Ms. Broderson has been allowed to speak, sir.
Good morning, ma'am. Please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
Good morning. Jane Broderson, J-A-N-E, B as in boy, R-O, D as in dog, E-R-S-O-N.
Do you swear to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Ms. Broderson, could you please tell the board your position on these requested variances?
As a near neighbor and as a proud member of Franklin Bridge North Neighborhood RCO, we are standing together in opposing the variances. Do you want me to keep speaking?
Only if you have something new and different to add, Jane.
Yes, so my brother and I own 253 North 3rd Street, which directly faces this proposed development across Bodine Street.
Our property is landlocked and only receives light from the front and the rear.
if this variances if these variances are granted we would be almost totally stripped of light
in the rear because the property could be a mere six eight feet from our rear windows
this would be a burden as a near neighbor there are jail cells that have more light than what we
will have. In addition, we have been meeting with the neighbors and while we oppose the variances
because while we like the mural, we believe there is a way to preserve the mural and still
give the developer enough of what they want, but they won't talk to us and we feel shut out.
we have been portrayed as uh nimbies not in my backyard people and nothing could be further
from the truth our neighborhood association i have personally seen them bringing coffee
to the homeless encampments in the middle of the winter and they clean up and they clean and they
clean up please don't interrupt and they clean up even though the trash is not our trash
like these are good people who care deeply about this community miss broderson with all due respect
no i don't think anyone is of the opinion that you and the rest of your neighbors don't care
about your community if you didn't we wouldn't be having this conversation so we can stipulate that
you are neighbors who are not nimbys or not bananas build anything nothing anywhere near
anybody it's a new one in case you haven't heard it so if you could proceed with your testimony
and or conclude your testimony that would be helpful. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Broderson?
Hi, this is Tanya. You can unmute yourself. You were muted. Please, I would ask everyone,
if the chair wants to speak, please stop speaking and allow him to do so. I would ask that all
attorneys be respectful and speak at one time so that we can get a record for the court reporter.
I thank you all very kindly.
Thank you.
May I proceed, Mr. Chair?
Please, please.
Thank you.
Ms. Broderson, is it your position that the lot coverage of this particular development, as it stands, is just too much in that it will block your air and your light with a mere six to eight feet between properties?
Is that correct?
That is correct.
And if they hand a lever out, it could be worse.
What we have asked is that at the very least, the developer set back at least eight feet from floors three through six, which is above the existing Painted Bride structure now, to give us a little bit of light and air, a token concession.
and one of our members, Max, tried to discuss that with Shimmy
and he slammed the phone down in his ear.
Excuse me, I represent Max and Ivana
and I would just like that I would be able to speak
about their interaction with the developer directly.
And Jane, is it your position that you and your neighbors
and your neighbors are ready, willing, and able to sit down at a negotiated settlement table
are ready, willing and able to sit down
at a negotiated settlement?
with the developer to try and come up with a way to make this project work for him
and still save all or portions of the skin of the bride. Is that correct?
Absolutely. Positively. Yes.
Okay. Nothing further.
Thank you.
Thank you.
You have one more witness?
I do, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Alice Reyes.
i will ask again respectfully something new and different please
okay all right am i can you hear me yeah please identify yourself spell your name and i'll swear
you in alice a-l-i-c-e reyes r-e-y-e-s glancy g-l-a-n-c-e-y 316 north lawrence street
you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
I do. Thank you. Thank you. Alice, were you a part and parcel of the community meetings with
the developer on this particular project? Yes, I have been. Okay. And at the final meeting between
the parties, was it your understanding that the developer was going to remove any units using
visitor accommodation? Did they communicate that to you? In fact, I was the one who asked him that
question myself. And yes, he acknowledged that yes, that they would remove the short-term rentals.
And just for the record, if I can be permitted to explain my angst over this, I have lived in
this community with my late husband over 30 years. The advent of short-term rentals has become a real
sore spot in our community. Many of them are regulated well, others are not. And so whenever
we see more short-term rentals being added to a building or a private property, obviously we are
greatly concerned regarding the late night parties around my neighborhood, around my corner. There was
a shootout over drugs because of a short-term rental. So I respectfully asked the board to
understand our my personal angst over this uh additional 10 units which shimmy at the january
7th hearing absolutely promised us would be removed and now they're back in again and this
rest miss rest just to walk that back a little bit uh even though these these uh visitor
accommodation units are permitted as a matter of right you were very grateful and happy that he
agreed to remove them from the plan. Is that correct? Absolutely. And I express that gratitude
at that meeting. Okay, great. And then is it your understanding that despite his assurance,
now those visitor accommodation units are now back in the plan. Is that correct?
