So when we talked to realtors and my client did, they basically said the commercial space in the
back, you're not going to be able to rent it. So then he decided, okay, then let me put two more
residential units in, in the back half of the commercial and keep the front half. We'll keep
the first floor and the basement right okay all right so that basically would
other questions from the so so that would be 10 units plus commercial correct yes miss graham
other questions from the board uh is there uh uh can you show the configuration of the
bi-level units with the basement living i mean yeah yes
So we'd come down the alley, go into the hallway, and there's unit B, and then you'd go down the alley and in the back, and there's unit A.
And A would have, just like B, cellar and first floor.
Any other questions?
So when you say down the alley, that's the property line, right?
Yes, Mr. Johns, right here.
So you come down, okay.
You come down here, right.
Come down, you go up the steps, you go down the steps,
then you go around the back and up the steps into the apartment in the back.
Correct.
Okay, which is bi-level with the bedrooms in the basement.
Yes, sir.
All right.
Henry, do you want to bring your client on?
Mr. D. Pretoro, are you still on the call?
Mr. D. Pretoro has been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Can you hear me?
Thank you, board, for being here this late.
Hold on, Tim.
You have to be sworn in.
Hi, sir, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Tim DiPerturo, last name D-I-P-R-E-T-O-R-O.
Do you swear or affirm that tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Mr. DiPertura, were you on the call when I presented your project?
And you heard my comments about the commercial space having frontage on Federal Street.
Did you speak to any realtor or professional concerning the ability to lease commercial space behind the space that we're requesting?
Yes. And, you know, the conversation and the thing was in today's commercial leasing market, visibility and street presence are critical factors in attracting and retaining tenants.
and, you know, the conversation and the...
and spaces two and three are the distinct disadvantage being in the middle and at the
rear of the property and you know due to their lack of frontage exposure and absence of walk-up
traffic making them particularly difficult to lease you know and not being on broad street
you know added to that and with that was was where uh you know he basically said these are
to be very very challenging to rent and and that's hence where the idea came up to replace the two
rear and middle commercial spaces with residential dwelling
and did you speak to a realtor about trying to rent the rear area in this commercial uh first
floor and cellar yes that's what i have you know just stated to you okay so that information is
is based on what a realtor told you yeah yes okay uh if you had the opportunity to testify
would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct yes okay all right all right
questions from our attorney uh just a i was just a little bit confused by the refusal because it
references that a commercial use will remain is this vacant commercial space at present or is
there a proposed commercial use at this time no it's it's totally vacant it's um not being used
the machine shop vacated i mean and the photographs so you so so there's not a use you there's not a
commercial use being requested with this i just usually the refusal will say it's vacant commercial
space use registration required prior to occupancy but this one didn't say that so that's why
i just wanted to clarify that that's that's what's happening in this case is the space
is vacant and at it at some point you know you you would submit a application for a use
in that front portion correct correct okay all right thank you questions or comments from the
virtual audience.
Planning Commission.
I see no hands, Chair.
Madison Matera, Planning Commission staff.
The Planning Commission recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing CMX2 commercial mixed use.
The appellant has not demonstrated that there are unique physical conditions or circumstances of the property that would prevent the property from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
The Planning Commission recommends the Board deny the requested variance for unit count and multifamily.
Can I respond?
You can, sir.
So my client reached out to a realtor that he has used in an attempt to analyze whether or not this deep commercial space is going to be rentable.
The entrance to that space would have to be down an alley into the rear part of the building.
I mean, there's many situations where store owners are lopping off the back half of their building, converting it to residential.
I mean, it's happening in Chestnut Hill and it's happening in other areas where the commercial space is just too deep.
This is a hundred foot deep property and it just doesn't make economic sense for the client to move forward with having empty commercial space on an off corridor street.
Okay. Thank you. Henry, we're going to hold this until next Wednesday. We're going to vote for
on it at two o'clock. We just want to have a little conversation about it.
Understood. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Appreciate it. And Henry, before you go, I'm getting ready to open up for the 330 list.
So I don't waste your time. The number one on the list, we believe is yours,
but we thought there was going to be an amended refusal.
Correct. And so did I. It just hasn't been issued yet. So I'm going to have to ask.
So what I'll do when I call that today, I'll continue it. OK, thank you very much.
Thank you, sir. I appreciate it. All right. Have a great night. All right.
So we're going to go right into number one. Is there anyone whose 2 p.m. case has not been called?
I see no hands, chair. OK, so we're going to go right into the 330 list.
Good evening. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing the RSA, the zoning board hearing for this for tonight.
With me as our vice chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board member Shel L. Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board member Teneda Graham.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Board member Michael Johns.
Chairman. Board member Taya Nguyen. Present, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Also, here is our attorney, Hillary Emerson, our zoning board director, Ian Haggerty, and our board administrator, Lakeisha Dandy.
Chairman.
Board member Ty Owen.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you all.
A recording of this hearing will be posted on the ZBA website.
By participating, you consent to be recorded.
There is an in-person meeting with remote capabilities.
Whether remote or in person, if you're called to speak, you must state and spell your name and then wait to be sworn in.
Once you're sworn in, please state your name each time before beginning your testimony.
