unfortunately that was unable to happen because the group did not want to meet so we took it upon
ourselves to reach out to the community ourselves so the petition addresses and the letter of
support so if you look at this we're the green which you can barely see but all these addresses
which surround us and these down here are people who supported us for our project so
and then here's a copy of the petition as well with the signatures
and then the letters of support
And then we did meet with the Logan, you know, Square, Logan, sorry, Civic Association.
It seems from their letter, there was only one nearby, I'm just taking base on their letter, but there was one nearby neighbor who was within the affected area who was present, only one.
There were 15 people there, don't know what the vote count was, it doesn't really state, but their explanation is we oppose, we want to keep the community single family dwellings in the neighborhood.
there are too many multifamily dwellings that exist on this block. I hear you. I get it. I
live in the neighborhood in Philadelphia, just like these individuals do, and they have every
right to state that. It would just be financially devastating for Ms. Morgan. Again, she dumped her
life savings into this already, and she purchased the property not knowing any better. So we really
ask the board for mercy here for Ms. Morgan. She's not a developer client of mine. She's just a
a normal person who wants who bought a property expecting to live in one unit having the other one
to pay for her mortgage so with that being said um again i try to speed it up as much as possible
i have miss morgan on the phone or on zoom so if miss morgan if you can virtually raise your hand
morgan has been allowed to speak miss morgan please spell your full name and i'll swear you
in am i on yes spell your name and i'll swear you in rita morgan r-i-t-t-a-m-o-i-g-a-n
you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
Thank you.
Yeah, Ms. Morgan, you heard everything I stated today.
And is it true and correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Okay, and most importantly, did you know about the requirements of the permitting of your property before you started doing work?
I have no further questions.
Questions from the board?
anyone else like to testify in this case please raise your hand
Ms. Hillary Emerson has a hand raised I will allow to speak at this time sir
good afternoon again Ms. Emerson please identify yourself you're still on the road
thank you Mr. Chair members of the board Hillary Emerson on behalf of Councilwoman
Sherelle Parker and with staff so the Councilwoman is opposed to the
requested variance for three units at this property. She feels it is an overuse of the
property. The property was purchased as a single-family dwelling, and there has been no
non-economic or non-financial hardship shown for why this cannot remain a single-family dwelling.
um there are um some there are a number of hold on guys there are a number of multi-family
dwellings on the block but the community indicated that they wish to retain um single
family dwellings on the block where they could um and the neighbor the near neighbor who was
present at the meeting was one, was a single family homeowner herself. And I just wanted to
note to them on the list that Mr. Nockamson had provided of single of the multifamily dwellings,
I looked at them. 5012, I didn't see any history that that was a multifamily dwelling or any
license history. For 5018, that was reduced to a single family dwelling in 2018. 5020 and 5021
have rental or have or had rental licenses most recently for one unit, not owner occupied.
rental licenses most recently for one unit not owner occupied and the one that was indicated
as being a four unit was only granted a three unit in the past and one of the photos 5004
the last known use for that was a single family dwelling there's no history of it being multi-family
so I don't think there are quite as many multi-families on the block as was represented
in the presentation. So I just want to note that for the record. The other thing that was raised
by the community in the meaning of concern was the fact that the basement, and I apologize,
the basement includes one and a half bathrooms plus what looks like another bedroom and living
space. So there was concern by the community that this could turn into a fourth unit and this would
actually turned out to be um a quadplex um so so in summary um the councilman is opposed
um and the community is opposed um and while there are multifamily on this block um the
the community and the councilman would like to maintain a balance of single family
um to the multifamily and and this would really tip um the balance uh the other way thank you
Thank you. Anyone else to testify?
No further answer to that.
Mr. Chair, just two comments, and I know we have a tight time frame.
If we somehow try to convert this to a fourth unit, we would need this board's approval, unless the zoning classification changed.
Again, this is almost a 2,000 square foot lot.
And if you look at my letter or the petition, 5004 and 5006, the occupants of those properties did sign our petition.
And if the board feels so inclined to not have it as a three unit and instead not have it as a single family, we would ask that the board grant it with a proviso not to exceed two units.
Again, this would be financially devastating for Miss Morgan. She needs to supplement her income with one of these units. Otherwise, I mean, she just sunk her whole life savings, and she's not going to be able to afford to keep this as a single family.
So the tenants of the people who live in 1104, I'm sorry, 50-04, 50-06, there were tenants?
um miss morgan's the one who distributed the petition so miss morgan can you answer
the chairman's question folks who signed your petition in favor who live at a 50-04
and 50-06 is that an apartment building and are they tenants
all right planning commission
i'm sorry mr charles about to ask for uh miss morgan again okay put her on if you can please
raise your hand please raise your virtual hand this morning
is my hand raised yes miss morgan the folks who signed your petition
reside at 50-04 and 50-06 north 12th are they property owners or tenants
i don't know if they are property owners i didn't really ask i didn't know whether
they have to be property owners they don't have to be i'm just curious if they were
mr chair i'm actually looking at the opa's website lamont love who signed the petition
according to office of property assessment he's an he's a property owner that's at where 584
yeah right next door to us he's a property owner okay thank you planning commission
good afternoon chair and members of the board I say under with the planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single family zoning at
this location the applicant has not demonstrated a necessary hardship created by unique physical
conditions particular to the property that would justify a variance to multifamily
Accordingly, we recommend that the requested variants not be granted.
