at this time chair thank you planning Commission mr. chairman and
members of the board this property is indicated for single -family use on the
City's comprehensive plan. We believe that this use does not propose any negative impacts to the
surrounding areas. Accordingly, we have no objection to granting this variance. Thank you.
Calendar number 39644 -7200 Brentwood Road. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes. Thank you, members of the board. Have a good day. Thank you. Do likewise. Thank you.
Confessor, let's do the North 53rd Street.
Calendar number 39023, 428 North 53rd Street.
This application is for a daycare center on a basement and first floor
and second floor household living one family dwelling in an existing structure no signs on
this application the proposed use is refused for the following the proposed use for a daycare center
is prohibited in the zoning district ma 'am miss cartwright you can put your video on now
Ms. Cartwright, you swear on the perm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I am.
Okay, can you please identify yourself, spell your last name for the record?
I'm Madeline Cartwright, C -A -R -T -W -R -I -G -H -T.
helper we just had her video oh you put it back thank you
good you got it now you good is it going now no
she said you just had you clicking them things so fast
now you have it yes thank you thank you can you put your address for the record please
428 north 53rd street philadelphia 19139
that's the property
that's the property address right frank you're muted
she says carbright can you please uh proceed okay i'm uh requesting to uh this is my property
i've had i've owned it since 1961 well my brother and i and uh he passed away so now since the last
20 years. To make a daycare there, there are, I'm a retired school administrator and my daughter is
a daycare, she's qualified, she's certified to be a daycare with her own childhood degree.
Anyway, we have met with the committee and we have the okay of the committee and the area
is in need of daycare. There are no daycares within four, five, six blocks of the place.
And I'm looking for your approval. Ms. Cartwright, you have any pictures, anything you could share
with us so we can see? Yes, we do. Thank you. This is Sharon Saleta. We did receive a letter
of support from the RCO on this appeal? Yes, push it.
Lots of pictures, lots of everything. There we go, look. Okay. All right. So Helper, did you share
your screen first? She said, did you share your screen? Yes, we're doing it right now. Okay.
can you see it it's coming up now there we go so could you maximize it though sure maximize it
make it bigger
yeah so if you look at the right hand corner yes the page yes maximize that
because we only see like a third of the screen of the actual document
okay make it bigger all right if you go up to the corner right hand corner there should be a box a
square all the way at the right corner you should be able to click that it should open it all up
oh so in the corner right here it says view options it's not my corner it should
be an X all the way at the top right corner instead of the X you're gonna hit
square. Over at the top, she says.
She said right. Over at the right.
Oh, right here? Is this it? No.
Do you mind if I take control and see if I see it? Yes, yes.
yeah it's something that's not preventing it for the whole thing to open yeah there's a
there's a black rectangle black vertical rectangle right in the middle of the screen how would you
read that i'm not sure i don't see it on my end all righty so if you um go to the next page let's
see what happens. Okay. This is Sharon Salete again. If the board members are able to access
your email, I did also just email you the photos.
Okay, I gave up remote control, so you guys can... Can you see it now? There's something now. Can you see that?
There we go. We did it. Thank you.
mr chairman uh i'm back yeah now there's what i would have wanted you to show them was the front
of the building first right here click this see this is this is the entrance to the basement
can you see that can you see that okay i had i had that um five six years ago i widened this
entrance to five feet going into the basement and I did that uh without what before I do
began this daycare idea I did all right then after that I um yeah you do the clip and hurry up
All right, then after that, I, yeah, you do the clip -in, hurry up.
See if you can get, then there's the front of the building.
This is the pavement here, and this is the first floor and the second floor.
This is the door closed, or it does, there's the door open.
That's inside of the daycare.
That's coming into the, coming out of, coming for the pavement into the building itself.
It's just one long basement. There are no partitions in it. It just goes straight back
to the back. The lot itself is 16 by 7. The basement itself is 16 by 74. The lot is a little
bigger than that. Here's another view of the basement. Now what I did here, and I had done
this before. This was done years ago too. This is a window. I put a window right here a little
far up from the floor because i wanted to bring light in for just my general remodel this redoing
this basement a couple of years ago uh i'm not sure what it's on i'll tell you what it is this
you see a yard there i'm sorry miss cartwright and helper so when you go to a different document
you would have to make sure you click on the document so that the red box is around that
document that's the only way we'll see it we're still see looking at your diagram of the basement
the black and white now do what he says do this she said she's what should be one that he looked
this is the last one you all saw here all right yes we're still looking at your black and white
of the existing apartments in the basement okay can you see this one can you see the door open
no so here's what you can do you can click share screen again right to come out of this
then hit share screen again and click on the document you want us to see who share screen
share screen okay now hit share screen again and then go into the very document you want us to look
at okay now you saw the door open coming in now i'm going to show you the inside show that one
there. Okay. Go to the next one. She saw that one. We know what we see in this now. The chair can see it.
Okay, the chair can see going into the basement from the outside. Yes. Okay, that's where you come
in and you come in over the pavement. When you leave the basement, the pavement, there are two
steps, three steps there, but they're all way close to the pavement. This door, the space in
between this door and the first step is 12 feet all right move it to the next one
go to another one
stay in the face stay stay with the house okay can you see that one
no not yet what now no we just see the line across the street screen
so did you hit share screen come out go back in and try it again okay
i don't think they saw that one show them that one
share all right i'm gonna share this one with you got it we got it we got it now thank you
okay that is uh when you come into the basement right here on here begins the the alleyway between
the two houses but in the bigger part on this side i put a window there i put that there a
couple of years before five years ago when i opened that front but that's a window that's
30 inches off the ground a full -size window and i did that to bring light in so it didn't look
like i didn't want it to look like a basement when i was doing the last project do that
i'm gonna do another picture yeah
can you show me art can you show me art but can you see the pictures no we're having the same
problem go back out again and try coming back in okay sure
i don't know do the uh do you see this one already
no it's just a line across the screen all right i do it again
you should have been practicing on this one that's okay it's wonderful
all right so i'm gonna share this one see this one okay okay that's the back
okay that's the back that's if you go from the front door straight all the way back to 74 feet
that's if you go from the front door straight all the way back to 74 feet
that's the back door to the back and then i have a window here with a with the uh
air vent in it and then i just have the the washer machine that i'm going to use later on go ahead
she said go ahead and come back in leave leave me did you leave
okay now can you see the window yes ma 'am uh that's the base the window i just showed you
this is the window from the outside right and that's the this part you see right here uh here
that's steps from the window so you didn't have to come out the window and be in a hole
you come out the window and it's straight up everything is straight up all right let's do the
next one do the back do the yard i want to show the yard
you have the line across the screen again okay she's gonna pick it go ahead that's the front
she already saw that
see that one yes we do okay that is two doors away that's my my uh the building where
i'm going to put the date where i want to put the daycare is two doors this to the left right here
this is my building this is an apartment building there's no access to the yard from the building
itself but uh i redid again i did this a couple of years ago uh i made this a nice little sitting
yard and that was for the community to use it if they wanted to have a cookout because most of
these houses are row houses and I had this lot this lot is 30 feet wide and 40 feet deep and I
had that lot sitting there growing weeds so I redid it so that the neighbor the community could
get some use out of it and if I get the daycare I want to be able to let the children play in
there on their little recess period go to the next one is that a different address yeah that's
just two doors down yeah that's my property but it's two doors down yeah that's that's my property
but this is 430 uh this is two doors down that's 28 there's 30 and 32 and then this is my property
and the address on if you looked at the real address on this yard property is 5300 west minister
i'm a little confused why you're showing us two different properties the application is for
yeah 428 north 53rd yeah no we had that for if you wanted to know like the last time we went to
the zba meeting they wanted to know where the kids were going to play but you didn't want to know
that part okay all right talk about the plan all right now i'm going to look at the plan you see
the plan itself yeah okay there's the plan this is where you come in on the right hand side where
the corner there okay you come in on the right hand side here from 53rd street and you come into
the daycare uh this this right in here is a little area for the desk and then you know like a little
entry uh room for to take people in and talk to people and all right over here is a uh going to
be a little powder room for adults in case somebody comes in and wants to use the toilet
or the staff. I don't like the staff to use the same toilet as the children. I didn't
do that as a school principal. I didn't let anybody use the children's toilet. Now you
come right in here. This is a play area for the children. How do you do that?
all right that's good now that's good now that's that's the play area for the children
uh he's this is this my architect has this listed as uh play area number three he says can house
three children for whatever maybe reading the book or playing in the sandbox over here is a larger
play area for the children this is 200 square feet he said would house five children that would be
for another activity room to do painting or whatever we do in that the activity area then
you go down farther here's yet another larger activity uh child area and he says that could
house five children so you could have three different activities going on at one time or
activities going on at one time, or you can bring your children together and do a reading session
can bring your children together and do a reading session.
or a presentation or anything like that. Then you go to the back. Right in this area here,
this would be the utility area for the microwave and the refrigerator. And I would have some kind
of a washing machine so that we didn't have soil clothes in the area. And then you go out the back
door to the backyard now my intention was not to use the backyard for anything except escape
because my air conditioner is back there and also uh there is access to the first floor from
to the backyard you have any questions there
not yet uh any questions from the board no yeah you know
is there anyone else who wishes to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no hands at this time chair
planning commission mr chairman and members of the board this property is indicated for
residential single -family use in the city's comprehensive plan we believe this use does
not pose any negative impacts on the surrounding area accordingly we have no objection to granting
this variance thank you calendar number three nine zero two three four two eight north 53rd street
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you uh thank you miss cartwright
And thank you so much. Thank all the members of the board and everybody for putting up with us.
Ms. Cartwright, this is Sharon Slitt. I apologize for the confusion on the continuance.
Yeah, on behalf of the board, we all apologize.
Sharon, Sharon, Sharon.
I have an announcement before we begin with the other cases regarding MI -2020 -000772, 1905 Spruce Street.
An appeal was heard yesterday and was held for discussion in executive session this morning.
Following the hearing, we heard from a number of members of the public who were unable to participate.
this despite being present we have therefore decided to reopen the record
and resume the hearing to receive community feedback
on september the 30th at 2 p .m september the 30th at 2 p .m
uh i think with that uh sharon unless i'm mistaken we can proceed with the
1932 north 4th street yes uh calendar number 39651 1932 north 4th street and i know that
rachel pritzker is um here i'm not sure sloan folks i believe was also going to come back
and um comment on any progress that was made i'm not certain if he is here
he was we see rachel is uh mr fulks available
no chair he's not here all right let's proceed with rachel and then uh maybe he'll be on before
we're done all right rachel do you swear in front to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth? Yes. Okay. I'm trying to call Sloan to help you out. All right. Hey, are you able to log
into the zoning board that are now doing this case and wanted to have you speak on the record?
Okay, thank you. Okay, thank you. Okay, he's jumping on. So just for the record, Rachel,
r -a -c -h -a -e -l pritzker p -r -i -t -z -k -e -r pritzker law group 1635 market suite 1600
philadelphia pa 19103 this case was heard two weeks ago and if you'd like i can refresh you on
what this case was about i don't it's been a minute brief description okay um this was for
the new construction of a triplex in, let's see, here we go, in North Square on 4th Street. Again,
it was an oddly shaped site, so we had generated a refusal for use and for rear yard, although we
did explain that we are providing more than a nine -foot rear yard. We just had designed the
Design the building in a way to sort of hug the curb given the significant amount of vacancy on this block
building in a way to sort of hug the curb, given the significant amount of vacancy on this block.
There's also precedent for other
multifamily on this block that this board has approved previously
I did go through an explanation of how this aligns with the comprehensive plan and that they're looking to support
4th Street and 5th Street and also North American Street
And so we had met with the community. We had two meetings with them in which
they were looking for affordable units these are affordable units we also changed part of
the facade on the one side near houston street as you can see in this photo they were concerned with
given the amount of vacancy over here they wanted a nicer material on this side which we were happy
to do we worked with the council office to try and come to some sort of a common ground for
support we they were they asked us for a continuance
we then continued this again and we didn't hear anything from the
community so i believe that sloan can probably better speak to
those discussions on the record that i can but at this point we
ask that you know this be approved and that
we're able to move forward with this just to bring up sort of
for the planning commission um let's see here's sort of how it aligns with the 2035 comprehensive
plan as you can see they sort of recommend higher density in this area you can see where our
property is is where the star is again they're trying to build up fourth street and fifth street
and north american street um so this aligns and it's probably why this board has approved
multifamily on this block. I can kind of quickly go through the other properties that have been
approved by this board on RSA 5 properties, as you can see on your screen, all on North 4th Street
within a stone's throw from this site. So again, I think we had just put it on pause
to give the community another chance to participate and see how we could work
with them and and you know here we are we do have Sloan folks available at this
sorry um rachel are you are you are you finished yeah i'm happy to have sloan speak okay mr folks
uh good morning uh chairman de chico and the zba uh board sloan folks office of councilman sanchez
508 city room 508 city hall um when i want to say you swear in the firm to tell the truth
the whole truth, nothing but the truth. Yes, I do. Thank you. Please proceed. When last we spoke
two weeks ago, our office submitted a letter asking for a two -week hearing hold so that the
community and the applicant could re -engage. They had been working towards a resolution regarding
this issue. The community had spoken briefly with the applicant. Unfortunately over the last two
weeks our office has reached out to the community RCO. We haven't gotten a response from them
regarding a follow -up meeting. We find that very unfortunate and we just asked the ZBA
proceed, you know, with their process.
Thank you.
Anyone else who wishes to testify on this matter, please raise your hand.
no hands chair thank you planning commission mr chairman and members of the board this
property is indicated for residential multi -family use in the city's comprehensive plan we have no
objection to multi -family here but we do request the proposal to reduce the number of units number
dwelling units thank you calendar number three nine six five one one nine three two north
fourth street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you
my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you thank you do we have any unfinished business
is this on this session i think that's it yeah nothing for me
okay thank you all see you back here at two o 'clock stay safe thank you
Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Frank DiCicco. I'm the chair of the Zoning
Board of Adjustment. I'll be participating in today's hearing along with Confessor Plaza,
our board secretary, and board members, Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James Snell.
Board Administrator Tanya Sunkit and board attorney Sharon Saleta are also in attendance.
For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings,
I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect.
First, we will begin this afternoon session by reading a list of content of cases to be continued.
If you believe that any announced case is being continued in error,
we will give you an opportunity to respond. After reading the continuance list and receiving any
feedback, we will take any additional continuance request and or withdrawal
request. Then once we've confirmed which hearings are being continued, Mr. Plaza
will begin calling the remaining cases for the list listed for this session.
When a case is called, we ask that attorneys representing applicants or
other interested parties in the matter identify themselves for the record. We
then hear the applicant's presentation followed by any presentation by attorneys representing
other parties. Interested parties and members of the public not represented by council
will then be given an opportunity to testify. We will finally hear the recommendation of the
Planning Commission. At the hearing's conclusion we will either vote the matter immediately or
hold it for discussion and executive session. Any case held for discussion will be voted at
the next scheduled Wednesday session. Please note the following changes
related to the virtual format. First, we will be administering oaths to
individual participants prior to their testimony. Second, for the benefit of
anyone participating by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify
themselves prior to speaking or testifying. Third, we'd like to advise
everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating you
acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. Fourth, for anyone participating
by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine
and then star six to unmute yourself. I'll repeat, for anyone participating by
phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and
then star six to unmute yourself. Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267 -270 -5548
and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue. I'll repeat that as well.
to enter an appearance statement call google 267 -270 -5548
and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue
that being said we can begin but before our secretary mr plaza calls our first case
we'd like to announce that the following matters are being continued
MI -2020 -000868, 2054 North 2nd Street, MI -2020 -000738, 2701 Ellsworth Street, MI -2020 -000832
1700 -06 Howard Street, calendar number 39322, 1739 West Oxford Street. If anyone
believes that any of those cases were called an error please raise your hand
or if you wish to request a continuance or withdrawal please raise your hand at
this time also no hands chair thank you with that I'll ask mr. plaza to read the
Thank you. With that, I will ask Mr. Plaza to read the first case to be heard.
first case
Okay. MI -2020 -000861 -631 -East Thompson Street, Adam Nockamson.
Hello. Good afternoon. It's Alan Ockamson.
Good afternoon, Alan. Alan, you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you. Please identify yourself with a record.
Yes. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
My name is Alan Ockamson of Ockamson, PC, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19109.
I'm sharing my screen right now and showing you the packet of materials for this zoning matter.
Let me just get the right one.
And along with me is Jared Gruber, the owner's representative.
So the packet of materials include eight exhibits.
The first one is the agreement of sale for this particular matter for 631 East Thompson Street, LLC.
The second exhibit is the tax clearance certificate showing that the property is in good standing.
The third exhibit is the notice of refusal.
So this is an RSA -5 property, and I would say that it's an RSA -5 property in name only.
If you look at the zoning file for this property, since 1900, this property has been used as a garage for storage and repairs of motor vehicles.
Now, there has been a residential component for this property, but just to repeat, like this has never been used solely as an RSA 5 type of property.
And you'll see from its conditions, it looks like nothing like an RSA 5 property.
So what we're proposing to do is take 631 East Thompson Street and 633 East Thompson
Street, consolidate the lots, and repurpose the garage structure, which is currently in
a dilapidated condition, and repurpose it for professional and office use, as well as
to repurpose the driveway that's there and to allow us to put accessory surface off -street
parking spaces there.
And the purpose of this acquisition by the buyer is this is going to be purchased by an entity which is also affiliated with JG Real Estate.
A little background about JG Real Estate.
They've been around since 2011.
They employ approximately 50 people in the Fishtown area.
Their operations are not far away from here on the 1100 block of Frankfort Avenue.
What they need, though, is additional space because they're outgrowing their space, which is a good problem to have.
You know, Philadelphia Inquirer has recognized them as one of the top 100 companies, private companies in the Philadelphia area, you know, in terms of growth.
And because of that, they've outgrown their space on the 1100 block of Frankfort Avenue.
And they're looking to put a satellite office here for some of their workers and to keep, you know, the jobs in the 19125 zip code.
