All right. Okay, Mr. Hanson, let's roll.
Oh, let's stop.
Donya, let me know when we're in.
I think we're good to go right now, Chair.
Good morning.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this morning's EBA hearings.
With me is Carol Tenere, our vice chair.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Ishmael Shahid, our board secretary.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thomas Holliman, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And James Snell, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also, here is our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkit, and our Board Attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Before we start, here is our virtual format.
Be advised these proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkit, at phil.gov.
For the benefit of our court sonographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question and answer box on the screen is not for comment or testimony. Any commenter or testimony has to be directed to Tanya Sunkett, our executive director.
So before we begin, let me read a few announcements.
Effective July 18, 2022, the case is continued. Attorney or applicant moving party.
the attorney or applicant has 90 days from the date the cases continue to either request a new
hearing date, ask for an extension of moving party status, or withdraw the case. If ZBA staff
is not contacted by the end of the 90-day period, the case will automatically be listed for a new
hearing date. Please note, extensions for moving parties must be sent to our Executive Director
Tanya Sunkett with board attorney Hillary Emerson copy. Two, the ZBA staff is currently sending out
letters to elicit applicants on appeals filed prior to 2019. If the case has been pending
and hold status, if an applicant or their attorney does not contact the ZBA staff to discuss the next
steps for their case within the time period stated in the letter, the case will be considered
abandoned and administratively closed. Questions about either of these two's policies should be
directed to our Executive Director Tanya Sunkett and Board Attorney Hillary Ramerson. So let's look
at our continuances for this morning's hearings. Number eight, MI 2022-002-121-202 Spruce Street.
This case is continued. Is there anyone with comments in the virtual audience relative to the case that's continued?
I see no hands, Chair.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
I see no hands, Chair.
Thank you. I want to go over several cases that we have no exhibits.
Number five, MI-2022-002-210-1814-North Van Pelt, and number seven, MI-2022-002-209-1816-North Van Pelt.
Both of these cases, we have no listings, and we believe that our attorney is needed for both of these cases.
Thomas Nichols.
I see no hands for Thomas Nichols.
However, Chair, we have Charles Richardson and Paul Toner with their hand up.
Let's start with Mr. Richardson first.
I don't think that's his case, but let's see.
It's not, Mr. Chair.
Good morning.
I always put my hand up because I'm requesting a continuance for case 4101 Germantown Avenue.
uh mr richardson can we swear you in first please oh yes right do you swear for him to
Mr. Richardson, can we swear you in first, please?
Oh, yes.
tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do okay which case is it 4101 germantown
avenue is listed as so i i i called that with no exhibits i'm gonna that's going to be called with
no exhibits okay no problem i will when i call that i'll just make sure the person's here and
tell them we're continuing okay excellent thank you sir so i'm still on five and seven mr toner
was he yes chair mr toner you're free to speak mr toner are you involved with both these cases
uh my office michael macklehan he's counsel so let me let me swear you in do you swear for him
to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do um we have no exhibits on both
these cases? So yesterday, my office submitted a request for continuance. We've met with the RCO.
They've requested plan changes. We're in the process of making the changes and rescheduling
a follow-up hearing with the RCO. Thank you. Number five, MI 2022-002-210-1814 North Pelt.
and number seven, MI-2022-002-209-1816-Northville Pelt.
Both cases are continued.
Number six, MI-2022-001-992-4101-Germantown Avenue,
Julio Garcia, no exhibits on this case,
and there's a request for continuance.
any hands for that i see no hands chair that case is continued
number nine mi 2022 001 991 1239 north allison street amari jacks is the owner
we have no exhibits first listing
chair we have amari jacks good morning mr jacks could you state your name and spell for the court
reporter it's miss jacks it's a amazon mom a r i last name jacks j-a-c-k-s do you swear for him to
tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do we have no exhibits for this
um exhibits meaning photos and videos i have that to share my screen
But did you send it in?
Send it in?
All right.
So here's what I would recommend.
We're going to continue this.
You need to contact the office and find the appropriate way to transfer all your information
to our office.
So I can just go to the RCO email.
Right?
Thank you.
MI 2022-001991.
That case is continued.
No exhibits.
And number 17, MI 2022, 002-171-1359 Cree Street.
We have no exhibits.
Jennifer Jordan.
I see no hands, Chair.
Okay, that case is continued.
MI 2022, 002-171-1359 Cree Street.
The case is continued.
Are there any requests for withdrawals?
I see no handshare.
Add-ons for the day.
MI 2022-00474-298 Delmar Street.
I vote no.
Carol Tenere, my vote is no.
ish ish no shaheed my vote is no thomas
okay thank you there's three no's james snell my vote is no
okay okay number one of the regular list
MI 2022-002-122-492 Scherz Lane. Paul Toner is the attorney. Letter of support, Central Roxburgh
Civic Association. Letter of support, Roxburgh Development Corporation. And letter of support
from Ridge Park Civic Association. Mr. Toner.
Good morning, Mr. Bergman.
good morning Mr. Bergman hi good morning Mr. Toner could you state your name and spell for
the court reporter please yes uh Paul Toner with Orphanese and Toner T-O-N-E-R right do you swear
a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do could you identify
your client and the relationship to the property my client is Brian Peshera he's the owner of the
property okay our vice chair has a few questions good morning Mr. Toner do you agree to wave the
reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do have you emailed the exhibit packet
with proof of ownership tax compliance refusal or 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 i do
you may proceed and please share your screen thank you mr thank you
Good morning, Board. This is an application that is fully supported by the coordinating RCO to Central Roxborough Civic Association. After a hearing where 31 participants appeared, there was what we believe to be a unanimous vote.
The application is also submitted by the Roxborough Civic Association and the Ridge Park Civic Association.
Letters of support from all three RCOs are included within our exhibit packet.
This is an application to legalize or confirm the legality of a two-unit use at 492 Shores Lane.
By means of summary review, my client recently purchased the property when he went to secure a Certificate of Rental Suitability.
The Eclipse system indicated that it was only approved as a one unit.
In Exhibit 7, we have copies of the zoning archives.
After the Certificate of Rental Suitability was only approved for one unit, we reviewed the archives,
And it was determined that in both 1971 and 1936, L&I had approved the legality of 492 Shores Lane as a two-unit property.
As you can see in Exhibit 7, our use registration permit number 183083, dated February 2, 1971, recognizes this property as a legal two-family dwelling.
And then going even further back in the zoning archives, there is an application for zoning use permit that was granted on November 18, 1936, that recognizes the subject property as a two-family dwelling.
It appears that in 1971, the owner of the property at that time is doing exactly what we're doing today.
They're submitting an application to confirm the legality of a pre-existing legal non-conforming use.
The property appears as depicted in the six of our exhibit packet.
It is from our appearances, a well-maintained home in the Central Roxborough neighborhood.
Exhibit 6-2 is a picture of the block looking towards the west.
Third picture, which is now on your screen, shows one of the two separate entry doors.
Page 4 is the second entry door. As you can see, both of these doors are of some age. They're not
new modern doors. As we go through the hearing packet at Exhibit 6-5, there's a picture of
the basement showing two separate water heaters, two separate gas meters. There's a separate
electrical service for serving each one of the units and that's depicted in 6 page 8.
The rear of the property which is exhibit 6 page 10 shows the two separate electric services
plus the one separate air conditioning unit for unit number the first floor unit.
Moving to Exhibit 6, page 12, these are interior pictures of the first four units.
As you can see, the molding is all vintage, the woodwork, the trim work all around the
front door is all vintage.
This is a page 13 of Exhibit 6, shows the entryway to unit number two, which is the second floor unit.
Again, vintage wood floors, vintage stairs, vintage molding, all the showing that's been occupied for a period, for an indefinite period in the past.
um for an indefinite period in the past and then exhibit number six page 15 and 16 show images of
and then
the second floor unit again none of this looks like to be a recent conversion as they're all
well-established um improvements at the property
Exhibit number five just depicts where 492 Shores Lane is. It's right before, right to the west of Ridge Avenue. St. Timothy's Episcopal Church is in the back.
Exhibit number four shows how 492 Shores Lane appears from the front of the property.
and exhibit number eight shows uh a application or certificate of rental suitability that was
secured by my client in 2021 and what this shows that my client has always acted in compliance
with the law when he bought the property was his understanding there was two units
he immediately got a immediately made appropriate application to get the appropriate uh rental
license and certificate around suitability in place once that was rendered uh impossible
he submitted this application to legalize what the zoning archives reflect to be illegal
pre-existing two-family use um my client is here and i would like to have him adopt my testimony
absolutely
mr besher can you hear me
good morning this is mr hander hey can you hear me yes could you do could you state your name
and spell it for the court reporter brian bishara representing uh b-r-i-a-n b-i-s-h-a-r-a
here for 492 shares lane right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but
the truth. I do. Proceed Mr. Turner. Mr. Bashar did you hear my factual summary of this application
to the board? Yes I heard everything from the beginning. Was my statement of facts accurate
as far as you're aware? Yes everything was correct that you said. Do you disagree with anything?
No I do not. And do you adopt my testimony as though it was your own? Yes I do. I have no
for their questions questions from the board no mr chairman questions or comments from the
virtual audience good morning this is jason hand again i do not see any hand at this time
thank you uh planning commission morning chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city
planning commission just spell your last name please and spelled h-e-g-a-r-t-y
right do you swear firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes sir proceed
thank you good morning board members um the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the
rsa 5 single family zoning on this block however as we've seen here the doc the property has a
documented use history and um an interior physical configuration to support two family use we
recommend that the board grant the variance. Thank you. MI 2022 002122 492 Scherz Lane. I vote yes.
Carol Tenere. My vote is yes. Thomas Alman. My vote is yes. James Snell. My vote is yes.
Thank you. My vote is yes. Thank you very much.
Number two, MI 2022-003-082-1525 North Stillman Street.
David Orphanides is the attorney.
Letter of non-opposition from Bruby Town, charged with Community Civic Association.
Association. Okay, sir, Mr. Orphanides has been promoted to panelists. Thank you. Mr. Orphanides,
could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Mr. Orphanides?
Good morning, Mr. Orphanides. Are you available?
Sorry about that. Can you hear me now?
Yes. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
What's going on there? David Orphanides, last name is called O-R-P-H-A-N-I-D-E-S.
Right. You swear to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth
and nothing but the truth
I do. May I share my screen?
Yes. Could you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
Certainly. My client is 1525 North Stillman Street, LLC, and they are the owner of the subject property.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good morning. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, referral, photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
And yes, you may proceed and your screen's up.
So go ahead.
Thank you.
Again, David Orphanides from Orphanides and Turner here in Philadelphia.
Again, I'm representing 1525 North Stillman Street, LLC.
see the this is a photograph just real quickly of the existing property you're going to hear
me go through a little bit of history of the property but it's presently a vacant and blighted
lot it's presently being squatted upon by the person who is not by my client but by somebody
else who's using it to store broken down vehicles and here's a rendering of what we we propose to
erect in its place um we do as mentioned we do have a letter of non-opposition from the coordinating
rco or the rco that was designated as a coordinating rco by the planning commission which is a brewery
town shardswood community civic association and i think that that letter was just forwarded uh
just recently i'm just going to kind of move this to there you go so you can see that
we do have revised zoning drawings there were some minor modifications made to the design
minor in the sense that there were some physical bump outs to the side property lines that were
reduced and modified some fencing was modified as well and those were things that we've included
with the revised proviso plan form that's been submitted and here you can see the original zoning
drawings that showed the bump outs a little further to either side. You'll see in a minute
the photographs of what's to either side of us. There's a one-story industrial commercial building
to the north of us up here, and to the south of us there's a multifamily dwelling.
Here you can see the subject property on North Stillman Street located between
Jefferson Street and West Oxford Street. Here you can see the vehicles that are presently
being stored on the property, again, not by my client. Here's the abutting residential multifamily
that's been completed and constructed to the south of us, the commercial industrial building
to the north of us. Even though the properties, we have RSA 5 zoned properties, as you can see
right here, to the ends, to either ends, you can see it's a very mixed block of industrial
um icmx rm1 rsa5 our property is zoned uh rm1 uh there are five single families down here
and one here there's a multi-family that since this aerial was taken has been constructed here
and then there is a large as you'll see in the photographs in a minute there's a large
uh electrical um supply i think i think it was called eastern electrical liquidators
that takes up, that goes from 26th Street to Stillman Street, located directly across from
our property. And real quickly, just to show you some images, here's the existing property. Again,
as you can see, the cars that are being stored there, not by my client. The multifamily residential
property to the south, right abutting us to the south, similar to what we're proposing,
multi-family view down the street parking on either side one of the advantages to what we're
doing here as the board well knows rm1 does not require off-street parking um for uh for residential
use um one of the reasons or the main reason for our height variance is that we because as you can
see parking is pretty tight up in this area and that was conveyed to us in uh in our community
meetings uh that we wanted to provide off-street parking and that necessitated pushing the building
up an additional floor um here you can see the uh and you can see a little bit of it here over
to the right oops and then down here that's the uh the electrical eastern electric liquidators
building that goes through to south 26th street and then you can see the view to the north of us
on stillman street and here oops one second there you can see the building to the north of us
uh historically and um
Historically, and you can see that the property was utilized as a garage dating back to 1918.
Approximately in 1951, sometime between 1951 and 1985, came a vacant building.
So that's what, over 40 years ago.
and then you can see sometime between 92 and 94 came a vacant lot so that's been it's been a
vacant lot for over 30 years the property is 80 feet wide by 78 feet deep it's a fairly large
property as I indicated there are other multi-family residential properties located
on the block the one that I indicated that goes through from 26 to Stillman is 28 units
uh with nine cars um given given the the nature of the block um given the the mixed the mixed use
of the block given the other residential uses on the block um given the fact that we wanted to
provide parking um which created our height refusal and generated some of the other refusals
that we have here you can see here down at the bottom because we're an attached structure uh we
get a refusal in rm1 but the benefit here was to get cars off the street and that was something
that was well received by the community. Our open area refusal is a relatively de minimis one,
particularly given the large buildings that occupy 100% or close to 100% of the lot up there.
And then while we do exceed the unit count for lot area, we are for 16 units, obviously you could
have no more than three unrelated people per unit, which would be 45 bedrooms. With our 24 units,
We're only doing a mix of about six, not about, but 16 two bedrooms and eight one bedrooms.
So we're only doing 40 bedrooms.
So it's not a particularly dense development, even though you look at the number of new units and you would think that we're not shoehorning in or cramming in a lot of a lot of residents into the property.
The archives for the property, you can see going back in time, copy of our zoning and board appeal is at tab 13, along with our project information form.
copy of the deed at 14a showing my clients are the owner of the property as well confirmed with
the office of property assessment a copy of our tax compliance is at tab 15 a copy of the hearing
notice for today's hearing which was posted at the property along with the copy of the notice
of refusal and compliance with the requirements of the zoning code and then our 14 303 notices
this is the email from the planning commission designating brewery town shardswood community
civic association as the coordinating rco and um and again uh we uh properly notified to the list
of addresses which you have here uh both the uh the date and the time and the zoom link for the
community group meeting as well as for the zoning board hearing and again uh as indicated by the
chairman as i indicated as well we do have a letter of non-opposition from the brewery town
Charswood Community Civic Association. We met with them last Thursday. And with that, I would
just like to have my client, and then if he's on the architect, adopt my statements. My client
representing the ownership LLC is Josh Matthews. If he could be identified. And just to be clear,
one thing I did want to point out in their letter from, while we're having them promoted to a
panelists, we did agree to provide, as indicated in the letter, one affordable unit as part
of our proposal, which we're not going in for the mixed income housing bonus, but in
this way, we were able to provide an affordable unit directly to the community through the
Civic Association.
And then if I could have Mr. Matthews identified or promoted to a panelist so I could have
him adopt my statements and then ian smith if at all possible mr matthew you're free to speak
mr matthew could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
joshua matthew j-o-s-h-u-a-m-a-t-h-e-w that's right do you swear for him to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth yes proceed mr orphanetes hey josh um can you state your
position with the LLC? I'm an owner. Okay, thank you. And did you hear the statements that I made
to the board today? Yes. And they true or correct to the best of your knowledge? Yes. Would you
adopt them as your own? Yes. And is there anything you would like to add? That's everything. Okay,
thank you. Mr. Peetor, I need you to question. The large property next to you, how many units?
mr question the large property next to how many units uh the large property just to the
south just to the south of us right um i believe that's 16 units okay thank you and one other one
in your package there was a buy right permit originally issued for this property for 18 units
correct okay and that's just the problem with that is that is that as time has gone on since
the issue of that that's not a viable um plan and the other thing is is that that plan um didn't
have any parking whatsoever it was just straight residential okay thank you so one again when we
went to the committee we've had a couple projects up in this neighborhood and and on street parking
is is a huge issue for them and how many unit how many parking spaces you're providing so we we have
we have a total of uh we have a total of eight eight car parking along with um one a handicap
spot that's included there all right thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no mr
chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission all right good morning uh thank you chair bergman
ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission uh board members in 2014 the zoning
maps were amended in this area in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan
this block face was intentionally left as rm1 um with regard to the dimensional variances we feel
the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the additional height and lot coverage are consistent
with the neighborhood character and are necessary to avoid some kind of economic detriment to the
applicant. With regard to the use variance for dwelling unit count, the applicant's hardship
claim is not supported with evidence of any kind of unique physical circumstances on this lot. This
is a flat square lot. And with regard to the variances for parking access, the applicant
has also failed to demonstrate unique physical conditions, and we feel the proposal would
negatively affect pedestrian safety on this street, which is the reason for the requirement that
parking be accessed by a shared or rear street. We also submit that the hardship for building height
and for parking access that have been put forward by the applicant are self-created
by the applicant by choosing their agreement with the neighborhood to include non-required
off-street parking on the plan. We would note that the adjoining properties at 1517 through 23
North Stillman Street have been recently redeveloped with fully compliant structures,
and we would cite that as evidence that variances are not necessary for development on this block.