MI 2020-003-417-5002 North 12th Street, my vote is no.
Professor Plaza, my vote is no.
James Snell, my vote is no.
James Snell, my vote is no.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is no.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is no.
Thank you.
Sharon, where are we with number 10?
I know it's one o'clock, we have to break, but what was the final decision on that?
You should announce that it is continued.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
MI 2020-002583-3959 Lancaster Avenue will be continued.
Any other unfinished business?
Not on my end here.
It's one o'clock.
See everyone back at two.
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 our
board secretary, Mr. Confessor Plaza, and board member, Mr. Thomas Hallowman. In addition,
our board administrator, Mr. Jason Hand, and our board attorney, Ms. Sharon Saleta,
are also in attendance, along with our board administrator, Ms. Tanya Sunkit.
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 be administering oaths to individual
participants prior to their testimony. Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding
is being recorded and that by participating you agree to acknowledge your agreement to be recorded
and that the recording will be made available to the public on the web or otherwise. Third,
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, 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. 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'd also like to remind everyone please do not attempt to testify in the chat
any comments or questions should be directed to mr jason hand with that i will read off a list of
requested continuances on the two o'clock list number one mi 2020-002261-1947 north 24th street
and number two on our list mi 2020-002420-2549 and a half north 32nd street is withdrawn
And there is a request by the RCO, East Falls Community Council, to continue MI 2020. That's 002-758-3018 Midville Avenue.
I'll hold that off till the end because it's a request by the RCO and I understand the applicant's attorney is not in agreement.
So as it relates to 1947 North 24th and 2549 and a half North 32nd Street, does anyone object to those cases, those two cases being continued, excuse me, number 2549 and a half North 32nd Street was withdrawn?
Does anyone disagree with the request for continuance or withdrawal?
Please raise your hand.
Mr. Chair, we have a Patrick Callahan with his hand raised.
I will allow him to speak at his time.
Is that all right?
Thank you.
Please identify yourself, sir.
Spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
This is Patrick Callahan, C-A-L-L-A-H-A-N.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
I'm sorry.
This was strictly a procedural question.
we were concerned that we were muted and the purpose of that raising the hand was just to see
if if we could be heard at the hearing and obviously that question's been answered okay thank
you does anyone does anyone
object to the continuance for 1947 north 24th or the withdrawal for 25 49 and a half north 37.
or the withdrawal for 2549 and a half North 32nd Street.
Please raise your hand.
No hint at this time, sir.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else who is requesting a continuance or withdrawal?
As I said at the outset, the 3018 Midville Avenue,
There is a request for a continuance by the East Falls Community Council, RCO.
However, it's my understanding that Mr. Bertil, who represents the applicant, is opposed to that request for a continuance.
Anyone else other than that case I read off requesting a continuance or withdrawal?
Mr. Chair, I have someone from Manningham office with a hand raised.
I will allow them to speak at this time.
Thank you.
Good afternoon. Please identify yourself, spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. William O'Brien, O-B-R-I-E-N, on behalf of Gemini 618 LLC,
the owner of 3656 Edgemont Street, MI 2021-001005.
Hold on one second. Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
And that was Edgemont Street?
That's correct.
Please proceed.
This is a February 20th accelerated appeal.
The original hearing date in May was continued because the ZBA materials were submitted late.
It was continued to today.
On July 2nd, the owner requested permission to amend the application to reduce the number of lots
and to reduce the variances from seven to three, one of those remaining variances would be de
minimis. Unfortunately, unexpected delay caused the consent not to be issued until July 29th,
last Friday. So we're not prepared because we do not have a revised refusal. I've requested the
board continue the hearing to 30 days, not more than 30 days after the revised refusal
is delivered to the board. Mr. O'Brien, this is Sharon Saleta. If the revised refusal,
if the revised application is the last plan that you showed to the RCO,
could be permitted to go forward and submit the revised refusal at a future date and the board
could hold the vote? We did not have the revised refusal, which I understand to be an essential
element of the presentation. We didn't have the opportunity to provide that revised refusal to
the RCO, which they would receive. We did have the amended subdivision plan and amended zoning
plan ready to go but unfortunately the the consent uh from the board took four weeks to be issued
so that's i'm just requesting that the continued date uh occur within 30 days of the date that the
revised refusal is issued um i think you'll have to work out that out with miss sunken
um because that's not a it's not a set date all right it's based on
i'm sorry i'm just trying to say chair if i may speak um mr o'brien once you receive the revised
refusal we can discuss offline a new date for you okay yeah because that's a moving target we can't
give you a specific date thank you thank you mr chairman thank you i'll just put this in as a
continuance, correct, Tanya? Yes, Chair, thank you. MI 2021-001-005-3656 Edgemont Street is
continued. Any other requests for continuance or withdrawals? Sir, I have Rachel Pritzker here. I
can honor to speak at this time. Thank you, Ms. Pritzker. Please identify yourself, spell your
name and i'll swear you in rachel r-a-c-h-a-e-l pritzker p-r-i-t-z-k-e-r 1635 market street suite
1600 philadelphia pa 19103 um from the tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes please proceed um so i represent the owners of 3613 north 16th street