I'll repeat that.
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.
Pardon me.
Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google number 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 number 267-270-5548 and leave your email address
and the address of the property at issue i would also like to remind everyone please do not attempt
to testify in the chat comments questions or issues of concern should be directed
to Fatina L, our zoning board administrator.
Having said that, we will go to the add-on for the two o'clock list, MI 2021-002084.
MI 2021-002084, 1618 West Erie Avenue.
Steve Bertil is the attorney of record.
This is a resumption hearing.
Originally heard on 922.
Madam Vice Chair, you were not present at that hearing.
We're returning for a feedback on RCO and Councilwoman Bass's position.
applicant now agrees to reduce requests to three units chair this is sharon if we could promote
not only steve bertill but um charles richardson i believe is is here okay thank you mr richardson
well first let's swear mr bertill in
good afternoon uh mr chair members of the board
hello yes hi please spell your full name and i'll swear you in
steve bertill b-e-r-t-i-l claire harrison
you're breaking up you're breaking up a little bit claire harrison i lost you claire harrison
harvey and bransburg 1835 market street suite 1400 philadelphia pa 19103 you swear affirm to
tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do thank you hold off carol for a minute
mr richardson please identify yourself and i'll square you in good afternoon mr chair charles
richardson from the office of councilwoman cindy bass room 312 city hall to tell the truth the
whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Okay, hang in here for a moment, Mr. Richardson.
Mr. Bertil, I believe, I don't know, do we need to read? Sharon? No, we don't. We have been copied
on email exchanges between Mr. Richardson, Charles Cairn of the RCO, and Mr. Bertil. I think
Mr. Bertil can just describe the conditions that they have, the provisos they have agreed to.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Pritzel.
Sure, absolutely. Just a brief background. So the board has a recollection of what we're discussing here.
The property is stated at 1618 was the Erie Avenue.
The property is currently a five unit rooming house and has been such since the late 30s.
The use was not abandoned. It was actually in use when the applicant acquired it this year.
Originally, we were proposing to convert the property from a rooming house into a traditional five-unit apartment, residential building.
At that time, after a submission, we met with the coordinating RCO, the near neighbors and affected RCOs, respectively.
After meeting with all the respective stakeholders, we reduced our proposed density to four units to be in line with the comprehensive plan for the particular site and to address the issues of density.
We came to the board on September 22nd, presented the proposed reduction to four units and the proposed support that we had from the near neighbors, the affected RCOs, and the opposition that we had from the coordinating RCO.
And at that time, the board allowed us to go back and meet with the coordinating RCO, which is the 13th Democratic Ward RCO.
The RCO chair is Charles Karn, as Ms. Saleta referenced, and present our reduced density of four units.
We did that. At that time, the RCO, the coordinating RCO specifically, still was in opposition to the proposed density.
with the provisals that we agreed to. And so we further reduced the proposed density from four
units to three units. And that is what, and that's where we are today. In addition to the
reduction, we discussed and proposed with the coordinating RCO, the provisals that were
reference, which were, at the time, it was for four residential units, private hauling, and to
secure trash within, I guess, a, not a container, but a contraption to hold the trash so it's not
freely placed on the front yards. And so we would still maintain those provisos, but with the
reduction of from four units to three units. I just wanted to highlight that with the reduction
we're even further in line with the comprehensive plan and that we still have the support of the
line with the comprehensive plan. And then we still have the support of the effective RCOs
effective
and the immediate neighbors on the block. Chair, this is Sharon. I suggested that the
two trash related provisos be read as commercial trash pickup, trash to be stored in enclosure
out of public view. And that's fine with us at the board. That sort of characterization is to
the board's like uh preference thank you mr bertel mr richardson yes sir the councilwoman is uh in
support of the uh reduced amount of units uh from four to three and with the proviso with regard to
the trash uh collection and and containment uh so she will be supporting the variance
Thank you. Thank you both. Sharon, do we need to get the planning commission in?
No, we already had the planning commission actually testified at the first hearing
and gave a recommendation as long as it was fewer, four units or fewer.
Okay. Double. Thank you. All right. Any questions from the board?