Here's our application for appeal.
Along with our project information form.
Here you'll see where we are.
So here's 633 East Thompson Street.
And then you can see 631 East Thompson Street is a flag -shaped lot.
you'll see the photographs of the property so as you can see this is a property in desperate need
of some TLC and we're hoping to do that by way of this proposed variance application you also see
that there's a pre -existing driveway here so we're not creating any off -street parking where it
hasn't existed well for well over 100 years you'll see properties to right of us and properties to
left of us and then you'll see our plans so this is the rendering of what we're trying to do
so we're trying to incorporate a property uh that is going to hopefully be a business and
office use but we're trying to make it in a way that adds to the uniqueness of fish town right
fish town like prides itself if you look at the fish town neighbors association website they
pride themselves on being unique to having a diversity of types of buildings within their
to having a diversity of types of buildings within their neighborhood.
But most importantly, they pride themselves on preserving the history of Fishtown.
So what we're trying to do is build or repurpose this lot so that when you walk by it,
you would think that it has been there for well over 100 years.
So if you saw the pictures of what this lot originally looked like or currently looks like
and compare it to, like, what we're proposing, it's night and day.
But the materials that we're looking to use are brick, wrought iron fence, landscaping,
and most importantly, to repurpose the garage.
And you'll see it better here.
You know, again, this is going to be a satellite office.
We're hoping of JG Real Estate.
Their office hours would be 9 to 5.
they're not accepting any clients here but they just need administrative space so they want to
have as light a use on the property as possible and to have to create as much light in air for
the surrounding uh property owners but you'll see that we're trying to create it more of as a park
atmosphere you know for the p you know so people would when they're walking by they don't think of
this as an office building and then here are just the plans of what we you know plan to do again
off -street parking, repurposing the first floor to store some of their vehicles, and then office
space on the second floor with an open floor plan and layout. Now, we did meet with the Fishtown
Neighbors Association. Now, there was no vote taken, which is rather disappointing to us because
we do believe that there's much support in the neighborhood for a property of this sort or a plan
of this sort. So we did meet with them. They refused to take a vote. They had their zoning
committee vote on this project. So what were they receptive and supportive of? Reuse of an existing
garage instead of demolition. Again, the Fishtown Neighbors Association as well as Fishtown in
general prides itself in preserving their history. So that's what we're trying to do by way of this
project uh things that they uh were concerned about the community felt that allowing this
project would create a precedent allowing for conversion of a mid -block rsa5 property to a
commercial use we're not creating a precedent we're actually preserving the past of this
property again if you saw the property it's always been a garage and so instead of having a garage
there which we don't think is an appropriate use we're trying to repurpose the space to make it
into a lighter use, a more appropriate use for that block in terms of a business and professional
office building for a boutique real estate company where they would not have that many
employees in there. And one in which has grown over the course of 10 years to 50 employees.
You know, the next issue that Fishtown Neighbors claimed that the neighbors had
was that this project would create a precedent of off -street parking for multiple vehicles
for commercial use mid -block RSA 5 lots.
Well, again, if you look at the zoning file,
this property has been a commercial garage for well over 100 years in its past.
So we're not creating a precedent.
We're actually preserving the history of this property.
They said while the site was previously approved for use as a garage to make repairs to vehicles,
The property he used was for a single -family and private storage and repairs of the owner's three vehicles.
Yes, that was the most recent use before the lot was vacated, was that there was a single -family component,
and then there was a garage component where he did work on his cars.
But if you look further and deeper into the zoning history, as far back as 1900, again, this has always been used for commercial means.
And even here, it was commercial means.
uh they're concerned that after the applicant outgrows and sells the current property to
another owner they're going to abandon the space as you can see from the drawings that we provided
we're putting a lot the the owner's putting a lot of money in here he's you know before he um he
worked in fishtown he lived in fishtown so he has many roots in fishtown and his hope is to continue
having this property you know over the course of his business's lifetime and it's exponentially
grown in just 10 short years so this is the community notice we gave you'll see that there
were 99 properties that we gave notice to so I appreciate that Fishtown Neighbors provided us a
So I appreciate that Fishtown neighbors provided us a forum to have, you know, to have a discussion about this project.
forum to have
What we were upset about was the fact that there was no vote taken.
So we, after the meeting, had, we both had people write letters, one of which is a commercial operator, BND Auto Service Center, which is around the block, which shows the commercial nature of this area in Fishtown.
We also had someone who was close by on Tulip Street.
And then we actually had a petition generated, you know, COVID -19 style, where we had everyone
DocuSign.
But, you know, but they all signed it because, you know, we've been very careful about, you
know, distributing a petition door to door.
But we thought it was important enough to have, you know, the board understand that
we have overwhelming support.
Maybe some of the board members don't feel like this should happen of the Fishtown Neighbors
Association, but the community in general does. And one of the things I would point out is the
fact that we have 627 East Thompson Street, the neighbor to our left or the property owner to our
left who signed this petition. We also have met personally with the owners of 1314 East Burke
Street, and they were also on the Zoom call or the community meeting call. And if you look at where
they are in relation to
so this is 1314
East Burke Street
but exactly against
the rear of our property where the building structure
would be. They would be the most
affected. 627, look at
East Thompson Street
they would be very affected
but the owners of 1314 East
Burke Street has told us
personally that they're in support of this
project and i i would like to quote what they stated unfortunately they can't be here today
they believe we are salvaging a building structure which has become the an eyesore to say the very
least and it's a superior option in comparison to other planning alternatives so they actually
appreciate the fact that we are going to be building to their side and 627 signed the petition
as well um so that's my presentation in a nutshell now i do have jared gruber the owner of jg real
estate and who will also be the owner of this property on the line uh jared can you uh virtually
raise your hand to acknowledge your presence yep i raised hand i think i'm unmuted as well
Okay, Jared, can you state your full name and address for the record?
Yep, Jared Gruber, 1140, Frankfort Ave, Philadelphia, PA, 19125.
Mr. Chair, would you like to swear?
Yes, sir.
Would you please, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
All right.
Jared, why did you select this site to purchase?
A few reasons. Existing building largely met my needs. And I know Fishtown specifically, the neighbors, the residents are impacted by construction and largely hope to keep construction activity reduced as much as possible.
So I thought it was a good opportunity to reuse an existing structure, which also met my space and kind of logistical requirements.
So my secondary site, my satellite site, needs to be in close proximity to my main office.
This is about three minutes away from my main office.
It offers some ability to have some off -street parking.
It offers the ability to have that second floor be used for 10, 12 desks.
And then, you know, again, it also allows me to minimize construction.
So it really seems ideal.
And I think these types of commercial properties are, even though it's embedded within, you know, the RSA 5 zoning district, it's actually pretty typical.
There's a lot of neighborhood, small neighborhood commercial, kind of low impact stuff embedded within residential blocks in Fishtown.
So I thought for all of those reasons, it was a good fit for me.
And what would happen if you weren't able to put your satellite office at 631 -33 East Thompson Street?
Well, unfortunately, I've had to think about that a lot because obviously the zoning hearing could go one of two ways.
So given the expansion, given the need for parking, given the need for the secondary location, you know, if I don't get the variance, I need to figure out another location.
Another location could take the form of another satellite office if I can find it.
The more likely path is that I re -look at the entire office and probably take it out of Fishtown because it's difficult to find offices or sites in Fishtown, which meet my needs.
offices or sites in fishtown which meet my needs yes so again another argument that i know is not
zoney related is to is to keep the jobs in fishtown um mr chair members of the board you
know jared gruber's company jg real estate um is if you look them up it's well known in the
philadelphia region they've grown in in a short 10 years to over 50 uh workers in who primarily
live in the 19125 area code and you know alternative plans would be to you know move to
another location in philadelphia but also take away those jobs in fishtown as well so which mr
gruber does not want to do so we're trying to put together a like a property that makes sense
because of its history given the given the the character of fishtown which embraces these
alternative types of buildings and sites and to preserve the history of fishtown by way of this
building and the fact that we're keeping you know the jobs in a zip code 19125 where many
of mr grouper's employees uh not only work but live we're hoping that the board look at the
petition, look at the letters of support, look at the proximity of those people who
signed the petition and who signed those letters. And, you know, overlook the fact that, you know,
the Fishtown Neighbors Association opposes it in name only through their executive board,
but not by the members of the community.
I have I I have concluded my presentation yeah I think we lost the
the chairman. I think it appears we lost. Confessor? Yes, Sharon? No, it's Tanya.
Tanya, I'm sorry. It looks like we might have lost Frank.
Okay. Is there anybody else that wish to speak in this matter? Please raise your hand.
confessor i do have benice whitaker benice you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in
hello can you hear me yes we can hear you do you swear or firm to tell the truth the
truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Can you please spell your...
Hello?
Can you please
please?
Yes, I'm here.
It's Venise, V -E -N -I -S -E
Last name Whitaker, W -H -I -T -A -K -E -R
My residence is at 1468 East Wilt Street, 19125
Okay, are you in opposition or are you in favor of this project?
So I'm calling in opposition of this project
I was attending the Zoom meeting, which was very well attended by the neighbors
throughout the zoom meeting the neighbors spoke against it there was only one person who spoke
for it numerous people spoke against this project overall this is zoned for residential not
commercial there's no need for a real estate commercial office in a residential area our
commercial corridor is where this should be we have tons of empty storefronts that this
realtor can go into who's already on Frankfort Avenue. In addition, we have five to six realtors
along Girard and Frankfort and Front Street already. So we do not need a real estate office
within a residential area. The reason, my understanding, the reason that F &A did not do
a vote from the community, because there was no way that they could have those votes valid.
I can't speak for F &A, but I know that they were going through that. But people spoke against this
project. I personally think it's questionable when you have a petition going on during a pandemic
but you know overall the neighborhood spoke against this project and requested for the FNA
spoke against this project and requested for the FNA board to vote against this project.
board to vote.
So I am asking as a neighbor in Fishtown for the ZBA to file the vote of no and
Support the neighborhood's vote of no and with no exceptions. Thank you.
Okay, oh
So can I just respond to that just in general?
um the reason why we're looking at this site is because of the parking that's been allowed on this
site since 1900 so we're again the the site is allowed for parking and that's why we're looking
for it and again this has been a commercial property since for over 120 years or in some
facet at least. Okay, confessor, we have Kevin O 'Neill. Kevin, you can unmute yourself and wait
to be sworn in. Hello. Oh, and before Mr. O 'Neill testifies, the other thing is, in terms of the
petition. Sorry, can you pause for a minute, please, Alan? Oh, yeah, sure, sorry. It looks like we lost
confessor, but you'll hold because we all are having connectivity issues.
i apologize i lost you all for a minute
can you hear me okay confessor thank you um so alan was speaking and mr nakasun you can continue
Thanks for your understanding.
Thank you, Tanya.
The only other item I would point out is that we did distribute the petition,
but if you look at the petition, we did not distribute it in person.
We would never put anyone at risk.
So the petition was actually done virtually,
and we have electronic signatures of all the individuals.
And in particular, we have the individual who owns the property next door at 627,
east thompson street in support of this project thank you
okay confessor we have kevin o 'neill kevin o 'neill you can go ahead and wait
to be sworn in before you speak
confessor mr o 'neill is prepared to be sworn in okay
and you said you didn't get
Mr. O 'Neal
I'm here
sound like you about to fall out again
confessor
Jim are you available to swear him in
I'm sorry what was that
are you available to swear in Mr. O 'Neal
oh sure uh mr o 'neill do you uh do you affirm to tell the truth all truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do okay great to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing
yes i do um this is sharon saletta i just wanted to say i got a text from
chairman to chico he is trying to reconnect but ask that a confessor handle the case until then
confessor you're not very clear
it's like you're in and out but mr anil you can proceed with your testimony
okay thank you um i live at 613 east thompson street uh just down the block from this site
and i also am in opposition to the uh to the variants um really for for one specific reason
um i don't feel that commercial use with multiple vehicles going in and out of this
site um throughout the day is is a is a safe idea i don't feel that it's within the spirit of
RSA 5. I realized that there was some question as to whether or not this has been used as a
commercial property, but it currently is not, and I haven't seen it being used as such in quite
It currently is not, and I haven't seen it being used as such in quite some time.
Right now, as of today, this is a residential block.
There's no businesses operating here.
And if anything, we have Penn Treaty Middle School directly across the street,
and we also have Alexander Adair School, which is two blocks down the street.
on a daily basis during the school year this is a major pedestrian thoroughfare there's a lot of
kids a lot of parents coming and going and it doesn't seem that you know adding a curb cut
situation with a business that would have employees and I think at the meeting it was
discussed that there would be you know maintenance vans going in and out of that driveway as well
that that doesn't seem like it's a you know safe situation for the block I think that's going to
create congestion there's school buses that park across the street as well and then there's also
the question of you know once this becomes commercial that variance would be would be
permanent and as much as most of the people in the neighborhood are supportive of JG real estate
we don't know what would happen down the line if they move out and a different business takes over
and still gets to, you know, keep that that variance intact. So yeah, I just would like to
request that the board deny the variance. And I also want to reiterate that on the Zoom meeting
that took place a couple weeks ago, there was significant opposition to the project from
neighbors that live within, you know, a close distance to that. I think that, you know, I would
guess that the petition that was submitted represents more of support of the general
community of the business itself but most of those signatures uh i'm assuming i'm you know
my guess is that most of those signatures are not from neighbors that live um on the block or or
adjacent to the property i think if if those um you know votes were taken or if that was uh if we
had a tally of how those people would vote it would look a lot different than that and and most
people um you know in the immediate vicinity would would not be in support of this project
uh that's all i have thank you uh so i just would like to respond in kind so our petition
actually has the owner or an extra neighbor to the left 627 east thompson street in support
And I stated, you know, previously during my presentation, 1314 East Burke Street, which is right behind us, is also in support of it.
So we have 627 in support, 1314 in support.
And again, what?
Excuse me, go ahead.
I'm sorry.
Oh, and, you know, in terms of the, you know, taking an RSA 5 property and converting into commercial, again, the only thing that has any residential history is, you know, there was a small portion of a history of one of the lots to have single family use.
but they had also he had his business on there a garage so it's always since 1900 there's always
been a commercial component a garage where cars would go in and out what we're proposing would
have a lot less use in terms of you know car traffic back and forth and then finally in terms
of like what happens if jg real estate decides to move to another location if you look at it
we're repurposing uh the the garage structure that's in the rear we're not like what we could
have done if we wanted to like really overuse the property is to either demolish this building or put
or or expand this building outward towards the curb or to the front of the property we're not
we're just repurposing this this two -story building that's in the rear and we're trying
to create an atmosphere that looks more like a park and less like an office building and then
the other thing to point out even if jg real estate happened to leave only the second floor
is used it's being used for offices so again it's not going to be a type of use or a type of design
or layout where you're going to have an ability to even overuse the property even if someone
wanted to so we we thought about all this again jg real estate is situated in fishtown they have a
clientele in fishtown you know they most of their a lot of their employees are in the fishtown area
they wanted to they want to remain in fishtown and this is the way they're going to be able to
hopefully do it
okay confessor we have jennifer
We have Jennifer.
Here we go.
Jennifer?
You can unmute yourself.
I'll wait to be sworn in.
Thank you.
Can you hear me?
Either confess or not, Jim, she can be sworn in.
Okay, Professor, she can be sworn in.
Okay, Jim, we're going to have to take it to you.
Can she be sworn in, please?
oh sorry tanya just having a little trouble getting on can you hear me
yes yeah we all are having issues it seems um so in the efforts of continuing can we swear
Ms. Jennifer in and ask her to put her name on record? Sure. Jennifer, do you swear to tell the
truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Name and address for the record?
Sure. My name is Jennifer Romanow, R -O -M -A -N -I -W. Address is 840 East Thompson Street.
thank you proceed sure i'm here to register my opposition in the rezoning of property at 631 to
633 thompson street i live about one and a half blocks from this and i'm also speaking on behalf
of my grandmother who lives at 635 east thompson street i'm going to object i'm going to actually
object in terms of here on the ground i'm her power of attorney i'm her power of attorney so i
I can speak on her behalf as well actually this is Sharon Saleta the power
of attorney does not authorize you to speak at a quasi -judicial yes you can
speak on your own so as a reminder to this committee I am my grandmother's
power of attorney. Hello? Yes, we're here. Okay, I was muted for a minute. So granting
this variance would cause a permanent hardship for my grandmother and the rest of my family
that are immediate neighbors and sets a precedent for adding this commercial activity on a residential
block. Let me just remind you that the reason the photos that were shown earlier look the
way they do is because a developer who owns the property currently at 631 to 633 Thompson Street
made the decision to dig in the basement without a permit and without engineering supervision
which caused the ultimate collapse of the property that was there as well as my grandparent's home
with them in it. So that's a misrepresentation that the property looks the way it is now.
it looks that way because something was done purposely so since this collapse my
95 year old grandmother and two family members who resided there they've had to
rent a home about 13 miles away on a good day is a 30 minute drive to the
closest family member this has been a hardship since the collapse my
grandmother and family members have had to incur thousands of dollars of out
of pocket costs countless hours of city agencies and professional services to
get their home rebuilt. This is a hardship and these are just some of the hardships my grandmother,
my family, and myself have had to endure at the hands of developers who feel entitled to do what
they please. These hardships, however hard they've been, are temporary. Branding a zoning variance to
convert this property to commercial will cause a permanent hardship for my family that will in a
few months be back in their home at 635 Thompson Street that is currently being rebuilt. And let
me say one thing about 627 Thompson Street. So I'm actually going to object just because
like a lot of that was irrelevant and going towards 635 and that person's not here. But
if they're going to go to 627, I think that's clearly irrelevant. So I'm going to object to
that. And I do want to respond, obviously, that we're in no way involved with what happened at
631, 33, or 35 East Thompson, but I'm going to object if she goes to 627.