Yes, that is correct. Okay. And what does that, how does that sit with you with respect to his
credibility? Well, obviously I'm concerned because if he pulled them out, gave us his word,
they were out and then put them back in, then my concern is, and again, I am not a judgment of
anyone's characteristics. That's not my place. But on the surface, I am concerned that if this
was a back and forth, there might be other issues that we as a community want to negotiate and then
are sort of conveniently put to the side. That's my perception.
And Alice, despite that, would you be ready, willing and able to sit down at a negotiated settlement table again with this developer to try and come to an amicable solution where a development can happen?
Some variances may be granted, but a portion or all of the skin of the bride could, in fact, be preserved. Is that correct?
Absolutely. And I just for the record, I appreciate the bride. My late husband and I were proud of this mosaic, visited many artistic venues there. Yes, I would love to see part of it preserved as a variance. Yes, we will be willing to negotiate. Absolutely.
And it's your understanding that all attempts at negotiation have been met with just no. Is that correct?
Yes, I am the vice president of our RCO. I also sit on our zoning committee and our efforts, our attempts have been met with negative results.
And were you aware that council member at large, Alan Dahm, recently reached out in order to help the parties negotiate a settlement? Is that correct?
Pardon me?
We'll let her answer.
Are you aware of Councilman Dahm?
I was aware of the communication that was going forth
between Councilman Dahm and our RCO, yes.
Okay, thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I just want to say one thing
Mr. Chairman, I just want to say one thing about Ms. Reyes's testimony.
about Ms. Reyes's testimony.
Give me one minute, Mike.
Give me one minute.
Excuse me, one minute.
Since there are so many, we have a large group of attorneys, would everyone, especially the attorneys, identify yourself before you speak?
Thank you.
Michael Matione again, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to say that Mr. Zakin did say that he would remove the visitor accommodations if the objection to the project was removed.
The objection to the project was not removed, so he did not remove the visitor accommodation.
It was done as part of, hey, I'll give you this if you give me that.
And when he said that he would do that, and then there was a response of, well, it doesn't matter.
We're still going to oppose you.
He said, then I will not remove the visitor accommodation because there's no give back from the community.
And that was the context that it occurred in, and that's how it happened.
So attack Mr. Deacon's credibility, I think, is improper, given the context of the matter.
And I do, I understand Mr. Anastasia was not there at the meeting, so I was, and I know what was said, and I put that on the record because, you know, I do have that advantage over Mr. Anastasia, because he just wasn't there.
So that's how it occurred, and that's what happened, and that's why the visitor accommodation were not removed, because there was nothing to be gained by removing him.
There was no removal of the objection by the community to the project.
And the witness has testified that, again, they're ready, willing and able to sit down and try and come to an amicable solution.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I have no other witnesses on my list.
I'm going to hold off on a closing argument until everybody else puts their witnesses on and then my close will follow Mr. Mattione's.
Mr. Moss.
Thank you.
Thank you. As I indicated earlier, I represent Isaiah Zagar, the artist who created the skin of the bride. And I'm going to address only one single issue, and that's a legal issue. And that is whether as a matter of law, the public policy of the city of Philadelphia should be considered in this matter.
I mentioned that the Hertzberg case, which is the leading case from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on dimensional variances, required us to be more flexible with regard to dimensional variances.
But it also said that the zoning board should consider multiple and numerous factors.
And those, as I said, were the exact words of the court.
And I then asked, is a municipality's public policy one of those factors that should be considered?
and I suggested the answer is yes. In the Hertzberg case itself, the zoning board in
Pittsburgh granted that dimensional variance, recognizing the project would advance Pittsburgh's
public policy of rehabilitating blighted neighborhoods. Philadelphia has demonstrated
in many ways that supporting public art is a major objective of the city. What's the evidence of that?