And then finally, just a reminder for the board that community benefits agreements related to
housing affordability are not reviewed or enforceable by the city and are essentially
meaningless in the long term should the building be sold or whatever so the city planning commission
recommends that the board deny all these variances may i respond okay so so first of all the project
that was didn't show up and that's been developed right here is does have parking as i indicated
that's uh 20 28 units with nine car parking and that building is 53 feet six inches tall
that building is taller than our building that we're presently proposing um there has been as
you can see there it's like you know even as i scroll out there are a number of vacant lots in
the area but these are all starting to be developed now and what the neighborhood is experiences and
what is what we've often seen is there's not a parking problem until the development comes in
and then there's an on-street parking problem it was made very clear to us that having off-street
parking was an important element of what we of a development project of course when you go in by
right they the community has no say in it you can build it by right without it so pointing to the
project to the south and saying that that doesn't have parking and that somehow that is something
that's appropriate for the neighborhood while the zoning code would say it is it is as a matter of
law i guess you have to take a look at the individual properties and look at the circumstances
in the community was willing to have the additional height, particularly when you have
the large structure located directly across the street that clearly occupies the non-residential
use and structure that occupies 100% of the lot, as well as the property just to the north of us
across the street. So providing off-street parking was something that was deemed to be
beneficial. You have the, I mean, you can look at the aerial and you can see, I disagree with
Mr. Haggerty, if you take a look at the aerial, you can see that there are an abundance. In fact,
the aerial you can see that there are an abundance in fact the majority even the residential
the majority, even the residents.
structures on the block but let's let's look at the non-residential structures occupy over a hundred
percent you know over the over 75 percent some up to a hundred percent a lot you can see down here
you can see across the street you can see all these even the residential here's a residential
property that clearly extends almost to the rear yard um so and you have some other ones over here
as well on the next street over on north 25th so this this building occupies 100 of the lot
so the condition on this block is clearly one and you can see it also if you review the Sanborns
this is all documented as well that the existing conditions on the block aren't necessarily as
Mr. Haggerty would describe them with all due respect in terms of the the community benefit
agreement. To say that they're worthless, I think is a little heavy handed. There's a reason for
them. They are binding contracts. They're enforceable in the court of law. And one of
the things that we were able to see here is that, unfortunately, if you go through the mixed income
housing bonus, you do a payment in lieu, the money goes into a fund and we don't know where that
money what neighborhood that money is applied in the same thing goes for the not for providing the
units it could be anybody coming from any neighborhood anywhere not necessarily serving
the people in the neighborhood so by what we are finding is that by entering into a direct agreement
with the community we're better better able to provide benefits directly to the community
that this building is located the property is located in again in terms of the height yes there
is a by right structure there but you know we've a couple projects up in this neighborhood and
the general consensus is that you do need off-street parking to provide for the units
we have a lower bedroom count than would be in that by right structure again um you know indicating
it that it could be um more than 45 unit 45 bedrooms or we're only at 40 so for those reasons
you know you can say that we've created mr aggie can say that we've created our hardships or
created the conditions but we don't believe that's the case we believe it's the neighborhood
that we're adapting to we're listening to the community and that there's a result we have the
project with the community benefit agreement um that we'll be entering into with the community
group so um for those reasons and the reasons that i've stated previously i asked the board
We feel that there's the basis for the granting of all the variances in this particular situation.
I think I might have to have my client adopt my statements again, just because I've added some additional information.
Mr. Matthew?
He's already been sworn.
Josh, you heard the additional statements I made in response to the Planning Commission statement.
Are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
And would you adopt them as your own?
And I'll just ask you a couple quick questions.
This is the second project you've done up in this neighborhood, the other one, having been supported also by the neighborhood.
Tell the zoning board a little bit about your involvement and your participation in the neighborhood.
Sure. So we've worked closely with the Brewery Town Civic Association here initially on a project about a block or two away at 26th and Jefferson.
and that was kind of our first engagement with the Civic. We had a community meeting with them
where we heard a lot of the concerns of the neighbors, and we decided to spend the next,
you know, 120 days canvassing the neighborhood, meeting with neighbors, meeting with stakeholders
and other constituents, and kind of understanding what the concerns are in the neighborhood and
devising a plan. And that plan consisted of community outreach. We created a mentoring
program, which we call it, it's a learn and earn program where we're exposing local brewery town
youth to commercial real estate by giving them a seat at the table and showing them the process
from acquisition to development to CO and letting them get exposure to the different aspects of
real estate from financing, law, community outreach, property management, etc. So we've
definitely become heavily involved with the community from that respect and trying to have
an impact. In addition to that, we've helped senior citizens with tax appeals and getting them
access and helping them understand different resources that the city is offering in tandem
with the Brewery Town Civic Association, which we've essentially almost worked out of
almost worked out of their offices on 30th and master. So I think we've created a pretty good
out of their offices on 30th and Master.
rapport and the other concerns around parking and affordability. We decided to add an affordable
unit in this building to kind of help with any of the concerns regarding affordability of rent.
And Josh, just real quickly on the parking. Isn't it true that providing the off-street
parking is what drives our our height refusal yes that is correct i mean we otherwise it would be a
four-story building which would could be built as a matter of right correct that is correct okay and
again during the meetings the prior meetings with the other project and then in this meeting as well
the community voiced uh serious concerns about mitigating having a project that um they looked
the number of units but also the number of bedrooms and then looked about whether or not
and how much off street parking was being provided correct and again we received a letter of non
opposition from the community group correct yes okay thank you thank you thank you and i don't
know if ian smith is on or not the architect i'm not sure to adopt my statements in our statements
regarding my statements regarding the design of the project is he on if you could raise his hand
not sure if he's on or not i see no hands
okay thank you any other questions from the board no mr chair thank you
mi 2022 003082 1525 north stillman street i vote no carol tinerian my vote is no
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
James Snell, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you, Ms. Garfinides.
Number three, MI 2022, 002-112-4942 Germantown Avenue.
Jermaine Harris is the attorney.
letter of i believe support now from 12th ward democratic committee
am i right hillary on that yes that's correct mr chair it's they have not submitted a new
letter but it's my understanding from the council office that the coordinating rco is now in support
of this project. Thank you. Mr. Harris.
Yes, good morning. Hi, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Yes, it's Jermaine Harris, and I'm counsel for the owner, and my spelling, my name is J-E-R-M-A-I-N-E-H-A-R-R-I-S.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and their relationship to the property?
The client is Termantown Masjid and the president, Chris Jackson, is here.
And the address, the property address is 4942 Germantown Avenue.
Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Harris. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, or referral,
photos under 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 do.
Okay, great. You may proceed and begin to share your screen.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I'm just pulling up the exhibits right now, sorry.
OK. Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. I just wanted to note quickly, the Councilwoman Bass is in support of the project.
Her position was not opposition, but her position now is support. Thank you.
Thank you. Okay. So again, this is for 4942 Germantown Avenue.
Again, this is for 4942 Germantown Avenue. And the application is that there is a seeking for this building to be, we're seeking for a use variance for this property to be used as a school.
Currently, right now, the property is being used for tutoring, and it's neighborhood and members, children within the community, within the Germantown community, and currently there's about 50, there is approximately 50 kids that go there, and this has been a staple within the community for the last three years.
My client purchased the property in 2017. And when they purchased the property, it was previously used as a, it was basically used as apartments.
It's in a CMX zone, a mixed-use zone, but it was used, all the floors were used specifically for, were used specifically for apartments, so the hardship here is that my client, he wouldn't be able to convert this to a mixed-use
without incurring substantial expense and converting it into a mixed-use manner.
The interior configuration is all rooms.
Now, I'll go through my exhibits.
Exhibit A is a listing of the posting of the zoning notice for the property.
And here we have the deed right here, evidencing ownership of Germantown Masjid.
we have here also this is a three-story building
and we have here the property details uh it's a 3900 square foot uh building so it's a it's a
pretty large building. We also have plans here. So we have essentially we have the front, we have
the first floor plan right here. As I'm pointing, we have a front entrance and then we have a side
entrance. There's two separate entrances in the front of the building, which I'll get to when I
get to the actual front photos. But then there's a lobby right here. You enter in. Then there's a
main lobby. You have a bathroom right here for the first floor. You have an office. And then you
have classrooms right here. That's the first floor. Second floor. As you go up to the second
floor. You have a classroom, another classroom. In the rear, another classroom, another classroom.
Bathrooms right here. Walk up the stairs, go to the third floor.
You would have a classroom, classroom. So the plan is for this, each classroom to
house approximately eight students per class. This is the front of the building. This is
one entrance. This is the side entrance of the building, which is an emergency exit.
So those are the two front entrances for the building.
Then we have just the individual rooms, which would be classrooms, stairs, door of a classroom, it's another room, another classroom.
uh let's see another room
another room this is the rear of the building which is the third exit uh for this uh building
uh for this uh building continuation of the rear
it's the tax clearance right here
it's the refusal letter uh it was previously it's a commercial district as i uh make as my statement
was before CMX. It was previously used as a three-family household apartment.
It's the appeal application.
I have here a letter. We had a community meeting and we had, it was on July the 12th
and there was significant community uh support for this there was a supporting of the there
were four rcos that were there uh faith cdc wakefield 49ers 12th ward and solo there was
a total of 38 people
that were
33 community members
a total, again, a total of
38 individuals that was
there. There were support
from two of the
there was support from two of the
there was an opposition
by the 12th Ward
and then there was a non-opposition
by SOLO
And, essentially, I'll just briefly, if I may, just discuss the concerns that the opposition RCO had.
They had concerns about the safety of the children being able to get in and out of the building.
And, unfortunately, this wasn't discussed at the RCO.
We didn't learn about this opposition or the concerns that they had.
until they sent this letter. Otherwise, we would have addressed it at the meeting itself.
But one of the main things was the lack of exits, and there are three exits there
to the building. Also, trash will be stored in the rear of the building through dumpster,
We're going to have a commercial dumping dumpster for that.
Also, as far as parking, my client owns two, they're going to offer off-site parking for their staff.
We anticipate on having three or four, because it's a small school, we anticipate on having three or four staff members, teachers there.
And the off-site parking would be 506 Germantown Avenue and 508 and 5010 Germantown Avenue, which my client owns.
My client has a very strong presence within the Germantown community area, which is why there was such a very good turnout and good support because they recognize what is being done here.
As far as congestion, there was issues concerning congestion, and as stated in this letter, my client plans on directing, first of all, they plan on hiring a crossing guard, a private crossing guard to assist with that,
and are going to instruct the parents of the children to drop off the children on the side
street, not on the main thoroughfare of Germantown Avenue, but on the side street of Seymour Avenue.
And so that should address the congestion issues. And we would just ask that given the fact that
there has uh been significant support there's support by the councilwoman um that this
uh variance be granted and i also have uh christopher jackson uh who who should be
online right now who can adopt these statements that i have mr jackson
i don't see a hand for mr for mr jackson but i have um it's could he be listed under another name
that's the jack hassan hassan imam yes all of them are women names
okay it may be his partner it may be his uh partner what what what name do you see i mean
It may be his partner.
What name do you see?
I mean, I'm sorry, Anya.
May I ask all to lower their hand and only the individual call.
Please raise your hand so we can promote you to speak.
Thank you kindly.
OK, thank you.
I think Amina was I Amina is also a representative of the.
And if she raised her hand, that's also a representative of my client.
We have someone by the name of Yassir.
He's barely able to speak.
Excuse me.
Okay, fine.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
caller please unmute yourself so you can speak
yeah i'm saying my name is yasir y-a-s-i-r
okay and could you state uh did you hear the test statements that i did wait a minute wait a minute
could you state your name again please and spell it sure yeah my name is yasir
y-a-s-i-r right do you do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth yes proceed counsel yes could you state what your relationship is to the uh
to the germantown to the applicant uh germantown masjid please
i'm basically the um the treasurer in the masjid okay and did you hear the statements
that i uh made for this presentation yes i did and do you adopt those uh test that those statements
as if you made those statements on your own yes okay is there anything that you'd like to add or
would you that you like to add to what i stated or would you stand alone on what i stated
i would stand alone with what you said okay questions from the board no mr chairman
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Charles Richardson.
Good morning, Mr. Richardson.
You've already been sworn to state your name.
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 312 City Hall.
The Councilwoman has no objection to granting the variance,
But we do acknowledge the fact that there were safety concerns that were raised by all four RCOs, the three of which are supporting the granting of the variance as well.
SOLO is still opposed as far as I know at this point.
But Councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variance.
Thank you very much.
Hi, Mr. Chair.
This is Tanya.
may I please respectfully interrupt and request that the witness provide a full name or did I
miss it I think that was his full name just the one name if we can verify on record I asked that
twice okay just want to make sure thank you any other comments from the virtual audience
yes chair we have someone first name miriam okay miriam could you state your name and spell it for
the court reporter please sure my name is miriam anor that's m-a-r-i-a-m last name a-n-n-o-r
all right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Yes, I do.
Proceed.
Okay, so currently I work as the school manager at Germantown Meschet Academy.
We've been in operation as a tutoring center for about eight years now, and we are requesting,
as Mr. Harris stated, to become a fully functional educational facility in order to register
with the Department of Education.
By doing this, we'll be able to provide full services to our students and our families.
We have a very small population, a small group of students that we service.
Some of the concerns that were brought up by the RCOs were not mentioned in the meeting.
However, we have taken extra measures as a part of our plan to address safety concerns, traffic concerns, and trash removal and things like that that were brought up.
For example, as relates to the...
For example, as relates to the emergency exits and safe evacuating students and staff out of the building in the event of an emergency, we have began training staff.
Teachers are aware of our disaster plan, which is in place.
We are basically following the similar protocols that other schools have in place without working under the umbrella as a school.
We have evacuation plans in each of our classrooms.
We have three exits, the two that Mr. Harris showed.
We also have the rear exit.
We have three floors and have designated a specific exit per floor.
Um, we are planning to work closely with the, um, fire department and, um, the department of education and also following what the school district does in terms of, um, monthly fire drills, uh, providing training, uh, providing other, uh, evacuation, uh, plans, uh, uh, quarterly.
um in addition to that in terms of i believe the other concern that was raised was the traffic
concern uh the traffic control and that's something with a small uh student population
we don't anticipate that we don't anticipate a heavy traffic load considering there are other
schools in the area who you know have uh hundreds of students in population and for example we have
Germantown French School here that has 1,100 plus students. We have 80 students. With the area that
we're currently situated, we don't see our arrival and dismissal drop-offs creating a significant
traffic issue. However, we're still taking measures to ensure that parents are dropping
off on the smaller, smaller street portico. And we'll have school guards on either side of the
street to assist students crossing the street. And this is to, you know, for the safety of the
students to prevent any, you know, any of the incidences that might, you know, might have
happened in the area. Without functioning as a school, we can't appeal with this. We can't put
in an appeal with the city or a request in the city for things such as across, what is
it? Upon approval, we would go ahead and request with the streets, Philadelphia streets, for
school zone regulations. And I believe that would also support what we're trying to do
for the for the students that we service and the families that we service in terms of trash removal
um we also have things in measure for that we will be we we do have a dumpster in the back of
our building and there shouldn't be anything significant you know um or obstruction or
anything adding to the um neighborhood um uh trash removal uh on the street so with the
Turns out we brought up the RCOs. We've definitely taken all of those into consideration and have a plan in action to address each other.
All right. Thank you. And thank you very much for pulling in. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. We have Rosalind, first name.
Hi, Rosalind. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Rosalind McKelvey, R-O-S-A-L-I-N-D, last name McKelvey, M is in Mary, C-K-E-L, Lee is in Victor, E-Y.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Proceed.
Hi. I am not the coordinating RCO. So if Cheryl Smith is here, it would probably be better for her if she has her hand up or puts her hand up to explain as she was the coordinator coordinating RCO. That's my first question. Is she here or does she have her hand up?
Well, why don't you just give us your point of view and then move on.
All right. I'm the Wakefield 49er president, and we've been working and had the honor to work with the Mosjet on many different occasions.
Town Watch, they assist him when people get shot.
The imam's even picking him up himself, and they're trying to get him to the hospital.
So we have a relationship, and they've encouraged membership to the 49ers.
But just for the sake, and let me be clear with this, the most important thing is education and safety.
And after West Philadelphia, the people that passed away in the fire, they have not read the concerns.
The people that passed away in the fire, they have not read the concerns and the Masjid has tried to fix all concerns, but the exits that we put in, and I'm only saying this, they said they're willing to do anything they have to do to comply.
The notes that I got from the meeting that I couldn't be at on the 12th said that they anticipate going for 80 students, possibly.
The exits for fire escape due to the fact that there's accidents and shootings in the front of the building.
We look for fire escapes or escape routes in the back.
There's one door on the first floor, but for the second and third, we did not see any fire escapes.
We ask them for ladders or some insurance that all staff and students can get out from the rear that enters into a dead end street.
If they can address that issue, but that would be an L&I issue.
That's what I'm saying. That's all L&I and fire code.
Right.
We're hearing about the zoning. That's what we're talking about.
We support education, and we are supporting them. I just wanted to make sure the 49ers were clear.
Thank you very much, and we appreciate your calling in. Is there any other comments in the virtual audience?
Yes, Chair. We have Allison Weiss.
Hi. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes. Allison, A-double-L-I-S-O-N, Weiss, W-E-I-S-S, Solo Germantown Civic Association.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Yes. We did submit our letter. I don't know that I saw it submitted with the submissions.
So we expressed our concerns.
And I just wanted to reiterate that the granting of this variance does not necessarily grant that there will be a school, because the state has to make that decision.
So there was no physical hardship given that this property could not be used as it's presently zoned.
so there's there it's just a question of um will the state agree and we have no assurance okay and
then the um the um at the meeting when we asked for authorization of street trees which we
understand to improve the quality of life and to increase prosperity on business corridors
was completely rejected so we were we were unsure of that so thank you for allowing all right thank
you thank you for calling in is there anyone else in the virtual audience mr chair this is hillary
i i just wanted to note that we did receive uh the letter from solo germantown okay thank you
I think. Yes, Chair, we have Amina Yasmeen.
Hi, could you, Amina, could you come on, please, and state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Good morning, everyone.
Hi, could you state your name? Can you all hear me?
Yeah, we can. State your name and spell it, please.
Hi, Amina Yasmeen, A-M-I-N-A-H-Y-A-S-M-I-N, like Nancy.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
I am a property owner in the area in a 4,900 block of Germantown, as well as the 5,100 block.
I provide affordable housing for approximately nine families, 80% of which are in support of the Masjid schooling their own children,
and the other 20% in support of the schooling facility existing in the community.
I also operate two restaurants in the corridor.
One of my restaurant owners is actually on the phone,
and everyone just remarks at how the children are always so studious,
so happy-looking, so orderly,
and we support the Mashed expanding their reach
in educating students and bringing a more positive force in the community. So I'm
all for this and I'm in total support. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much for pulling in.
