standpoint is exactly what we're offering there. But more importantly, what you'll see is that,
and I attached the drawings, the architect who happens to be our architect for this project was
also the architect for this other project. And he's in a virtual audience, and he can answer
any questions but it's mixing apples and oranges this is a much larger lot 309 311 and 313 delmar
compared to 298 delmar and if we were trying to you know squeeze a project up like this which is
on a much wider lot it wouldn't make practical sense and from a from another point of view is
I actually looked it up on the internet actually today to see where 309, 311, and 313 Delmar Street
was in terms of selling. And according to realtor.com, 309 and 313 Delmar Street
have been listed for sale since November 5th of 2021. And there's no indication of public record
that those properties have been sold. So those properties have been on the market, those extra
large wide lots which are probably out of sorts and out of character for this neighborhood have
been on the market for over nine months which again the market has slowed down but to have
properties to be on the market for over nine months seems like this neighborhood doesn't want
you know properties that big with a single uh shared drive aisle and and during our community
meeting actually one of the community members actually stated as such indicating that they were
that they were in favor of actually having the original design we wanted because what they
stated was that Roxborough is a family-oriented community and that one of the reasons why people
move to Roxborough is because of their lush backyards and by having this single drive aisle
to go to the rear of the property
to go to the rear of the property and then to have basically a paved driveway in the rear would take
and then to have basically a paved driveway.
away from that family atmosphere because you would have concrete jungles in the back and they prefer
to actually have grass in the back and grass in the front and that's why we originally agreed you
know originally designed this project to have a little bit of grass in the front and to actually
have it so that the backyards would be fully grass but while this community wanted to have it another
way. And it hasn't sold so far, two of the three units. And then another example is 283 Delmar
Streets. So we looked up 283 Delmar Street, right? So this is what they want us to build.
They want us to build, if we only could build something as of rights, it would be three single
family homes with no parking at all associated with this property. They would have to park on
the street. 283 Delmar Street, which is across the street from us, was foreclosed upon in March of
2022. Again, my understanding is this neighborhood has significant parking issues.
And to not have parking associated with a house causes an issue with the sellability of homes.
So we don't want a home too big, which makes no sense because no one wants to buy a home that big because no one wants to pay those prices in this neighborhood.
We don't want a home in this neighborhood with no off-street parking because it seems like homes in this neighborhood, which don't have that parking, people are not as interested into moving into this neighborhood.
and typically people don't allow properties to go in foreclosure especially if it's easy to sell
like this property went into foreclosure and according to the public records this property
went to foreclosure for five hundred thousand dollars if they could sell it excuse me i i'm
sorry for interrupting you but do you have an updated rco letter i i don't i don't okay yeah
Yeah. No, I do not. And then this goes into my presentation as well. Now they say it's basically they have a policy of not supporting these front loading garages.
And I know I have appeared in front of this group before, but it's not a blanket policy. Like in two instances, at least this board has approved it. But I know one instance, 4736 Sheldon Street, under calendar number 33799, this board approved a variance for a front-loading garage setback on Sheldon Street June 20th.
2018. This RCO actually supported that project. I'm the one that presented it. It was with V2
properties. And the reason why they supported it is because they believed it was contextual
in nature, right? So they obviously don't support where it doesn't make sense, right? If you walk
by the property built or used as proposed, does it stick out like a sore thumb or is it something
that fits within the fabric in the neighborhood? We're not asking to put front-loading garages
on a block where those don't exist, right?
We're asking to put front-loading garages on a block
where they do exist, a lot of them.
So, and we'll go-
Alan, why don't you show us the rest of the block, Alan?
Okay, yeah.
So this is our zoning map.
So I just wanted to point out here,
if you see it, this side of the street,
this is our property, this side of the street,
and you can see a little better.
they're all 16.67 16.91 17 feet wide right what they're asking us is do 23 feet wide it's actually
24 and a half feet wide two single family structures 24 and a half feet wide where we're
allowed three single family structures so we're asking for what kind of makes sense on this block
I just want to point that out but photographs so this is the front of our property right single
family a lot we're also behind between two two-story structures so we're you know to meet
the physical and dimensional limitations of the zoning code we have to be set back right which
adds another layer of complexity that's why it's so important for us to have those front loading
garages here but and here's Delmar Street to the right of the property Delmar Street to the left
of the property you can see there's a real parking issue here I mean it's very very tight here and
you know parking is at a premium but here 288 and 290 delmar street same essentially the same
width as our property now we were proposing to set it back not that back but we were saying set
but we were saying set it back kind of give some greenery things like that but the width of the
it back kind of give some greenery things like that but the width
properties are no more than 17 feet wide 288 and 290 delmar street and then here's the rest of the
2000 block of delmar street see what we're offering is not out of character to this this neighborhood
so again we're not trying to you know to do something that doesn't make sense and that's not
And then, you know, NHA development, they're well known developers. They've developed dozens of, you know, they've developed dozens of single family homes in the Philadelphia region, well known for their quality. I always like to just show the board and the community, like the quality of work product.
But here's their kitchen. I mean, there's a bathroom. Here's a bedroom, you know, nice light and air. Example of a kitchen, another bathroom, you know, just their staircases, another bathroom. So they believe in high quality products.
and then again this is the rendering that you saw before as you can see we're set back on the third
floor to be in conformance with you know with our requirements under the code which adds a level
of complexity originally we just wanted to add a little bit of you know trees and greenery but we
get it they don't want that in terms of setting it back they wanted more you know additional like
just to walk down the block and see a row of building structures, and we accommodated that.
And by doing that, and by changing the size of our curb cuts, we went from five refusals down
to two refusals. And then these are our original plans. Again, we were set back.