Jennifer you can unmute yourself and continue to testify regarding the property of issue
Jennifer, you can unmute yourself.
hello yes okay so my family did not get the opportunity to see any kind of position petition
and the image that was shown most of the addresses that I've seen on there were not in the immediate
area and I agree with the person that presented earlier they were not in the immediate area
so my grandmother is medically fragile with serious health issues my other families who
family members who live there are also vulnerable one has a serious medical I'm gonna so I'm gonna
object again. I don't think those are zoning related issues. I also don't think that she
doesn't live at the property either. So she's testifying on their potential issues
that are non -zoney related. Okay, Jennifer, you can unmute yourself.
hello is there a way that um i can finish without being interrupted and the objections can come when
i'm done okay um for one thing um i just want to inform you that the chair um has had a problem
connecting and the other board members as well um they're both there are three board members on the
line however the idea is you speak to the zoning related to the address of question and um the
attorney has the right to object okay okay so if you could summarize regarding i'm at the end of
my testimony if i could get through it okay he can't object so we're clear okay yep so according
to the presentation at the community meeting the planned development this driveway would be used
for commercial vehicles for property management and for the vehicles that will be there daily
so the idea that 633 and 631 used to be a commercial site is not entirely accurate so
in the early 19 when my grandparents bought the house in the 50s there was a trucking company
there prior to their purchasing it in the early 1980s there was a zoning variance that allowed
the person that lived there who owned commercial vehicles to park his vehicles there in the garage
it was not a commercial business the only property available the other issue that
they brought up during the zoning meeting that this is the only property available and usable
for the project in the neighborhood and therefore there are no other options this is not a hardship
the other issue they brought up was the company has expanded and can no longer fit in their
current space this is not a hardship their commercial vehicles property management trucks
cannot be 15 minutes outside of the neighborhood because it would delay services this is also not
a hardship these are not hardships that would necessitate a zoning variance the point mentioned
are all business issues that need to be addressed and they should not they should not change the
zoning to impact all the immediate residents on that block with constant commercial vehicles
and potential alarms that they said they may put on the garages or on the gates when they open
okay confessor and jim i have another person andrew so oh so um tanya can i just respond in kind
thank you uh so first of all i do want to set the record straight that we were in no way involved
with what previously happened at 631 and 633 east thompson street my understanding is that there
was an irresponsible developer who had, you know, I don't know if they did it without permits or
whatever, but we're not that person or that company. You know, we're purchasing this property
with the hopes of repurposing the garage portion that's in the rear of the property, which has been
there for well over 100 years. And even as Jennifer testified, I believe her name is Jennifer,
um this there's even more uses than i even realized there was a trucking company in the 1950s
here and i would dispute the fact that that there was no commercial use since then because if you
look at the zoning file there was actually a variance granted to allow whoever owned that
property to actually fix not only his own vehicles but other vehicles and so there was garage
to actually fix not only his own vehicles but other vehicles and so there was garage
All right.
there for many many years before this property got vacated in terms of alarms that
she mentioned that was actually at the behest of the community they wanted a mechanism where
we can open up the the front gate of our property for protective purposes so that you know when
someone was coming out or someone was coming in that they would see that but
again all we're doing is repurposing a curb cut that already exists so I just
want to respond to those items. Secretary Plaza we do have Andrew Miller. Mr. Miller
you can unmute yourself and wait for either Secretary Plaza or board member
Jim Snell to swear you in. Thank you, Zanya. I'm here. Mr. Miller, do you swear to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Okay, great. Name and address for the record,
please. Yes, my name is Andrew Miller, N -D -R -E -W -M -I -L -L -E -R. My address is 1405 East Columbia
Avenue. I'm just a couple of blocks away from this site. First, I want to address the discussion
about the FNA meeting. At the FNA meeting, there were over 80 people there, and I simply want to
testify that the discussion at that meeting was much more in line with Mr. O 'Neill and
Mr. Romano, Ms. Romano's testimony. I don't know if I said their names right, but their testimony
was what was echoed over and over again at the FNA meeting, even though we weren't allowed to
take a vote. So there's a proper tally of how those opinions were displayed. Secondly, I want
to reiterate the concern that the zoning on in this area was done just a couple of years ago,
The rezoning was considered, and this site, with the history that it has, was deemed RSA5 because this is a residential block, and the residents here intend to keep it a residential block.
And because there is no hardship on this project, I don't see a reason to change that.
uh lastly uh just to address the issue that was raised about uh the property at 633
where the collapse of both 633 and 635 took place um mr mr nokamson uh said that they don't they
didn't have any part in that and that's true as far as i'm aware um the the the only issue i see
is the sale of of 633 right now could allow the the responsible party the the owner developer
of currently of 1633 to close their LLC and avoid repercussions you know this this collapse
only happened about a year ago uh you know in our court process through COVID has been
on hold uh so i i think i think if there is a hardship in this situation the hardship is on
the property at 635 still taking issue with 633 in this matter uh before it should be allowed to
be redeveloped in any way let alone changing the zoning to commercial use uh so i just wanted to
say those couple of things. Thank you for your time, and I oppose this, obviously, and hope that
the board upholds the zoning that we've put in place. Thank you.
Mr. Knockinson, did you want to respond? I mean, the only thing I would say is that I would assume
that the owners of 635 have attorneys and that they can avail themselves of the legal
process as to whoever was involved or responsible for the matters at hand, but that should not
stop the development of a project that makes sense for the community and that's supported
by the community by way of extensive petition as well as by way of letters.
And I would note that the neighbor to the left at 627 East Thompson Street, as well as the neighbor at our rear that would be most affected are in support of this project.
I have Hal Shermer.
I have Hal Shermer.
Mr. Shermer, could you unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in by Board Member Snell?
Of course.
Do you affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Okay, great.
Could you provide your name and address for the record?
Yes, Hal, H -A -L, last name Schirmer, S -C -H -I -R -M -E -R.
This is the court reporter.
I can't hear him at all.
Yeah, Mr. Schirmer is very loud.
Give me a second.
Is this better?
Are you right in front of your mic, and is your device volume turned up?
Yep, give me a second.
Yeah, we can't hear you.
It's very faint.
So we're going to move on to the next person while you get your volume in order.
John Scott?
Mr. Scott, are you there?
John, you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn in.
Hi, can you hear me?
Yes. Thank you. Mr. Scott, do you affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth? Yes, I do. Can you provide your name and address for the record, please? John Scott,
456 Moyer Street, Philadelphia, 19125. Okay, great. You can proceed. So I am actually going
to speak in two capacities, if I may. The first, I am an FNA board member. I want to put on the
record that the FNA followed the guidance by the Planning Commission and
the Zoning Board of Adjustments in setting up meetings during the COVID
pandemic. Those meetings allow us to receive public input but unfortunately
we do not have a secure way to conduct a community vote that we did in person
before the pandemic. So our meetings were conducted according to our process
which was established according to the guidance set out by the ZBA and the Planning Commission.
I would like to further testify on my behalf as a neighbor, not on behalf of the FNA board.
I live two blocks away. Over the last few years, the neighborhood has put a tremendous amount of
effort into setting up business districts on Gerrard Avenue, on Frankfurt Avenue, and on Front
Street, and in setting up the zoning across the neighborhood corresponding to that. There's no
hardship here that would require the board to ignore those business districts and that
duly enacted zoning map that would put commercial uses on the commercial corridors. That's it, thank you.
is there anyone else Tanya we have Hal Schirmer how did you resolve your audio
Mr. Schirmer you can unmute your mic and give your testimony
it looks like we lost him let's see anybody anyone else no that's all okay does the board
has any questions?
Alan, are you done
with your testimony?
Yes, I am.
The only thing I would
state again, well, first I would like
I think Jared did affirm it in the beginning.
He affirmed it, right? It's been so long.
Okay. The only thing
I would state is that
if you look, we have the support
of the neighbor to the left of us,
to neighbor behind us. It sounds
like we don't have you know the support of the people to the right of us but i think their lack
of support has more to do with their dispute with the current property owner than anything that
we're trying to do if you look at the history of this property um this has even though this is an
rsa5 property it's never been used solely as a single family residence it's had cars go back
It's had cars go back and forth throughout its history.
and forth throughout uh its history the use that
The use that we're proposing is a light use compared to what, you know, we could have proposed.
And, you know, given the, you know, the fact that we're trying to keep JG real estate in Fishtown,
we really do hope that the board will consider those factors in granting the variance.
Sharon, I have a question.
I'm sorry.
Go ahead, Tanya.
Secretary Plaza, Hal Shermer has now come back and is unmuted if you wish to allow him testimony.
Okay, let's try this again.
Are you there, Shermer?
Yes, can you hear me better?
Yes, we can hear you.
Can you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Okay, can you put your name and address for the record?
Your name is Hal, H -A -L.
Last name is Shermer, S -C -H -I -R -M -E -R.
Address is 1805 Ridge.
I'm still having a really hard time, Tanya.
I'm going to ask Mr. Shermer if you can get as close as possible to the mic.
If not, we're not going to be able to have your testimony.
and I would ask if legal counsel Mr. Letter would allow it to be written testimony because the court
reporter has to get it. I'm back on. I apologize to everyone. Somehow I lost my audio and anyway
I'm back on I believe. Can you hear me? Yes. Thank you. Sharon. I think we lost him. He's here.
he's unmuted i just can't hear him okay so um frank yes um was looking to legal counsel but
would you be okay with how shirmer submitting yes um written testimony because we can't hear
his audio at all absolutely yes okay and how long would you give him chair well we're off next week
so uh when we come back on the 13th well the the only thing i would say is that this is subject to
an acquisition so i think we are actually on a time crunch especially since this has been delayed
due to covet 19 so it's it it's something that we we were hoping to get a decision today
would it be possible to try to have mr could we have mr shirmer try to call on my cell phone and
will put him on speakerphone okay mr shermer can you please do that
yeah and mr i can't again why am i losing everybody can everyone hear me yes
yes yes
Yeah, I'm not getting a response from Mr. Shermer, so I'm going to mute him.
And Chair, you can proceed as you wish.
Are you hearing me?
Very well, Chair.
Again, I came in very late.
I apologize.
I started out in the beginning and lost, as you know, I lost everyone.
So where are we now with this?
Are we into the public comment?
We were pretty much done.
Confessor, I'm going to leave this up to you for the most part, because in all honesty,
I never even heard the complete presentation by Mr. Notkinson.
Well, I was leaning more to like holding it for some internal discussion.
Jim, Tom, how you feel?
You guys want to hold it or?
Yeah, I would suggest holding it.
Yep, that's where I was going to.
Mr. Notkinson, as you know, we're off next week,
and you just mentioned that this may be time -sensitive in terms of,
I guess they need approval in order for the deal to go through.
That's correct.
Tanya, we have a – let me get my schedule out.
so we have nothing scheduled until the week of 15th with the week of the 14th
15th with week of the 14th so we normally would do this an executive session but
so we normally would do this in
maybe we can make an exception to do with the 15th
that works for me chair all right if i could uh put on record that the whole session is video
recorded so all those who had connectivity issues can view the video and then vote accordingly
I will do likewise. Thank you.
So, Mr. Chair, when will you vote?
On the 9 .30 session or at the 2 o 'clock session?
We can do the 9 .30.
We can have an executive session Tuesday morning.
Tanya, does that work?
Yes, it works for me, Chair.
So we'll do it at the 9 .30 session on the 15th.
okay we ready for the next case okay yes did you want the planning commission to make a
recommendation oh sorry yes please this is ayesha unber with planning commission staff
swear to firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I do. Please proceed. Chairman and members of the board, this property is indicated for single
family residential use on the comprehensive plan. The use variance is out of context and does not
demonstrate hardship given significant demand for residential in this neighborhood. The variances
for the height of the fence and non -residential roof deck are also inappropriate given the
residential nature of the area. Planning Commission staff opposes the granting of these variances.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Okay, we ready for the next one, right, Chairman?
Yes, please.
M -I -2020 -000 -861 -631, I'm sorry, M -I -2020 -000 -674 -6600, Cornelia Street.
Allen, are you still under oath?
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth?
I'm sorry.
Do you swear?
No, scratch that.
I apologize.
So you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to his own person?
Thank you.
All right.
So now I'm having technical issues.
Oh, my God.
All right.
Let's see.
Hold on one second.
Let me just get some help here.
I don't know why.
By the time I got back on, we were down to, like, the fifth case.
Control W?
All right.
Let's see what that works.
No, it's not.
Let's see.
control w hold on a second let me uh just let me control w i'm just trying to get out this one oh
there we go why is it not getting up though hold on sorry what oh yeah all right there we go sorry
about that um i'm going to share my screen i have 6600 let's see oh i got out of all of them hold
in one second. I apologize. Let's see, 6600. Okay, share a screen.
All right, so in front of you should be a packet of eight exhibits for 6600 Cornelia Street.
The first exhibit is the deed to the property, showing that Urban Renewal LLC owns the property.
The second exhibit is the certificate of tax clearance, showing that they're in good standing.
Third exhibit is the notice of refusal.
So this is an RSA 5 property, but if you look at the history of this property, it has had
a multi -use history up to three units. Currently there are two residential units and there's
a vacant commercial space. We're only trying to swap out the commercial space with a residential
space and we're here to also legalize the parking that's been there for some time. I
know the board's listened to the previous owner for such a long time, so I'm just going
make this pretty short and sweet you'll see here here's the parking that's been in there in the
past and is legal curb cut or just trying to legalize this curb cut here in this parking here
we're just trying to legalize this curb cut here and this parking here and as you can see in 2011
and as you can see in 2011
from google maps you'll see that three cars are parked here and you'll see that you know there's
off -street parking allowed on the common driveway so it's a very simple project again each floor
will have its own unit and most importantly we met with the neighborhood and they were unanimously
in support of this project so they had 23 people there all voted in support of
this project I have the owner's representative Carl Klossbach here Carl
can you virtually raise your hand
Carl you can unmute yourself and wait to be sworn
I'm unmuted. All right uh Carl can you state your full name and address for the record?
Carl Klotzbach 6266 West Valley Green Road Flower Town PA 19031
i didn't hear his address sorry uh 6266 west valley green road flower town pa 19031
chair can you swear him in please
i think he's on mute i'm frozen i'm sorry hold on okay a court reporter i'm sorry i really think
it might be something with zoom because everybody's having problems okay so if it works for you as
well i will have you receive the video so anything you lose now you can get through the video
and now she's on oh she's on mute okay
all right you good quick reporter
i'm good thank you tanya you're welcome frank you can proceed
he's on mute he's somehow lost his volume
no i have him not muted no i know i just i'm seeing his mouth move
okay yeah something happened with the device
how about this i don't think um can any uh secretary plaza
are you available to swear in yes um carl klotzbach
yep thank you
sir you affirm and swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Thank you.
Can you please identify yourself for the record, name and address?
Yes, my name is Carl Klotzbach.
My address is 6266 West Valley Green Road, Flower Town, PA, 19031.
Hi, Carl.
You heard everything I stated today with regards to your Sony matter.
Yes, I did.
i'm sorry because i'm just looking at the chairman like having like some words on the screen um
and everything you uh everything i said is true and correct right that is correct and you were
adopted as your own testimony yes okay including the fact that the community was unanimously in
supportive of this project? Yes, they were very supportive. Okay. I have no further
questions or presentation materials. Okay. Is there anyone that would like to speak in this
manner? Secretary Plaza, we have Hillary Emerson from the Councilwoman's office. Hillary,
You can unmute yourself
And wait to be sworn in
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair
Members of the board, can you hear me?
Good afternoon, yes we can, Hillary
Hillary, you swear and affirm to tell the truth
The whole truth and nothing but the truth
Thank you
For the record, Hilary Emerson, H -I -L -A -R -Y, Emerson, E -M -E -R -S -O -N, from Councilwoman
For the record, Hillary Emerson
H -I -L -A -R -Y
Cheryl Parker's office, regarding 6600 Cornelius Street.
The Councilwoman is not opposed to the variances requested in this case.
Sorry, I have a helper.
um yeah this property has a clear history as a multi -family use um in addition to having some
commercial in the basement and there are three units each with their own um their own entrance
um and the the basement unit is is above grade um which uh addresses safety concerns that we
typically have with um basement apartments i did attend the community meeting um and the community
was not opposed and would ask for a proviso that a certificate of occupancy be obtained within
nine months okay thank you um that's all secretary plaza you can proceed okay uh does the board has
any questions no no frank your audio is still off
frankie there yeah he's putting up a paper that i can't see let me just try to i'm gonna get rid
put it up frank it's backwards i hear here's my hear me no we can't hear you frank okay uh
Planning Commission?
Chairman and members of the board, this property is indicated for a single
family residential in the comprehensive plan.
Given non -opposition from the community and the council person's office as well
as the history of multi -family use here, staff does not oppose the granting of
the variances. Okay, thank you. Tanya,
anybody else you see? No hands? That's all.
Tanya that's all secretary okay okay so calendar number am i two zero two zero zero zero zero six
seven four sixty six hundred Cornelia Street my vote is yes with the proviso that a certificate
get over it. Occupancy must be obtained within nine months. Yes, with proviso. Yes, with proviso.
Okay, good luck. Thank you. Calendar number 39448416 Poplar Street. Again, Alan,
are you still under oath? Do you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to
I'm going to share my screen.
Just given the technical difficulties, I'll try to streamline this presentation as well.
416 Poplar Street was in front of the board in February of 2020.
We were here for 414 and 418 Poplar Street, and, you know, we made some changes to the drawings at the behest of the community with regards to the rear yard and items like that, and there was concern with regard to 416 Poplar Street that we may have accidentally increased the variance where we want to make sure that we dealt with all variances, you know, through this process.
So, and this is a single -family structure with a front -loading garage.
If you see Exhibit 3, this was the original notice of refusal, you know, to have a single -family
house with a front -loading garage on the block that doesn't allow on -street parking.
So we're not taking any public parking.
