H-R-E-A-T-T
We're firm to tell the truth, the whole truth
nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do.
Thank you, Glam. Please proceed.
Ma'am, you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and planes five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I have.
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
I met with the RCO. I was not able to ascertain a letter, although the commissioner just
indicated to me that he did receive a letter. Thank you. Please proceed.
Can you see my presentation package, commissioner? Yes.
You said yes? Yes.
Good afternoon. I'm Darlene. I'm representing the applicant at 3625 North 22nd Street.
I have the cover page of my presentation package on screen now.
Basically, there are 12 sets of exhibits encompassing 36 pages.
I will not go over every exhibit, but I will start and scan down now.
The first exhibit that I will address is the refusal.
As you can see, we applied to legalize an existing nine-unit single-room residence.
I'd like the board to take a look at the refusal specifically.
You'll see that in 1944 that this property was used as a five-family dwelling.
That's almost 77 years ago.
You'll also see that in 1984, this use, which has continued, has been, was approved for a dwelling for nine single room residences.
The nine single room residences.
And I'll continue with my exhibit package now.
The next exhibit is the appeal, which I won't comment on.
Then we have what we call the project information form, which I won't comment.
Then we have what we call the project information form, which I won't comment on either.
Then we have the deed.
After the deed, I don't know why, but I wasn't really able to print the tax clearance, but I did print a sheet from the revenue department,
which shows a tax balance due of zero.
Here I have property information
which gives you details about the property.
As you can see, my client purchased this property in 1981
and the property is approximately 3,324 square feet.
the next exhibit is an exhibit that i threw in um commissioners i uh reached out to mr karn
in june i asked him to uh please provide me uh with a letter uh shortly thereafter somehow
my client's property got inspected and were issued several violations. The most damaging,
a fire code violation for the certification of the system. I would submit to you that in all
years previous to 2020, this system was certified. And as soon as that violation was issued,
my client called out the certifying company. They really weren't certifying last year and they came
and here is the current fire certification. We got the violation on 626 and on 7-9.
The examiner came out and looked over the system and certified the system again. I just really
wanted to be known that this place is not a fire hazard and that there aren't, although the examiner
hasn't come out again yet, there are no current fire code violations and those violations were
appealed. Commissioner, I believe this section is most important here. This section is what I call
the zoning archive history. And I'd like you to specifically look at the page that I'm showing
here, which shows that this property was legal for nine non-housekeeping units in 1985. So this
property has been existing as nine non-housekeeping units since that time. Unfortunately,
the person responsible for renewing the license every year failed, and we're all human, and we
have failures at one time or another. I just really also want to show you since 1944, you can
see this stamp here in the back that this property went from three apartments to five
apartments. It's always been, at least with the zoning history, it's always been a multifamily
dwelling. Here is just another L&I document which also shows us a legal five-family dwelling
at one point. That was in 1944. This was just a layout which is consistent with the layout
now since 1944. Here you can see in 1969 the case went to the board for some requested repairs. You
can see it was a single-room residence in 1969. Again also in 1969 you can see at least from here
it looks like it was four apartments then there were two apartments at least on the second floor
two apartments on the third floor. It doesn't really mention the first floor, so I can't tell
you what was on the first floor at that time. I just really want to show you that this property
and this use has always been used in this location here. The last document you can see also
is from, I believe that says 1942. And again, it shows in 1942, it was a rooming house. It has
two housekeeping units there and then it had three housekeeping units which would be a total of five
again here's another lni document which just shows a history for this property of multi-family
specifically in 1985 it was nine housekeeping units
here are commissioners is a statement of occupancy issued by the city of philadelphia back to 1985
so this use was recognized and it was approved at one time here we have commissioners and i'm
going just to flip it for you and i apologize i couldn't get it to scan the other way is what
is the layout of the property and the layout of the property is consistent from when
is the layout of the property. And the layout of the property is consistent from when it was first
being used. Currently, this is the basement. It's not used for any housing or anything.
It's just basically used for storage. We have the first floor here. You have two units on the first
floor. This is a community room here. And then we have a kitchen. On the second floor, we have three
units excuse me three rooming units and on the third floor we have three rooming units if somebody's
on the board doing math there you'll see it's only eight units at one point in time this large room
was two and it was condensed into one a counselor can i ask you how many i can't read it too good
but how many bathrooms there are three bathrooms there's one on each floor so they're common
Thank you.
I'll continue.
I'll flip it back for you.
Commissioner, these are the pictures that I took for your review.
You can't see them that well, but the zoning posters are posted here.
And they're posted over here.
This is a picture of the structure. It's a pretty big structure, and it has a garage back here.
There are a lot of missing spots on this block. There's not many houses.
There are about two, four, six, and then there's a commercial business at the end of the street.
The second is a picture down the side of the street.
That's Pacific Avenue. As you can see, there are not parking issues,
and there are plenty of places to park for the residents that live in the facility.
And I would submit that most of them don't have cars.
Here's a picture of Pacific Avenue and across the street.
As you can see, it's a block that has some disrepair on it.
It's not kept very well clean.
And across the street, I believe there's only maybe three or four structures on the whole block
And there are a lot of missing houses there that have probably been knocked down.
Down the street is a PHA facility, which houses residents and single-room residences.
And across the street is some commercial business, but not a lot.
And on the end, there's a store.
That's just another look down Pacific Street.
And that's another look down 22nd Street.