Oops, let me just. No, oops, sorry.
these are original plans we were set back the original site plan this was the amended site plan
and again we got authorization from the zba to file this appeal not saying that they're granting
it but authorization to refile a new zoning permit application so again as a as in an abundance of
caution if this board is inclined to grant it i would ask by way of proviso and specifically
reference the zoning permit number for the amended refusal and then this is just our survey you know
showing how we're breaking up a lot. And then simply stated, this is just our floor plans.
You know, each of the units will have a front-loading garage, and they'll have their
living room and kitchen on the first floor. There is a lower level for an additional living room
and bathroom down there. And then the second floor is two bedrooms, one in the front of Delmar,
one in the rear, and then two baths. And then the third story is a master suite.
And then we met with the community on April 12th at 7 p.m. As you can see, this was the original
refusal. There were five of them. And then 107 neighbors were notified of the community meeting.
here to list the addresses
proof of mailing of those addresses our application for appeal
and our detail property showing the NHA development LLC purchased a property
along with our certificate of tax clearance.
One other thing I did not note
is that this board has granted
a similar variance request
and the property address is 341 Delmar Street
under MI-2020-000750
on September 10th of 2020.
So again, this board has granted a similar request
for this type of front-loading garage and off-street parking.
With that being said, I would ask that Mr. Siobhan virtually raise his hand,
be sworn in, he can adopt my testimony, and then me, him, and Mr. Dry,
who's also in the virtual audience, can answer any questions you may have.
Mr. Siobhan is free to speak.
Yes, good morning, Your Honor.
Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
My name is Tony Shaban, S-H-A-B-A-N.
I am a member of NHA Development LLC.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Mr. Siobhan, you heard everything I stated today.
Mr. Shaban, you heard everything I stated today.
Is it true and correct?
Is it true and correct?
Correct.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
I'm sorry?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
All right.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
i would ask that mr dry also virtually raise his hand just to indicate the you know again
the reasons why we're um submitting this uh proposal as opposed to an as of right scenario
was that the architect yes mr um okay mr dryer is uh free to speak excuse me
Hi, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
Sure. Logan Dry, L-O-G-A-N-D-R-Y, KCA Design Associates.
All right. Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Yes, from a feasibility and functionality standpoint, Mr. Dry, why are we proposing to have this type of project rather than an as-of-right project?
um i mean it sort of goes to what you mentioned before and again i don't want to get you know
too far into it because you did a pretty good job explaining you know comparisons to the other del
mar properties um you know when we were looking at 309 11 and 13 compared to this property you
know those homes are sort of contextually on a little bit of an island of their own in terms of
the lot widths you know they have three streets around them um when we looked at 298 you know we
looked at the lot areas and obviously subdivided based upon a by right subdivision and that worked
out to be you know three lots that are roughly the same size as lots directly adjacent you know
it's the thinking that at one point or another there probably were three lots there so you know
the approach we took there obviously we couldn't take the same approach as the wider homes because
if we did a drive mile underneath you know the width of the ground floor and basement of two of
those homes would be extremely narrow if not unusable and again it's always just easier to
have the vehicles front load into a garage from a from a safety and usability standpoint than it is
to you know drive underneath the building and then really have to pave most if not all of the rear
yard just to get the turning radiuses and things like that to work so you know we sort of started
with context in terms of the lot size and then you know went in with some setbacks in terms of
the front setback and everything else. And, you know, based on our feedback, you know,
pulled, pulled the buildings forward, make them a little bit more contextual so that they line
up with what's there. But we still really felt that the parking made sense there based on,
you know, other homes that have it as well as just, you know, the, the adjacent properties.
Thank you. Questions from the virtual audience or comments?
And it's about, let's see, it's five bars there in front of the houses.
And then where your empty lot is right now, there was only one house with the yard, and that was it.
The guy who owned it just before it was sold, he cut his own driveway in there in the yard.
But there was only one house on that property.
So it was never three properties.
And now they're proposed eight houses right across the street from there.
So, the area is saturated with houses.
It's, you know, you're basically trying to fit 10 pounds of potatoes in a two-pound bag.
Mr. Janicek, may I ask a question of Mr. Janicek?
I think, did I hear correctly that there was a curve cut on this property at one point?
i don't know whether it was in with the city that the gentleman who lived there
he put his own driveway in okay again that's one of the issues mr chair with the you know
with the streets department there's not a clear record of like which are legal curb cuts and
which are illegal curb cuts right but there is it sounds like there is a history of having curb
cuts on this property i'm not stating it was legal early there's no curb cut there's there's
no sidewalk there's no curb there's just dirt yeah but i think what he's saying is you said
the guy had a curb cut there before where he parked his car that's all he's saying yeah and
yeah and mr chair his other testimony has to go with density and we're allowed to have three
single family homes the only variance we're asking for is a curb cut right okay for all
intents purposes mr mr janicek thank you so much for calling in we appreciate okay is there anyone
else in the virtual audience yes chair we have paul tone excuse me paul toner
thank you very much hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please
paul toner t-o-n-e-r with orphanese and toner we're counsel for the ridge park civic association
do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
I do. And I also have the president of Ridge Park, Marlene Schliefer, available today to address and update the letter that was submitted to the board.
But before we call her to testify, I just wanted to just to go over some of the statements made by Mr.
Nocklinson and Mr. Dry. First of all, significant focus was made on whether 23 feet was in context
of the community, or as Mr. Nocklinson said, out of character with the neighborhood.
In terms of neighborhood testimony, the applicant has an operating neighborhood testimony as to what
is or was what is not in context with the neighborhood. In fact, the neighborhood through
the Ridge Park Civic Association very clearly is opposed to this project and has not raised any
issues with the width of the lots being in any way out of context. Also, the new RCO has also
similarly opposed this project and the issue of the 23 feet has not come up whatsoever. The only