Any person may enter their appearance to become an interested party to a case.
there are three ways to enter your appearance. You can identify the case property address on
your Zoom webinar. You can see a staff member or you can call ZBA appearance line by the close of
business tomorrow. Call 267-270-5548. Leave a message that includes your email address
and the address of the property of the appeal case. The following guidance is for our remote
attendees first when directed by the chair you must raise your virtual hand in order to be
recognized second if you're called to testify you will be prompted to join as a panelist please
accept the request and turn your camera third the webinar q a is for questions about the hearing
do not comment on cases in the q a and fourth if you're participating by phone
press star nine to raise your hand and star six to unmute um we also have uh directions for
attendees in person there is no one in the room so we're going to go right into our our list right
so i mean right that's i mean i'm not just joking i mean okay all right all right so
So MI 2024-006-715-8200 to 08 Castor Avenue.
This case is continued to 10-15-25 at 3-30.
number three mi 2024 007 462 6215 north 13th street this case has been continued
until 10-15-25 at 3-30.
Case number four, MI 2024-007-465-6217 North 13th Street.
Case is continued to 10-15-25.
And number six, MI 2024-007-674-4927 5th Street.
This case has continued to 10-15-25.
We're going to go to the one case that we have, MI-2024-007-485-2146 North Franklin Street.
Meredith Ferliger is the attorney.
Meredith Ferliger is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Thank you.
chairman members of the board good evening council could you please state your name and
spell for the stenographer sure meredith ferlinger f-e-r-l-e-g-e-r right do you swear or firm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do would you identify your client the relationship
to this property? My client is 2114 North 8th LLC, the owner of the property. That LLC is
represented today by Dennis Schifrin. There's a letter of support from APMRCO. Vote was five
in support, four in opposition. Four choose not to vote. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good evening, counsel. Do you agree to either read another refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all of the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I did, with the exception of proof of tax compliance, which was sent in this morning.
Thank you. Please proceed. And you've already shared your screens between you and us.
This is the last case, I think.
Save the best for last.
no we've never seen you here this time of night personally uh you are i it's been a long time i
had one at seven o'clock probably 10 years ago so it's been a long time that's a pretty good run
The request before the board today concerns 2146 North Franklin Street, and we submit
the request before the board today concerns 21 46
that it is a de minimis request, so I will be brief.
You have an exhibit packet in front of you that contains 15 exhibits.
To briefly summarize the basis for today's request, this application requests a variance
for the addition of a third residential unit, which would be permitted if the lot were less
than 10% bigger than it is. Despite some unusual disruptions during the RCO meeting that were
entirely unrelated to this project, the application did ultimately receive support from the local RCO
APM. Let me first orient you to the location of this property. The deed and the recently submitted
tax clearance are included at Exhibits 2 and 3, and for Board Council I did submit the tax
clearance through the portal, so if you don't see it yet, it is there. As you can see on the aerial
images that I have up on the screen at Exhibit 11, this property sits roughly mid-block between
West Susquehanna Avenue and Diamond Street. As you'll see in the photographs a little bit later
on the aerials are slightly out of date as there has been further development on this block since
even these aerials were taken however they are still helpful to provide the context of the block
which you'll notice has been significantly developed in recent years
from the east view you'll see that the lot that is the subject of the application
is one of the few remaining vacant parcels on this block.
Consistent with the zoning map that's up on your screen at Exhibit 6,
this is a nearly exclusively multifamily block that is zoned RM1.
We have also included photographs at Exhibit 12 that provide a more current look of this block,
again, given the volume of current development that has occurred here.
From the first image, you'll notice that the property is surrounded by newer multifamily developments of predominantly two- and three-family density.
There is not necessarily a uniform aesthetic character of the newer construction, which is shown in the next image here, directly across the street from the subject property.
after that the next image is pointed towards the right of the property looking down towards
West Susquehanna Avenue and then in this next image this one is the same side but looking down
towards Diamond Street and again this predominantly shows the three-story character of this block
despite the fact that these structures themselves vary a little bit in look
i've also included another image showing across the street towards diamond street where again
you can glimpse the significant construction that has occurred and this is showing the
location of the property here this is the one showing directly across the street
photos of the zoning posters which were timely posted are also included in the exhibit packet
The proposal for 2146 North Franklin Street is shown on the zoning site plans at Exhibit 7
and includes one new three-story structure. The building will contain three dwelling units.
As you can see on the elevation, the structure is elevated so that the lower level is roughly
four and a half feet above grade, similar to other newer developments on this block
and possible due to the heightened grade of many of the properties on this block.
Turning to the floor plans at Exhibit 8,
the proposal includes three units, each a one-bedroom, one- or two-bathroom unit.
Each unit has high ceilings of nine feet.
The units are diversely sized.
Unit A comprises the first floor and lower level and is just over 1,200 square feet.
Unit B is on the second floor and is 560 square feet.
Unit 3 is on the third floor and measures 650 square feet.
There is also a roof deck.
Each unit has its own washer and dryer, and trash will be stored interior to each unit.
Dennis, my client, and his maintenance staff are responsible for all of his property's trash maintenance, which includes putting out and cleaning up trash after collection.
Dennis, my client, and his maintenance staff are responsible for all of his properties.
He does also own other properties in this immediate area and can answer any questions the board has about his management of properties in this immediate area.
Just by way of example of what this may look like, at Exhibit 9, we've included a photograph of another recent development that my client is in the process of constructing, just to give you a sense of the aesthetic intent for this property as well, since the zoning plans are simply two-dimensional.
now regarding the refusal the application was refused for the proposed density as two units
would be permitted on the lot by right where three units are proposed as i mentioned earlier
this block is nearly exclusively multifamily unfortunately the lot is 991 square feet
which is a measly 89 square feet deficient to allow that third unit by right