We appreciate it. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience that has something they could
offer different than what we've heard? Chair, we have Cheryl Smith. All right.
good morning can you hear me good morning could you state your name and spell for the court
Good morning. Can you hear me? Good morning. Could you state your name and spell for the court?
reporter my name is Cheryl Smith C-H-E-R-Y-L Smith S-M-I-T-H right do you swear or tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth I do proceed okay I represent the 12th Ward RCO that was my
letter that was um you know shown on the screen thank you um we have since changed on the left
at the beginning of the meeting, you stated that our position had changed to support.
We do support the school. We absolutely support the school. So we will change our vote.
But we are concerned, and you've addressed those in some of your statements,
the concerns and safety concerns and fire concerns that come with expanding
the street concerns, the traffic concerns, which are absolutely not your,
um you absolutely can't do anything about it but it is a concern and we want that noted that
we are in favor of it but with those concerns thank you thank you miss smith for calling in
we appreciate it is there anyone else chair we have anwar right okay
uh yes good morning my name is anwar right a-n-w-a-r right w-r-i-g-h-t
Do you swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed.
Yes, I'm an individual who I have two daughters.
They've both been tutored at the school.
And I can assure you that that was mentioned from safety concerns.
The school has been very proactive in making sure, you know, there's safety measures in place, whether for shootings or whether it be for fires or anything other than that.
The school administration, they've been very proactive in contacting the parents and working with the parents and likewise the students as it relates to these measures.
also as it relates to um parking and and and things like that we haven't encountered any of
that which some have mentioned regarding you know uh traffic and things like that
it's been smooth pickups smooth drop-offs so i'm from i'm from those parents uh who who's definitely
thank you mr wright thank you for taking the time of this project
is there anyone else that has something different than what we've already heard
i see no hands chair thank you planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the
philadelphia city planning commission members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends
no change to the cmx 2.5 zoning at this location however we feel the proposed use is uniquely tied
to the presence of the adjacent existing community center and religious institution
we also believe that the applicant has demonstrated the impacts to neighbors in the neighborhood would
be broadly consistent with the range of permitted uses in CMX 2.5. Therefore, the City Planning
Commission recommends that the Board grant the variance. Thank you, Ian. MI 2022, 002-112-4942
Germantown Avenue, I vote yes. Harold Tenere, my vote is yes. Thomas Hollowan, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Thank you, Counsel.
Number four, MI 2022-001-760-5514 Land Sale Avenue.
Joseph Consul is the attorney.
Recommendation of support from Hesentville RCO.
Mr. Consul is coming back in as a panelist.
Good morning, Mr. Consul.
Good morning, Mr. Counsel.
Do we see Mr. Counsel's hand?
I'm sorry. Can you hear me now?
i'm i'm speaking for joseph consul uh i we can hear you now okay uh he's actually in another
hearing that he's finishing up and he asked if this could be pushed to the end we we will we
will a little bit later okay thank you
recommendation and just so you know chair this is tanya it seems like zoom is slowly very slowly
promoting people there is a bit of a delay thank you for the good news tanya
you're welcome uh number 10 mi 2022 003 303 892 north 41st street
0-0-3-3-0-3-8-9-2-North 41st Street, Parcel C.
Mr. Mattione is the attorney.
Let's see here.
recommendation of support from the bell mount alliance civic association
morning mr chairman morning mr mattione could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
please sure michael mattione that's m-a-t-t-i-o-n-i right do you swear for him to tell the
truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Could you identify your client in relationship
to the property? Yes, it's 2621 Jefferson Development LLC. They're the owner and the
principal, Eugene Nidovich, is available today. Okay, our vice chair, Carl Tenere, has a few
questions. Sure. Mr. Mattiani, do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to
its accuracy. Yes. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance,
refusal referral, photos under 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, everything. Okay, you may proceed
and begin to share your screen. Thank you. Thank you.
as i stated i am representing 2621 jefferson development they are the owner of this property
at 892 north 41st which is a large parcel at the corner of 41st at westminster street
and i have submitted as the vice chair said submitted exhibits including the tax clearance
the refusal, the RCO letter of support, site plan, floor plans, renderings, and photographs.
And Mr. Nidovich is available as well.
And this matter, this property is in the RM1 zoning district.
And Mr. Nidovich did receive approval for a 30-unit project already.
However, he is seeking a 30-unit project with variances.
The biggest one is he would like to remove the green roof and obviously lose the bonus units that he would get with the green roof
and have a larger footprint, which then creates a refusal on the side yard.
As we stated, the RCO supports the project.
The project, again, is a multifamily 30-unit building.
it meets virtually all of the requirements of the zoning class and it's at 41st and
Westminster Street. The proposal is for all of the floors to be basically the same
and that is that they would have
two bedroom units on each corner, one bedroom unit in the middle,
and again two bedroom units on the other corner. So a total of six units per floor.
I just want to scroll down and show the renderings as well.
Okay, and what he's seeking to do is increase the size of the units.
When he was approved for 30 units originally, he had 10 studio apartments and 10 one-bedroom units.
I'm sorry.
He had 10 studio units.
He wants to change them to 10 one-bedroom units, and he wants to increase the size of the 22-bedroom units.
He will retain the low-income housing bonus and will still have the three low-income units that he was originally granted if this variance was granted.
Again, what we would do is we would still have four two-bedroom units, but they would each be about 800 square feet, 20 total, and two one-bedroom units on each floor, 600 square feet, or a total of 10 one-bedroom units.
There would also be 10 bicycle parking spaces, trash storage in the rear of the property.
This property is zoned for multifamily.
It's compliant with multifamily uses.
The neighborhood supported this.
In fact, they asked him to make the units bigger, to have one bedroom units instead of studio units.
And the way that he accomplished that was to eliminate the green roof and to have a larger building footprint.
Eliminating the green roof allows him the extra funds necessary to increase the size of the building and size of the units.
Again, if this variance were granted, he would have a 30-unit building, just like he already has approval for, but with just larger units.
Again, if this variance were granted, he would have a 30 unit building just like he already did.
Instead of having 700-square-foot two-bedroom units, he would have 800-square-foot two-bedroom units.
And instead of having 400-square-foot studios, he would have 600-square-foot one-bedroom units.
It's not really increasing the density.
It's just increasing the size of the units.
And, you know, the community where this is located, it has a red brick facade, it blends in with the red brick facades.
I want to show the site photographs.
It's a vacant lot, as you can see at 41st and Westminster.
Looking to the north, you see multifamily structures.
Looking to the south again, multifamily structures.
and in the surrounding area you had a 56 unit senior senior living facility
again the multi-family structures on the other side and then there is a large school
as well on the northeast corner of 41st and westminster
If granted, this project would be developed consistent with the community and surrounding uses.
It would develop this longstanding vacant property and eliminate the blight that comes with the vacant property.
It will not increase congestion over what is already approved.
It will improve public welfare by activating a vacant parcel.
and it will eliminate the problem of illegal dumping that you often get with
vacant parcels. Again, this was fully supported and in fact Mr. Nidovich I'm going to call on
will explain how the community approached him about making the changes that he made
and that's why they were made and that's why the variance is requested.
So what I'd like to do is call Mr. Eugene Nidovich.
Mr. Natovich, you're free to speak.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Eugene Natovich, E-U-G-E-N-E.
Last name is N-A-Y-D-O-V-I-C-H.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And Eugene, did you hear my comments?
I did.
And are they true and correct?
They were.
And do you have any additional comments to add about how you came up with the plan to increase the size of the building footprint and the size of the units and how that came about?
Yes. So I'm very active in the community and I constantly take community input on projects, even when they are by right.
So one of the things the community asked is to have larger units.
So in this situation, we didn't increase the number of bedrooms, we didn't increase the number of units, all we did is increase the size of the units, and we are still within 80% of the allowable lot coverage.
And we also met with the community twice on this matter, so we get input on types of facade and giving it that kind of historical look that they want to have in the neighborhood.
And do you have any further comments?
I don't.
And do you adopt my statements as your testimony in addition to your testimony?
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I vote.
Mr. Mationi, did you state this was originally approved for 30 units?
Was that by right?
Yes, that's by right.
It had the smaller footprint, Mr. Chairman, and I did adopt the zoning permit for 30 units as well.
What questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
no mr chairman questions or comments yeah so this is hillary mr matthew you mentioned that the um
the green roof was removed is that correct that's one of the things that's still listed
on the refusal are there um revised plans showing that revised no we do not have a revised plan
showing it but there will not be a green roof and it was specific that we were not having a green
roof okay okay i'm sorry thank you that's okay questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no he is chair planning commission thank you chair bergman uh
you know for the philadelphia city planning commission uh members of the board the
comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change from rm1 to rsa5 at this location
with regard to the dimensional variances city plan.
um with regard to the dimensional variances city planning commission believes that the proposed
dimensions are generally consistent with the character of the neighborhood and don't conflict
with the purpose and spirit of the zoning code however with regard to the proposed use variance
to permit 30 dwelling units we believe the applicants claimed hardship is actually self-created
here by eliminating the proposed green roof from the structure which as i understand it would be
uh the reason that 30 units are no longer allowed um we further believe that the claimed
hardship is not related to a unique physical condition of the lot and so we would have to
recommend that the board deny this variance mr matione you want to respond to that certainly
mr chairman the um the property is on rm1 the multi-family use is permitted and we would have
30 units permitted by Wright, but for removal of the green roof. The green roof was removed
because the community requested at an RCO meeting that we increase the size of the units.
In order to increase the size of the units to meet the request of the community, which
is part of the purpose of the RCO meetings, in order to do that, we had to lower the cost to
build the building. Well, the only way we could lower the cost to build the building and develop
the property as the RCO was requesting was to remove the green roof so but we were still providing
the three affordable units as would be required if we had the green roof and we are still you know
doing 30 units which are permitted as of right as we showed we're just changing the building
footprint and the only way to be able to do that and meet the request of the community was to remove
the green roof mr chairman mi 2022 003 303 892 north 30 892 north 41st street i vote yes
harold tenere my vote is yes thomas holloman i vote yes thanks now my vote is yes
thank you
number 11
MI 2022
002 181
1401 South Patton
Street Henry Clinton is the
attorney
recommendation of support from Tasker
Morris Neighborhood Association
letter of support also
from Councilman Johnson
good morning mr chairman members of the board good morning mr clinton could you state your
name and please and spell for the court reporter sure henry clinton c-l-i-n-t-o-n right do you
swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do could you identify your
client, the relationship to the property? Sure. My client is Tree Trimmers, LLC, the principal of
which is Keith Palsis, P-A-U-L-I-C-S. I believe he's on the call, but he is on vacation and he
may not be able to connect from his destination. Okay. Our vice chair, Carol Tenere, has a few
questions. Hi, Mr. Clinton. Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy i do have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required documents consisting of proof
of ownership tax compliance 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 all the above
you may proceed and begin to share your screen thank you mr harry thank you
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Is this visible?
Maybe just a little larger. That's fine.
Good afternoon, Henry Clinton for Tree State Tremors LLC, the principal of which is Keith Palsas, whose name I spelled previously.
This is my presentation package containing exhibits AA through A11, which I ask to be admitted into evidence.
Appearance statement, this is a refusal.
so just by way of background this is a corner lot and as was typical back in the day in the
Grace Ferry neighborhood and other neighborhoods throughout the city the corner lots were typically
used by commercial on the first floor and residential above although on occasion you
might see a two-family dwelling and this proposal application we're asking that instead of any
commercial on the first floor, we're asking that this be a two-family dwelling. Granted, it is zoned
RSA 5, but it has documented historical use of two uses at the corner, as I will demonstrate.
The refusals concern the rear yard and some open space, but I'll show
uh the rear yard and some open space but i'll show you there's a drive aisle behind the homes
on this block and there's really no yard at all so really the issue today is
is a two-family dwelling permitted in an rsa 5 zoning district
we do have an rco letter of support from tasker mars neighborhood association and it was unanimous
this is the photograph this is reed street going west this is the corner property 1401
south patten street and if you can see between patten and napa street to the east there's a drive
aisle in the back the drive aisle was really impassable as i'll show you from the other
photograph at this end of the block but there's in effect really no rear yards other than an area
for a car to drive through. This is the corner lot here. This is ostensibly the drive aisle
which is supposed to daylight onto Reed Street and then you can go west. So our property
is on the corner as I said and there's two vacant lots next door. Again this is the zoning
map is showing the board that is an RSI A5 zoning district or some RM1 across the street.
This is a park and this is a Salvation Army daycare and also house center.
This is the rear elevation. This is the front elevation brick, which the neighborhood wants
and supports. Party board siding on the second and third floor.
and then here is the actual site plan to show you one of the refusals is for failure to have
five foot setback on the rooftop deck we do have a five foot setback on the rear on the rooftop deck
the reason we that refusal was generated is because other homes on the block have a front porch and
the l and i examiner determined that since our property is coming all the way out to the property
line. He's really counting the front porch as the beginning of where the roof deck should be,
and we're actually pushing it back five feet. And then here's the rear yard that I discussed
earlier. There is a dry vial here. There's really no rear yard at all,
so any refusals for the rear yard really should have no bearing on the application.
these are the floor plans we have a unit on the basement of first floor three bedrooms two baths
and then there's a unit on the second and third floor and that's three bedrooms and two baths
and then there's access to the rooftop deck there's ample area in the rear yard
for trash storage for both the first and basement unit,
as well as for the second and third floor unit.
We have no issues with height, open space.
I just wanted to get to the zoning records.
The rest of the documents that are in my package
are the pro forma documents you would see
in any zoning application.
This is the deed indicating ownership.
Our notices.
and then here's some of the zoning records.
So as I said, ages ago,
and some members actually of the Tascamars neighborhood group
remembers this corner
because they used to get their hair cut there.
It used to be a barbershop and one family on the first floor.
From the records, I couldn't tell when it was demolished,
but the corner has been vacant for many, many moons.
Again, just some more historical records
indicating prior use was both commercial and residential.
So in summary, based on the historical use of the building,
or the lot rather,
we're asking that a two-use be reinstated
at this corner property.
Instead of commercial and single family,
we're asking for two residential.
The commercial corridor basically is Grace Ferry Avenue now,
which is two blocks away,
where they're shopping both.
And there's a bank, there's a supermarket,
pocket and there's a couple other commercial stores there. This is a long vacant lot. We're
not altering the essential character of the neighborhood. We're not impairing the development.
We're impacting light and air of any adjacent property. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I'd like
the rest, introduce my client, have him adopt the testimony if he can make a connection. If not,
and I'll have to verify that he would adopt my testimony.
Mr. Keith Palsas, can you raise your hand
if you're able to connect?
I see no hands at this time.
I see no hands at this time.
Mr. Clinton, you're an officer of the court.
We'll take your testimony.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I very much appreciate it.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman and Ian Hegarty
for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission board members the comprehensive plan recommends
no change to the existing RSA 5 single family zoning at this location with regard to the
dimensional variances we agree that the proposed dimensions are both consistent with the neighborhood
and attributable to the smaller lot size of this property however this is a vacant cleared lot with
no evidence of unusual existing physical circumstances. We therefore believe that
the appellant has not supported their hardship claim to support the proposed use variance for
two-family in this RSA 5 single-family district. City Planning Commission therefore recommends
that the board grant the dimensional variances but deny the variance for two-family household
living. Thank you. Hold on here. Mr. Chairman. And Mike, pardon me? Would you like me to address
those comments? You most certainly can, Mr. Clinton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So Mr. Haggerty
is correct. This is a vacant lot. It's a long vacant lot. It has not been developed, has not
been touched. There's two adjacent vacant lots to it. So it's really a blight on the neighborhood.
I've documented the historical use of this property as consistently being two uses,
although commercial and residential.
It's not out of character that it have two uses on this corner, as are many other corners
in the Grace Ferry neighborhood.
There's ample light and air because this property is on the corner.
The side area will have plenty of light and air coming from Reed Street and coming from
the north.
so i i submit those comments in opposition to what mr haggarty's recommendation or rather the
planning commission recommendation is thank you plus it's in harmony with the community and in
harmony with the code mr clinton did i see to did the council office prove this or recommend it
i don't know if they weighed in on it mr chairman i i haven't i i think it's mr chair yeah mr
chair this is hillary we received a letter of support from councilman johnston thank you thank
you miss emerson mi 2022 002 181 1401 south patten street i vote yes carl tenere my vote is yes
thomas holliman my my vote is no jane snell my vote is yes
my vote is yes
Mr. Clinton I have you next too
MI 2022
5111 Baltimore Avenue
Mr. Clinton again
and I have here let's see here
letter of support from Cedar Park
neighbors
one vote was conditioned on a larger yard.
Mr. Clinton, you've already been sworn.
Could you identify your client
and the relationship to this property?
Sure, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, or still good morning, rather.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board,
Henry Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N.
My client is Keith Sheed, S-H-E-E-V,
and he is certainly on the call,
along with his partner, Sean Thomas, T-H-O-M-A-S.
All right.
Our Vice Chair, Calitonieri, has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Clinton.
Again, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet
with proof of ownership tax compliance,
the copy of the refusal or 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, to all of the above.
That's great.
You may proceed and begin to share your screen.
Thank you.
Good morning again, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Henry Clinton.
The owner of the property is 4934 Locust Street, LLC.
The two principals, Keith Shee and Sean Thomas, are both on the call today.
Again, this is the table of contents, which I ask to be admitted into evidence.
Exhibits AA through A11.
appearance statement refusal. This is an RSA 3 zoning district, and we're asking for a three
Appearance statement, refusal.
This is an RSA.
family dwelling in this property, which is consistent with other uses on the block. As
I'll show the panel or the board as we move through the presentation, there are other properties on
this side of the street, Baltimore Avenue, which is really known historically as a commercial
corridor, but there are other properties on the same side of the street that are multifamily
and I'll show the panel and board
as we move through this presentation.
The refusals concern open space and rear yard and parking.
There is no parking in multifamily,
even though this is zoned RSA 3.
And you'll see from aerial photographs,
I'll present to the board that there is no parking
on any of the properties on this side of the street.
This is a letter of support from Cedar Park neighbors
as Mr. Chairman alluded to earlier.
This is their letter of rationale.
And here are the plans.
So this is Baltimore Avenue,
right on the edge of Penn's campus.
And basically there are four other multifamily homes
on this block already.
And you'll see when I get to the zoning map,
it's a blend of commercial
and residential zoning districts.