So in February, the following day after the hearing, I asked the permission of the Zoning
Board of Adjustment to allow for amending my zoning permit appeal, which was granted,
and we obtained a new notice of refusal. Again, it's the same exact drawings that were approved
on 414, as well as 418 Palmer Street, which were also supported by the community as well.
so we're here just as you know to just you know follow up to also get a you know a decision from
this board but as you can see there is no parking allowed on this on this street and it's actually
There is no parking allowed on this street, and it's actually quite common to have off -street parking.
quite common to have
So, and these are the drawings, and this is our letter of support from the board,
the RCO, and proof of mailing of that community meeting,
as well as the permits that were granted for 414 and 418.
I have Tomer Alon on the line.
Tomer, can you virtually raise your hand?
He's available.
Tomer, can you state your full name and address for the records?
Before you start, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I affirm.
Tomer, can you state your full name and address for the record?
Tomer Alon, 921 Alborger Avenue, Philadelphia, PA, 19115.
Can you spell your first and last name for the synopsis?
T -O -M -E -R -A -L -O -N.
So, Tomer, you heard everything I stated today.
And is it true and correct?
And would you adopt it as your own testimony?
All right.
I'm done with my presentation.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else that would like to speak in this matter?
No hands.
Does the board have any questions?
Whatever you think.
no okay planning commission
chairman and members of the board this property is zoned for single family residential on the
comprehensive plan staff is not opposed to the granting of the variances thank you calendar
Number three nine four one six. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. Okay good luck.
Calendar number three six seven two nine five twenty one dash five three one West Susquehanna
Avenue and 2209 -15
Fairhill Street. Mr. Clinton?
I'm sorry, confessor. Yes.
So I have Frank on the line here. Okay. If at all
possible, we're requesting a brief recess. Okay. Everyone's having technical
difficulty sharing, all of us. So if we could kind of
pause for five to seven minutes and then reconnect
as necessary chairman did you want to say something no let's say we'll be back at 3 45
for now we'll be back at 3 45. yep tanya can we try to shut everything off and then you know
restart uh um dpv zoom let's check with dpc zoom bill yes since we're all having major issues
um yes you can certainly try that uh the only problem is i can't really stop and restart
the webinar no not you i'm talking about all the panelists who are having issues and concerns
come back in yeah well at least i don't force zoom to reconnect them so hopefully i'll reconnect
them properly or you know through a better channel this time all right okay awesome so
So the IT person has said that if we can go out and come back in, that's fine.
But Frank, we're now at the 3 .20 mark, and you're suggesting we return back at what time?
I don't know how long.
Let's say 10, 15 minutes.
All right?
We'll try.
If we get on, then we can start.
Let's try 10 minutes, all right?
so to all listening the board is going to recess until 3 35 and try to reconnect hopefully we'll
have better uh reception thank you all
Thank you.
Thank you.
No, I can't hear you.
Frank how's your audio Tanya you have feedback
Sorry about that, okay, Frank, you still don't have audio.
So here's an option if you wanted to call in using your cell phone and keep your video
on and talk through your cell audio.
Okay, Frank, that's what you've got.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Can you hear me?
I hear you, Fred.
I can hear you.
I can hear Jim.
All right.
Tanya can you hear me yes chair very well okay
wait for confessor
Sharon, can you hear us?
I can, yes.
Thank you.
We're waiting for Jim.
You can hear me, right?
We're waiting for Confessor and Tom.
Tom can you hear us? Tom? You can hear me Frank? I can hear you. You've got to get
closer to the mic. Can you hear me Frank? Yes, obviously Tom can't hear me. Can you
you hear me Frank? No. Sign language. Tom, we all hear you. I can hear you. I hear you now. Tom,
could you hear me? Tom, do you hear me? Oh, he's messing with you. I think so. Can you hear me
now, Frank? I hear you. Tom, make sure your volume is turned up, please. Tom is showing very poor
connectivity whenever his image comes up, so that may be part of the problem. Yeah, but he's usually very loud. He's very low.
The pressure's not on yet, correct?
Did we lose Tom?
Yeah, we lost him.
We don't have confessor either.
Thank you.
Tom can you hear me Tom can't hear me
can you hear me Frank
yes can you hear me Frank I can
Thank you.
I'm calling Tom on his phone and I'll try to reach confessors connecting
mm -hmm confessor you hear me loud and clear okay hold on I hear you too Frank okay hold on Tom
you're not hearing me on the zoom correct we hear you but we can't you're not hearing and
You're not hearing me.
Confessor, see if you can talk to Tom.
See if he hears you.
Tom, can you hear me, buddy?
No, I don't hear him.
No, Tom's not hearing anyone.
No, Tom, I'll text him the number.
He can try calling in through his cell phone.
Tom is going to text you a phone number for you to call in, Tom.
Okay. Thank you. Okay, no problem. All right. Okay.
Thank you.
Okay, no problem.
All right.
Alan, you hear us?
Mr. Knuckamson, do you hear us? I do. I'm sorry. I had my headset off. Okay, no problem. We just
want to check to make sure that you hear us and the stenographer. Can the stenographer hear us?
we're waiting to get her back
would be glad to have Tom call on my phone and put him on speaker but if the mailman comes it's
going to be very disruptive I think Tanya was doing it court reporter you can hear us
yes thank you
I thought it was me earlier and no one else, but apparently it's the system itself.
Something wrong with the system.
well while we're getting tom since we do have a quorum myself
james snell and confessor plaza why don't we uh continue where we left off alan
um excuse me the only thing is you announced that it would be starting at 3 35 so if anyone
signed off thinking they would sign back on then no problem i'm sorry i didn't look at the time my
fault 335.
Sharon
yes Tonya i'm sorry i'm going to text you the phone number
can you send it to Tom?
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Can you put the ZBA staff on as co -hosts, please?
No, they came in.
Tom is calling in now.
Thank you.
Thank you.
It is 3 .35. Do we still need to wait for anyone?
It looks like us everyone. Just waiting for time, but us everyone.
Court reporter, sound check. Everything sounds good?
Yes, Tanya. Thank you.
All right.
Ron from the planning commission joined us yeah Ron will be doing the 330s I think I
Shay is going to finish out the twos of what we have left yep I'm here okay
just making sure everybody's all connected
okay cheer we have ready and our time has elapsed so we're ready okay thank you mr notkinson uh
yes uh which one are we handling what we uh did we finish popular street we did yes we are on him
Then it's Mr. Clinton, I'm sorry
I'm going to go ahead and call it again
Calendar number
521 -531
West Susquehanna Avenue
2209 -15
Trader Street
Mr. Clinton
Thank you Mr. Plaza
Good afternoon Mr. Chairman
Good afternoon
And do you swore or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And can you agree to waive the reading of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Plaza.
Henry Clinton, Queen Memorial Building, 1313 South 33rd Street, put off UPA 19146.
and with me is my client, Neti, N -E -T -I, Levy, L -E -V -I,
who will testify at the end after I lay out the case.
Appreciate the opportunity to present this case.
It has a long and tortuous history.
The refusal was issued back in 2019.
We've had an initial meeting with APM, a community group,
back in November of 2019.
so I'm glad that we're being heard today and I appreciate your time. This project is an existing
vacant lot and Ms. Sunkit, if I should share my screen, I can walk through the presentation.
Yes, you have the authority. Thank you.
Has it come up for everyone to see? Not yet. Not as of yet. Did you hit the share button?
here we go how about now yes okay uh so the owner is susquehanna commons and the principal is a is
i as i said my client neti levy uh we originally had a hearing a january 8th was scheduled for
january 8th and then i'll explain why it was postponed from that time until today
I have my exhibit package, A1 through A8, or A11, and I'll go through each one briefly.
Appearance statement.
This is the deed to the property, indicating that the property is currently owned by my client.
it. This is the most recent letter. We had a Zoom meeting on August 25th,
which I will address later. Here is the contents of that notice indicated.
which I will address later.
Here is the contents of that notice
indicating that we were going to have a Zoom meeting on August 25th
and also noting that there would be a hearing today at 2 o 'clock.
So what I want to do is start at the very end
and give you a perspective of the project.
So this is the current project right here.
My client removed all the vehicles that were on this lot.
As far as I can tell from the zoning records, it's been used as kind of a used car lot for many, many moons, many, many years.
Right now, it's vacant, and it's just a vacant plot of ground.
What's unique about this, and I'll go back to the zoning map, is that this project is a blend of residential and commercial.
And that is what has resulted in many of the refusals.
so the project basically is a combination of rm1 and rsa5 and the code provides that
if more than 20 percent of a piece of property or parcel is residential and that's the most
restrictive use and it's adjacent or combined with an RM1, then the RSA5 zoning category
basically prevails. So in this situation, we have a 60 % is RM1 and 40 % is RSA5.
Our proposal is to do a mixed -use project here of commercial and residential.
we understood that susquehanna street is in need of commercial at least that's what my client
understood from the neighborhood and so he proposed on the first floor on susquehanna to have
commercial units and then above he would have 33 apartments summer studios the majority are
one bedrooms, and there are occasional two bedrooms. The layout or site plan of the project
indicates the commercial is on the first floor, front England, Susquehanna. There's parking for
12 vehicles. There's also bike storage, and there's also area for the residents in the building to
bring their trash down, and it will be commercial trash pickup on a regular basis. We certainly
wouldn't be using the city of philadelphia to pick up our trash this is a look it's an l -shaped
building this is the look of the apartments there's 11 apartments on each floor as i say
the bulk of them are one bedroom eight typically eight on the floor are one bedroom uh there are
two two bedrooms and then a studio or two on each floor and so as i said the first floor is commercial
because the first floor is commercial the height of that first floor is about 10 feet and then we
have floors two three and four uh composing the rest of the building and this is the typical floor
plan for each of the floors just showing you another plan the outline of the of the plot of
ground and then here's an elevation from susquehanna and this is an elevation from fair hill street
I want to go into the history a little bit about meeting with the community group.
So when we first proposed this project, we ended up meeting with APM in November of 2019.
And at that meeting, there was support from the community.
This is their letter of January 7th, 2019, that we were supposed to have a hearing on January 8th, and this organization, Zulu Nation RCO, sent in a letter of opposition saying that they didn't get a chance to be heard at the APM meeting.
That letter was then followed by, that same day, a letter from Councilwoman Kenona Sanchez's office, saying that in light of what was going on here between the two community groups, and I'm paraphrasing, she said, there's no, without clear indication that immediate neighborhoods support this appeal, I'm submitting this letter of opposition.
Since that time, we've gone in front of another RCO, which is Norris Square.
And my client and I presented one public meeting with individuals.
And my client and I presented one public meeting with individuals in attendance prior to COVID.
And then we had another meeting August 25th, just last week, via Zoom.
And we've had two independent meetings with NARA Square.
We've attempted to get a letter from NARA Square.
And what they've said to us is that they don't want to take a position.
And that was in an email.
And I believe Mr. Fulks, a representative from Councilwoman Sanchez's office, is on the line, and we'll speak to that.
But we come before the board advising them that we've had numerous meetings with NARA Square.
We've indicated that we are willing and able to commit at least four units to affordable housing.
We are trying to acquire additional properties, two of them, from the land bank on Fairhill Street
so that we can then commit those two parcels to open and green space,
not only for use by the residents of this proposed project, but also residents in the neighborhood.
We also have explained to the RCO, NARA Square, that we will accept bids from licensed qualified contractors
and suppliers and vendors for any materials and for work on this particular project and that we
would go to community members first for any of the four units that are defined as affordable
per the PHDC guidelines. So I stand before the board today with letters that are stale.
One is in support from November of 2019.
One from Zulu Nation.
I don't know if they're on this call today or not.
They certainly were invited to the Zoom meeting on August 25th.
Apparently, in candor to the tribunal,
apparently, the Zulu Nation said that they had technical difficulties.
I then reached out to Zulu Nation, Mr. Bo McCann,
by email or Friday and said, look, I understand you have problems.
What's the issue?
Can we talk?
And I have not received any response from him.
So hopefully he is on this call and he can address any issues he may have.
So, Mr. Levy, have you heard my testimony?
Tanya, can you unmute Mr. Levy, L -E -V -I?
And Henry, I'll swear him in when it gets on.
good afternoon chairman good afternoon board good afternoon sir please identify yourself for the
record my name is netanel n -e -t -a -n -e -l last name levy l -e -v -i 1319 north 6th street unit 2r
philadelphia pa 19122 you're swearing the firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing
about the truth? I do. Thank you. Please proceed, Mr. Clinton. Mr. Levy, have you been listening
to my testimony throughout this meeting? Yes. And in particular, have you listened to my outline
of how we approached the community meetings and who participated and what the results were? Yes.
And if you had the opportunity to testify yourself, would you adopt my testimony as true and correct
and as your own? I would with two minor changes. My full name that you mentioned is Netanel Levy.
The second thing, the lots that we wanted to acquire with the recommendation of the neighborhood
just to use as open space are 517 and 519 West Susquehanna. And you mentioned North Fairhill.
So the correct lots are 517, 519 West Susquehanna. Otherwise, your testimony was
exactly the way I've presented. And I appreciate that correction and I stand
correct that you are correct. These are these are the lots on Susquehanna.
Thank you. Questions from the oh I'm sorry Henry. Yes Mr. Chairman I just want to ask that my
presentation binder be admitted into evidence and that in summation that this is a combined
commercial residential lot because of the the code requirement that the least restrictive applies
The refusals that we got with regard to this lot, all concern this particular partial as a residential situation.
This lot has never been used as residential that we're aware of.
It's been used for a used car lot. It's been an eyesore in the neighborhood.
There's overgrown trees there, but now all the vehicles have been removed.
We've met numerous times with Norris Square.
we went so far as to discuss putting together a benefits agreement that we would certainly sign
after the hearing and we just see that this is a plus for the neighborhood
and we just see that this is a plus for the neighborhood.
The commercial use on the first floor,
we understood because Susquehanna was a wide area,
wide berth, and there's other commercial here
that some stores would be nice for the neighborhood,
and we've even gone as far to say
that this 4 ,000 -square -foot first floor,
that we would either make that one store
or a series of stores for smaller businesses
in the neighborhood if that's what the community wants so we're open to all those ideas and with
that i rest and i ask that the board look kindly upon this request for variance thank you questions
from the board no no anyone else who wishes to testify in this matter please raise your hand
Chair, we have Sloan Foulkes from the council's office.
Mr. Foulkes, we swore you in earlier, so you're still under oath.
Yes, Chairman DiCicco, ZBA, good afternoon. The applicant for this variance has reached out to
the community through the RCO process uh beginning in um late 2019 and through I'm sorry I'm sorry
can you hear me could you yes but could you put your name and I'm sorry I'm sorry record thank you
I'm sorry uh Sloan folks SLO ANA uh folks F as a fire OLKS office of councilwoman Maria
canyone sanchez room 508 city hall 19107 thank you okay again uh the the the applicant for this
request has has uh reached out to the community through the rco and met uh with apm who at the
time was not the coordinating rco uh we we worked with them to reschedule a meeting with the
coordinating RCO, who is North Square Community Alliance. They met with them where I was in
attendance at the meeting in February of this year. After that meeting, there was an agreement
that they would come back and meet with RCO to discuss the project and possible
community benefits agreements. Through this process and through COVID -19, the RCO and the
applicant have had discussions. The RCO has not, has taken a position at this time
to have a non -position on the project, on the variance request. Our office requests
that there be a two -week holding here on this process, primarily just to give the RCO one more
opportunity to to respond to the uh applicants in good faith thank you thank you any other
individuals want to speak on this case please raise your hand
no hands chair uh planning commission
chairmen and members of the board these properties are indicated for a combination of residential
multi -family and single -family uses in the comprehensive plan staff is not opposed to
the granting of the variance for multi -family at this location staff is also not opposed to
the provision of parking and given the number of units staff does oppose the commercial space
given that the corridor is not commercial and legacy commercial zoning was removed in a 2017
remapping bill. Germantown Avenue, a commercial corridor, is also a mere block away. Staff does
not support the dimensional variances and encourages open space be maintained at this site.
open space
can you be a little more specific about that
the variance does not provide the proposed use does not provide much of the open area required
for the rm1 zoning we recommend that there is some open space provided given the number of units
even with the acquisition of the adjoining properties that will become somebody's moving
their cursor around in that area is 15 is that 15 517 and 519 correct mr chairman that would be
open space correct correct all right so it's not part of the application so i can understand that
All right. So it's not part of the application, so I can understand that. All right.
all right uh either
Either way, Mr. Clinton, you heard Mr. Folks, I would like to propose that we hold this hearing be resumed.
We'll see you next time.
If we can get a special date in a couple of weeks, at which time we will only consider any feedback from the from the Councilwoman's office.
Understood and agreed.
Okay, Tonda, we have a date.
okay cheers so we have the september 17th if we could put it on that date for limited testimony
which is a thursday morning or afternoon that would be 9 30 in the morning but bear in mind
we have a special and another case listed right i don't i think this will probably be done in a
couple of minutes but thank you all right so calendar number 36729521 -531 West Susquehanna
Avenue and 2209 -15 Fairhill Street this hearing will be resumed on September 17th at 9 30 a .m
at which time we will only consider any feedback related to the councilwoman's office
councilwoman sanchez's office
thank you very much thank you excuse me chairman de chico just repeat the time
and september 17th at 9 30 a .m thank you
Okay, calendar number 39469, 3503 West Clearfield Street.
i would ask that the applicants for that case raise your hands
3503 west clearfield street
John Sanborn and Ariel Gould, you can promote your screen as necessary and unmute yourself
and wait to be sworn in it's gold will you be testifying also yes okay so why don't we start
with you uh please spell your name for the stenographer a r i e l l e gold g o l d
Address?
3503 West Clearfield.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Okay, is Mr.
There's no attorney present, correct?
Correct.
Okay, this application is for a three -family dwelling in an existing structure.
The proposal is refused for the following.