No, Mr. Jones. Is anyone else out there to testify in this case?
was limited to this okay just to this all right thank you again all right mi 2021-002-084
1618 west erie avenue my vote is yes with the following provisos maximum number of units to be
three commercial trash pickup and trash to be stored in in an enclosure out of public view
we need to confessor and time on this one confessor plaza yes with proviso
thomas holliman yes with proviso thank you we'll now chair just as a reminder we were
we got a last minute request to call number 11 first if you can do that thank you yeah we have
a request as sharon said to uh accommodate one of the attorneys we're going to go to case
number 11 on our list mi 2021-003 384 620 diamond street sean ward is the attorney of record
letter of non-opposition from uh the association uh puerto ricos and marquet
i'm sure i chopped that up
APM APM that's right APM that was perfect Mr. Chairman good afternoon Mr. Chairman and members
of the board Sean Ward coming to you live from Key West Florida I'm just going to say you look
like you're on an island somewhere good for you you know you know I'm on vacation and uh you know
Due to administrative snafus and delays with the applications in this matter, I promised my client I wouldn't postpone the hearing, you know, given the undue delays.
So we got the technology figured out down here finally.
So I'm good to go.
All right.
I know you're going to go to that.
What's that famous bar there?
What was the guy's name?
He used to go.
I can't think of the name of the bar
There's a couple of them
Oh, I know that
You've got the
You've got the green parrot
Not related to my green parrot
But yeah, we have that
Alright, do you swear for him to tell the truth
The whole truth, nothing but the truth
I most certainly don't
Mr. Mary has a few questions for you
Hi, do you agree to waive the reading
Of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
Yes, I do
have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership proof of tax compliance a copy of the
refusal referral photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing
and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes i have you may proceed thank you very
much tanya the administrator i'm sorry um if i could um chair um just make a request that the
board member who recently arrived, make himself known.
Mr. Snell, Mr.
Snell is present and snow was present. Thank you. Thank you very
kindly. Thank you.
Welcome aboard James.
Okay. I'm going to share my screen. If somebody can confirm that they can view it.
Okay, I'm going to share my screen. If somebody can confirm
that they can view it.
We can see it.
Excellent. I represent Gary Cooney. Unfortunately, Mr. Cooney is not technologically savvy as we are. And so he is unavailable. However, I did review this packet with him. And after we go through it, I used to stipulate that he would verify and adopt.
But in any event, he does business as Sovereign, S-O-V-E-R-E-I-G-N, Developers LP, and he owns the property at 620 Diamond Street, which is the subject of this hearing.
It's an application for a permit for the erection of an attached structure for use as a three-family dwelling with an accessory roof deck, not decks.
The refusal, commercial first floor use is required, none is proposed.
We need a lot area. There's two lot area refusals. They tend to be intertwined with one and the other, as well as the occupied area.
So we need dimensional and use variances today.
A2 is the application of appeal. A3, project information form. A4, proof of ownership. A5, tax clearance. A6 is the site plan. A7 are floor plans. A8 are photographs. A9 is my RCO meeting notice.
A10 is in fact the RCO letter which has been received at the time I prepared the packet
and submitted it. I had not received it yet, but I do have a copy today to share
and the board should have it in their electronic file. If a letter of support was submitted by the
council president, I would ask that that be marked A11. I don't know if Mary Jones is on the
Zoom to chime in on this. However, I would defer to her. A-12, a relevant zoning history of this
property in 1966, and well thereafter, was used as a doctor's office and one dwelling. A-13 is
the zoning map. A-14 is the aerial photograph. With regard to the RCO meeting,
uh nobody showed up as you can see uh in the you know the support letter or the the rco letter uh
nobody attended it was basically me the applicant and uh the representative from apm rco and they
have taken a position um despite the fact that there was no attendees that they would have a
No opinion, non opposition for the plans. They asked for one change to the site plan following that meeting. All right, but I'm sorry, very quickly. Let me go back to my, my comments. Okay.
Okay. You know, multifamily is permitted in the CMX2, RM1, and the 5th District overlay district.
We propose no first floor commercial because there is a ton of vacant commercial space in the area.
And quite frankly, APM recognizes that 6th Street and Germantown Avenue are the preferred commercial corridors, not Diamond Street where this property is located.