There's even a cafe and a childcare facility on this block.
This is the subject property right here. You'll see from the detailed drawings by an architect that he tried to mirror the front porches and the second floor bays.
And I think when you see it, you'll be impressed with his opportunity to try to match what is existing homes in context.
Again, some other photographs to give the board perspective of this vacant lot.
again, I couldn't tell from zoning records how long it's been vacant. My understanding is it's
been vacant for at least a decade. There's just some photographs in the back. So here are the
plans. I'll start off with the site plan. Again, a proposed three-story house. You can see on the
front, we do have a protruding bay. We also have a setback on the third floor with a pilot house
on the third floor. Here is the rendering of the first floor. This is the first floor porch,
second floor protruding bay with nice detail trim, shadow boxes to match existing properties
on the block. Third floor is set back. We have detailed cornice work, not only on the bay,
but also on the third floor. And the pilot house is not visible at all from the Baltimore Avenue.
This is the floor plan. Basically, these are going to be condominiums, which the community
group was pleased with because they want more home ownership in the neighborhood. Basically,
three condominiums first floor basement second floor and third floor with ample bedrooms and
bathrooms throughout give you a perspective of the house to the east again trying to mimic what
is there keeping in context with the neighborhood again this was well received by the community group
the remaining records are the pro forma tax certifications or application and i wanted to
show the board the zoning map. For contextual purposes, this is the subject lot. The depths
of the lots are about the same, but you can see close on the west, one away, the CMX2
as well as on the corner and behind is RM1 on Webster Street.
These are the zoning records, which I mentioned earlier.
So on the corner, 5101 Baltimore Avenue, there's four rental units, 5105, 2, 5107 child care
facility 5119 for dwelling units and 5121 Baltimore Avenue sidewalk cafe and these are the supporting
documents concerning the summary that I just gave to the board so in summary I'd like to mention
that this is a unique situation in that the lot has been vacant for a while. There's a mix of
multifamily on the block already, as well as commercial. None of the properties on this side
of the street have parking. There's nowhere to park. There's no curb cuts to enter upon.
half parking there's nowhere to park there's no curb cuts to enter upon any lot and park
we're not affecting any light or air or the development of any adjacent properties
and we have a documented history of multi-family use on this block with that i would like to
ask my client to unmute himself dot my testimony as well as entertain any questions
from the board
or from the planning commission
could you state your name please
and spell for the court reporter
can you please unmute yourself
can you hear me
yes could you state your name
and spell for the court reporter
Keith Shee
K E I T H
C-E-D.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Clinton.
Good afternoon, Mr. Sheed.
Are you one of the two principals of the LLC, which owns this property, 5111 Baltimore Avenue?
And were you on the call when I presented the project?
And if you had the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct?
thank you mr sheen questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience
chair i've seen no heads at this time planning commission thank you chair bergman members of
the board the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change from rsa3 to rm1 on this block
face to recognize the surrounding context of multi-family use of these buildings the proposed
use and dimensions conform to the recommended zoning district and so the city planning commission
recommends that the board grant this variance thank you mi2022-002-206-5111 baltimore avenue
i vote yes carol tenere my vote is yes thomas holomon my vote is yes
jane snell my vote is yes ishmael shaheed my vote is yes
thank you mr clinton thank you mr chairman members of the board have a great day
you too number 13 mi 2022 201 989 8417 chippewa jay jay fischel is the attorney
uh chairman as you wish to we have case number four attorney available whenever you choose yeah
we'll try to fit him right
letter of non-opposition
from the Roxburgh Civic Association
although I
do believe we have letter of complaint
from a neighbor
Council Feinshaw
Chair, Mr. Donis
coming back in as a panelist now
excuse me
Mr. Chair. Mr. Dunn is the neighbor. Jay Feischel is the attorney. He should be the one
that's coming in as a panelist. Mr. Feischel just rose his hand. He's coming back in as a
panelists now. Okay, thank you. Good morning, counsel. Could you state your name and spell
please for the court reporter. Can you hear us? Can you hear me? I can hear you. Okay.
State your name and spell for the court reporter. I don't know why I am. Could you state your name
and spell for the court reporter? Start my video. Okay. My name is Jay Feinshill. I'm an attorney
for Mr. Mathis, J-A-Y, F as in Frank, E-I-N, S-C-H-I-L. All right. Do you swear for him to
tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed. While you've identified
your client, he's the owner of the property? Yes, he is. Okay. And our vice chair has a few
questions. Sure. Certainly. Hi. Good morning. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of
ownership 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
i did okay great you may proceed and begin to share your screen uh thank you
Okay, great. You may proceed and begin to share your screen.
Thank you. Forgive me. I cannot share my screen. I don't have the necessary skills, but I've submitted my package well in advance. It includes a lot of photographs, including photographs of the shed that is the subject of the controversy here. Mr. Mathis owns a residence in the upper...
Wait, wait, wait. Wait a minute. Tiny, do we have the ability to show his package?
No, not at this time, Chair. Okay.
Council, we have to have a package to be able to put on the screen that we here. Here's what I
want you to do. I want you to get a hold of the office and they'll give you some instructions,
but you're going to have to have to be able to present it to us. We just can't go on without it.
uh should we postpone the hearing that's what i'm saying well we're going to continue the case
okay we'll be in touch with you when the when the case is coming back but if you have any
questions on how to do this there's people in the office who are will be able to tell you what to do
okay okay my apologies no no that's okay i'm a retired district attorney not i don't appear
much in front of you. Well, it's a different client you have here. So anyway, the case is
continued. We'll be in touch. Okay. Okay. Thank you very much. All right.
All right. Tanya, let's go back. Sure. Chair, check case number four. Okay.
Okay. MI 2022, 001-760-5514 Lansdale Avenue. Joseph Consul is the attorney.
Recommendation of support from Hestonville RCO.
Chair, Mr. Consul is coming back in as a panelist now.
Hi, Mr. Consul. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Good morning, Chair. Good morning, Board. Joseph Consul, J-O-S-E-P-H, C-O-N-S-O-L-E.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
Yeah, my client is 644 Elm Street, LLC. And the representative who at least was on before and is hopefully still on is Max Jablonski.
Okay. Our vice chair, Carl Tenere, has a few questions.
Hi, good morning. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, 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, to all.
Okay, great. You may proceed and begin to – okay, you did. Share your screen.
Is my packet up?
It is.
All right, thank you. Good morning. Again, Joe Consul here for 644 Elm Street, LLC.
The property we're here for is 5514 Lansdowne Avenue. I want to just show you what it looks like in the sense that it is a sore thumb in the middle of the block there, but that's the property that we're here for.
The property has been approved and operating as a commercial space on the first floor with two residential units on the second floor.
And that was most recently licensed in 2013, although it lost its licensure when it was rezoned.
And now we're back seeking an approval for what has been approved as far back as the zoning records go.
This approval has been on the books.
So here's our refusals for a commercial space with two residential spaces above it.
We have a letter of support from the local RCO, Hestonville RCO.
Unanimous support.
Not a huge amount, but it's unanimous.
It's proof of our mailers.
Photos and plans.
Again, here's what the property looks like from the outside.
It's zoned RSA 5 now.
would not be appropriate or available for them to reconvert this property back or to a single
family home as it had never existed as such. And it's always been what it is, which is a floor plan
What it is, which is a floor plan, as we're going to show you in a second, it's to two bedroom units, one on the second floor, one on the third floor and a commercial space on the first floor.
as we're going to show you in a second.
We have some other photos and then our required documentation deed showing that my client purchased the property in November of 2011.
And finally, their tax clearance certificate.
I don't believe that there is much else to mention here.
If board needs, though I'm sure Planning Commission will confirm, we have up here proof that the two rental licenses were issued as recently as 2013.
And here is the most recent entry in the zoning archive from 1987, showing a duplex with store as existing and as approved at that time.
So with that, I'll ask my client to raise his hand and adopt my testimony.
Are you available, Max?
Yes, I am.
All right. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
My name is Maxim Dablonowski. First name, M-A-K-S-I-M. Last name, Y-A-B-L-O-N-O-V-S-K-I-Y.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Proceed, counsel.
Hi, Max. First of all, I apologize for butchering your last name.
That's okay. It's a doozy, I know.
did uh did you hear uh the testimony that i that i put forward regarding 5514 lansdowne avenue
yes i did i was on the whole time okay do you agree what i said and with what i said and do
you adopt it as your own i do okay thank you very much thank you so before we go to questions for
the board hillary what we're considering is only two dwelling units right first four to remain
vacant um yes mr chair um we we cannot do a general um commercial variant i just want to
make sure that we need to we need a specific use or um a specific use category right so we're only
looking at the ctu family aspect today with the first floor remaining vacant okay thank you so
questions from the board relative to that no mr chairman no no mr chairman no mr
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the city planning
commission board members in 2021 the zoning map was amended to rsa 5 at this location however the
proposed use conforms to documented prior use of the building city planning commission recommends
that the board grant the variance. Thank you. MI 2022-001-760-5514 Lansdale Avenue. I vote yes
with proviso. Approval is for two dwelling units only. First floor to remain vacant.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes with proviso. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso. Ishmael Shaheed, yes with proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you, board.
Number 14, MI 2022-002-180-1345 West Jerome Street.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
Letter of support from Nicetown-Taioga Improvement Team.
Morning, Mr. Chair.
Good morning.
Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
It's Vern Anastasio, A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O, 2016 Spruce, Philadelphia, 19103.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
I represent the owner, Keona Polk.
Our vice chair, Carol Tenere, has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Anastasio.
do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance,
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?
Okay, you may proceed and begin to share your screen.
Thank you.
You're fast.
I'm thinking of you all.
make sure you guys can get the lunch as soon as possible. Thank you. So it's for the legalization
can get to lunch as soon as possible. Thank you. So it's for the legalization of
of an addition in the front of this property. And basically my client has taken the front porch and
has covered it. And that's kicked two dimensional variances, a maximum allowed occupied space
went from, well, what is allowed is 75%, but because of the covering of the porch
and we're proposing 81 percent the front setback but the porch was in fact about six feet deep
because it's covered now the porch is is no longer providing said setback this is a very rough block
my client will testify that they have had to deal with you know things that lots of Philadelphia
neighborhoods are having to deal with with respect to crime and lawlessness. My client is
one of several on the block who have had their front porches serving as attractive nuisances to
young people who were not associated with their household, but would ultimately end up loitering
on or around their porches. And there were, you know, several instances that led the police to
come out. As such, my client decided to cover her porch. Again, so did several other neighbors on
the block. And when that in fact happened, she found out after the case that she needed the
proper zoning to do so. As you can see here, the encroachment does not impact the walkway.
The stairs of the house are still well in line with everybody else on the block. It's just the
front porch that was covered and again it was solely for safety reasons my client did in fact
meet with the neighbors 144 individual households were mailed folks did come out on the block
here is the flyer that went out in addition and what we have is a letter of support from
NTITRCO. My client was, in fact, represented by my law partner, Mr. Attorney Harry Cook,
at this particular evening meeting. We do have a tax clearance, and we have our photos and our
plans. We understand that once this is approved, it will have to get reviewed to make sure that
the building code is compliant with safety and engineer reports, and we're readily willing and
able to do that. With that, I'd like to call my client, Keona Polk, to raise her virtual hand.
Ms. Polk, you're free to speak.
Hi, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
Sure. My name is, you guys can hear me right?
Okay, great.
My name is Kiana, K-E-Y-O-N-A, last name Polk, P-O-L-K.
Right.
Do you swear, affirm, to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Ms. Polk, did you hear my presentation to the board this morning?
And is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
That's correct, yes.
Okay, and do you adopt it as your own testimony?
And do these dimensional variances, are they, in fact, required to maintain safety and security for your home?
Based on past instances regarding your porch and other porches on the block?
Yes, that's correct.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Chair, I have nothing further.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Members of the board, the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change from RM1 to RSA5 single-family zoning on this block.
While we don't believe that the porch of this property needed to be enclosed to overcome a unique physical condition related to the property,
we do acknowledge the presence of at least eight other similar structures on this block that have enclosed front porches.
so the city planning commission has no objection to the granting of these variances thank you
mi 2022 002 180 1345 west jerome street i vote yes harold tenary my vote is yes
thomas halliman my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes
thank you all thank you mr council number 15 mi 2022
Number 15, MI 2022, 002-111, 2472, 76th Avenue.
Jerome Harris is the attorney.
Mr. Harris, you've already been sworn.
Just state your name when you come on, please.
And there's a letter of support from the 50th Democratic Board.
Yes, good morning again, Jermaine Harris, counsel for the applicant. This is regarding 2472-76th Avenue.
Thank you. Could you identify your client and the relationship to that property?
Okay. So the client is, again, well, the client is D&J Holdings. And the owner of that company is Jim Brennan. And he's on the call right now. And again, he's the owner of this particular building.
Our Vice Chair, Carol Tenere, has a few questions.
Hi, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal, referral, photos under plans of the property, five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Okay, you may proceed and begin with sharing your screen.
Thank you. Thank you.
Just bear with me.
okay here we go
okay again for your consideration is a variance request uh we're seeking a use variance here
uh we are seeking to uh use a particular property uh 2472 76th avenue we're seeking
to convert it into a triplex. Okay, here we go. What we have here, the property,
I don't know why it's upside down. I apologize, I didn't know it was upside down. Okay,
this is the rear of the building it's a corner property uh and it has three separate entrances
it has a front inch it has a front entrance a side entrance and a back entrance this is the
back entrance this is the side entrance again i apologize uh didn't realize it was upside down
And this would be the front of the building. It's a two-story building with a basement.
And this represents the front. Again, my apologies for it being upside down.
Let me see here. This is another picture of the front.
um now what is sought here again it is a triplex that we're asking for it was previously
approved uh as a two family this is an rsa5 zone it was previously used again it was previously
approved as a two family uh my client is a recent owner of the property he just bought the property
in, I believe it was, he bought the property January of this year. And at the time when he
bought the property, it was being used as a duplex by the owner. And the owner would live there
uh and he would live in the basement so the top two apartments would be used uh as rentals and
the basement would be used as living quarters for the uh the then owner so my client again
he purchased the property with that configuration and essentially they get some plans
Essentially, let me get to the plans.
Thank you.
So this is the basement section that is that my client is seeking to legalize.
and pretty much it has the uh the entrance points right here right here on the side
as well and there are three rooms in this in the uh in the basement uh area you have just
open space right here these are the room the boiler room storage and then the bathroom which
the back which uh the owner installed the previous owner installed and then all of these are the
additional drawings relate to the upper uh floors which is the second floor
and then the third floor so
there was a a community meeting with the art with the coordinating rco which was the 50th ward
and uh there was support by the rco and this letter reflects that the meeting was held on
June the 14th of this year and it was support for this. There were questions about trash. Trash
was going to be stored. Trash would be stored in the rear of the building and essentially what my
client is seeking to do is just legalize this prior use that the owner, previous owner, had
done. It's currently vacant right now. It's still being used as the duplex. And
And we also have the posting, and I'm sorry, again, I apologize.
The posting is in the front of the building, but this is the posting of the zoning notice.
These are the pictures of the unit itself, the vacant unit itself.
Mr. Harris, what's the rest of the block look like? Are there other multi-family units there?
there are no other multi-family units on this block this is the but this property is unique
in the sense that it is a corner property it is large it's extremely large the square footage
of this building a lot size is 3,407 square feet on this and yes here's the deed as well
Evidencing that my client just purchased this property January 18th of this year.
We have the tax clearance.
The refusal letter.
All right.
You want to have your client adopt your testimony?
Mr. Brennan?
uh good morning can you hear me yes could you state your name and spell it please for the
quarter yes uh james brennan j-a-m-e-s b-r-e-n-n-n do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the truth uh yes i do proceed counsel uh yes uh so mr brennan uh did you hear
the statements that I just made? Yes. Do you adopt those statements as if you were to testify
on it? Now, do you have anything else you'd like to add to the statements that I've made
to this panel that you'd like to let the panel know about this? Yes. So regarding the other
Yes, so regarding the other multifamily on the block, from the records that I can see, 2467 across the street is zoned a triplex.
multi-family on the block.
Oh, okay. I stand corrected. I'm sorry.
Thank you. Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Dylan Mahoney.
Good morning, Mr. Mahoney.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
Dylan Mahoney, D-I-L-L-I-N-L-O-N, M-A-H-O-N-E-Y.
All right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Proceed.
Thank you.
Dylan Mahoney from the Councilwoman Terrell Parker's office. We've received a letter of
support from the 50th Ward RCO, the coordinating RCO for the case, and we are also in support of
the variance. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for calling in. Anybody else in the
virtual audience? I see no hands, Chair. Planning Commission. Thank you, Chair Bergman. Ian Hegarty
for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. Members of the board, the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the RSA 5 single-family zoning at this location. However, we've seen this
property has a documented use history as a two-family dwelling, and as the photographs have
shown, the interior physical configuration includes three units. We recommend that the
Board grant the variance. Thank you. MI 2022 002 111 2472 76th Avenue. I vote yes.
Harold Tenere my vote is yes Thomas Holloman my vote is yes James Snell my vote is yes
Ishmael Shaheed my vote is yes thank you 16 MI 2022 001 990 815 North Taylor Street
Geraldine Dressler, letter of support from Fairmount Civic Association.
Applicant also provided petition of support signed by 12 neighbors.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Geraldine Dressler, J-E-R-I-L-Y-N.
dressler d-r-e-s-s-l-e-r right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the truth i do and you're the owner of the property right i am i'm not an attorney and i've
never done this before so that's okay that you're not an attorney um our our vice chair has a few
questions and uh vice chair could you please read the caps on the i sure will for us hi miss dressler
this is an application for use as visitor accommodations in an existing structure
there's one use refusal whereas the proposed use visitor accommodations is expressly
prohibited in the rsa5 residential zoning district um do you want me to go ahead with
there's a letter of support from fair amount civic no we're good just the catch you're fine
Okay. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, 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?
That's to all of the above.
Okay, great. You may proceed and begin to share your screen.
Can you see my screen?
We can. We can. Okay. I'm just going to talk and you guys can tell me.
Yeah, just tell us what you want to do. Okay. So last year, a bill was passed through council
to try to tackle the party house issue with short-term rentals in the city.
They passed bill number 210-081, which basically required a visitor accommodation permit
for all non-owner occupied short-term rentals. Short-term rental meaning any rentals for
less than 30 days at a time. With the new legislation, it was required to get this
in order to rent my property short-term, I would need a visitor accommodation permit.