For multi -family dwelling prohibited in the RSA 5 district.
mr sanborn will you be testifying yes okay please put your full name on spell your name
for the record john sanborn j -o -n -s -a -n -b -o -r -n address
3503 west clearfield 1132
do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do so i'm not sure if you or miss gold will be testifying whoever is please proceed
i'm sorry could you repeat that who will be testifying both of you i will okay so please
proceed okay um i just have to figure out how to share my screen really quick
you are the owner yes okay okay ariel go to the bottom of your screen you're using a computer
yes ma 'am i think i got it okay oh that's not it hold on you got it you have it um
there's a lot of um things sorry so we're looking at
there's a lot of um things sorry so we're looking at 3503 clearfield
yes okay your tax cert so that's it can you see that yes okay great um
so we are applying for right now it is zoned as a duplex
and we are applying to make it a triplex. When we purchased it, we were under the impression
that it was properly zoned as a triplex. If we go to our
zoning archive on page 19,
it has that this was a triplex back in the 40s but when we purchased it we didn't realize that
that zoning variance had lapsed so it has been used as a triplex since probably like 80 years
at this point and we went and met with the community at the community center for this area
they gave us their full support to rezone it and once we get rezoning passed
we're gonna get rental licenses for it and everything up to code you have any
photographs or floor plans yes you can share with us that would be helpful
Sure. We had this drawn up for the meeting. This is how it currently looks. We didn't
change anything about it when we purchased it. We just redid the interior flooring.
Can you maybe enlarge that just a bit?
Let me figure out how, but I can do it. Hold on.
You're going to hit the plus sign at the top next to the percentage.
So this is the existing property and this was the same as what it looked like when we purchased
So I'll start on the left.
That's it in its vicinity.
The side elevation, front elevation, and the aerial view of it.
do you want to see anything in closer view i don't know anybody on the board tom do you want to see
anything else no that's good okay all right moving along questions from the
board no no thank you anyone else wish to testify in this case if so please
raise your hand here i have a stephen d 'agostino stephen you can unmute your mic and wait to be
sworn in mr d 'agostino when you get on please spell your full name and give us your address
s -t -e -p -h -e -n d apostrophe a g -o -s -t -i -n -o
and i'm also an owner at 3503 west clearfield
you're swearing a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
testimony i just want to echo everything she said we we were very careful to not change anything and
the community fully supports us. So I'm an owner, so I just wanted to be present and
show that we care about upholding the community and keeping things as they are.
Thank you. No other hands up, Chair. Thank you.
thank you
chairman and members of the board this property is zoned for single family
residential in the comprehensive plan the commission does not have does not
oppose the granting of this variance
oh sorry about that calendar number three nine four six nine three five oh three west
clearfield street my vote is yes
my vote is yes
confessor
um i voted yes okay it's three we have three yes fine good luck to you
It seems like we may have lost confessor, so I'll call the next case. MI -2020 -000800 -2406
north howard street
hi alan occamson hi you're still under oath uh just identify
yourself good afternoon alan occamson of
knockamson pc 123 south broad street suite 1600
philadelphia pa 19109 mr knockamson do you agree
uh to wave and snip i do thank you please proceed
um in front of you is a packet of uh materials which include eight exhibits the first is the deed
to the property showing that v2 properties owns the property the second exhibit is showing that
B2 Properties is tax compliant with regard to its obligations to the city.
The third exhibit is the Notice of Refusal.
So this is a 1 ,700 -square -foot lot that goes from North Howard to Waterloo, and we're being
refused for two reasons.
The first of which is the lot size of 859 .5 square feet for lots A and B for this proposed
subdivision.
And the second one is the front setback with regards to North Howard Street.
You'll see in the map that we're going to provide you that it's not uncommon to have one property or one building structure facing North Howard Street and another single -family building structure facing Waterloo.
You'll see my application appeal to this board as well as the project information form.
But again, here we are on the 2400 block of North Howard Street, and you'll see that, again, the properties to the left and right of us are actually subdivided, and all these as well are subdivided, where there's building structures, single -family structures facing on North Howard, and then there's single -family structures facing order low.
you'll see photographs of property we keep the property in good repair it's a vacant lot right
now and you know again the only reason why we're here is that you know this property next to us
is set back but you'll see there's a diversity of property some being set back some of them not
if we were set back we would also have a refusal for rear yard setback so the choice is which
variance is more important. We think having a property that has usable square footage or space
in the rear for a yard is a better use of the property than having a front yard where there is
not much use other than, you know, walking to the front door. As you can see, this person to the
left of us, you know, doesn't even use that that well. You'll see the plans. Again, this is a B2
property single -family structure with an open floor plan on the first floor, second
floor there's two bedrooms, and then the third floor is a master suite. We did
meet with Norris Square Community Alliance. They did not take a position
because even though we sent out notice to you know to let me see how many
um you know to um let me see how many people we sent to 104 addresses no one from the immediate
people who sent it to 100.
community showed up um i will say this that they they stated in their letter that um you know they
would leave it up to the board uh to decide uh and here's proof of mailing a little bit about v2
properties i've presented v2 properties on multiple occasions uh in front of this board
V2 Properties is one of the largest home builders of single -family homes in the city of Philadelphia.
They have been recognized by the Philadelphia Inquirer for 2018 and 2019 as Developer of the Year.
They are looking to start doing work in the North Square area of Philadelphia where this property is located.
And they're looking to build, you know, single -family homes on, you know, fronting North Howard Street, as well as Waterloo, which is, again, not out of character for this portion of the neighborhood.
And as such, we're seeking a de minimis variance with respect to that.
Bill Archer, can you virtually raise your hand?
can you hear me now yes yep i'm here hi uh bill can you state your full name and address for the
record sure bill archer 130 clover lane it's in perkyomanville pennsylvania 18074
Mr. Archer, do you affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Thank you. Proceed.
Bill, you heard everything I stated today.
And is it true and correct?
And would you adopt this in your own testimony?
Yes, I would.
The only thing, again, I would point out is that the lot size is well over 1 ,700 square feet.
we're simply looking to subdivide it and put a single family structure one facing north howard
street one facing waterloo which is not out of character with the neighborhoods
thank you anyone else wish to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
chair we have slum folks
good afternoon again mr folks just identify yourself you're still on the roof
Good afternoon, Chairman Chico and ZBA Board.
Sloan, folks, FSF Fire, OLKS, Office of Councilwoman Maria Keona Sanchez, Room 508, City Hall, 19107.
The applicant, having met with the RCO and receiving a letter of no position, our office offers non -opposition to this very request.
Thank you very much. Anyone else wish to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
no one chair thank you i went out of order any questions from the board no no planning commission
chairman and members of the board this property is zoned for single family residential in the
comprehensive plan the planning commission has no opposition to the granting of the variances
requested thank you very much mi -2020 -000 -800 -2406 north howard street my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you uh is the sonographer we have two more cases
in this session. Are you okay? Do you need a break? Okay, thank you. MI -2020 -000854 -2531
north 2nd street and mi -2020 -000855 -2531 north 2nd street mr knockinson uh good afternoon mr
chair members of the board alan knockamson of knockamson pc 123 south broad street uh suite
1600 Philadelphia PA 19109. I'm here to present 2529 and 2531 North
2nd street I will share my screen
And you will see a packet of materials in front of you, which include eight exhibits.
The first is the agreement of sale to the property or properties for these properties.
Second exhibit, you'll see a certificate of tax clearance, or showing that the owner
is in good standing with the City of Philadelphia.
Third exhibit is the notices of refusal.
So each property has its own refusal, and essentially it's the same.
Both are CMX2 properties, and we're allowed to have three units, two residential and one commercial.
As to both, we're just looking to swap out the commercial unit on the first floor and put a residential unit,
and these will each be three -unit condominium buildings.
Last month, August 25th, we presented 2262 North 2nd Street under MI -2020 -000771, the
same circumstances for the same client of E2 properties.
In that presentation, as well as this presentation, we asked for the board to hold it under advisement
only because we're meeting with the community September 9th and we would like community input.
But we did meet with the coordinating RCO.
We had a pre -community meeting with them last month,
and they were very receptive to this plan of converting essentially the commercial use on the first floor to residential use
to increase the ability of the commercial corridor on North Front Street to succeed.
During that hearing last month, I also pointed out that we did 2401 North 2nd Street, which is a 102 -unit apartment complex under calendar number 38531.
We have presented, not for V2 Properties, but for another client, where we have heard time and time again from the Norris Square Community Alliance and from the neighborhood in general,
In order to make the commercial corridor succeed on North Front Street, they would like to push the commercial uses to North Front Street and keep the residential component of North 2nd Street intact.
So, you know, here's the application appeal for these matters.
and here are the
you'll see this is
even though this shows CMX2
or ICMX
on North 2nd Street
that's the furthest thing from the truth
you'll see from the photographs
that this is a residential neighborhood
I mean there is a parking lot here
but on this side there's a residential
in nature and they would like
to keep that intact
so you'll see there it's residential
And then you'll see the floor plans, typical V2 property, you know, three unit condominium building. Each unit has its own floor, brick facade. And you'll see that we're meeting with them on September 9th.
I will point out that the Planning Commission, when hearing this exact same presentation at 2262 North 2nd Street, recommended for the approval of the zoning appeal.
For 2262 North 2nd, not this, obviously.
Bill, can you virtually raise your hand again?
He's already sworn in just to identify himself.
He's still on the roof.
Okay. Bill, can you state your name and address for the record?
Bill, you have to unmute yourself.
Okay, Alan, can you hear me now?
Sorry to interrupt.
No worries. State your full name and address for the record.
for the bill archer 130 clover lane perky omenville pennsylvania 18074 all right uh and you heard
everything i stated today yes and is it true and correct yes and would you adopt as your own
testimony yes i would okay thank you questions from the board no no anyone else wish to testify
in this matter, please raise your hand.
We have slum folks.
Folks, you're still under oath.
Just identify yourself with a record, please.
Once again, Chairman DiCicco, good afternoon.
Once again, Chairman DeChico,
good afternoon.
Slum folks.
Sloan folks, S -L -O -A -N -E, F is a fire, O -L -K -S.
Officer Councilman Maria Ciena Sanchez from 508 City Hall 19107.
We just respectfully request that the ZBA hold this matter until the community has a chance to weigh in.
We appreciate and understand that there's a preliminary meeting with the NSCA committee,
but we just want the community to have a chance to hear what the various request is
and give their opinions and ask questions.
And we only want the Norris Square, we only ask to hold so that Norris Square can make their opinions known to the ZBA.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Anyone else wish to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
no hands raised thank you planning commission
chairman and members of the board this property is zoned for commercial mixed use in the
comprehensive plan staff has no opposition to the admission of the commercial use and
the granting of the variance is proposed thank you sharon and or tanya do we recommend a
attorney moving party?
Since they have
a definite date for the RCO
meeting, maybe if
Tanya, if you have a date available after
that for them to return for the community
input. And
actually, I just want to interject. We
do have a date, and I don't have in my notes
of course, but we did have a date
well, after
September 9th, Mr. Chair.
For 2262
North 2nd Street, when we met
uh on august 25th we did create a supplemental hearing date uh in time and i don't have it in
my notes all i would ask is let's have all three of these heard together
but you don't you know i don't i don't i don't have it in my notes it was stated on the record
and i'm trying to look um and i don't seem to have it in my notes but we leave it this way
that i'll read it in that this case will be resumed on the date to be uh to be uh
to be decided on and that way alan can get back to tanya with it with the date for the other
hearings sure that works all right and this again is limited yeah yes absolutely thank you all right
So MI -2020 -000854, 2531 North 2nd Street, MI -2020 -000855, 253 North 2nd Street.
the hearing will be resumed on a date specific to the date to
a date certain that will be supplied to us by mr mr knockinson excuse me at which time
we will only consider any feedback from the rco
and that date will be consistent with the date on the other second street north second street
property you'll get get that date to tanya please thank you okay does that work tanya
yes chair it does thank you calendar number three seven six seven nine
two seven zero dupont street is a reconsider case for reconsideration
Mr. O 'Brien Mr. O 'Brien and Mr. Wise, you've both been promoted to panelists.
You can share your screen and unmute yourself so that you can be sworn in.
Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Please identify yourself with a record. I'm Coren Wise,
attorney for protesting RCOs and neighbors, RCOs including Central Roxborough RCO and many of
neighbors please spell your name sure c -o -r -e -n w -i -s -e and you swear and affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you mr o 'brien please identify yourself
good afternoon mr chairman members of the board william o 'brien from manioc law office 4322
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Members of the board, William O 'Brien from Manioc Law Office,
4322 Main Street, Philadelphia, 19127.
We're confirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Thank you.
If I could just interject one thought, Chair,
if we can have Mr. Wise put his address on record.
Mr. Wise, your address?
I'm sorry, my phone's ringing.
I think, do you hear that?
I'm sorry.
I'm trying to not
shut myself off in the process
Cor and Wise
Law Offices of Cor and Wise
100 North 18th Street
Suite 300 Philadelphia PA
Thank you
Mr. O 'Brien
Are you
I believe Mr. Wise's client
is the moving party
Okay, thank you
that's right yes thank you um mr chair uh members of the panel um this i believe this is our fourth
appearance uh before the zoning board we were heard on this application originally in november
i think that was this that might have been the second listing um it was held for a vote uh so
that parties could um try and come to a compromise although they had tried uh value valiantly
uh before that hearing um a decision was received in january of 2019 um uh after a letter from mr
o 'brien had been hand delivered but uh mailed to the rcos i don't believe i got a copy um
that could have been an oversight uh we that 2019 or 20 i'm sorry the november hearing was 2019
the decision was January 2020 okay thank you yes thank you a reconsideration was requested by
the joint RCOs on this project on this application because it's such an important
application and really does change the nature of this block and the neighborhood and we do
um we do thank the board for hearing us uh and we're here in september and thank you all for
your efforts uh it's been it's been a long slog um this is this is 270 dupont street um this
present on the property is a compliant non -conforming three -family dwelling
uh that's been there for years it's occupied excuse me for interrupting sir do you have
any exhibits you can share with us? I do. Does everyone see where we are? So this is
the exterior of 270 DuPont Street. It's a corner property and where these cars are,
if you can see my cursor is dupont street this property faces on dupont street and this one -way
street where my cursor is on the side of the property is fleming street uh the nature of
dupont street is front -facing homes on dupont street there's uh i don't believe there are any
driveways uh presently uh mr o 'brien's applicant appeared before the board testified that they are
equitable owners with the property under contract they testified that the agreement of sale the
consideration of price was a secret matter confidential um and we're seeking to uh raise
this property take it down and build subdivide this single family lot which is our uh i believe
rsa uh it's a single family lot rsa3 or rsa5 um and uh construct four originally the project was
to construct four fleming facing uh uh homes townhomes uh this would dramatically change
the character of this block of dupont street this is a prominent property on the corner
of what is a main drag in this area um with all these properties facing on dupont and uh what
would happen would be then this property would be facing fleming street dupont street would now have
a side of a building, and there was a proposition which has been adjusted a few times, but at
some point, if not continuing to today, the proposal was for a driveway with a curb cut
on DuPont Street so that the newer homeowners on Fleming Street would access rear -facing
parking so that the neighboring properties on DuPont Street would then be looking at
the back of a house with a curb gun and a drive aisle there.
with a curb cut and a drive aisle there. The neighbors, when we appeared in November,
I forget the exact number, the record would reflect that I believe at least 15 or 16 near
neighbors did appear in person at our hearing before the Zoning Board. Several testified
along with me appeared John Carpenter and Celeste Hardister from the Central Roxborough RCO as well
as John Hunter and Celeste Hardister. I have my notes backwards. The representatives of the
Many Young Neighbors RCO as well as the Central Roxborough and they are here on the call today
as well, as well as several neighbors. I believe, and we'll, we'll find out when we get to that
point, but I want to also share a petition that was, was handed up at the prior hearing,
which you'll, you'll, there's, there's several, obviously several pages of petitions. This was
circulated online. All these zip codes are 198. I believe there are several 197, but to
highlight the opposition to this we also went through and showed let me spin this so you can
view it we we did want to show the board um on the map that we have 270 here and in that petition
i believe which is five pages of over uh over 100 signatures near neighbors are noted on the
on the map with green checks uh also with me today on the call
we believe if everyone's made it this long to be
this list of names i believe this is 11 names that should be with us if if more haven't joined
you'll see that all these addresses are 200 block of DuPont Street this last one is a 200 block of
Cram Street also several neighbors I think that's three neighbors down the bottom here also on the
200 block of DuPont that can't attend due to work conflicts but are previously on the record from
prior meetings in opposition and we should be able to hear from them after my presentation
um going back to this uh the the character of the block is uh front -facing properties
no driveways on dupont street um the reason we requested this reconsideration because mr o 'brien
did submit a letter um there was a couple things that we didn't agree with but a decision was
rendered uh before it was that his letter was actually received we didn't have a chance to
respond to it um the council i'm sorry the chairman uh in november did uh ask us if we wanted to
um continue the matter and hold the vote to compromise up to that point compromise had been
discussed the and and none of these neighbors are here for personal gain they're all here to
preserve their neighborhood and the character that that they appreciate and love um they want
to keep the property facing on dupont street the discussion has always been this is a wide lot
uh it's this is a single family lot um it can be subdivided but i believe it can be subdivided
as by right over the counter and two properties can be built facing on dupont if the developer
so chooses uh that's that should be by right a compromise was discussed that if more properties
were desired by the developer, that a third property could be built back here on Fleming
fronting while maintaining front -facing properties on DuPont Street. That's been rejected by the
developer. The developer's wish is for properties facing on Fleming Street. After we were here in
November, the developer, not Mr. O 'Brien, the developer did attend a general meeting
of Manioc neighbors and he he brought what all he brought this proposal which had been discussed
previous of essentially removing the corner property altogether which had been proposed to
front on Fleming so if you can see this this is the plan of the applicant this is Fleming Street
This is where our property is today facing DuPont.