Same. And that's the commercial business on the end of the block that I referred to earlier.
Again, that's across the street, shows a vacant lot. There's a lot of missing houses in this area over here.
And as you can see, that's a better picture across the street. There is not a lot of activity going on there.
Commissioners, here is the mailing receipt for the meeting.
That was the first letter where we didn't set up the meeting.
And then there was the second letter where we had a meeting on October 1st.
Commissioners, I attended the meeting on October 1st and probably eight residences
and then quite a few members from the board attended the meeting.
We were there for the meeting.
We were there for the vote.
At the time of the vote, it was tied.
And I had a conversation with Mr. Kron about it.
I told him that I would provide some additional information.
He indicated that he would get back to me.
It was a tied vote, though.
And I must say that the negative votes really came from the board.
Thereafter, I did circulate petitions in the area.
As you can see, there are not a lot of houses on the block.
And I would submit to you at least 12 signatures on this petition are from the block that the houses reside on.
With that, I will submit to you that this property hasn't been used in use as a multifamily for at least 77 years, Commissioner.
This property was legal.
They failed to get a rental license, I don't know how many years ago, and the zoning lapsed.
The property now houses, though, six men.
They're in various states of health.
Some of them get disability, but the owner of the building does provide services.
She has one person who resides in this building who's responsible for the cleaning and just looking in on some of the men.
There are mechanisms to take them in there to their doctor's appointments and help filling out their social service type forms for anything that they may be.
There are mechanisms to take the men there to their.
The ages of these gentlemen that live in the house are from 55 to 68.
Commissioners, in that this property has been legal since at least 1944 for a five-unit multifamily, I'm suggesting that the use currently is much decreased.
commissioners until um june 26 of 2021 there were no outstanding violations on this property
and i will submit to you today that since june 26 my client has cleared these violations
and i have appealed them all and we're just waiting for an inspection
it provides a needed service to this community it provides a home for six individuals who can
pay affordable rent the rents for the rooms there are from 400 to 500 the owner provides services
and help with documents social service programs rides to hospital appointments at the meeting
The neighbors that actually came said the men were a good addition to the community, that they were helpful, they were not disrespectful, and that the property was not a problem in this community.
Commissioners, I did circulate those petitions, and I think a good amount of the neighbors, as they said in the meeting, had no objection to this use.
I like to say this is not a new use. So it's not adding to rooming houses in the community. It's been there since 1944. There are no parking problems. There are no disability density problems. There are no, not that I know of anyway, not that anybody expressed at the meeting.
there were no neighborhood complaints. Everybody thought fondly of the individuals that resided in
the house. And for those reasons, Commissioner, I'm going to ask that you grant this variance and
allow these individuals to remain in the home that they've lived in for many, many years
and not be put out on the street and become homeless and unable to afford a place to live
and a place to reside in these trying times.
And with that, that's all I have, Commissioner.
Thank you.
Do you have any interior photographs?
Commissions, I didn't upload interior photographs,
but I have a host of interior photographs
that I'd be happy to send to you.
It was just a huge package, almost 40 pages,
and I didn't think the photographs shed that much light,
but I do have them, and I can upload them
and give them to you today.
Another question. How long has your client owned this property?
Since 1981.
Never paid a rental license.
I'm not sure. I'm sure she's on the line and I'm sure she can address that.
That's your client to raise her hand.
Ms. Williams.
Williams has been allowed to speak, sir.
Good afternoon, Ms. Williams. Please identify yourself with the record and I'll swear you in.
Ms. Williams?
Ms. Williams, you need to unmute yourself.
any quiet while we're waiting any questions from the board no no
Ms. Williams, you're out there.
For some reason, we're not getting her to unmute.
I already requested it of her, and we're still not getting her to unmute.
All right, I'll move on and we'll come back to her.
Is there anyone who would like to testify in this case?
Please raise your hand.
Mr. Chair, I have Suzanne Penn with her hand raised to allow her to speak at this time.
thank you you have to unmute yourself
ms penn are you here for this case or a different one please unmute
you can take your exhibits down please
thank you
i see miss williams um she has her hand up but she's muted
anyone else to testify in this case
okay mr chair the next person i have is on mr william hofner i will allow him to speak at this
time you good afternoon sir please spell your full name and i'll swear you in
um my full name is uh william e hoffner h-o-f-f-n-e-r i apologize i'm actually trying
to correct i think it's the reason why suzanne penn was still on um i believe that are you are
you here for this case no but 3018 midville was continued it's not marked that way and you were
asking continue we're coming back to that case we had to skip over because we were having some
technical difficulties with the attorney who represents the applicant we will hear that case
next anyone else to testify in the matter regarding 3625 north 22nd hello hello hello
miss williams yes can you hear me yes do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes i do miss williams had a question you've owned this property since 1981
yes i have what caused you not to uh have rental license for this property for 40 years
um what happened was i had somebody else assisted me and i left them in charge of some of the
paperwork i thought it was done at that time i wasn't familiar with all all the technicalities
but that one i did leave for assistant to do it and it wasn't done and i didn't do it i did not have
one and uh miss three would you uh i like i love this i would like to see some interior photographs
i will provide you with some um interior photographs i'll send them over um asap
i'm sorry i'm sorry i would also like to say here though that um we didn't come to the board here
because we had violations for zoning we came to the board because my client became aware
that she was required to have these licenses and that she did i understand we understand
that we understand that we're going to legalize