But in order to get a visitor accommodation permit by the existing standards, you have to
be zoned CMX3 or higher. I am zoned RSA5 residential. The house 815 North Taylor is
directly adjacent to my primary residence, 813 North Taylor. There is no CMX3 in the entire
neighborhood of Fairmount. I have been a host on Airbnb for a number of years since about 2000.
Um, I have been a host on Airbnb for a number of years, since about 2016.
Um, this home belonged to my family.
Now it belongs to me.
Um, and they use it as a, you know, second residence when they come to visit.
And then I also rent it out for extra income, um, mostly to people who are in my neighborhood
who have family and friends visiting.
Our houses are very small.
There's not enough, a lot of room for guests.
There's no hotels around.
And then also families who come to Philadelphia who want to stay in a house and not a hotel.
So I have spoken about this at length with my neighbors who are all in support of this variance.
I also have the support of the Civic Association with the CBA.
They noted something strange about the way that the bill was passed in that by getting a variance,
that basically attaches to the property and not to the property owner. So even though I've been
in the community for 16 years, my son goes to the public school. I used to be on the board of the
Fairmount Civic. I chair the board of Friends of Baish Martin. That's our local school. We're here,
deep roots. They said, if I were to ever sell the property, the variance would transfer.
So we agreed on a CBA that if I were to ever sell the property, that I would get the variance
removed and have it just go back to the RSA-5. Okay. Did you take any pictures of your property
just to show? Yep, I have that. One of them shows a photo. Okay.
So here's the front. Right. The pane. And then I have some interior photos I can show you too.
Where'd they go?
so this is the front room kitchen
that's fine that's okay and the fair amount civic voted what was the vote
pull that up um there was um no opposition only one took no position um and just about everybody
it supported either outright or with the cba okay all right questions from the board no mr chairman
no mr chairman no mr chairman uh questions or comments from the virtual audience
chair we have a someone with the name first name theresa okay
hi could you state your name and spell it please for the court reporter
um it's teresa hoberg t-e-r-e-s-a h-o-b-e-r-g i am the signatory to the letter
okay all right do you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do proceed uh i just want to confirm what jerry lynn has said and i guess we
We consider this kind of a difficult, an odd situation where you would need a variance
for something that appears to us to be really a licensing process that attaches to the owner
as opposed to the property. So we agreed to a CBA, which I guess we'll enter into
if this variance is granted, although I recognize that a CBA, technically according to the way it's
set up, is not usually for these kinds of matters. So we're a little bit at a loss how to really go
about that, whether that needs to be recorded or whether that can remain as just an agreement.
You're fading away, ma'am. We can't hear you.
I'm sorry.
Did you hear anything that I?
We heard most of it.
We heard, you know, you were just at a quandary of how to do it.
Well, we thought that we could agree on a CBA, but I'm not clear whether that needs to be recorded.
Well, that's that, that, that, the zoning board doesn't get involved in the CBA.
Right.
So I'm not even sure how we go about that.
In general, there was support for it as long as we could enter into the CBA that not only reverts, essentially removes the visitor accommodation variance, but also retains the property as a single unit household because it wasn't clear to us that once you get a variance for a visitor accommodation, if they could also then physically change the property into a hotel or a motel.
thank you for calling in ma'am are there any other comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission
planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning
thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city plan
commission board members as a point of clarification one of the main intents of the limited lodging
zoning law is to prevent replacement of housing stock with short-term rentals in in philadelphia's
neighborhoods the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single family zoning
on this block um you know while we understand the use of this property will have very limited
impacts on near neighbors. The applicant has failed to meet their technical burden of
demonstrating an unusual physical condition related to this property to substantiate a
hardship claim. The property clearly can be used as a single family home in conformance with the
zoning. And so we have to recommend that the board deny the variance. Thank you. I'm not 100%
sure what that all means um we're not done we're not done right mi 2022 001 990 815 north taylor
street i vote yes gerald tennary my vote is yes thomas holliman my vote is no james snell my vote
is yes ishmael shaheed my vote is yes so so you have your variance thank you so much i appreciate
it have a good day good luck is there anyone else on the morning schedule that their case has not
been called i see no hands here okay thanks everybody got a lot of work done this morning
see everybody too thanks bill mr chairman mr handsome
right yep good afternoon my name is bill bergman and i will be chairing this afternoon's meeting
with me is harold tenary and she should be on very soon ismail shaheed our board secretary
President Mr. Chairman. Thomas Holliman our board member. President Mr. Chairman. James Snell our
board member. President Mr. Chairman. Also here is our Executive Director Tanya Sunkett and our
Board Attorney Hillary Emerson. Before we start here's our virtual format. Be advised the proceedings
are being recorded. By participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting tonyasunkett at phila.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter the period statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And lastly, the question-answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sumkin.
And I have a few announcements to make.
Effective July 18, 2022,
if the case is continued for attorney or applicant moving party. The attorney or applicant has 90
days from the date the case is continued to either just request a new hearing date, ask for an
extension or moving party status, or withdraw the case. If ZBA staff is not contacted by the end of
the 90-day period, the case will automatically be listed for a new hearing. Please note extensions
Mentions for moving parties' status must be sent to the Executive Director, Tanya Sunkett, with Board Attorney Hillary Emerson copied.
The ZBA staff is currently sending out letters to listed applicants on appeals filled prior to 2019.
If the case has been pending and a hold status and an applicant or their attorney does not contact ZBA staff to discuss the next steps for their case within the time limit, in the time period stated in the letter, the case will be considered abandoned and administratively closed.
Questions about either of these policies should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkett, and our Board Attorney, Hillary Emerson.
So let's look at our continuances for the day.
Number two, MI 2022-002-811-100-North-55th Street, Continued Attorney-Moving Party.
And number 17.
And number 17, MI 2022, 002-157-718-26 North 17th Street.
That case is continued, attorney moving party.
Is there anyone in the audience with questions or statements relative to those two contingencies?
I see no hands, Chair.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
I see no hands, Chair. Thank you.
Are there any requests for withdrawals?
I see no hands, Chair. Thank you very much. We're going to go to our add-on list.
number one on the add-on list mi 2020 000 657 4154 north 7th street this case was held for a vote
today waiting on an rco letter the rco letter has come in and it's in opposition i vote no
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
Ishmael?
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
I'm sorry, a little confusion there.
James Snow, my vote is yes.
Mr. Chairman, which case are we voting on?
The number one in the Adwan.
Oh, okay.
That's 7th Street?
yes my vote is yes number two mi 2022 002 385 1148 to 62 frankfurt avenue there are two people
to vote on this this was previously voted and it was a 2-1 vote jim snell votes carol tenere votes
both should go online and both go on the record of saying you've read or watched the video
okay um i'll start uh this is carol tenere i watched the video of the hearing that was on 810
my vote is yes with proviso this is jane snell i likewise i watched the video and my vote is yes
for proviso. Thank you. Number three is a result of hearing. MI 2020-002-812-830 East
Thayer Street. RCO, there was a meeting. There has been several continuances waiting for the RCO
letter. There's no RCO letter. I vote yes. Carol Tenere, my vote is yes. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Yes, Mel Shahi, my vote is yes.
We're going to go to our regular list, and I'm going to start with number 12 for scheduling purposes.
MI 2022-003-095-5757, North Fish Street.
Darwin Beauvais will be presenting.
Our attorney will recuse herself from it.
From this case, we have Councilwoman Parker's office served as coordinating RCO, two community
members attended, expressed support for the proposal, a letter of support from the Fifth
Street Revitalization Group, and a letter of support from T House Incorporated, a small
business in the area. Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. I am recusing myself in this matter. I just want
to note that Drew Aldinger is serving as counsel for the court in this matter. Thank you. Mr.
Beauvais. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. It's always good to see you. Thank you. Could you
state your name and spell for the court reporter, please? Yes. Darwin Beauvais. That's B-E-A-U-V
as in Victory, AIS as in Sam. I'm from the law firm of Dilworth Paxson. We're located at 1500
Market Street in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19102. If we can also just make note that there's
Megan Hanna and Penny Ellison are also present and that they should, I probably will most likely
call on at least one of them you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing
but the truth i swear and affirm right carol are you still on carol i'm still on yes right um
right carol are you still on carol i'm still on yes right um could you so the two people you
you spoke about they're the owners uh they they are the proprietors yes okay so carleton area has
a few questions for you okay hi mr bovade you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and
stipulate to its accuracy yes have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax
compliance 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 okay you may proceed
and please share your screen awesome pull up my screen
mr chairman what's the address of this case 57 57 north 5th number 12. can we see this
we can we're good oh great great great great let me
visually pleasant okay mr chairman members of the board again my name is darwin beauvais
I'm at Dilworth Paxton and before you today is 5757 North Street we come before the day
we come before the board today with a request for a special exception and a variance to accommodate
an exciting community-based use of the property the board will take note that and as you've done
already take note of two letters of support that you'll find in exhibit 14 we did submit exhibits
one through 15 and exhibit 14 includes two letters of support as well as a letter from councilwoman
parker acknowledging the community meeting that was held um i believe i believe dylan mahoney is
online, and he will most likely be here to answer any questions with regards to that.
So let me just start here with the zoning map on page 30.
As you can see here, the property is zoned CMX 2.5, right?
And if you can see my cursor, that's where the property is located, on the corner of North Grange Avenue and North 5th Street.
Now, there are additional photos on page as part of Exhibit 415.
Let me just go there.
and this is the property it's a commercial property it was once a dentist office and
it actually sits with this entire area it's a mix of commercial and residential there's
actually a parking lot for a retail store directly across the street and that is the front of it
notices and here's the interior you can see there it was a dental office at one point in time
it was a waiting room you have conference space uh additional conference space
Here's the restrooms, other office space, and here's the basement which will be used
mainly for storage.
So, having said that, let me just go back to our refusal, and let me just explain to
you what Hand and Paul Foundation is.
So, again, Handum-Paw Foundation is looking to occupy
Again, Hand and Paw Foundation is looking to occupy this existing property.
Hand and Paw's mission is to provide a safe and supportive work environment for youth
ages 16 to 24 who are experiencing housing insecurity or foster care involvement.
The program involves pairing these youth with homeless animals, predominantly either small
animals or cats who have been obtained through partnerships with area shelters or other animal
non-profits. The participating youth assist with feeding, cleaning, and enriching the lives of
homeless animals through training and limited adoption services. These youth also participate
in field trips and job shadowing. Hand to Paw is a variety of programs, and if you require further
information, we do have the two individuals, Megan Hannah and Penny Ellison, here for any questions.
Now, as you can see with some of their handouts, their goal with this space centers around three points.
One, they want to increase and help foster coping skills for the local youth.
Two, they want to create, as obvious with our application, they want to create meeting space where they have youth and animals interact.
And three, they also, which I find very unique and very worthwhile, they actually want to do community outreach with pet workshops for the surrounding area, which I think is very, very, very novel.
Now, we do have a floor plan that's Exhibit 18, a floor plan, you'll see briefly that the first floor will be used primarily as program and office space.
The second floor will be used for animal rooms, intake facilities, and study rooms.
And the basement, as we mentioned before, will be used mainly for storage.
But we also will have some reptiles, and they like a dark space.
So that's how we plan on creating the uses to effectuate the goal of this project.
Now, with respects to the refusal, this proposal received both a referral and a refusal, which is somewhat untraditional.
And I guess it's because it's untraditional use.
What we're proposing does not neatly fit within the existing zoning classification.
The hardship lies predominantly in the unusual nature of this use, which is in one sense appropriate under CMX 2, but does not fit within the code.
and prior to this application, we received a permit for the office use, which is by right
allowed under CMX 2.5. The permit is part of Exhibit 12, which is, let's see.
As you can see here, we did receive an office, a permit for office of business, but that's
not enough.
Animal services is allowable is allowed under a special exception.
But because we're suggesting that we're keeping animals, therefore boarding animals overnight
just to have our programs, we receive the variance, which is why, and I want to stress,
this is the essence of our argument. We can do what we can do, but we can't keep the animals
there. So we have a special exception to do what we're proposing, but because we can't
keep the animals there we are being told we have to have a variance so with that we believe that
we've been able to suggest to the community that what we're proposing does not have a negative
impact to to the community the community has sat down and met with us and they pretty much
they pretty much have agreed. Now, animal services would be permitted as a special exception
have agreed. Now, animal services would be permitted.
under CMX 2.5, but because it doesn't meet the use of animal services, we're still suggesting
that this variance is something that we should be entitled to get. The animal service uses in
keeping with the impacts normally expected from such a use, and it will not cause congestion and
endanger the public or create overcrowding. This is not a public or retail use, although there
will be some accessory retail goods and services available, particularly at special events. Only a
limited number of animals will be kept at the property at any time, and this is considerably
less impactful than one might expect from a traditional animal service type of use.
In other words, we're not Petco, we're not PetSmart, nor are we a camel.
We further submit that the applicant is entitled to a variance for boarding, which is accessory to our predominant office use and animal use, because the animals will be kept for the accessory use, which is why we believe we're entitled to this variance.
It's a community service organization, and that use is purely being put forth simply to make the community-based goals necessary for the community to receive these services.
We further submit that because we're suggesting this variance, that we're entitled to this variance, that we are getting the least minimum variance.
Again, we're not increasing congestion. The neighbors' properties will not be harmed. We're not impairing light and air. And the fact that we did receive letters of community support from both the T House and the Fifth Street revitalization neighbors, we believe that we have satisfied that requirement.
So having said that, you know, I would like to talk to Ms. Penny Ellison, if she can just adopt my testimony, adopt my statements as her testimony.
Ms. Ellison, could you come online, state your name, and spell it for the court reporter?
Sure. It's Penny Ellison, P-E-N-N-Y-E-L-L-I-S-O-N, and I am the volunteer executive director of Hand to Paw.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Yes. Penny, you've heard the statements I made today?
I have.
And would you adopt it as your testimony?
Yes, I adopt that testimony.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
we have i'm sorry chair we have dylan mahoney okay
hi mr mahoney you've already been sworn just state your name
dylan mahoney okay um dylan mahoney from uh councilwoman parker's office uh we received
We coordinated the meeting for this project, had one neighbor in support, as well as the executive director of the North History Revitalization Project, and our office is also in support of the requests.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Mahoney, for calling in.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no handshare.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
de defecto f e c t e a u with the city planning commission right do you swear for him to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes sir i do proceed thank you sir mr chairman
and members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed use
zoning at this location the philadelphia code presents us with a tough issue in in this case
animal services are allowed by right or with a special exception in every commercial zoning
district but unfortunately animal boarding which is a specific type of animal services
is not allowed by right in any zoning district in philadelphia and so we would argue that this
is a rare instance where the zoning code itself presents a hardship since a reasonable personal
presents a hardship since a reasonable personal a reasonable person would expect caring for animals
a reasonable person would
Picks.
and providing them with overnight shelter to go hand in hand so since the applicant has shown that
the proposed animal services will have no more of an impact than animal services would be expected
to have and since overnight boarding of animals would tend to be paired with animal services
the city planning commission recommends the board grant the use variants for boarding and other
services and a special exception thank you um drew are you on
yes i'm here chairman so so drew do we need a separate special exception with a timeline
and then the variance approval
i would suggest if it's okay to hold the case and confer and um wait and we'll give a later date
as a thank you so much chair all right so okay i'll go ahead darwin if i may it's one refusal
So I think the board can vote on that refusal.
That refusal does raise the special exception as well as the.
So Darwin, why don't we do this?
I'm going to hold it and we meet next Wednesday, right, Tanya?
Correct, Chair.
And we'll vote then, okay?
You'll have your answer then, Darwin.
No problem.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
Cases closed except for that only vote.
Okay, number one, MI 2022, 002-887-2200, Wekiko Avenue.
Michael Mattione is the attorney.
Letter of support from the Whitney Council Incorporated.
letter of non-opposition from councilman council member squilla
hi chair this is tanya if i could i just wanted to state our wonderful counselor miss hillary
will be back on as counselor for the rest of the cases oh that's that's great good thank you chair
that's nothing nothing to say about true right but hillary's back and we thank drew for filling
in. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Mattione, you've been sworn already. Could you identify
your client and the relationship to the property? Yes, it's Nigros 2 LLC. They're the owner of the
property and Dominic Nigro is on as well. Okay. Ishmael, could you take care of the necessary
follow-up questions carol's off
sure thing no problem um good afternoon council good afternoon
um did you agree to read the reading of a refusal to stipulate to his accuracy yes
did you email all the exhibits and documents that are required such as proof of ownership
tax clearance, copy of refusal or referral five days within the advance of his hearing
and did you meet with an RCO and do you have a letter? Yes to everything. Thank you. Please
proceed and share your screen. Thank you. And Mr. Chairman, in addition to Mr. Nigro,
we also have Rustin Ohler, the architect available as well today.
and this application uh and like i said we we included the um tax clearance the refusal the
unanimous support letter from the whitpain council the rco the letter of non-opposition
from council member squilla we have a revised plans form and revised plans
with one page on the revised plans and what we did was we revised i wanted to look at the
changes first we reduced the building coverage slightly by about a thousand square feet
we increased the street trees from three to five we added as a use which is a permitted use vehicle
paint finishing we increased the total gross floor areas the building slightly by about 400 square
feet. There's a slight increase in the height of the building, but there is no height limit here.
We increased the height of the elevator overrun. We have a mechanical tower. We made a change in
the note for the architectural tower. We did make some changes in the parking stall count
We did make some changes in the parking stall count and reduce the curb cuts from three to two.
and reduce the curb cuts from 3 to 2.
And this is the revised site plan.
I want to go back to the refusal, though, Mr. Chairman.
And the uses are all permitted uses.
This is a longstanding auto body auto repair company. They've been in business for more than 40 years, and they're presently at 939 to 41 Washington Avenue, and they are seeking to relocate.
So when you look down at the refusals, it's because a roof deck's not permitted in a non-residential zoning class.
They got a refusal for street trees.
They're supposed to provide seven.
Originally, they had three.
They upped that to five.
They have mechanical parking in the lot, which is prohibited.
The total number of parking spaces is less than our proposed.
And the freestanding sign is 30 feet tall, and the wall sign is above the second floor windowsill.
So none of these uses have anything to do with the actual use of the property, which is a permitted use.
I wanted to show just a couple of photos of where they are now.