Every year, the city gives about $2 million to the Mural Arts Program, the leading agency for
the creation of public art. Other examples the Philadelphia redevelopment authority mandates
that developers dedicate a full one percent of total construction cost to the commissioning
of public art. The city itself in the percent for art ordinance provides that all construction
projects on city-owned or city-related land must include site-specific public art in an amount up
to 1% of the total budget. And finally, another clear statement is one this board deals with all
the time. The zoning code offers height and floor area bonuses to developers who agree to commission
public art. So far, those incentives have been offered only in areas of the city where the city
wants to encourage even more public art than already exists. And look at the actual language
of the code. In section 101, the code provides that one of the purposes of zoning is to preserve
and enhance the public realm, excuse me, including the streetscape and pedestrian environment.
And then in 14702, the code explains that the bonus for public art is intended to expand and
enrich the public's experience and enjoyment of buildings and public space. So in conclusion,
in addition to the compelling testimony that I heard earlier and the persuasive legal argument
that Mr. Mattione is making on behalf of the applicant, I suggest that the city's unquestioned
policy in support of public art certainly is one of those multiple and numerous factors that the
Supreme Court tells you to consider. And in this case, the city's absolutely clear policy
would certainly be advanced, wherever Mr. Zakin, by his highly praised design,
and the Magic Gardens, by its commitment to protect the mosaic in perpetuity, will
And the Magic Gardens, by its commitment to protect the mosaic in perpetuity, will preserve this 7,000-square-foot mosaic nine years in the making for the benefit of the city, its residents, tourists, and for future generations.
Thank you.
Mr. Moss.
Mr. Madi, any questions for Mr. Moss?
All right.
um i i don't i'm going to just acknowledge uh the attorneys in the order that i see you on the
screen going from left to right so mr yamploski you would be next i have no question thank you
uh miss uh jennifer uh basilow you'll be next yes um should i call my clients or is that where
we're at i just want to just identify yourself again you don't need to spell your name just
Sure, Jennifer Vazidlo. And I ask that Ivana and Maxim Spilchek, I'm sorry, I have a hard time pronouncing their last name, raise their hand so that they can testify. And do you mind if I share my screen?
Please do. And I'll ask your clients to please provide some new and different testimony if possible.
yes and we're going to try to stick to the point and get through this quickly but I do think they
have a different perspective um on this project and a different proposal uh about what they would
like to see as well um so give me one moment I don't mean to interrupt but Mr. Chair I thought
you were asking me if I had any questions for Mr. Moss not whether or not I was ready to proceed with
my presentation I apologize I wasn't clear so you uh Jennifer we're going to go back to Mr.
Janplasky. I will unshare my screen then. Hold on one second. Sorry, Mr. Janplasky. Please proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you know, I represent Franklin Bridge LP, which is the owner of the two
properties immediately to the eastern side of the proposed building. They are 226-228. These
are properties that were built in 1770. They have been recognized by the City of Philadelphia as
being historically significant, the highest designation of historic properties that the
city bestows. They are a Flemish brick design, which is unique in the city and unique in
the old city neighborhood in which these properties are located. I have submitted to the board
letters from engineers at Keys and Hood, three letters that are dated June 9, 2021, in which
the opinion of the well-respected engineers is that the construction of an 85-foot building
with an additional 15-foot elevator tower to the side of my client's properties creates risk of
physical harm to my client's historically significant property. Those dangers are the
increased snow load, which would cause the risk of potential partial or complete collapse,
of my client's roots, the creation of a wind funnel over the roofs of my client's properties,
which could induce pressures which were never anticipated by builders of those properties
back in the 18th century, and the risk of earth pressures on the foundations of 228 Vine Street,
which most likely have narrow footings consistent with the type of construction which was
prevalent in the 18th century. Mr. Moss talked about the city's policies regarding
preservation of art or the promotion of art, and I would imagine that everyone here would
equally recognize the city's policies with regard to the preservation of historic buildings,
let alone historically significant buildings.
So the risk to my clients' buildings
are something that I ask the board
to consider with great seriousness.
In addition, I have a witness here, Diane Tucker,
who is the principal of Franklin Bridge LP.
She's also a longtime resident of this spot.
She's lived in the 300 block of Vine Street
for in excess of 35 years.
Her late husband, Dick Tucker,
developed much of the residential properties
that are situated on the 200 block of Vine Street, including 59 apartment units that are
approximately directly across the street from the building in question, none of which required
variances. So if Mrs. Tucker is present, I would ask that she be admitted and allowed to testify.
morning miss tucker please raise your hand give us your full name and i'll swear you in
Give us your full name, and I'll swear you in.