The application is to put Fleming facing properties 1, 2, 3, 4.
front Fleming facing properties one two three four and I believe I wasn't present but I believe
that the developer did present the the compromise as what we see here cross off this house
let's leave that vacant and we'll just put our three properties on Fleming still
with rear -facing parking but nothing here and it was it was floated that we could
deed restrict this lot or do something with it again the neighbors and the RCOs feeling that
this corner property is a prominent anchor property essential to the character of this block
that that's not a compromise to which they were interested but it had been discussed before and
they'd always, you know, sought a proposal and a compromise that would include front -facing
properties on DuPont Street. DuPont Street, excuse me. Excuse me for interrupting. What are the
dimensions of that property at the corner that's X'd out? On the Fleming Street side, what is the
with i don't off the top of my head um i can't see those numbers there see if we can get in there
is that a number there does that say 28 i i don't want to guess i i i don't have that number off the
top of my head um but as these are facing on fleming um yeah i'd like to know if we can see
that if we can get that uh before mr chairman yes sir mr the parcel a the corner lot is 28 .125
feet wide on fleming street and 50 feet deep on dupont street okay so so was there any discussion
about flipping that corner
so the frontage
would be on DuPont?
That was the
compromise sought by the
It was always
voiced as
I'm sorry if I'm ringing.
I have a
mechanic trying to get me to pick up a car.
I don't know how to turn that off.
was that was that mr maybe mr o 'brien you can answer that was that something that was taken
into consideration yes turning that property around it was it was considered by the applicant
but was not doable um and if i may mr chairman we're here on a motion for reconsideration
Under the Board's rules, under 6 .3, the burden is to produce a special circumstance that
could not have been known at the time the Board made its decision.
The RCOs have identified my letter dated January 13th as the special circumstance.
um this is not under my understanding a rehearing of all of the facts uh it's whether or not my
letter does present a special circumstance i don't believe it does and i'm prepared to respond to
that but i want to give mr wise an opportunity to address the his client's position that
my letter to the board is a special circumstance that should alter the board's decision thank you
for clearing that up as you know i'm not an attorney so i i kind of lost my way i'm trying
to figure out a way in which we can maybe hopefully figure a way to developing those that property
and an address yes shower so sharon seleta the reconsideration was already granted that is not
the issue that's before you now the reason that it was granted was because there were materials
submitted that the parties opposing Mr. Weiss's clients did not have an opportunity to see before
he voted for projects. So really what the hearing should be limited to at this point is consideration
of the new plans that were submitted and voted on. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
Mr. Letta. So at the beginning of my comments I did mention that letter and we did receive
a decision on our reconsideration petition granting and scheduling the hearing in April,
we're here in September. So as I was referencing the issues that were noted in Mr. O 'Brien's
the issues that were noted in Mr. O 'Brien's letter the day before the decision was made.
letter the day before the decision was made.
The comments in the letter seemed to reference compromises that were similarly dismissed,
which we felt was a mischaracterization because those compromises had been presented
previously to my knowledge. And as you brought up, Mr. Chair, the neighborhood who obviously
are passionate about this and feel strongly about this application changing the nature of this
block and the neighborhood presented by an equitable owner not presently in possession
with limited hardship, no hardship.
There's no hardship supporting any variance
where the lot is large enough to build not one,
but even two by right properties, single family,
and the neighbors and the RCOs
that offer a third property as a compromise,
their wish was that the properties front on DuPont
and maintain the character of that block
as it's present there right now
where this building is currently occupied
and currently maintaining that character.
I do, as I was stating,
clumsily, John Hunter and Celeste Tortister
are on the line from Central Roxborough
and John Carpenter and Kevin Smith
from Maniunk Neighbors
as well as I can see the participants now
but I believe there's 12 Neighbors
that were interested in appearing in opposition
from the 200 block of DuPont
where this directly affects them
but the bottom line is that
where there is no variance, I'm sorry
where there is no hardship, no support for a variance
and where a variance would change the character of the block
add congestion, add a curb cut on DuPont
where there hasn't been one before
and where the other contention in Mr. O 'Brien's letter
was that this was a minimal variance being sought
which it's not a minimal variance
where you could subdivide this down the middle
and build two structures
and if you needed to get a variance
that would be for three total structures.
This is an application for four to fill the lot
and even turn it onto the side street
changing the character for nothing more
than financial maximization.
We ask for the board to reconsider
and deny the variance
and if I'm able or if it's appropriate now
Mr. Chair for the for the RCOs to be heard or at least I'd like to hear from Mr. O 'Brien first
and then we'll go to witnesses very good thank you thank you so under the rules of the board
in order to reconsider I mean Mr. O 'Brien Mr. O 'Brien we hear you but a little bit of an echo
maybe you can get closer to the mic uh maybe i can adjust my volume i'm going to stop my sharing
if bill you need to take over i think you can do that is that any better much better thank you okay
so under the rules of the board uh in order to grant reconsideration and this hearing is to
this has been scheduled to consider so the board may consider the allegation that my letter of
dated January 13th is a special circumstance I submit that it is not and I'd like to share
if I may my screen
Mr. O 'Brien again you're not considering what you are arguing that was did you
appeal the grant of reconsideration when the board because you could have
appealed that to the court did you well had i known we were going to have
seven months delay maybe maybe i would have but
at this point the effect of the grant of reconsideration was to vacate
the original decision we are now considering what happened after
the hearing in November? What changes did you make and should they have been approved?
Let me respond to that. My understanding is that because this had been
My understanding is that because this had been continued or the vote was suspended pending the RCOs and the applicants pursuing an opportunity of possible compromise and that there were documents, plans, produced, exchanged that were not part of the record.
Thank you.
that it would have been, if the board did not grant reconsideration, it would have been
likely remanded by the court on appeal because of these matters that were not part of the record.
So they're now been submitted, and I suppose they are now part of the record. But if this
is going to rehash the entire case, I'm prepared to do that in a very quick manner.
Let me share my screen.
Mr. O 'Brien, it's actually, it's so that it is for a limited purpose.
There were documents that were submitted.
There was a revised plan that was submitted after the original hearing.
The community did not have an opportunity to comment on those or give feedback, and
that's why you're here today.
So the revised plan was the proposed compromise plan.
um bear with me i'm trying to is my document now being shared yes okay so uh we can go down to uh
the post zba hearing documents which are on pages 50 through 87. the plan that was offered
eliminated the house on parcel A, which is the corner lot that we just discussed, and
building attached row homes on the remaining three lots.
uh the this is an image of the original development plan can you see that
well well the original development plan um proposed four attached structures extending from dupont
to the entire depth of the lot 28 foot wide homes attached with roof decks pilot houses and a rear
deck through several meetings both with committees and with the community a lot of modifications
were introduced the pilot to reduce massing and scale the houses were narrowed the pilot houses
and roof decks were eliminated to conform with the open area dimensional requirements the rear
decks were removed to restore it on on street parking space where the curb cut is the curb cut
was narrowed to the minimum allowed 12 feet and to provide five foot sidewalk clearance as the
planning commission requested the entrance stairs were recessed and the window wells relocated to
the side yards so we made all those changes and then at the close of the hearing the board
suggested that we the two parties pursue the possibility of compromise my client proposed
to build three houses on lots on parcels b c and d that the corner lot would remain open unless and
until both civics agreed otherwise. My letter on page 50, which I can bring up, provided
that there would be a deed restriction to enforce that because that was the remaining
issue that had not been addressed to the satisfaction of the civics, and that is that it was too
dense now again um the board should be reminded that um these lots what we're basically asking
the board to do is to allow rsa five -dimensional requirements apply not rsa3 and there are many
reasons to support that. If you look at page 16, which was Exhibit 5A of the zoning packet,
the red marks are my marks, the circles and the triangles. The circles are RSA 5, the
the triangles are RSA 3. At least I cannot discern any pattern. It is some areas in the
triangles or RSA3.
You can...
same block go back and forth between RSA 3 and RSA 5. In fact, if you look at the very
corner right here where my cursor is, the next page, and this was Exhibit 5B, takes
that corner and show so here's the parcel work in question it's rsa3 the rest of the fleming street
block is rsa5 across the street is rsa5 and caddy corner is rsd3 um but both these corners
as depicted in Exhibits 6 and 7 of the zoning package, pages 20 through 41 of the document
that I submitted.
Both of these corner developments were developed to RSA five -dimensional standards.
This area A across the street from 270, lot sizes are 783 square feet.
The section, the houses B are 1 ,320 square feet.
Both, again, well below RSA 5 requirements.
The proposed lots for 270 DuPont, the subject, are 1 ,406 square feet, a de minimis departure.
from RSA 5 requirements. So there is nothing that is contrary to the neighborhood despite
the representations that the civics make it. If you look at the zoning plan, which is page 12,
I have to try to reduce this if I can. Bear with me so you can see it. The Fleming's
You would think from the representations made by the Civic that DuPont was like Benjamin
of Franklin Boulevard.
The dimensions of DuPont, both the street and the cart width and the sidewalks are identical
to Fleming.
There's no distinction.
One is not a major road.
They're both the same.
And when you look at the houses across the street depicted in the photograph on page
35, well, that's the Caddy Corner property.
Those are 1 ,320 square feet lots.
And if you look at the photograph on page 20,
these are across the street from 270 DuPont Street. These lots are again,
783 square feet, and they were built with the consent and support of the Civic Association.
So the suggestion that we're imposing something extraordinary is not supported by any of the facts.
It's just an opinion that the civic really embraces.
I don't know why.
Mr. O 'Brien, could you go back to page 12?
is that a driveway separating the
on Fleming is it separation between a and b and then c and d no these are now um so that
I can show you the rendering rendering is on page 15.
Let me see if I can increase the size of that.
So what you see is the original format was, again, four wide houses attached.
In order to reduce the massing, they were reconfigured on the same lot lines as a pair
of duplexes.
so what you see is the side side yards between the two structures was there any consideration
looking at this uh proposal here uh to have the entrance keeping everything the same but the
entrance on the dupont street side to that a property i mean i don't know if it works uh i
mean i guess it could work i'm just curious it didn't work with turning radius providing parking
turning radius providing parking is essential to this development and providing parking and
is essential to this.
turning radii it just didn't work okay all right but you know again if you if you look at the
civics request for reconsideration and most recently their letter dated
august 28th it was submitted they make representations that the applicant did not
make modifications. There were many modifications made and these lots again are as much as 45 %
greater than lots across the street that the Civic had supported. I do want to address one issue
and there's a representation that I misrepresented to the Board the Planning Commission's position.
in my letter i state that the zoning board or that the planning commission supported
the applicant's proposal and mr smith in his letter said that they expressed non -apposition
the two days before the zoning hearing there was a and i'm going to bring that document up
There was a plan review of the modified plan, again, without the roof decks, without the
pilot houses, the reconfigured narrow houses, the smaller driveway.
And that plan review was Monday, November 18th, and that was with Marty Grigorski and
Matt Weisong.
They had no objections, expressed no problems with the plan.
however they did express a preference for five foot wide side uh sidewalk clearance um i'm sorry
bill can you just what page is this in the packet can you see this document i see it is that in the
packet that is uh well this was produced uh to the zoning board and i was bringing up as rebuttal
to the to the suggestion that i misled the board uh this is a copy of my email to marty grigorsky
and Matt Wisong dated the same day, Monday, November 18th at 440 -something in the afternoon.
Marty and Matt, thanks for taking time to meet me today to review the proposed modifications
to the proposed redevelopment of 270 DuPont Street. As modified, the proposal calls for a pair of
twins, piled houses, and decks have been eliminated. Each of the four single -family homes will have
accessory two -car garage accessed from dupont street by a shared driveway the proposal satisfies
the nco overlay and replaces non -conform a non -conforming multi -family dwelling your
remaining concern focused on the encroachments in the public way your recommend you recommend moving
the escape wells the window escape wells to the side yards and modify the stair entrance
so a five foot right of way is maintained the following day
i sent an email to kevin uh smith and celeste hardister the president of the two civics
matt wysong marty gorski the councilman joshua cohen tanya sunkett and sharon were copied in
this email kevin and celeste the planning commission uh have expressed the staff has
expressed preference for a five foot wide clearance at the sidewalk of the proposed twin homes
accordingly the escape walls have been relocated to the side yards and the entrance stairs have
been recessed attaches a copy of the revised zoning plan the subject of our october of the
october 2nd rco meeting that now includes the two foregoing modifications this plan will be submitted
to the zoning board tomorrow with the revised proviso plans form when i wrote my letter saying
that the planning commission supported it that was my frame of reference that a plan review with the
plan the northwest plan reviewer matt uh weisong and and staff uh the uh coordinator uh martin
marty gregorski had no problem expressed no problem with this they had one suggestion we
adopted the suggestion um so i don't know and i raised that question with um uh matt weisslong
when this issue was arose august 7th i sent him a letter uh suggesting that
sorry to interrupt i think the comment in the letter just was that they stated non -opposition
as opposed to support at the meeting.
I don't know if we need to read it.
Okay, we understand that.
All right.
So on August 7th, I sent this letter to Matt Weisong
where I go through the facts with him
and suggest that maybe Ron Bednar,
Ron Bednar, who expressed the Commission's position, wasn't aware of the plan review
who expressed the commission's position,
that had occurred two days earlier.
But at the end of the day, I don't know if there's support or non -objection whether that's
a distinction that really doesn't make a difference.
I'm sure that I'll probably have a lot more to respond to as Mr. Hunter and Mr. Smith
than the others testify to so I think we'll leave it there and I'll just yeah I want to
interrupt everybody for a minute it's uh five o 'clock I my question I guess is to the court
reporter would the court reporter like to have a break this is the last case on the two o 'clock
session we still have two or three cases for the 3 30 session I would love a break Mr. Chairman
10 minutes yes perfect 10 minute break we'll come back thank you thank you mr chair
okay uh mr o 'brien we're back on uh i would you're muted at the moment
mr o 'brien you have to unmute yourself okay i i i mentioned uh that i think i responded
everything that corin had raised generally yeah i know that the corin has witnesses that want to
testify and rather than ramble on i'll hold off until i find a need to respond to additional
testimony just one last thing in response to corin there was a suggestion that i did not copy
the RCO's attorney, Mr. Wise. This matter started about 16, 17 months ago. I found out that the
RCO's engaged Mr. Wise for the zoning hearing on November 20th, on the morning of that hearing.
In speaking with Mr. Wise that day, it was my understanding that he was engaged for that
purpose if you look at the documents on my cover sheet the six post zoning documents my letter
to the rcos of december 12th through the date of february 11th when reconsideration this
reconsideration hearing was scheduled um none of them copy mr wise uh the reconsideration
the letter issuing the April 15th reconsideration hearing date is sent to Mr. Smith and it is not
even copied to Mr. Wise. Now I would never had I known Mr. Wise's relationship was an ongoing
relationship I would have included it. I didn't know that didn't realize that so no harm. All right
Mr. O 'Brien, have you concluded this portion of your testimony?
The only thing I want to suggest, the Civic has repeatedly said that the compromise offer of three houses with the empty lot on Parcellet is somehow kind of an epiphany that four houses is not the least modification.
the modification that the applicant is requesting is for the board to allow this to be developed
according to rsa 5 standards the three house proposal proposed compromise still requires
rsa 5 standards it doesn't change the relief that the applicant requested but it was the remaining
issue that the civics had on the table was density and so okay we'll do three attached houses
rather than two semi -detached and we'll have this empty lot on the corner uh i did not attend the
hearing uh i think some of the witnesses that are going to testify uh mr wisena call will confirm
that it was their opinion that this proposal as depicted i don't know if you can if it's still on
screen, the two mansard roof twins was better than the three -lot, the three -house compromise,
that the three -house compromise, as Mr. Smith articulates in his letter dated December 23rd,
he has four or five or maybe six bullet points as to why the compromise proposal is not as
is this as a as the revised plan but both require application of RSA five dimensional standards
but why are we here I don't mean that sarcastic no we're here because we're saying that four
is better than three I I'm I'm lost yes Mr. Chairman um
i i'm i'm lost yes mr chairman um i'm also lost uh the the application is an rsa3 lot
and the variance is seeking four houses it's not we mr o 'brien is saying well if if we just ask for
rsa5 it's it's not really a variance or it's not or it's minimal but that's that's not really in
my opinion that's not really how the code works we have an rsa3 lot and a developer that has an
agreement of sale on it is trying to maximize it and fill the lot and by putting them facing
fleming street and calling them rsa5 properties um but if he's looking to amass if it's an economic
issue isn't he kind of cutting himself short by removing one of the houses he's only building
three as opposed to four i don't know there's no evidence on what the financials are when we
the agreement was secret i think i think it's obvious that it could cost more to build four
than it does to build three well i i can't speculate as to what the finances are i assume
that it's cheaper to build three it's cheaper to build three on fleming than it is to build
two on dupont and one on fleming but the neighborhood who has nothing to personally
Gain wants to maintain that character on DuPont and has offered up a third property, which by
right, there should only be two properties if they subdivide the lot. But we don't get to a variance
because we haven't heard any evidence of a hardship. There's no hardship that supports
a variance on this lot to build anything but a buy right property it could be a very large
property on dupont or if he wants to split the properties it can be two good sized properties
on dupont and the minimal variance would be a third one on fleming which the neighbors have
have consistently supported density is not their main issue it's character on dupont and a curb cut
on a street that has no driveways okay all right yeah but but the four on fleming street uh never
mind you guys finish i'm not going to briefly counsel raised the issue of hardship uh it's
the applicant's position that the record contains uncontradicted testimony that because of the
existing multi -family dwelling the purchase price does not allow this property to be redeveloped
according to the civic's wishes we have tried to work with the civic to find a way that makes sense
and i want to refresh the board's recollection on the screen right now is 217 green lane
and the following photograph is uh the corner of um wild and fleming street i mean this i'm sorry
mr o 'brien i have to object mr councilman i i don't know what the relevance of other properties
is i'd like to hear let him finish we've made an effort the applicant has made an effort to
develop this property consistent with the community to to have design elements that
are compatible the civic in its letter requesting reconsideration criticized the applicant
it, because it mentioned the Central Roxborough Overlay District. One of the exhibits offered,
which is now on the screen, shows the Central Roxborough Overlay District, and it clearly
shows that 270 Dupont Street, the red circle here, red square, is outside the district.
we don't have to comply with the overlay but the applicant wanted to and there's a reason for that
the code says that the overlay is important because it makes the area walkable and walkability
serves the health safety and general welfare of the citizens by providing human scale design
interesting and pedestrian friendly facades and eyes on the street my point was that the applicant
He didn't have to do that, but he adopted these standards and applied them to these
proposed buildings that are outside the district.
