Mr. Vernick, one quick follow-up question and then we'll let you go.
Are you aware since the last hearing of our efforts collectively in trying to negotiate a settlement with the applicant's attorney?
I am absolutely aware.
Any settlement discussions are just that, settlement discussions.
That's right, and we're not going to get into what we discussed.
I just want to clarify for the record, Mr. Vernick, is that correct?
clarify for the record uh mr vernick is that correct that uh uh you and the other clients
have directed uh your attorneys your your legal counsel to try and come up with a negotiated
settlement is that correct that is correct and i am aware that i don't know gary gary and then
also uh part of that settlement uh part of your direction to your counsel was to do what we could
to preserve some or part of the mosaic is that correct we've been trying to talk since the
beginning of this and we've just been met with the fears thank you very much what the preservation
of the uh mosaic part of that conversation would that have changed any of the variances that are
being requested the developers mr anastasia excuse me mr vernon mr anastasia say it again
mr chairman you said there's some there has been some conversation about possibly preserving some
portion of the of the bride is that correct of the building absolutely it's our position
that that can happen and the development would that change let me finish would that change
Gerald Moss to be.
I'm sorry, Sharon.
Oh, I'm sorry.
I was texting Tanya, but let me say it on the record.
If we could please promote Gerald Moss.
He has been asking.
He's been texting me that he is not promoted.
We have tried on numerous occasions to promote him, and it's not letting us because he's
denying it.
So we'll try one more time.
We did swear him in.
He did speak, and we swore him in.
Yes, he's audible only.
Okay. All right. Before we go to Mr. Moore, just again, the discussions that you've been having
with the developer, I'm speaking to Mr. Anastasio, does that change anything in terms of the three
variances? And if so, what changes would that require? Mr. Chairman, to call them discussions
would be an over embellishment. We have proffered to come up with all sorts of scenarios. All we
want to do is have a conversation and we believe one of those options is the preservation of all
or some of that bride's skin and we can and they could still build but we can't even get to a
conversation we're just shut down immediately and I know that's not Michael's fault he's just
doing what his client tells him to do but we'd be willing to save you know we understand the
importance of uh for some people of that of skin of the bride uh we believe there are ways in which
we can preserve part of all or part of that bride skin and still have a development that
makes sense for the developer we can't even have that conversation unfortunately
we love that conversation councilman dom tried to even initiate the conversation
he was shut down well we've been trying to do this for quite some time
mr chairman my client has said and i appreciate council member dom's intervention as well along
with mr anastasia my client has stated um did make changes back when this was first filed
reduce the number of units, reduce the setback at the seventh floor, and cannot find a way to do
any further reduction in building, massing, et cetera, and make it work financially. And that
has been his position. We appreciate that everybody has reached out, and he has in good
faith looked at numerous options and can't find a way to make any of them work other than what he
has presented today. So we understand and appreciate the concerns of the community,
and but that's where we are but still nobody sat at a table and worked this through at all
and that's unfortunate and i think that's what council member dom was hoping that would happen
at the very least all right uh jim moss did you have something i'm sorry mr moss did you want to
speak and that look and you have to unmute yourself and then i'll get to the other attorneys
Mr. Moss
you're still muted
still muted
there you go
you're now unmuted
yeah I can say then
Chairman DiCicco, members of the board, I am Jim Moss, and I represent Isaiah Zagar, the creator of the mosaic, the skin of the bride.
Chairman DiCicco, members of the board, I am Jim Moss, and I represent
I'm going to speak to just one legal principle, and that is a matter of law.
The city's clear policy regarding public art supports the granting of these variances.
Now, as the board knows, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Hertzberg made two important points with regard to dimensional variances.
The first being that the board should be more flexible in considering a dimensional as opposed to a use variance.
But the second was that when considering a dimensional variance request, the Supreme Court directed the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court directed the boards to consider numerous and multiple factors, numerous and multiple.
Those are the exact words that the court used.
now would a municipality's public policy qualify as one of those factors i think the answer is
certainly yes mr chairman are we going out of i'm sorry mr moss are we going out of turn now
because i have to i have more witnesses i'll come back to you i i they were the only reason i went
to mr moss they said he was trying to respond to something so let's hear him and then it sounds
like it sounds like an opening argument to me this is sharon we were only trying to have mr
Moss promote it to panelists. Yeah. Mr. Moss, if you don't mind, we're going to get the complete
Mr. Anastasia's witnesses and we'll go around. Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you. Go ahead,
Vern. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Next, I have a Chandler Brennan, if he could please.
Please identify yourself, spell your full name, and I would respectfully ask again
to try to give us new information or new comments
as opposed to repeating what has already been spoken to.
Sure. I'm testing my mic now. Can you guys hear me?
Yes. Please spell your full name.
Okay. My name is Chandler Brenneman.
That is C-H-A-N-D-L-E-R-B-R-E-N-N-E-M-A-N.
so i'm a resident at oh i'm sorry yeah you finish finish okay i'm a resident 303 vine street and
the secretary of franklin bridge north neighbors thank you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the truth i do thank you thank you chandler could you please tell the board your
position uh on uh on this proposed appeal sure uh franklin bridge north neighbors uh exists because
other parts of the city don't have our community's best interests at heart. Franklin Bridge North
was born out of old cities disinterest in stepping into fight for the neighborhood when the Vine
Street Expressway was planned and built. And here we are again being bullied by those outside of
our neighborhood. Of the over 700 names that were collected in support, almost none of them live in
the neighborhood. They simply don't have to live with the actual, not perceived consequences of
this project. The Magic Garden and the developer, after hitting roadblocks of the historical
Commission of the PA Courts believes that using the financial and political resources they have
to threaten and shame our community. They can get us to kowtow.