And again, there's currently multiple vacant properties, commercial spaces in the area.
I did a survey of what's on the 600 block of Diamond Street.
600-04 is, in fact, the APM RCO offices.
606 vacant, 08 vacant, 10 vacant, 612 vacant commercial on the first floor with two apartments above.
616 vacant lot, 618 single-family dwelling.
historically it's been used as a four-family, 22 no history found, 24 single-family dwelling,
historically it was a three-family, and the list goes on. There's either nothing found,
multi-family, or vacant lots. So we also have a copy of the notice of refusal,
my transmittal letter to the board administrator, my application of appeal,
project information form. A copy of Sovereign's Deed. Bought it in November of 2020.
Proof of tax clearance, as you can see. For 2021, there's a balance due of $92.39.
That has probably since been paid because I pulled this off of the Revenue Department site
quite some time ago. Again, it's your typical new construction in the area.
It's a corner lot. APM had asked us to provide a area for trash and recycling,
so we were able to fit two cans each for each unit. One would be for trash, one would be
two cans each for each unit. One would be for trash, one would be for recycling. It's stored
in the rear yard, which would be fenced in. And they all obviously, since it's a corner lot,
they all have access to the rear yard. You know, we provided them with a copy of the floor plans.
The first floor is two bedrooms and the living kitchen area with a finished basement for storage.
The second floor, again, it's a two-bedroom unit.
Third floor, again, identical to the second floor, a two-bedroom unit with a living kitchen area.
All have access to the roof deck.
Just a couple photos.
Again, it's a corner lot at Diamond and Master Street.
Again, you'll see the views on looking down Diamond Street towards 6th.
this is across master street we would be on the corner to the left this is the other half of 600
block again this is 6th street or germantown avenue you can see the multiple vacant commercial
spaces so to build a a new commercial space would detract from those and again we'd most likely sit
vacant for some time and not the best and highest use of this property just a couple aerial
photographs again where the corner lot APM office is here and APM owns and operates the residential
complex on the block behind them again this was a copy of my meeting notice it had a copy of the
refusal a copy of the zoning notice poster the addresses and then the zoning history that I
cited before, along with a copy of the zoning map indicating it is zoned CMX2. As you can see,
it's on adjacent blocks with predominantly RM1 or mixed commercial use. And then we have finally,
as always, provide an aerial photo from Google Earth just to give you an idea of where the
property is located. And then again, going back to the APM's letter,
Again, they cite that nobody showed up for the meeting. It was held via Zoom. And we did take the time to modify the plans at their request to provide for off-street parking. It doesn't change the nature of the variances, so we don't need any revised plans stamped today.
And Mr. Chairman, again, if the board stipulate that if Mr. Cooney was present today, I did speak to him earlier.
He would verify my representations as true and correct today and adopt them as his own testimony.
Officer, we will stipulate to that.
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman.
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
Please raise your hand.
i see no hands chair thank you planning commission
good afternoon mr chairman members of the board david vecto f-e-c-t-e-a-u with the city planning
commission you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes sir i do thank you sir please proceed thank you mr chairman members of the board the
comprehensive plan recommends this property for residential multifamily use under that designation
three dwelling units would be allowed by right. The applicant has shown that commercial use is not
viable in this location. We recommend that the board support the requested use variances. Thank
you. MI 2021-003384-620 Diamond Street. My vote is yes. Carol Tineri. My vote is yes.
professor plaza yes
james snell yes thank you yes thank you when i go back to our regular list
uh i do not have any requests as of yet for a continuance or withdrawal
so i will now ask is are there any requests for continuances or withdrawals on the two o'clock list
If so, please raise your hand. If you're requesting a continuance or withdrawal
for the two o'clock list, please raise your hand.
I see no handshare. Two o'clock list, absolutely. Okay, thank you. Case number one on our list,
MI 2021-003398, 1111 South 24th Street, Adam Laver.
1111 South 24th Street, Adam Laver is the Attorney of Record, Point Breeze Community Development Corporation, sent a letter of support from their neighbors.
Mr. Laver.
Hi, please identify yourself, spell your name, and I'll square you in.
Good afternoon, Chairman DiCicco and members of the board.
Adam Lever of Blank Rome, 1 Logan Square.