This is where the Niagara's Auto Body is located now, 10th and Washington.
Next door to that building, there is a large 24-unit building being erected with a fresh food market on the ground floor behind it.
is League Street, which is a traditional, again, Washington Avenue where they are now,
and then League Street behind it. So an auto body shop in that neighborhood really doesn't
fit well anymore, but they have been there for 40 years. And like I said, the use is permitted
at the new site.
Again, this is the site plan.
They have two curb cuts.
They have five street trees now.
They do have mechanical parking proposed.
And with respect to the parking issue,
they have two floors.
You have the first floor
with parking on the inside.
and the second floor also which is a work which is a shop but also has a lot of parking available
so they really have a whole lot of parking and remember at their 2600 square foot building now
they have no parking it's all interior here they have 10 parking outside and two floors of parking
inside on the third floor you have offices administrative staff etc and you have an outdoor
deck for use by employees. They also will agree to make the deck area available for
the community for gatherings and those kinds of things. Now, when you look at this, there
is only one street frontage. The property has this little street frontage here. There's
no street frontage in the back. It's a triangular property. So the property really doesn't have
very much street frontage. It's got about 236 linear feet of street frontage, which really
limits the amount of street trees that you can have. So they did manage to squeeze in five,
even though seven are available. If they had street frontage on more than one side and more
than just a small amount, they would have clearly met the required number of street trees. And they
are going from a building that's about 2,700 square feet to one that has a footprint of about
17,000 square feet. It's a lot. It's more than six times the present size. If the variances are
improved and they move to this bigger, they will have a much bigger and friendlier work area for
employees. They will move their business out of its present location, which really doesn't fit in
well anymore, to a more appropriate location in the I-2 zoning district. They presently have 10
employees they will at least double that if they move down here they are going to a six facilities
about six times larger than the one that they're in they operate five days a week 8 30 to 5 p.m
and i just want to just show some additional photographs to see the the context of where
they're going assuming it gets approved and again it's in an industrial area that's the lot this
shows a lot it's an appropriate use for the area again the floor plans the first floor
the second floor and third floor elevations
again the roof deck
renderings
renderings and just some additional photos showing the the lot it's a vacant lot right
now and some of the surrounding uses you have industrial uses all down there and also some
big box retail on the other side of Wekiko Street.
I just want to go back. The RCO letter, like I said, the RCO letter is a unanimous support
letter 15 people attended and all 15 people supported the the application and understand
that it would be a good thing for the city to allow this building this company to expand its
business the variance is requested are due solely to the unique nature of this site having only one
street frontage making it impossible to comply with things like the street tree requirement
the denial of the variances would be an unnecessary hardship it would result in a thriving business
not being able to expand in an appropriate area the variances are least necessary due solely to
the unique lot the limited frontage and the triangular shape the variances are in harmony
with the code they will enable enable the proper appropriate use of the site they will not be
detrimental to public health they'll benefit it by allowing this business to relocate here
again the signage is required as well it only has one street frontage so they need better
signage that you can see passers-by can see so that people can find the business
and the variances are an appropriate use and they will allow this to business to expand
for these reasons we do believe that the requirements for variance are met by this
application and again in addition to the RCO letter of support there is a letter from council
member school a non-opposition as well um what i'd like to do is call on mr nigro
dominic nigro mr chairman sure
sir could you please raise your virtual hand
do we see his hand raised yes i allowed him to speak he has to mute himself
sir could you say state your name and spell it please for the court reporter
dominic
dominic you on yes could you yeah i'm sorry yeah yeah sorry i'm unmuted now i think
so it's dominic nigro it's d-o-m-e-n-i-c last name nigro n-i-g-r-o right do you swear or firm
to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel
thank you mr chairman uh dominic did you hear my statements i did and are they true and correct
they are and uh do you adopt them as your testimony i do mr chairman i have no further
questions for uh mr nigel from the questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience
I see no hands chair. Planning Commission. Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and board members. David
Fecto, City Planning Commission. Mr. Chairman and members of the board, the comprehensive plan
recommends no change to the medium industrial zoning at this location. The use complies with
the purpose and intent of the zoning code and the recommendations of the comprehensive plan
and although there clearly is no hardship requiring a roof deck to be built on top of an auto repair
shop the remaining variances partially result from the configuration of the property and so the city
planning commission recommends that the board grant the proposed variances at this location
thank you mi 2022 002887 2200 wekiko avenue i vote yes revised plans one page stamped by zba
on August 24th 2022. Thomas Holloman my vote is yes with proviso. James Snell my
vote is yes with proviso. Ishmael Saheed yes with proviso. Thank you counsel. Thank you
Mr. Chairman. Okay. Number three, MI 2022 002 810 616
0-0-2-8-1-0-6-1-6-7-61 Geyer Avenue.
Alan Notkinson is the attorney.
Letter of support, 40th Ward Republican RCO.
Letter of support from Councilman Johnson.
An applicant also submitted a petition of support signed by 13 neighbors in the 6700 block of Geyer.
good afternoon mr chair members of the board alan knockamson a-l-a-n last name knockamson
n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-n 1-2-3 south broad street suite 1600 llppa 19109 do you swear for him to tell the
truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do could you identify your client in relationship
of the property? Yes, Mr. Chair. My client is J.N.K. Vincent Enterprises, LLC. And the virtual
audience is its member, Jessica Vincent. Okay. Ishmael Shahid has a few questions for you,
our board secretary. You're breaking up, Ish.
yeah we can hear that
do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
i do all right did you know all the exhibits and documents as required such as the proof of
ownership tax clearance copy of refusal or referral five days in advance of this hearing
Did you meet with the RCO or do you have a left?
Yes, in all respects.
I think I may have left one out.
Pictures of drawings of the property as well.
Please proceed and share it with your screen.
Yes, thank you very much.
So I'm here to present 6761 Dyer Avenue.
In my presentation packet, you'll see the notice of refusal,
the letter of support from the 40th Ward Republicans,
where you'll see that there was unanimous support
by all RCOs pertaining to this property.
A food preparing and service licensed numbers 207435.
The reason why I referenced that
is that this is a CMX2 property.
And what we're trying to do
is merely swap out the commercial unit
with a residential unit to make three units
rather than two residential units and one commercial.
This property, according to the public record,
has not had a commercial use actively since 2006. In addition, you'll see our petition. So not only
did we get unanimous support by all RCOs pertaining to this property, my client also
reached out to the nearby neighbors. And you'll see in the petition that we limited our scope to
the individuals who resided in the properties most adjacent to our property or in support of
our project next you'll see maps of the area photographs of the property in the surrounding
area our plans and drawings of particular note there's no basement so there is a lower level
and because of how the property slopes down there is no below grade living in this property uh
we're taking that commercial space on the first floor and we're looking to really swap that out
to make it a residential space then you'll see our rco meeting notice and proof of that notice
our applications for appeal, our deed to the property, showing that J and K, Vincent M. DePos,
LLC, is the owner of the property, and our certificate of tax clearance. As I indicated
previously, Jessica Vincent is in the virtual audience, and at the conclusion of my presentation,
I'll ask her to adopt my testimony, and then we'll be more than happy to take any questions from the
board. First things first, this is a notice refusal. Again, this is a CMX2 property. What's
allowed as a right is two residential and one commercial and all of our refusals pertain to
the fact that we're merely trying to swap out that commercial unit uh with a residential one
uh so again not out of character of what we're asking for um not out of character for what is
um in the neighborhood um and in in the uh in the letter of support from the 40th award republicans
They actually, in support of our project, they specifically state, it's our belief that the corner store concept is no longer appropriate for such a residential neighborhood as commercial use has adversely impacted the quality of life for near neighbors.
So in this neighborhood, there's not many of the corner properties have commercial use anymore, and it's disfavored within this community.
So this is a residential neighborhood, and they would prefer to have the commercial component eliminated by way of having the residential component in there.
And as you can see, there was unanimous support by way of this letter of support.
uh there was unanimous support by way of this letter of support five to zero all five rcos
Five to.
supported this project and then just a food preparation license again we went based on
the public records but according to atlas there has not been a commercial component here of any
sort of public record since october 13th of 2006. so we're going on almost 16 years of no commercial
use in this property so given the fact that commercial use is probably not supported in
this neighborhood from a financial standpoint from as well as a standpoint of their position
that they want respectively then petition again as you can see all of our addresses are on the
6700 block of dyer street we really try to eliminate our scope to the petition to the
people that would be most directly impacted by this proposed use and then maps of the area as
can see it's all orange we're all rm1 we are cmx2 on the property but typically the properties in
this neighborhood that have cmx2 don't have a commercial component in there so you can see
there's like commercial here and there was nothing showing there there is some commercial sporadically
here but not on these corner properties that are cmx2 and then photographs of the property um
So even before, you know, you know, seeking the ZBA's approval to make this multifamily in nature, my client has done aesthetic improvements to the property that was appreciated by the community, such as painting, you know, the facades to make it like more modern, more up to date.
And here's 6761 Geyer Street to the side of the property where the corner is 68 in Geyer.
As you can see, again, throughout, there is no basement living here.
So there's two ways to get in through this front door here, which will be the first floor
and second floor.
And then this is the lower level, but again, no lower level, no below grade living.
and then here's dyer avenue to the right of the property dyer avenue to left their property again
you can see it's just a residential neighborhood uh south 68 to the right of the property south
68 to the left of the property and then just examples of what my client has done on previous
projects uh again trying to give examples kitchens bathrooms living rooms things like that so the
board has an idea of what you're dealing with in terms of my clients so here's the kitchen
living room and then just again simplistic floor plans that we help our client create
but this is the lower level unit the one that's on 68th street it has its own entrance again
everything is above grade it's simply two bedrooms one bath here's on the guyer street side you saw
that front door you go in the vestibule area go to the left again another two bedroom one bath
on the first floor you go to i guess whether it be the second or third floor depending what your
perspective is you will apply the steps and this is another two bedroom one bath and then our meeting
notice we met with the community earlier this month 164 addresses were notified here is a list
of the addresses that we know the notice to proof of mailing to those addresses our application for
appeal showing that J&K Interprises LLC filed the application for appeal. Our notice of refusal,
our project information form, our deeds of property showing that J&K Interprises LLC is
the owner of the property. Alan, could you get a little closer to the mic? We're having a hard
time hearing you. Oh, I'm sorry. That's good. That's good. I just don't want my head to be
so it's okay it's okay sorry uh and this is j and k enterprises llc uh showing that they're the owner
of the property and then our certificate of tax claims uh with that being said i'm going to stop
sharing my screen for a second i would ask that miss vincent virtually raise her hand
miss vincent you're free to speak hi could you state your name and spell it please for the court
reporter i am jessica vincent that's j-e-s-s-i-c-a vincent capital v-i-n-c-e-n-t do you swear or firm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do you see counsel yes uh jessica
you've heard everything i stated today that's correct is it true and correct it is and do you
adopt as your own testimony i do all right thank you very much questions from the board no mr
chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Craig Middleton.
Hi, could you state your name and spell, please, for the court reporter?
Craig, C-R-A-I-G, last name Melidosian, M-E-L-I-D-O-S-I-A-N.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, sir.
Thank you.
I wanted to affirm what council indicated. I'm the coordinating RCO, but I represent the Southwest Consortium of RCOs, multi-RCO group.
We're pleased with the visual and internal upgrades that we believe have occurred at this property.
It's been significant since current owner has taken management.
as we indicated also that the corner use by traditional bodegas in this neighborhood has
had an adverse impact on the residential quality of life. We sit in close proximity to Finnegan
Playground and several of the other bodegas within a two-block area over the course of the last 24
months have been a source of significant disorder in the community, including violence. So regrettably,
simply want to say we're pleased with this proposal. We ask the board to support it. Thank
you very much. Thank you, sir. Thank you for calling in and your input. Is there anyone else
in the virtual audience? I see no hands, Chair. Planning Commission. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
David Fecto, City Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends a change in the
zoning to residential single family at this location. However, we have to judge this by
its current zoning which is cmx2 but the building has a documented history of a commercial ground
floor unit with two rental units above the additional dwelling unit proposed would replace
the former ground floor commercial unit and it appears to be a legalization of an existing
condition so the city planning commission recommends the board grant the use variance
for three dwelling units thank you mi 2022 002 810 67 61 guyer avenue i vote yes
Thomas Solomon, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you very much.
Okay, so I'm going to call number four, and I'm going to go through.
It's going to be a series of nine cases together.
So, number four, MI 2022-003-164-3405 North 19th Street.
Number six, MI 2022-003-160-3403 North 19th Street.
Number 11, MI 2022, 003-159-3401 North 19th Street.
Number 13, MI 2022, 003-508-3345 North 19th Street.
Number 14, MI 2022, 002-176-3413 North 19th Street.
Number 15, MI 2022, 002-276-3415 North 19th Street.
Number 16, MI 2022, 002-819-3349 North 19th Street.
Number 18, MI 2022, 003-507-3351 North 19th Street.
And number 20, MI 2022-002-902-3347 North 19th Street.
Rachel Pritzker is the attorney.
She will be handling all nine cases.
There are letter of support from Upper North Neighbors Association and also Tioga United.
Thank you, Chairman. Rachel, R-A-C-H-A-E-L, Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R, 1521 Locust Street, Suite 605, Philadelphia, PA, 19102.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you identify the client and the relationship to the property?
Could you identify the client?
Yes, the client is Ramfilla Community 4 LLC, which is the owner of the property.
And Ishmael Sheed, our board secretary, has a few questions.
Good afternoon, Council.
Yes, you're breaking up a little bit, but I can hear what you're saying.
Okay, let me see if this is a little better.
Did you email all the exhibits and documents required, such as the proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of refusal or referral, pictures or drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
Did you meet with the RCO and do you have a letter?
yes to all thank you please proceed and share your screen thank you um so i'm going to try to
do this the best i can chairman it is uh nine lots as you mentioned so i'm going to try to do it
without confusing anyone right um i'm going to start with uh just going through the project as
a whole um and then we'll go through the individual lots and i'll have the architect go through so
So, as you mentioned, this is nine lots. They are somewhat contiguous. For the most part, they are directly adjacent with some staggered infill development sites as well, which I will go through.
There are nine lots for a total of 57 dwelling units with six parking spaces.
The project was originally proposed at 59 units with 10 parking spaces, but through conversations with the community to address some of the concerns, we have reduced it to 57 with six parking spaces.
The reduction in parking spaces actually helps eliminate a number of refusals that we obtained on the property, but also what it allowed for is a better mixture of one and two bedroom units on the site.
So I'm going to start with the corner, which is 3351 North 19th.
I'm just going to pull up documents.
This is 3351.
I'm going to share my screen.
can you see my screen yep we're good great
so i'm going to start with uh 3351 north 19th street uh we are proposing the site is zoned cmx2
It is kind of an island of as a commercial site by itself on a pretty thin lot.
The proposition for this lot is six dwelling units with no parking.
Originally, a parking space was provided, but we submitted revised plans that remove that given community feedback.
This proposal also does not include any ground space commercial, which is one of the refusals that we obtained for 3351 North 19th Street.
I'm going to bring up individually the refusal for this project.
share it on the screen
okay you're able to see that we can great so um as i mentioned one of the part one of the refusals
we obtained was for parking however that is now moot as we have removed that via revised plans
And the only refusal that we have is for, in CMX2, you have to have a ground floor commercial on 100% of the ground floor within the first 30 feet of the property.
As you can see from the aerial that we provided, this area is mainly vacant, a lot of vacant and blighted properties.
In addition to the fact that this is kind of a commercial island by itself, no other of the corners in any of the relative blocks require commercial.
And so we don't believe that a commercial space is viable here.
In fact, given there's no commercial on any directly adjacent corners, and this is not
a commercial corridor being on the corner of 19th and Ontario, it seems that the use
of the site as commercial mixed use is out of character given the rest of the neighborhood.
Literal enforcement of CMX2 would create an unnecessary hardship because there's really
no market for commercial at this location, having no active commercial uses located on any of the
four blocks that meet at the subject corners near the property. It is also substantially
It is also substantially invalid under constitutional jurisprudence because the parcel is the only parcel on this corner and within a full block radius that carries a commercial zoning designation.
invalid under constitutional jurisprudence because the
It is a zoning island evidenced by lack of connection between the designation and also was not going to interrupt the viable use of the property.
Being residential in a residential area will not affect the safety, well-being, welfare, health and safety of the community.
In addition, I think it's only 16 feet wide, if that. Once you put walls in, having any kind of commercial on this site would be quite limited as well, in addition to probably being vacant for a long time.
Again, this lot has also been vacant for, I think, at least since 1996, showing that there really should not have and will not be a viable commercial use at the site.
The rest of the site proposes multifamily, which is permitted by right under CMX2.
And again, once we remove the one parking space in accordance with the agreements with the community, we basically have a project by right all but for the random requirement of ground floor commercial in this mostly residential and vacant lot.
Counsel, out of curiosity, do you have a map that shows all nine together?
Yeah, we do.
I mean, it might be worthwhile to have that map up and just go from one to the other.
Why don't I do this?
I think that's a great suggestion, Chairman.
And why don't I do this?
Can Scott Woodruff, who's our architect, be called on as a panelist?
He can then assist me with maneuvering that as I go through the description.
Right.
That way I think everybody can see where the nine fit in.
Mr. Woodruff is coming back in as a panelist.
Thank you.
Do I need to be sworn in?
Yes, please.
State your name and spell for the court reporter.
Scott Woodruff, W-O-O-D-R-U-F-F.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
i do all right scott can you scott can you pull up the um full package maybe it's the cdr package
or the just the full package that we put together showing all the units i think it just
as the chairman suggests be easier to kind of show it that way and then i can go through each
one individually that's it that's it okay awesome
So, Rachel, you were talking about this property here.
Yeah. So, as you can see from the aerial, we have the corner at 51 through 45, so the four that go in right there on the corner of 19th and Ontario.
Then we have 34.01 to 05, which is the three on the other corner. We then have two 34.13 through 15.
And essentially, as I go through it, we're all proposing six and seven units on each site in separate buildings, but basically the same plan in order to sort of mimic the existing conditions of the block and try to do some infill development on the sites.
um back to the uh 3300 block um so besides that one corner being cmx2 the rest of the lots are
zone um rsa5 so if i go through 33 45 uh 47 and 49 um they basically are the same we're proposing
six units with zero parking spaces. And the refusals for those are now moot as they were
removed as an agreement with the community, again, to provide more two-bedroom units as well.