We're just presenting a case. I mean, I think it's threatening and shaming. I think it's
incorrect. I don't necessarily think he means during this presentation. Go on, Chandler.
Thank you. They feel they can get us to kowtow and accept their monstrous proposal
as if they're holding it down to our head,
your money and your life, or rather.
I think it's way out of bounds,
your testimony, sir, with all due respect.
I mean, I don't know.
Mr. Chairman, if my client feels.
I need one at a time, please.
Thank you.
This is the court reporter.
Thank you.
This is a hearing.
Variances speak for themselves.
That's what we're here about.
No one's threatening anyone.
The threat is the variances.
your mosaics. It's one or the other in the way that it's been presented to us. Either we get
our variances or we demolish the mosaic. There's no compromise. And Chandler, it's your position
that that's a false choice. Is that right? Yes, it is absolutely a false choice. I think that you
can have both. But for them to be coming at us with this, you must give us variances or we're
going to demolish your mosaics is a threat for those that believe that the mosaics should be
should be preserved. I believe this is disingenuous behavior both on the part of the
developer and the magic art. The developer wants to create a hardship where none exists and get
permission to build something larger than they would otherwise be permitted to build. In addition
to it being out of scale, it visually clashes with the neighborhood and further sets a bad precedent
for the neighborhood development when so many other parcels are being put forward or putting
forward plans. Allowing this project to go forward will be letting the genie out of the bottle and
Allowing this project to go forward will be letting the genie out of the bottle and could set off a change reaction of events that would radically alter the presentation of the neighborhood.
could set off a change reaction of a
Having suffered the indignities of the Vine Street Expressway and I-95 construction, the community must take a stand and oppose those who want to bend, skirt, or exempt themselves from the rules through whatever convenient excuses they can manufacture.
I believe that the Magic Garden is equally disingenuous, and having been
denied historical designation, they are once again attempting to create precedent,
but not with their own property in their own neighborhood, nor any of the other 220
plus such mosaics that exist throughout the city, but with this one. And the Painted
Bride was never the exterior of the building, but the Painted Bride stated as much themselves
in front of the Historic Commission. Objection, Mr. Chairman, the Historical Commission
and there's no bearing on this case.
Stained.
Sustained.
This is a quiet residential neighborhood
with the legacy of historic industrial buildings
and neat row homes,
not massive new built apartment blocks
like Northern Liberties.
As a renter in this neighborhood,
I believe that adding more apartment units
to our neighborhood will not lower my rent
and will likely have the opposite effect.
As existing properties are forced to compete
with new buildings and new amenities,
property managers will likely be forced
to go up market offering new amenities at higher rates speculation speculation this is this is the
impact that i see this is the impact that that i believe could happen additionally as existing
lots are developed and more residences without dedicated parking or creative the cost of leasing
a parking space in the neighborhood is also likely to go up and townhouses again it's all speculation
speculation that's his opinion he's going to impact his community one at a time please
thank you this hearing is going to get shut down if we don't start having some cooperation from
everyone please if if the developer can point out the fact that there's ample parking in the
neighborhood and use that as an argument to support their design then i can point out the
flow on that argument. I believe that townhouses with dedicated parking, which was the original
plan, simply would not impact the neighborhood and existing residents in the same negative ways.
And frankly, I was shocked to see the original plans developed for the townhouses on the property.
The original plan seemingly incorporated mosaics as architectural access. Given the choice between
the two proposals, the overwhelming apartment building or the tasteful townhouses, I believe
the townhouses are very handsome and would not only better conform to the neighborhood, not
require any voting variances, nor set a bad president, they actually preserve the legacy of
the mosaics themselves. Something we are told is impossible without the variances in the grossly
out of place building. Yet this is not what the developer wants anyone to believe. It's simply
the variances or else. Franklin Bridge North neighbors understood this threat when they voted
and they voted to oppose it all the same. And I want to stress that. We understood what the vote
meant, and that is the vote we took. And here we must stand on principle and not bend to these
threats. It's a convenient excuse for the developers to say that the community and the
city want to preserve this mosaic and that that is causing the hardship. And that's simply not
the case. A small group of well-funded, well-coordinated interests want to preserve this
to further their personal, professional, and political interests. If the comment section on
Inga Safran's opinion piece from January 15th of 2021 about this development are any indication
or general public's attitude, the majority either don't care in the newspaper. That's not part of
the record and it's not relevant to the case. Saying that the majority of people don't care
about the mosaic or outright feels not worth preserving. Perhaps you have a sensitivity and
a politeness toward a living artist that is constraining people's honest opinions
if they're less than glowing. The comment section on a news article don't value sensitivity and
Again, your news article, you know, the old saying,
don't believe everything you read. So please, Mr. Anastasia,
would you direct your, would you please direct your client?
Thank you. Chandler, I'm going to ask you a couple of questions and we're going to wrap this up.
Okay. Is it your understanding that, I'm sorry,
is it, are you ready, willing, and able, along with the other members of your RCO,
to sit down with the developer and come up with a negotiated settlement wherein they can get their
development and preserve all or part of the bride skin. Is that right? That has always been our
position. Okay. And is it also your position that the fact that the developer already has
a permit for eight luxury duplexes is prima facie evidence that no hardship exists? Is that correct?
That is absolutely correct.
I have nothing further, and I think Mr. Brennan is done.
Thank you.
I have two more, Mr. Chairman.
Are they going to do something new and different?
Different perspectives?
Different perspectives? Yes, based on what they've told me. Jane Broderson, if she's in the audience, I'm asking that Jane raise her hand.
Based on what they've done.