In Mr. Smith's most recent letter of August 28th, he enclosed photographs of houses, 10
houses on DuPont Street.
I checked city records on these houses, and it revealed that not only is the existing
structure on 270, a non -conforming multifamily dwelling. But based upon the 10 houses that
But based upon the 10 houses that Mr. Smith provided, it may be the only non -owner -occupied dwelling in the neighborhood.
Mr. Smith put in the house, the 10 houses, the 10 houses, the 10 houses, the 10 houses,
All these 10 homes are owner -occupied.
So by removing the non -compliant, the non -conforming structure, introducing four new homes with a shared driveway, two off -street parking spaces,
it's it's a benefit to the community they're going to be owner -occupied
i'll i'll uh i'll rest there but we you know relying on the record that was produced before
the zoning board uh on the essential issues and again my letter of uh january 14th is
a letter offered in summation and i stand by every word that's on the letter
and Mr. Smith sent a letter on December 23rd, similar to mine, offered in summation.
There was spin and hyperbole in that letter. I don't disparage that. He's trying to make
his best position, but the civics positions in this case are contrary to the facts. RSA 5
is consistent with the community's immediate, the immediate area, and these homes are consistent
or even larger, that lots are even larger than what the civics have previously supported.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, if it's appropriate, I'd ask neighbors and the RCOs to raise their hands so they can
yeah and and for those folks who are preparing to testify i'm sure i know mr hunter and others
have been here before we always ask that you as you speak you give us new and different information
i could be wrong but i guess uh i'm going to be hearing a lot of we're going to be hearing a lot
of the same things so we're going to limit your comments to two minutes thank you thank you mr
chair um i in response to that mr hunter as an architect can speak to the streetscape uh argument
on dupont much more eloquently than i mr smith can speak regarding the the procedures uh and the
rsa3 um uh better than i have um so uh if you so choose mr chair um and i believe you should be
able to see if if the neighbors in attendance have raised their hand um we'll handle that she'll
she'll take that mr hunter mr hunter would like to speak first i believe and he's representative
from uh neighborhood council mr hunter please raise your hand if you haven't already done so
when you get on identify yourself with the record name and address uh can you hear me yes i can
Excellent. It's John Hunter, H -U -N -T -E -R, address is 4308 Terrace Street, T -E -R -R -A -C -E, 19128, representing Man Utd Neighborhood Council.
Do you swear in a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Mr. Hunter.
And I'm sorry, John, do you need the screen or do you have documents or do you want me to put up the photos?
I would like you, if I ask you, to sort of pull up a plan or something.
If Mr. O 'Brien could.
Actually, if you could pull up the compromise plan with the X on it.
If Mr. O 'Brien could release the screen.
Thank you.
Thank you, Bill.
Chairman DiCicco, I will try and avoid the filling of Groundhog Day.
I will just remind you, and I wouldn't expect you to remember this,
But back on November 30th in 2019, we went through this whole argument in exactly the same fashion from Mr. O 'Brien.
And we got to the end of me giving my version, which I'm trying to do now.
And you asked me if the civics would be willing to consider a compromise.
And I said we had suggested that we would be willing to discuss a compromise from day one.
that we met with the applicant some over a year maybe 18 months ago now and then you turned to
Mr O 'Brien representing the applicant and you asked him um quite pointedly I would suggest in
in my recollection before you made uh the decision did Mr O 'Brien did the applicant wish to
um consider a compromise and he said he did so I think that is indicative of something um
I won't go too much into the details of that, but we did make as good an effort as we could when we met with...
We did make as good an effort as we could when we met with
Mr. Abrams by himself. Mr.
O 'Brien had noticed but for some reason wasn't there and we spent probably 40 minutes with our
zoning committee from both Central Rocksboro and from
MNC. Included in those is an architect, a planner, and
And a developer, an active developer who lives around the corner on Cram Street, we came up with every possibility we could around a compromise, trying to explain what were of importance to us and how we thought we could arrive at a three house solution.
And clearly, if you're sitting at a table discussing a compromise where the buy -right solution is two houses and the applicant is asking for four, you're focusing on a solution that revolves around three houses.
We had a very straightforward direction that we wanted to go and we got resistance continuously coming back to that same plan that was suggested to us and was included in the documents that we sent through to the ZBA.
You will see from that plan that it's a compromise solution, which, you know, is a very clever trick in sort of negotiation where you suggest the compromise, but you attach so many conditions to it that that compromise on the surface looks good, but it's always unacceptable to the other party.
it's a typical negotiation in union negotiations and so that's what that was and so we end up
really coming back to you and to this board and just saying um pretty much enough is enough
we've tried uh we can see a way forward that we'd be happy and would give the compromise solution
um i i don't think that there's any more to be said we've exhausted what we said
we have 20 people who've turned up three times and there's 13 of them are here listening in yet
again they're very local they're very committed they're very specific and doesn't matter what
mr o 'brien says about rentals and ownership they know what they want and it isn't this
and so we ask you to deny the application completely i'm just a little bit confused
Maybe you can clear it up about the compromise being a, I guess, not in good faith.
First of all, look at this.
The plan that is shown here is not the plan that Mr. O 'Brien latterly at the very end of his negotiation showed to the Planning Commission and got, whether it's non -opposition or support, I don't care.
this is the plan that was from very early and is a four -house row solution that goes right from one
end of the side to the other and is different from the twins that he that was proposed to us
later so that's the first correct me if i'm wrong am i looking at something this is isn't this three
houses no this well there's four houses with one hexed out well three houses get built and no house
gets built on the x out area correct correct that that would be the proposal but at the same time
if you look at it um the the house that's x x out and was in mr o 'brien's letter was a compromise
is one of four lots and that x out one would just be a temporary deed restriction which somehow
would be under the control of the rcos who would at some future point decide that it could be built
on because they decided it wasn't so bad but at the same time Mr. Abrams at his discussion with us
told us that first of all because he was only building three houses at the time and he would
never know if he ever built one in the future would strip down the uh the materials so they'd
have inferior materials and he couldn't tell us what they would be and also the end of the
road that was facing Newport would be a blank end of a property which would be rendered in some
temporary material because he would always hope that this fourth house would somehow be built in
the future so we'd be looking at a blank wall with a profile of a pilot house and inferior materials
in front of it would be an empty lot which would have no specific owner and could be just a
detriment to the neighborhood and it retains the other thing that we were opposing to
opposed to which is the curb cut on DuPont Street giving access and having
all the problems of having these properties turned at 90 degrees and
therefore overlooking the adjacent neighbor's garden for no good purpose. The
The only good purpose is for this arrangement to make the maximum amount of money for the applicant so that he can offer this property for sale to a future developer as four locks and offering.
only good purpose is for this arrangement to make the maximum
Who else?
Who's next?
Thank you.
Kevin Smith.
Mr. Smith, please identify yourself, spell your name for the record.
give us your address um this is kevin smith president of manioc number neighborhood council
k -e -v -i -n -s -m -i -t -h
if i'm to tell you the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do um and my address is 471 ripka street um
So, actually, Corin, can you put up page 28 of our letter to the Zoning Board with the
RSA -3 map?
Apologies, bear with me. Let me find it.
I think it's the next page.
Oh, I'm sorry.
oh that's the exhibit one if you have the full letter
oh there it is well that's it
so this one
yeah so this shows the RSA 3 development
in the area
this lot and this has been said but this lot
is RSA 3 the applicant is attempting to
rezone it to RSA 5 by variance
but it's an RSA 3 lot
and i'll point out that because the developer proposed a terrible three house plan it doesn't
make the four house plan any better that we had already rejected the community's core concern
core concerns here are preserving the dupont streetscape and keeping the rsa3 zoning on the
dupont facing side the applicant has disregarded this core concern entirely with every one of his
proposals. And even a flurry of irrelevant comparisons has no bearing on the case. It's
an RSA 3 lot. It's developable as an RSA 3 lot. And the DuPont streetscape is something worth
preserving. And I think if Corrin goes down to the next two pages, there's a series of photos
of what that street looks like I think it's over here it should be just the
the next page on what you got up there
Are we there?
I'm still seeing the RSA3 map.
Oh, okay.
Let me, you're not seeing.
You're not seeing what I'm seeing. Let me try again.
Is that it?
That's it. That and the next page are the 200 block of DuPont.
And these are the types of houses, and this is the streetscape,
And this is what we're trying to preserve, which is side yards, front porches, front setbacks.
It's a look and feel of the street.
It's a streetscape, and it's RSA 3.
And Bill left out of his comparison this mansion across the street, directly across the street from 270 DuPont.
So, I mean, that's basically it in a nutshell.
There's no hardship, no hardship, no hardship, and no hardship.
And it's RSA 3, and he's trying to make it RSA 5,
and all of his compromises ignored the community concerns
about the DuPont streetscape and maintaining RSA 3.
So all of the other bells and whistles he hung on the other design
are not relevant to the community's concerns.
Um, that, uh, I think is, is what I have to say.
That, I think, is what I have to say.
Chair, we have Tyra.
Can I briefly respond?
Yes, Mr. O 'Brien.
Just, I will concede that the houses, uh, on the 200 block of DuPont Street were all built before there was a zoning code.
Um, I don't know what relevance that has.
the civic group civic this civic association supported development of attached homes
across the street and caddy corner built to rsa5 standards um the rest of the block flooding street
block is all rsa5 um i'm being repetitive okay understood i'm trying to figure out what if
anything in the rs rsa 5 classification would be acceptable to the community i'm i'm i'm not
i'm at a loss on that one but the next witness please tyra you can meet yourself uh it's
actually elliot duhan using tira's device elliot e -l -i -o -t yes last name i don't see that person
I have Tyra next.
Ms. Sunken, it sounds like a neighbor is using.
No, a husband is using the vice device.
I didn't realize I was logged in as Tira.
We got it straight.
Give us your name again.
Please spell it for the stenographer.
Elliot Duhan, E -L -I -O -T -D -U -H -A -N.
Address is 256 Crams Avenue.
and do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do and where is your home and relationship to this uh property uh it's a block down from dupont
thank you please proceed i wanted to speak to the character of the houses which is utterly out of
sync with everything on that block of dupont uh mr o 'brien's mr o 'brien's cherry picking of other
examples are completely out of uh completely out of order the examples he picked are geographically
close but completely out of sight because of the tabography of manioc the neighborhood is
the neighborhood is asked for certain concessions while mr s uh 100 mr smith point out he appears
to have made concessions but none of them were substantive and it's a negotiating tactic to say
we've made a lot of offers the neighborhood was unwilling we were happy to have those concessions
but they don't address any of the substantive points of that block of DuPont and the character
of the neighborhood. The neighborhood has been fully opposed to this development as is since
inception. I also quibble with Mr. O 'Brien's characterization of the neighborhood council as
supporting the row houses across the street. My recollection is we were opposed continually and
finally reached a compromise when it was clear they were going to be built. So that doesn't
carry any points with the neighborhood. When were those houses built? Does anyone know?
Early 2012. 2012 and the letters and the support letters from the Manioc neighborhood council
are included in exhibits six and seven. When was that again? What year? 2012 was when they were
completed. All right it wasn't me. That was the uh those those were the ones uh where the library
used to be the others were earlier okay i just was curious the neighborhood was opposed to them all
all right just curious when that took place okay thank you
i also have elizabeth fisher
miss fisher please identify yourself spell your name for the record
give us your address and hopefully you will give us something new and different
Okay, my name is Elizabeth Fisher, E -L -I -Z -A -B -E -T -H, last name F -I -S -C -H -E -R.
I live at 4538 Maniunk Avenue, 19128.
Where's that in relationship to DuPont, 270 DuPont?
I'm at the corner of Maniunk and DuPont, so one block up.
Okay, thank you.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
I am on the board of the Central Roxborough Civic Association, and I'm the district rep for the area with 270 DuPont.
And I'm also a member of the Mania Neighborhood Council.
And as far as Mr. O 'Brien's continuing to show other properties that the civic, you know, and I'm not sure if he's talking about MNC or CRCA approved.
uh it's my understanding as an attorney that every every decision here in front of the zoning
board is supposed to be based on that property and not being considered and that the decisions
And that the decisions that civics or the planning commission have made in other cases are not supposed to take precedence over the individual facts of the specific case.
that civics or the planning commission have made in other cases are not
And in this case, I feel like I attended numerous meetings about this property, and it seems that it's continuously been a bait -and -switch type of situation.
and at the zoning board hearing in or at the zba hearing in november uh chairman de chico you
specifically said well what about three houses come back give me a plan for for three um and
that does not seem to be what happened and i'm confused as a member of the civic and on the
board and i like to think fairly involved in these things that i don't feel like we are getting the
right the true story from the developer and i don't feel that this is something the community
wants and i feel like it's being shoved down our throat thank you but again i i must be missing
something your compromise plan is three houses correct mr o 'brien yes yes it is okay all right
it still would require variances i i understand that but as the last witness said that i said i
asked you guys to go back and would you consider three and they she said yes they would but she
doesn't understand there's something else going on here but i only see three in your latest version
i can only suggest mr chairman that um somebody believes that dupont street is more special than
fleming street and that it is somehow a slight to dupont street to have these houses on fleming
Street. If you look at the zoning plans, the two streets, the cart widths and the sidewalks are
identical. There is, because of the configuration of the lot, there's no way to put three houses on
it and provide one curb cut and turning radii for garages without configuring them facing
fleming street the civic insisted that any three lot three house plan would have to be
two houses on dupont one house on fleming and that's just not possible but we don't know what
why it's not possible mr chairman uh uh it just i don't know i'm just going to ask that question
what is the what are the dimensions of of the property property line on dupont
i believe it's 50 feet the entire entire footprint yeah i have to bear with me i've
got to bring up a plan i don't remember the exact number but it's it's a it's a double wide
right that's what i want it's a large lot if it's 50 foot you if you could you can do 225 foot
with right in november i i in november i had the numbers um and it was proposed that a a lot line
relocation uh down the middle would provide room for the developer to put two uh on dupont facing
on dupont no driveway no curb cut maintain what the neighborhood um uh feels as the character of
the block uh as you drive down um dupont um and the name and all we all we hear is that the
agreement is sale and the price is secret and you can't do it that way but i think all right i i
hear financial hardship which is not a hardship my question was physically you could put two houses
there of course of with 25 foot or so width okay let's get them then the problem comes back yes
that is physically possible but because this property is now encumbered by a non -conforming
multi -family use it has a value based on its income that doesn't support that development
but that's not relevant for a variance yeah i understand understood understood code the code
does allow financial considerations variances and that's all we're asking for is financial variances
i just wanted to use okay all right gentlemen gentlemen let's get the next witness please
thank you council chair we have four more what uh six more witnesses is your call
how many more it just went to six i mean i keep repeating this at every hearing unless somebody
has something new and different we're not trying to ignore you we're not being disrespectful
we appreciate the time that you spent on this call but to be redundant is not helping this
process so if you have something new and different we understand the the aesthetic integrity of
dupont street we get that we get the driveway issue on dupont so if you have something new and
different then keep your hand up if not we would respectfully request that you put any
We would respectfully request that you put any of your comments in writing and submit them to Ms. Tunkett.
of your comments in writing and
Okay, we do have Celeste Hardister.
Celeste, you can unmute yourself.
Wait to be sworn in.
Ma 'am, are you on?
Ms. Hardister, you will have to unmute your mic.
No success, Chair.
Okay, next witness, please.
Mary Cochran you can unmute your mic and wait to be sworn in yes ma 'am good afternoon
good afternoon uh thank you uh for waiting uh please identify yourself spell your name for
the record and give us your address m -a -r -y -c -o -c -h -r -a -n on that two six two dupont street
the house they had semi -detached house next to the proposed uh site for construction do you
swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do please
proceed uh one thing that there's a couple of things mr obayem brought up a picture of a house
that he said he used as an example but it had a front porch all the houses on dupont street and
that most of the houses on fleming street all have front porches and he did not include that
in the design so it doesn't look anything like anything on either of the two streets
also there's a major problem with parking if he puts this driveway in in the back
and it exits out onto dupont street we are going to lose parking spaces my house
was actually built before there were cars none of the houses on dupont street have
parking places we have no driveways no garages where will we park it's already crazy with the
parking and we've all got parking permits and there's still not enough space to park
when he builds these houses it's going to bring more people in a very tiny neighborhood and it's
going to be impossible if they have people visiting them where will they park someone needs
to truly consider the parking in this area and what happens to those that come home in the evening
that work at night there is no way to park at all thank you for that consideration and thank you for
considering the porches as well i'm going
i'm sorry chair mr o 'brien just very briefly uh i would direct the board's
attention to photograph 1d in the original package it shows the
fleming street houses um north of this site they do not
have porches uh and one of the concessions was made
uh the original plan should depicted an 18 foot wide driveway
curb cut that was reduced to 12 feet so the community would only lose one off
street parking space. Thank you.
Celeste Hardister. Thank you. Yes, this is Celeste Hardister, C -E -L -E -S -T -E -H -A -R -D -E -S -T -E -R at 368 Green Lane 19128.
I'm the president of the CRCA. I was present at the - Thank you and I need to
swear you went you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do thank you please proceed i was present at the meeting in december where jordan abrams
presented to the zoning committee of mnc uh the the alternative of the four houses with the corner
lot x'd out and he was the only person at that meeting it became clear that he did not have the
authority from his partner nor the counsel of his his attorney to actually discuss alternatives so
as we worked through various considerations to try to get to where we could come to a compromise
it was clear that he was not he did not have the authority to compromise and so nothing resulted
from that meeting i i would add that i'm concerned that regardless of the design of what has been
provided by this developer of the potential design that there would be with a zoning permit
there would be with a zoning permit no obligation to build houses that are anything like what has
no obligation to build houses that are anything
been presented in the plan should they sell this property with the zoning thank you
may i briefly respond attention to my letter dated december 12th which uh confirmed the
proposed compromise plan again it still required rsa 5 but it was three houses still providing
off -street parking and the zoning decision does not include any provisos but my client would be
willing to accept the proviso to build the four homes depicted in the reviso plans as shown on
that rendering. Thank you. Chair, if I could mention we're almost at the six o 'clock mark
and we have 330 cases and I still have five hands up. I'd let someone, I think what we're
going to have to do is ask those individuals, unless Mr. Wise, somebody has some new and
different information that you're aware of, I'm going to ask that the other folks submit written
testimony and and submit them to the board and we will take this matter up at our next executive
session we'll give everybody everybody time to have written uh responses and mr o 'brien maybe
you can come up with something as it relates to the issue that of the compromise plan that could
be shared with the uh this rco and with the zoning board because it seems to be there's some people
We have a question, I guess, of trust or don't understand exactly what the compromise represents.