Basically, all these properties, for the most part on the 3,300 block, have been vacant since
1996. There are no records as to what they were before, but directly adjacent on the 3,400 block,
almost all of those properties were six-unit buildings, so the idea was to put back what was
there prior. These buildings have, this land has sat vacant for many decades, and we're again
putting back something that we believe is in line with the prior history, in addition to many of the
other adjacent properties are all multifamily properties. Given the size, shape, location,
and condition, and also market conditions, we're not required to show that the land is valueless,
However, we do, we can show and are prepared to explain that putting single family homes on blighted vacant lots that have been vacant for 40 years is not feasible in this market and hasn't obviously been feasible for the last couple of decades.
is not feasible in this market and hasn't obviously been feasible for the last couple of
decades. As a result, again, we're putting back something that was already there, six and seven
unit buildings. Again, the only refusals that we generate in the 33, 45, 47, 49 relate to
multifamily use and also some relate to the setbacks. Scott will go into why some of the
buildings are set back differently than the others, but those are typically a function of
what's directly adjacent to them, and also keeping them in line so that there is a contiguous flush
front for all these properties for lighting, security, and landscaping purposes. Happy to
go into the other side of the block, 3401 to 05. This side of the block is randomly zoned RSA 3,
although I don't know that there's anything substantially different between the two sides
the block just the zoning uh goes from down from four uh from five to three um and again yep
there we are that's a great that's a great area so as you can see this block is basically vacant
and what we're putting back is what's uh most in character with what's directly adjacent which is
basically six unit buildings um i just want to quickly mention um some of the additional uses
that are in line with what we are providing.
And then Scott, if you'll go through the different setbacks
and some of the dimensional refusals
that we generated as a result.
On the 3,400 block of the property,
34, 13, 34, 11, 09, 07, 03, and 01
were all six unit and five unit buildings.
since 1983, some earlier than that. As you can see, they've been demolished and nothing has
taken its place, but they do have a prior history of multifamily use. Additionally,
some of the existing buildings on the site, on the 3400 block, 15, 17, 19, 21,
and goes up to 34, 33, are all multifamily buildings since the early 40s and 30s,
And even a variance of property was granted three units in 2019, 3431 North 19th Street.
So there really is not a precedent of single family.
And we believe that part of the hardship is the economics of the area, in addition to
the prohibitive cost of building large single family homes in a neighborhood like this that
cannot necessarily support that use.
Again, trying to put back what was already there.
Additionally, again, we do have, we are generating some refusals for parking.
but in order to provide some parking spaces for the project in addition with collaboration with
the community that was something that we were okay with most of them which have been removed
from the revised plans. Other than that again it's really just kind of nine duplicates some
have parking some don't all to have exterior finishes that meet the neighborhood quality
and characteristics. In addition to the support that you have from the community groups, we also
have a community benefits agreement that we negotiated with the directly adjacent near
neighbors who I believe will speak on this call in order to accomplish some things that will
better the infrastructure for the neighborhood. So new sidewalks, lighting, bollards, so that
people are not parking on the curbs. There are some underpasses, as you can see from the, as you
have any lighting or security features and so we've worked with the neighbors and we'll continue to
to kind of just better the area around the site in hopes that some of the vacant lots and blighted
properties won't remain that way. I know the board is well aware of the challenges that we're facing
as a city related to security and public safety so it was important for us to incorporate some
of those benefits into this project as well. I'm kind of just going to pause there and allow Scott
to go through from an architectural perspective. And if you can highlight, Scott, any of the
dimensional considerations that we have for the site and then any of the changes that were made
from the inception of the project. Sure, not a problem at all. So again, based on our
our conversation here 19th street is here i can't hear you scott oh sorry is that any better
yes great um one of the big things that realizing the site uh is there is quite a big slope uh
that's kind of up on both these corners so that was one of the things that we dealt with in the
design um in that we're kind of coming down the hill through 19th street uh so there's a large
grading challenge here. Am I the only one that's not able to hear him? Yes. I can hear him.
Yes. I can hear. The court reporter can hear him.
Go ahead, Scott. Is that any better? You're low now.
Scott. Yep, I'm here. Okay, go ahead.
Looking through the site, these are some existing photographs, as Rachel mentioned, fairly vacant street frontage.
Here, we're looking down 19th Street.
Again, you can kind of see this large slope here as we're looking up.
On this one, we're looking at Ontario Street.
Again, looking through at this larger slope.
This is looking at that four-unit development along 19th Street, and this is really the face that we're starting to meet from a setback perspective, which we'll look at in the plans.
And again, this is on Ontario, looking towards the rear of the properties.
As we go down the block, a lot of inspiration was drawn from some of the architecture that you see here.
three-story stone buildings with mansard roofs and dormers.
Most of the block was this style of architecture.
So it was important that the development team
also said to incorporate that in the new design,
again, to kind of hold the character of the existing block,
the buildings that were on the existing block.
Again, that's that overpass that Rachel had mentioned previously.
And then again, you can kind of see this is a detached version, but kind of a three-story stone building with a man-side roof and dormers.
This is just a building massing, looking at all the different structures along the street.
They're all within the 38-feet height threshold that's permitted against all of the zoning districts.
And then there's also kind of the footprint that we're building within, which is in line characterily with the rest of the structures, as well as the zoning requirements.
And again, this is kind of the master plan, just looking at all the buildings.
And we'll look at each pack of these buildings kind of individually that they're doing.
So these four on the southern side of 19th Street, we had revised the plans.
We originally had parking kind of coming to rear on Ontario Street with one car parking in the rear of each one of these lots.
Through conversation with the RCO, we made changes to add some more two bedroom units to the development, which essentially had us take out some of the parking that was on each lot.
but now we have two large eight two-bedroom units on the ground floor and the second floor
and then we have two units on the third and fourth level really the second or third this
is kind of a walkout basement going through these next two and really these next three are very
similar we have two car parking kind of in the rear and then we have a flat unit proposed trash
with access through to the parking, lobby, mail area, and then two units for each floor.
Again, very similar. These are just small tweaks, as Rachel mentioned,
just depending on the orientations of the buildings themselves, but again, very similar in design.
these two down here again in a opportunity to change and add some more two-bedroom units
we added two two-bedroom flat units to each one of these to add those counts up so we ended up
with a total of over the whole development, over 20% two bedrooms, 54% one beds, and 24% studios
as a whole. This is just a site section looking at kind of the elevation changes
and some of the buildings stepping a little bit through the site.
proposed materials on the elevations proposing again this like kind of limestone look which is
fairly prevalent on the block kind of decorative bays and cornices that transition up to a man's
side roof and hardy plank siding that'll kind of be on the front of these and each one of these has
a little bit of a different flavor but also similar as you can see in aesthetics of the
Also similar, as you can see, in aesthetics of the London, but also not be the exact duplicate.
London, but also not be the exact.
Just a narrow perspective.
There's another one looking at the northern sides.
These are the three.
Little alley between, and then these are the other two.
Aerial, just some of the massing.
And then this is just an artistic rendering looking at kind of what those will look like.
These on this side will have front yards, kind of landscaped area, lighting, security as Rachel mentioned, and then kind of adjacent to the other ones.
This is looking more at the further side of 19th Street.
Again, smaller front yard, but still has a nice lit entryway that kind of go into these with stone pieces on them.
Rachel, was there something specific you wanted me to walk through dimensionally on these?
No, I just know that some are just set back different than others and just wanted to just address that for the benefit of the board.
So this face, we're essentially matching this one structure kind of towards the northern side of 19th Street, again, just to try and hold the existing block face.
So all of these were kind of at the smaller front yard, but again, trying to keep in line with what is existing on the block.
um similarly 33 45 to 51 uh these existing structures have like these small kind of
porch porches but the actual building face is right here which we are also matching
um i know some of the refusals around that the rear yard for this parking
were essentially because the drive aisle can't count as your rear yard and that was an attempt
to get the parking to be able to fit into the site.
But there is light and air for all intents and purposes
in back of these structures.
Thanks, Scott.
Before I move on, I just want to make sure
there's no questions for Scott.
We're OK.
I'm OK.
keep going rachel okay i just wanted to um go through some of the thoughts again regarding the
planning of the site so um as i mentioned we're putting back what was there and it's also worth
noting that the city uh philadelphia city planning commission's north district plan does not recommend
this block for single-family-only zoning and includes in their 2035 comprehensive plan for
proposed zoning west abroad on page 79 of the plan that redevelopment of vacant properties with
multifamily uses is advisable within a radius of several blocks surrounding the property.
As you can see from this map, you know, there is a benefit of putting multifamily towards a lot of
these commercial and commercial corridors to help with the density that's needed to drive
economic development and growth in our city. So wanted to mention that. And lastly, just go
through the support that we had from both the Tioga United that is a affected RCO, a letter
that was sent to the chairman and members of the board, in addition to the letter sent from UNNA,
also in support, the support with Proviso, which is the changes that we have made. This is the
meeting summary as well. And a lot of this was worked through with the owners of 3414 North 19th
Street, the Divines. And then lastly, just for the board's benefit, everything that we agreed to
outside of what we can do by Proviso is included in this community benefits agreement, all to note
that this will be developed by a certified women-owned business and a certified small
women-owned business in the city of philadelphia which i think is important to note in addition to
the fact that it includes a lot of local hiring provisions um and advancement for certain jobs
in the neighborhood which is also really important um and um including a trash and safety plan which
includes certain items like we mentioned around infrastructure with the sidewalks and underpasses
and things like that. So there's a lot of benefit besides just the housing component,
the affordable housing component with this project. And I was really proud to be able
to incorporate that into this. Okay. Other than that, Chairman, I'm at your disposal for any
I'm at your disposal for any questions that you have at this time.
questions that you have at this time.
So let me ask you, you don't need to adopt a testimony with anyone, right?
I would like to, if that's okay.
I think one of my partners is on the line, Adam Pritzker.
Mr. Pritzker, please unmute yourself.
Yeah, I believe I am.
Could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Adam Pritzker, A-D-A-M-P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Counsel?
Adam, have you heard the testimony that I've given today?
Is it true and accurate, and would you adopt it as your own?
Yes, I would.
Thank you.
Questions from the board.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
I'm sorry, Chair.
Mr. Richardson, hand just one.
Mr. Richardson, I believe sometime this morning I swore you in.
could you just state your name please you did mr chair charles richardson from the office of
councilwoman cindy bass room 312 city hall uh as you may be aware there's been a flurry of emails
going back and forth between the rcos in the area that the councilwoman would like to review really
quickly uh she's not taking a position at this moment but would ask that the board hold the vote
until uh for one week and uh she will review and then submit her decision
uh sometime at the midday end of this week okay
chair we also have someone else wait wait one minute
council did you hear that yeah i'm fine with that chairman okay thank you proceed
i'm sorry it must be a delay because it sounded like everyone has stopped talking i apologize
us no no no it was actually thought i threw in here that's fine okay we have someone by
the first name carmella all right hi carmella
carmella
is your hand up
yes she's unmuted can you hear me okay yes hi could you state your name and spell it please
for the court reporter yes it's carmela c-a-r-m-e-l-l-a last name vassar johnson v as in
Victor, A-S-S-O-R hyphen Johnson, J-O-H-N-S-O-N.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed.
So I am a member of the Upper North Neighbors Association.
We were the hosting RCO on this case.
we were very pleased with the level of listening and engagement that this development group took
with the community they really listened to us actually we had two separate meetings the first
one on zoom the second one in person and I'm pretty sure that
Hello?
Carmella?
Did we lose Carmella?
She's speaking.
She's still here, but it appears she's having technical issues with her mic.
All right.
Okay, Carmelo, can you get back on?
Okay, I think we have a lot of what Carmelo said.
Can you hear me?
I can hear you now.
Okay, so I'll keep it quick.
So basically, we are very happy with the level of sensitivity that this developer has worked with the community.
We feel like they will be very good community partners and not just develop and leave.
So we are happy to support this project.
Thank you so much for calling in your input.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no other hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Oh, sorry. David, so I just, I guess you could, you might, this could be a little bit more of a
David, so I just, I guess you might, this could be a little bit more.
complicated answer for you. So however you want to approach this, we're listening, David.
That's fine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. David Fecto, City Planning Commission. So Mr. Chairman
and members of the board, we're going to begin by just noting that the, if the area RCOs and
the frequent applicants want to continue seeing multifamily units on specific blocks,
they really should reach out to planning and the council office to request a rezoning
of certain blocks. We certainly can facilitate that because these variances really do get to
be a bit much. The comprehensive plan recommends two family attached zoning for the lots on the
3,400 block of North 19th Street and no change to the residential single family zoning on the
3,300 block of North 19th Street. However, the current zoning maps were changed in 2006
in tioga at the request of the local civic association so whether the zoning maps are
appropriate or not you know a comprehensive rezoning could uh could reveal that so 3351
north 19th street is zoned commercial mixed use too we do agree with the applicant that there
could be a hardship that would prevent a commercial unit from being built on the ground floor since
this appears to be an oddly placed commercial mixed use designation in the area primarily zoned
residentially however the remaining lots are zoned residential single family and we don't believe
there's a unique physical condition that would prevent these lots from being used in conformance
with the zoning code so what the city planning commission is going to recommend is that the
board approve the variance for 3351 north 19th street but deny the use in dimensional variances
for the remaining lots on the 3300 and 3400 blocks of north 19th street thank you david
Chairman, is it okay if I just put a comment on the record?
You can put a comment on the record.
Thank you.
I just want to mention again that unnecessary hardship is also found when physical features cannot be used for their permitted purpose, but also when a property can be conformed for a permit use only at a prohibitive cost.
I know that we like to only talk about the physical and geographic considerations,
but prohibitive costs and also a four almost four decades of it's sitting vacant, I think,
can help support that. Also to mention that these properties, most of them were formerly
multifamily properties despite the zoning. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to comment.
So, Tanya, we can target this for next Wednesday.
Tonya? Hillary? Yes, Mr. Chair. We can close the record except for the letter from...
The record is closed. We will wait to hear from the council office and we will target to take
this to executive session next Wednesday. And then vote it on the two o'clock list.
Yep. Yep. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you.
Okay, so let's go back here.
So number four, I think, four, no, number five, MI 2022, 003-140-4245 Sampson Street,
Stephanie Boggs Magna is the attorney. Spruce Hill, letter of support from the Spruce Hill Community Association, letter of non-support from the Intercultural Family Services located adjacent to proposed project and the former owner of the property.
Chair, I see no hands for this case.
okay oh wait wait a minute two hands just came up okay all right mr chair i just want to note i
think i think you said letter of non-support i think it's a letter of non-opposition from the
intercultural family services for this project let's see here just want to make a note yeah
non-opposition i'm sorry chair we have mr michael kellerman
hello mr chair michael kellerman m-i-c-h-a-e-l kellerman k-e-l-l-e-r-m-a-n um i'm the ceo of
intercultural family services and just wanted to clarify what was just clarified okay good thank
you thank i appreciate that let's let's see if we can get the attorney on here it there's a note um
that in the in the q a that carl primavera is going to be presenting for this case okay carl
Carl? He's coming back in as a panelist.
he's coming back in as a panelist
Can you hear me now? We can. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter,
please? Yes, thank you. I'm Carl Primavera, P-R-I-M-A-V-E-R-A. I'm substituting for Stephanie
bog who had her baby last week oh that's great her second and uh i'm representing the applicants
uh which are the intercultural family services inc and you've already heard from the ceo michael
kellerman and rrg firm to tell the truth told you nothing but the truth yes i do okay and and
who's the owner of the property so it's the rrg chestnut street llc who are represented online
by Forrest Passerin and Ethan Fellheimer
and also Intercultural Family Services, Inc.
And you've heard from the CEO, Michael Kellerman.
And I'll explain.
It's really a joint development project.
Our board secretary, Ishmael Shahid,
has a few questions, Ish.
Good, counsel.
How are you?
Good afternoon.
Do you agree to read the reading and refuse the recipient to his accuracy?
We do.
Did you know all the exhibits and documents required, such as proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of the refusal or referral, pictures of the drawings and the property, five days in advance of this hearing?
Do you?
Yes, we did.
All of the above.
Did you meet with the RCO?
Yes, that is correct. And there is a letter from Spruce Hill.
Thank you. Also on the Zoom is Jay Rockefeller from DAS Architects, and I will ask him at some point to just state his name and address for the record.
So we'd like to move all our exhibits, which have previously been submitted.
This is a request for what we would call minor dimensional variance with regard to 4245-29 Sansom Street.
The property is the original location of the nonprofit Intercultural Family Services.
And as they outgrew the space and wanted to upgrade and expand, they were able to partner, quote unquote, with RRG Chestnut Street LLC, which is a private developer of multifamily.
And as we'll discuss, they were able to come up with a plan that provides the ability for the nonprofit to stay at this location in new and improved new facilities.
And above it are apartments, which provides the revenue for the nonprofit space.
So it's a creative approach, and we're pleased that we were able to be a part of it.
The only refusal, as I mentioned, is a
I'm sorry, this is Tanya
Are you going to present on the screen for us?
I'm going to ask Jay to do that
I don't know if you need to enlist him
Thank you, Jay Rockefeller
Could you promote him, staff, to panelists?
Yes, he's coming back in there
Thank you kindly
Thank you
and we're going to go to really
the plans. Oh, that's perfect. All right. So what you'll see here is at the top,
it says previously approved, and that's a conforming view. And then you'll see at the
bottom proposed, and there's a little red box, which I'll get into. That's the area of infill
that we're seeking approval on. And you'll also see another exhibit that shows you that we actually
own from Chestnut Street all the way to Sansom. And Jay, you'll show that in plan. There it is.