I'll put it to Mr. Kevin Smith.
I know he said he had experience as far as the compromises and that he had experience with if he needs to speak or he can.
We'll hear from Mr. Smith and then we'll move on.
And as I said, submit written responses to anyone who's listening in to the board.
And obviously copy Mr. O 'Brien.
And Mr. O 'Brien, you'll submit any compromise material to the board as well.
Very well.
Okay, Mr. Smith.
Do you want to speak, Kevin?
It's kind of awkward.
Kevin, you can unmute yourself.
I got an unmute pop -up list.
Okay, Mr. Smith, please identify yourself.
Name and address.
Kevin Smith, president of Manioc Neighborhood Council, 471 Rivka Street, 19128.
We swore you went out, didn't I?
Yeah, you did.
Okay, you're still under oath.
so um as we've said uh sort of repeatedly and you actually and you acknowledged is the core concern
is preserving the dupont streetscape and an rsa3 conforming development facing dupont so if mr
o 'brien is prepared to offer that um we are prepared to hear it but he has so far refused
to offer any solution that approaches that so i we would urge the board to just go ahead and
deny this case and if he really has another plan he can he can bring it back but right now i have
no faith in his desire or ability to to to do a plan that conforming to the community's concerns
of an rsa3 streetscape on dupont but if mr o 'brien is willing to say he's prepared to
propose such a plan we would certainly listen perhaps i didn't make myself clear the applicant
has tried to find a way to put three houses two facing dupont one facing fleming with curb cut
turning radii and parking for all three houses it cannot be done so if that's
clear now we can move forward the remaining issue that the board offered
was to address density if that is important to the community we can go
back and look at the three house configuration with the curb cut coming
from dupont street and and see if that can be tidied up but achieve
developing it according to the configuration from preferred by the civic is not possible
is not possible mr chair this is an application for a variance by a developer with an agreement
mr chair this is
of sale he wants to build the houses the way he wants to build them which is 50 feet deep
we're hearing he can't have a turning radius with a curb cut off of fleming but the compromise would
be maybe reduce the size of the house so that that turning radius can be increased just without
testimony about so I don't want to thank you for all your time I don't think this is the forum to
entertain these these things you've been very indulgent but it's it's what the neighbors have
been saying where we can't do it take this so in closing on on my end I do thank you for your
indulgence and all the time and to all the other applicants present but the this is a variance
application where these are neighbors who are long -standing neighbors invested in this
neighborhood protecting the character of what they feel is important to this neighborhood
where the developer is someone who who is under contract to buy this property with no prejudice
if if this important issue is is rejected by the board but I do not believe there is support or
evidence for a variance where there's no hardship mentioned why a project as by right can't be
constructed on that lot and when we talk about financial hardship these are not this is a use
variance looking to use a single family property for more than a single family use um so uh he's
creating where you're creating the hardship by claiming you want to subdivide it into four lots
uh and make it a dimensional variance that's that's not a true hardship that would entertain
any financial being said there's no financial evidence that's been presented uh what is what
is the hardship financially other than mr o 'brien telling us that it can't be done um so again i do
thank all the neighbors appearing multiple times on this important issue and i thank the board and
mr chair as well as all the applicants here today uh thank you thank you mr chairman just for the
record i'd ask that jordan abrams raise his hand um chair um chair yes um legal counsel would like
to confer with you briefly uh we just spoke thank you okay good mr abrams would you raise your hand
please so you may be recognized hey bill mr abrams please identify yourself with a record name and
address my name is jordan abrams i live at 139 civil street i am the applicant
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, all truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. O 'Brien?
Mr. Abrams, were you listening in to this entire proceeding?
I have been.
Did you clearly hear all the representations that I made?
I did.
Are they true and correct?
Do you adopt them as your own?
Thank you.
I have nothing further.
it no testimony on the financial thank you um the record already contains that record
i'm sorry what was that the record mr wise asked me to provide additional financial information
and the record already contains that uh testimony thank you as for calendar number three seven six
Let me start again. Calendar number 37679, 270 DuPont Street. The record is closed. The board will render a decision at its next executive meeting, which is September 16th, 9 .30 a .m.
Oh, Planning Commissioner.
Chairman, can I ask a quick question of the applicant to clarify because this has been going on a lot and I don't have the materials in front of me?
So the applicant is proposing three homes, but you're still proposing four lots.
No, the Zoning Board, the matter that was submitted to the Zoning Board on November
12th was the revised plans with four houses on four lots configured as a pair of duplexes.
The Board granted the variance under those revised plans.
This is a reconsideration based on new discovered things.
The interim was a period that both parties took advantage of to see if a compromise could be reached on a three -house configuration.
The offer was not accepted, so there is no three -house configuration.
It doesn't exist.
okay so we are four houses on four lots it is the revised plan
okay so we are four houses on four locks it is the revised plans uh which were either supported
based upon upon the plan review with marty and and matt or were not objected no objection to them
uh if that was what ron said at the hearing so there's four houses on four lots yes configured
as duplexes our recommendation i don't have the recommendation from the previous hearing that
asked for the four houses so we're going to have no objection thank you i have one question excuse
this is sharon seleta mr o 'brien if the board should vote to approve this they would be doing
it with the same revised plans that were approved in the initial vote is that correct that's correct
thank you thank you everyone that concludes the two o 'clock session thank you members thank you
the stenographer you okay
do you need a break stenographer three minutes please five minutes okay okay
now you said it not me make sure it's on the record five
good evening everyone i guess i have to read this entire statement is that correct uh sharon
all right uh good evening everyone my name is frank d chico sorry the answer was yes i know i
know i knew it was i just was hoping that uh we didn't have to do it all right uh good evening
everyone my name is Frank DiCicco I'm the chair of the zoning board of adjustment I'll be
participating in today's hearing along with our board secretary Mr. Confessor Plaza and board
members Thomas Holloman and Mr. James Snell. Board Administrator Tanya Sunkett and board
attorney Sharon Saletta are also in attendance. For those of you who haven't participated in one
of our virtual hearings I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect. First
we'll begin this evening's session by reading a list of cases to be continued.
If you believe that any case announced is being continued in error, we will give you
an opportunity to respond. After reading the continuance list and receiving any feedback,
we will take any additional continuance request and or withdrawal request. Then once we've
confirm which hearings are being continued, Mr. Plaza or Mr. Snell will begin calling the
remaining cases listed for this session. When a case is called, we ask that attorneys representing
applicants or other interested parties in the matter identify themselves for the record.
We will then hear the appellant's presentation, followed by any presentation by attorneys
representing other parties interested parties and members of the
public not represented by council will then be
given an opportunity to testify we will finally read the recommendation
of the planning commission at the hearing's conclusion we will
either vote the matter immediately or hold it for discussion in executive
session any case held for discussion will be
voted at the next scheduled wednesday morning session
Please note the following changes related to the virtual format.
First, we will be administering oaths to individuals prior to their testimony.
Second, for the benefit of anyone participating by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses
identify themselves prior to speaking or testifying. Third, we'd like to advise everyone
that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating, you acknowledge your
agreement to be recorded. Fourth, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify,
you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself. I'll repeat,
for anyone wishing to participate by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by
hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself. Finally, to enter an appearance statement,
call google 267 -270 -5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue
i'll repeat to enter an appearance statement call google 267 -270 -5548 and leave your email address
and the address of the property at issue with that said we will begin but before we call the
first case we'd like to announce the following cases are being continued
we'd like to announce the following cases are being continued
calendar number 39353 -1431 north 25th street
calendar number 39459 -11528 west erie avenue
calendar number 38983 -2401 master street and calendar number 39477
530 West Mount Pleasant Avenue. If anyone believes that any of those cases are being called
for continuance and error, please raise your hand. And if you have any reason to request
a continuance or withdrawal, raise your hand at this time also.
No hands, Chair. Thank you very much. Calendar number. I'm sorry, a hand just popped up.
Hold on. I made one. I have one more to add on. I apologize. Calendar number 40077 -1029 East Columbia Avenue is being withdrawn.
Carolyn, you can unmute yourself and speak to a continuance.
I'm sorry. Could you clarify what you mean by continuance on 530 West Mount Pleasant Avenue?
what does that mean exactly being continued to a date a date in the future okay no hearing on
that today we're not hearing any testimony on that case today okay thank you thank you
chairman to chico if i could remind you there are two delay list cases that you were going to read
into the record um everyone everyone except confessor will be voting on those hold on i
got to pull them back up all right let's see would you like me to read the calendar number yes if
you don't mind by the time I get them back up yeah sure it's calendar numbers 38589 and 38590
1038 and 1040 Dorrance Street those cases are my vote is yes
my vote is yes
my vote is yes thank you thank you
any more
was there another delay is that the only one no there's nothing else okay thank you thank
you good afternoon mr klein i'm going to call your case up mi -2020 -000946
2000 cyber street s -e -y -b -e -r -t street
thank you mr chair uh good evening members of the board jared like black rome 130 north 18th street
philadelphia 19103 garrett do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy yes i do if you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth yes i do please proceed uh mr chair this is actually a companion case uh to the 2016 master
uh case that you have on your list if you okay let me for the board's efficiency if you want
to call that one we can yeah i'll call that as well calendar number three nine eight eight eight
two oh one six master street thank you okay uh good evening mr chair members of the board um
can everybody see the screen that i've shared i hope yes great yes um great uh i know the board
has had a long and somewhat technologically challenged afternoon so i'll endeavor to be
as brief as I can. I'm here on on behalf of the developer Penrose of the Shoreswood project. This
is part of an overall redevelopment plan for the Shoreswood neighborhood. It's accompanied by
30 million dollars in tax credits and grants and the idea is to create a affordable housing element
in an area of the city that sorely needs it and as as the board knows already is
rapidly transitioning this is the project here there are two sites as you
mentioned that we're talking about the applications both proposed the
consolidation of multiple lots into new lots that will be at 2016 master and
2000 cyber street um the lots are located here uh on the aerial picture that you can see
The lots are located here, on the aerial picture that you can see.
And the proposal for 2000 Seibert Street is to create one lot from 14 and to erect a new
set of attached townhome style structures on those lots that would be used for a total
of five residential dwelling units.
For 2016 master, the parcels here, again, we're consolidating these into one lot from 22 existing lots.
We're going to demolish the existing structure that's there and erect a new attached structure for use as 51 units.
The 2000 Seibert lot will be able to accommodate eight off -street parking spaces.
The 2016 master portion will have 12 off street parking spaces and 18 bicycle spaces.
This is some contextual photographs of the immediate surrounding area.
As you can see, many of these lots are vacant or have some dilapidated existing housing
on them.
And so we're really excited to bring these new projects to the neighborhood that we
think will not only add an affordable housing element, but revitalize some blocks that have
been vacant for quite some time. The affordability component, these are going to be marketed to
people who are at 50 % or less of AMI, and those numbers will vary based on the unit size.
Here are some proposed renderings. This is the facade that is going to be facing Master Street.
this is the facade facing cyber street and this is the style of the townhomes that we are proposing
to erect I'm going to put up some sample floor plans and a building layout the units are going
to be in a variety of sizes throughout the master street building the townhomes will all be
constructed in a similar style and there are additional exhibits that I sent to the board
administrator with the you know administrative items that we typically have photos of posting
tax clearances deeds etc i didn't think it was the best use of the board's time to walk through
those administrative items here this is just a perspective view of what the project will look
like and i did want to call the board's attention we had a meeting with the brewery town shardswood
civic association they've submitted a letter of full support for both applications that were
speaking about. This is a project that has had a lot of community conversation over the last year.
There's a lot of stakeholders involved because PHA, who has been transferring and assisting with
the acquisition of the lots, and we've had a lot of very enthusiastic support and people are
excited about this affordable housing element coming to this neighborhood. With that I would
like to ask Lindsay Samsi to virtually raise her hand so she can adopt my testimony and I'll open
the floor to any comments or questions from the board. Thank you Jared. Can everyone hear me? Yes
please identify yourself spell your name. Good evening chairman my name is Lindsay Samsi. I'm
with Penrose, first name L -I -N -D -S -E -Y, last name Samsey, S -A -M -S -I, 1301 North 31st Street,
Philadelphia PA 19121. Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
about the truth? I do. Thank you. Please proceed, Mr. Clark. Lindsay, did you have an opportunity to
listen to the statements I made in explaining these two projects? I did. And do you adopt my
testimony as true correct in your own i do and um jared i just wanted to thank you for for
presenting on the project i just wanted to point out as a chairman i'm sure you know on the board
this is part of a choice neighborhood in sharswood blumberg um we did receive the 30 million dollar
grant through the housing authority and this project is the first phase of four phases um that
penrose will develop um for affordable housing so the project is 100 affordable and i just wanted
to correct one thing it's for persons at 60 ami or below per the tax credit code thank you thank
you uh questions from the board no no anyone else wish to testify in this case if so please raise
your hand no hands chair thank you Planning Commission hey Ron we didn't
hey ron yes we didn't swear you in did we uh you have not all right so give us your name and
swear you in did we you have
you know you know the drill name is ronald bednar that's b -e -d -n -a -r we're in a firm to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do and you're representing the planning commission
correct please proceed so these properties both uh 2000 siebert and sabert and 2016 master are um
split zoned in our comprehensive plan the applicant that in this particular case has
given a thorough examination of the redevelopment initiative going forward
we support the granting and the variances thank you calendar number let me start again
mi -2020 -000946 2000 cyber street and calendar number 39888 2016 master street my vote is yes
to both mr chair i'm sorry i'm sorry to interrupt your your positive vote i wanted to point out that
2016 master does have revised plans uh those are submitted to miss saletta um the changes were
reductions in some of the dimensional how many pages i believe there were three pages mr chair
okay so let me review the plans and the changes are fine they can be made by revised plans
okay so let me let me redo those sorry about that mr chairman no problem uh mi -2020 -000
946 -2000 cyber my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes calendar number 39888
2016 master street my vote is yes with the proviso revised plan three pages approved today
yes with proviso yes with proviso okay and there's one more case i believe
jared uh you have the next one as well i don't believe i do those were the only two
uh my other two matters were continued mr chair okay no chair that's all oh sharon gave me
something earlier bain street oh i'm sorry
that correct sharon
that is correct yes thank you m i dash two zero two zero
dash zero zero zero one zero six one one six one four
baines b a n e s i believe it's spelled correct me if i'm wrong
anyone here on this case one one six one four baines
um sharon i don't have that information do we know who that
it was a i know that he's a um it's the property owner who was going to represent himself
daniel kebner yes that's correct that's correct
he did send in the documents
um no in deference to him i don't want to dismiss it
um tanya what i mean we can continue it uh it appears that they're here hello
whoa whoa whoa you got uh mr keppner you have uh two devices
one should have mute and you can use the other one
and when you've done that you can unmute yourself and prepare to be swarming
mr keppner
hello hi mr keppner um please identify yourself by spelling your name first and last name and
Give us your address.
I'm Daniel Kepner, D -A -N -I -E -L -K -E -P -N -E -R.
We're still getting feedback, Mr. Kepner.
You're still getting feedback, Mr. Kepler.
My wife took the phone away.
My wife took the phone away and turned it off.
All right.
Your address?
11614 Bain Street, Philadelphia, 19116.
Thank you.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
Tell us what you're asking this board.
um we had a um we wanted to build a uh sunroom on our back porch we bought the home recently and uh
we had a couple people come out contractors and uh we settled on someone and um
we had a really big issue with him he he lied to us he said he had permits which he just had
a permit to correct something on our front porch instead of the permit he should have had so we
fired him and uh lost $16 ,000 in that deal but anyway we rehired someone else resubmitted new
plans and what happened after that was there was something called a one -year rule which it lost
it wasn't able to go through because of that
and also there was a variance
where too much of my
ground would be covered by the
percentage and
what we did we had to go to a
a town
hall meeting
the Somerton Civic
Association and
send letters out to 200
of our closest neighbors and
get replies
and they all you know it was a unanimous vote
they said we could build the the uh sunroom and um mr kepler if i could interrupt you for a minute
this is sharon saletta we did receive letters both from councilman o 'neill and from the rco
supporting the project okay great uh the other thing about the coverage of so much of our ground
that there was an existing concrete patio there is an existing concrete patio on the back of our home
which this screen porch will fit on so we're not covering any extra we're just which that's why
i didn't understand why that would come into play because we're literally putting on top of
something that's already covering the ground but uh anyway that that's pretty much where we uh
where we stand i think we got it okay thank you uh any questions from the board no no anyone else
out there wishes to testify in this matter if so please raise your hand
no hands chair thank you planning commission
senate property is indicated for residential use on the city plan given
the existing character of the neighborhood and
proposal we have no objection or granting
adherence thank you mi -2020 -000106 11614 bain street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is
yes okay mr keppner yes sir all right hopefully the nightmare is over
all right the any unfinished business sharon tanya nothing for me
no cheer nothing for me okay everyone thank you for your time today be safe over this holiday
weekend see you in two weeks thank you great job everybody all thank you again the staff and our
court reporter i think thank you mr chairman yes good night everyone bill thanks for everything
tanya thank you no problem tonight okay tanya should i chat you my email for the um video
this morning that kept going out yes please do okay you got me right tanya that sunk it at
phillip .gov got you all righty take care and thank you so much for your understanding
oh no problem we all have to work with each other right i know right
enjoy your holiday bye you too