The top is Chestnut Street. It's already been approved for 116 apartments. And as I said,
the offices for the nonprofit. But then in the back along Sansom Street, there's going to be
an additional 16 units. The red box, which again you'll see is the area of infill. When we went to
CDR last year, the entire project was presented and presented to the community as Spruce Hill
and presented to the community, as Spruce Hill in their letter indicates, and we were going to do
in their letter indicates.
it in one shot as of right. Lo and behold, in the review process, there was a change in code
and interpretation on split zones. The Chestnut Street portion is CMX4, which is high-rise,
but the rear portion with Sansom Street frontage is RM1. So because of this split zone,
we couldn't infill the little red box as we would have before the change in the code so we
received our permit we're way into construction on the chestnut street project and now we're
seeking this variance to allow us to build the sansom street portion they really were designed
to be integrated and they serve a purpose the traffic activity for this is along chestnut street
uh which is both for the non-profit as well as for the main apartments above uh and that's where
we want the activity to be sansom street is very discreet it's only the residential for 16 units
that are serviced by that all the truck traffic and everything else is really designed to be on
chestnut street and where the infill is along the so-called uh split zone line uh jay and you can
show that where the red box is, we're using that area for ADA compliance, elevators, and other
important amenities. So even though it looks like two separate projects, it's really one project,
but we had to do it in two bites. So that's really the long and the short of it. So the area that
we're seeking relief from is the fact that we don't have at that spot the required nine-foot
rear yard depth and we don't have 144 square feet of rear yard open area. But as we own both sides
of the property line and it's one project, it's a moot point. Also, we still have, if you can point
to it, Jay, a lot of open space on either side of the property, including rear yard depth. We just
don't satisfy it entirely because of the red box situation. So that's the story. We believe that we
do have the hardship here because of the split zone and because of the configuration. We have
been at Spruce Hill. They did see it at CDR and then we went more recently to show them the need
for the zoning. With that, I would just like to have the project architect, Jay Rockefeller,
sworn and adopt my testament my name is jay rockefellow it's j-a-y-r-o-c-k-a-f-e-l-l-o-w
right you swear for him to tell the truth told you nothing but the truth
i do proceed so jay you are the architect along with uh marce uh and
other architects at das architects in philadelphia correct and you heard my testimony in my
presentation regarding the need for a variance uh the split zoning that required us to make two
separate applications yes and has everything that i've said been accurate to the best of your
knowledge uh yes except for there's 12 units not 16 oh in the sansom street property the sansom
side and how many in the front 116 i think correct all right and then the two floors for the
intercultural uh center correct i have nothing further of this witness unless the board has
questions questions from the board no mr chairman all right and then mr chairman
okay what were you going to say carl uh the next short witness will be michael kellerman whom
you've heard from already. Okay. Mr. Kellerman. Hello, everybody. Michael Kellerman again. I'm
the CEO of Intercultural Family Services. Could you spell your name for the court reporter,
please? M-I-C-H-A-E-L, last name K-E-L-L-E-R-M-A-N. Right. Do you swear a firm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed. Michael, you are currently CEO. How
How long have you been not only in that position, but just in any position with the nonprofit?
So I'm actually new at the nonprofit.
I came on board in February as CEO with the retirement of the longstanding CEO and founder.
But the organization has been around for 42 years.
We have been providing community services, family services, clinical behavioral health support services to multiple communities.
but our main community is in west philadelphia for those uh 42 years we are across the street
We are across the street in 4225 Chestnut Street right now, but as explained in our letter supporting this, we are so enthusiastically in support of this project because it includes a new state-of-the-art headquarters for our operations and service center.
in 4225 chestnut street right now but as explained in our letter
And as a mid-sized nonprofit, that's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to upgrade our facilities and expand our services right here without having to leave the community that we serve or to change a location where our community members are accustomed to coming for services.
So the partnership that we have between us and the other teams developing the property that you've heard from is a true partnership.
Intercultural will occupy the first two floors, the main feature of the building on Chestnut Street.
And it's a true event for us in a positive way.
So we couldn't be more enthusiastic about our support for this joint project.
All right. And you've you heard my recitation. Is it true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief?
It is good. I have nothing further with regard to this witness or anyone else.
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission thank you mr chairman david facto city planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the combined residential multifamily and
commercial mixed use zoning at this location the proposal substantially conforms with the
proposed zoning and so the city planning commission recommends the board grant the
dimensional rare yard variances. Thank you. MI 2022-003-140-4245 Sampson Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you. Have a good evening.
Right. Number seven, MI 2022, 003-076-500 North 18th Street.
Joseph Council is the attorney.
Letter of support from the Spring Garden Civic Association.
Hello.
Mr. Counsel, you've already been sworn, just state your name.
Joseph Consul.
Could you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
Yeah, my client is Franklin Tower Associates, and the tenant is Thrive Affordable Vet Care.
The representative, Roger Davila, should be on this call.
Okay, our vice chair has a few questions.
not our vice chair our board secretary i'm sorry
afternoon council
the reading of the refusal
did you email all the exhibits and documents as required such as proof of ownership tax clearance
copy of refusal or referral pictures of or drawings of the property five days in advance
of this hearing and did you meet with an rco do you have a letter
Yes, all sir.
All right, we should just proceed.
Joe Consul here, 500 North 18th Street.
The tenant in this property is Thrive Affordable Vet Care.
It's the corner of 18th and Spring Garden.
Here is what the space looked like when we were in front of the board last year.
similar to the the one of the earlier cases in the two o'clock list we were seeking animal care
and such for the leased property although not not boarding but it still required a variance
for these two spaces that are that are facing us right right now we got the approval all was good
My clients were then seeking to put a sign up.
They didn't realize that all of the commercial spaces on the sides of both Spring Garden and 18th Street counted against their ability to put a sign up because of the amount of space that the current signage already covered.
So when they submitted their sign permit, they got a refusal.
It's RMX3.
That's a maximum of 24 square feet of the sign area allowed for the lot frontage.
There's just a lot of lot frontage and a lot of businesses on the other two sides of the building.
So what we're here seeking to do and what we have the support of Spring Garden Civic to do is add signs to the property.
to do is add signs to the property. Here's the rehabilitation as of when these photos were taken
last month. Here's our signs up. Here's the company logo. And this shot shows you what the
signs are going to look like. So we have all the spaces here that are in blue. You can see both
both the as proposed and the existing.
Those are gonna be Sunbrella canvas awnings
as requested by the Spring Garden Civic
in that general color,
as well as the Thrive sign above that.
And here's a mock-up of the actual sign
that's gonna be above the awnings
and the illumination bit that's required.
and a description of the awnings themselves being Sunbrella Shade Capri.
Past that, we've got all of our other required documents, the deed and the tax compliance certificate.
I'll ask Roger, if he's available on the call, to raise his hand and adopt my testimony.
do we see his hand yes yes i'm you okay this is roger hi could you state your name and spell
it for the court reporter please roger r-o-g-e-r d-a-v-i-l-a
could you do that again i'm waiting at it could you get a little closer to your mic roger if
possible. He's breaking up. I'm afraid it's not clear enough. Mr. Consul, you're an officer of
the court. We will take your testimony. All right. Thank you. Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman. Hi, Mr. Chair. This is Tanya again. May I ask a quick
question? Sure. Would it be okay for Mr. Consul to just state and put the spelling of the person?
Sure. Thank you so much. He is Roger, R-O-G-E-R, last name Davila, D-A-V-I-L-A. And he is a
direct representative of Thrive. Thank you both kindly. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Mr. Navarro.
Hi, Mr. Navarro.
Could you state your name as spelled, please, for the court reporter?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
And members of the board, Justino Navarro, J-U-S-T-I-N-O, N-A-V-A-R-R-O.
I'm a representative of the Supreme Guardian Civic Association and the Zoning Committee.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
We met on several occasions with the applicant and attorney counsel on zoning matters regarding this property, as well as the subsequent meeting regarding the sign that's proposed.
And the applicant was totally receptive to recommendations to improve and have the property representative of the Spring Garden Historic District.
and we are fully in support of the variance that's being requested for the signs that the
signs that are depicted above so we encourage the board to approve approve so accordingly
thank you thank you thank you for your call and your your insight is there anyone else in the
virtual audience i see no hands here any commission thank you mr chairman david fecto
city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential mixed
use zoning at this location due to the restrictions of this zoning district the existing business in
this building cannot currently install signage without the proposed variance so we would argue
that this is actually a hardship and so the city planning commission recommends the board grant
the proposed variance for a static illuminated sign. Thank you. MI 2022-003-076-500 North
18th Street, I vote yes. Thomas? James Snell, I vote yes. Thank you. This must be yes.
Thomas, counsel, you have your three votes.
council you have your three votes all right thank you chair
All right.
Thank you, Chair.
hi chair nine mi 2022 it looks like we lost mr um thomas i'm going to try to get him back and
just for you to know and for the record we are having various issues with um i know i heard it
We all hear it, Tanya. Number nine, MI-2022-002816, 3129-33 North 22nd Street, Mr. Knockamson, letter of, let's see here, letter of opposition from the Coordinating RCO, West Allegheny West Civic Association,
A letter of support from the affected RCO, Swamp Poodle Neighbors, Neighborhood Parcels Association.
Applicant provided two letters of support.
Sarita Scott, Letters of Child Evangelism Fellowship and Dobbins High School.
Counselor, you've already been sworn to state your name.
Alan Ockhamson.
could you identify your client in a relationship to the property uh yes uh the property is owned
by amuru llc in the virtual audience i have both sarita scott and darnell thomas members of that
llc all right our uh our board secretary has a few questions
yeah i'm here good afternoon council you agreed away to the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to his accuracy?
You email all the exhibits and documents as required,
such as the proof of ownership, tax clearance,
copy of refusal or referral,
pictures or drawings of the property
five days in advance of this hearing,
and did you meet with an RCO?
Do you have a letter?
Yes, in all respects.
Okay, thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Again, my name is Alan Ack.
I'm here to present 3129-33 North 22nd Street.
During our presentation, we'll go over the notice of refusal, as well as the correspondence we received from multiple organizations, including the Allegheny West Civic Association, as well as Swamp Poodle Neighborhoods Parcels Association,
as well as the nearby the nearby school in a nonprofit organization.
We also canvass the neighborhood and obtain signatures in support of our project.
Also, we have a zoning permit regarding a project that was approved by this zoning board last month next door, which allowed for 206 units, as opposed to our project.
It's merely nine units with a commercial component. That's a CMX 2 project. Nearby CMX properties with full lot coverage, the reason why we're showing you that is that two of our refusals pertain to open area issues, as well as rear yard setback issues, showing that it's not out of character to have full lot coverage in this neighborhood.
And you'll see it even in the aerial showing the existing building structure.
Parts of the building structure has full lot coverage, the existing one for our property.
Then we'll go over Ms. Scott.
She's a well-known hairstylist.
Her company is Dape Hair Salon.
If you looked her up and we have some literature about her, she does hair, holistic hair for the African-American community.
She has done work for Jill Scott, Janet Jackson, Questlove, so she's known locally as well as nationally for her work, and she's looking to keep her business in this neighborhood by way of this development where she would have the commercial components, and she would have nine units above with full affordable housing, which we'll go into further.
maps in the area photographs of the property or plans and drawings or rco meeting notice for the
for the certified rco meeting there was a subsequent meeting as well
where we're asked to attend but it was not certified because no notices that went out to
the surrounding neighbors our application for appeal our deed to the property showing that
amaru llc is the owner of the property and our certificate of tax clearance again in the virtual
audience, we have Sarita Scott, as well as Darnell Thomas, as well as their architect, Chris Johnson
of 24-7 Design. Hi, so this is a CMX2 property, and what we're looking to do is erect a nine-dwelling
And what we're looking to do is erect a nine-dwelling unit with ground floor commercial.
unit with
Our refusals are as follows.
First, the last square footage is a little over 3,000 square feet.
And because of that, we're technically allowed only six dwelling units on this property.
If we were to avail ourselves of the affordable housing bonus program, we would be allowed for low income housing, we would be allowed nine units. And that's what we're basically gearing our project to.
The reason why we are trying to emulate that and indicate that to the board is that unlike the affordable housing bonus program, where under the circumstances that we have here today, only one unit would be required to participate as an affordable housing unit.
My client is proposing to have all nine units as affordable housing. Mr. Thomas, who is Ms. Scott's partner on this project, is a general contractor who focuses all of his attention on projects with affordable housing.
So that's his business model. So that's why we think it's appropriate to kind of match apples to apples here.
we're allowed nine units to do the affordable housing program. We, instead of having one
affordable unit, we want nine affordable units. And I think that's why we've generated some
support because this neighborhood's in desperate need of affordable housing. The other, and by the
way, under the program, we would be allowed to build 45 feet high while we're only proposing
38 feet. The portion of the property that's on 22nd Street is two-story in nature. We thought
was more appropriate to build 38 feet high rather than 45 feet high so instead of just having a
higher building with less lot coverage we were proposing to have a lower building greater lot
coverage for several reasons first if we even built a building at 45 feet high under the affordable
housing program forget about the neighborhood contextual nature it would just wouldn't be
an appropriate and reasonable floor plan it would be out of whack and Mr. Johnson would you know
speak to that the architect of the project it just wouldn't be a functional floor plan
so we believe that having 38 feet greater footprints would have more functionality in
terms of our project secondarily the reason why we're offering to have a lower building
with a greater footprint goes to the contextual nature.
It's not out of sorts to have buildings
with full lot coverage with no rear yard setback.
And you'll see from the aerial photographs
that our current building structure
would run afoul of the building code
if it was judged today by L&I.
And that's where our two other refusals go.
We're required to only have lot coverage of 80%.
We're at 93.2%.
And then the third refusal has to do with the rear yard setback, where nine feet is proposed, excuse me, nine feet is required and zero is proposed.
So we have correspondence from the Allegheny West Civic Association.
We met twice with them.
The first time we met with them, honestly, I thought we did really well.
Like, it was an in-person meeting.
it was at an older and over 55 community and the room was packed with individuals. I would say
there were probably upwards of 50 people in that room and we received this we received an ovation
you know again Miss Scott just a little background here we're near the Tasty Cake facility
in Philadelphia and that's where her parents actually met so she has strong ties to the
neighborhood and her business has been there for some time. So given her ties to neighborhoods,
given her business being there, given her background, given her reputation locally,
as well as nationally, we thought that this was, given the affordable housing component of having
nine affordable housing units, we thought this was a really strong project in spite of the
requested variances. And after the meeting, we were told that we did not receive approval. There
was two votes that were broken down. The RCO board committee actually voted in support of the
project, the first meeting, four to three. But they say that the people in attendance who were
within the affected area, they voted three, four, and six against. And then our understanding was
that, at least from the meeting, there was no one against that. My understanding, after speaking to
to the community representative for the coordinating RCO
is that the coordinating RCO took votes
of individuals who are not present at the meeting who merely sent either a letter or a petition which
of individuals who are not present at the meeting
who merely sent either a letter
I haven't seen to this date. So but that's how the vote of three to six against was formed,
my understanding. So after that meeting, we asked the coordinating RCO if we could have another
opportunity to meet because, by the way, we also had a petition at that meeting and we presented it
where those votes weren't counted in support of our project, which are the same, you know,
petition, basically the same petition you're seeing today or you will see today. So eventually
my client was asked to come back. It wasn't a certified meeting because we never send out
notice to the surrounding community. We did, myself and my office, we participated in that
meeting as well. I don't know when a vote was taken. It was a rather long meeting. But after
that meeting with the same presentation, instead of four to three, four by the RCO board, it was
three to four against. So apparently someone switched their vote after meeting with us with
the same project. And then for the surrounding neighborhood, again, we weren't present with the
vote, which is typical. A lot of times people don't vote in front of us, which is truly
understandable. But that meeting, it was seven people for and eight against. Again, I don't
know who was there. I don't know how they voted. I know there's been some discussions since then
with some of the RCOs that they don't believe that the vote was taken accurately. I don't get
into that. I'm just telling you my perspective of what happened. So this is the Allegheny West
Civic Association, and this is their letter. And they mentioned, and we never mentioned this,
but they referenced that we were willing to go to three stories at one point. And that's not the
case. Like, again, as we indicated, Tim, under the affordable housing program, we're allowed 45 feet.
That was a concern of theirs height. So I stated, well, we're actually doing 38 feet. We're just
asking essentially for full, you know, for dimensional variances regarding lot coverage,
as well as rear yard setback which kind of goes in line with you know what they're asking for um
but their opposition had merely to do with more people against their project who voted than
for it um but again i can't speak you know to the fact of who voted when all i can say is that the
first meeting we got a good ovation as to our project and then swan poodle neighborhood
Association sends a letter of support. They were appreciative of the fact that we're providing
affordable housing. They referenced the affordable housing component. They did also indicate
state that they would like confirmation that there's no occupant use on the roof deck and
our refusal states that that the only reason why we have roof deck access is for mechanical access
only which is specifically stated on a refusal and their third request was trash and recycling
stored indoors except at collection times and we'll go through our floor plans but our we have
dedicated trash uh specifically for this project and then they go into the whole you know issue in
terms of what they saw about the voting procedures and things like that and then we also have the
Child Evangelicalism Fellowship. Again, my client, Ms. Scott, it has deep roots within this
community. And Maureen Davis sent a letter of support due to, you know, what she does for this
community. She employs many members of this community. She wants her business to stay in
this community. But given, you know, financial circumstances, she needs to actually, you know,
have a bigger space, a newer space, given marking conditions. And then you'll also see
a letter of support from Assistant Principal Douglas from the Murrell Dobbins High School,
which is nearby, also stressing support because of Ms. Scott's participation in community-oriented
events. And then our petition. Again, my client worked really hard to circulate a petition,
meet with as many neighbors as possible, and, you know, she had pages of petitions of Sangers.
And then, as the board may remember, this board granted a zoning variance for 206 units
next door at 2100-20 West Allegheny Avenue. So it's not all sorts to have an increase in density,
because that's one of our refusals is that we're only allowed six units for a CMX2 property,
we're asking for nine. Here, you know, you have an I-1 property, but 206 units in this neighborhood
Here, you know, you have an I-1 property, but 206 units in this neighborhood pales in comparison to just us asking for nine units.
And here's the notice of refusal as backup.
And we got this all, you know, online.
And then going to our refusal about full law coverage, if you look at 3100 and 3102 North 22nd Street,
not out of character to have full lot coverage, especially on the properties that are towards
the end of the block. And then 3130 North 22nd Street, again, a nearby CMX property with full
lot coverage right here, as you can see. And then 3132 North 22nd Street, again, full lot coverage
just the MX2 property. And then just a little information about Ms. Scott, again, kind of goes
back to what I was saying. You know, she's been in business 20 years. She's done hair for event
goers, you know, for the Nobel Peace Prize, the Grammys, the Kennedy Center Honors. Some of her
clientele include Janet Jackson, Smokey Robinson, Jill Scott, Questlove. And, you know, she's just
well known in the area. You can look at her reviews and she focuses on holistic care care
for the African-American community. And then just the map of the area, we're a CMX2 property. We're
at the corner of 22nd and Lippincott. And then you can see here, you know, we just want to support
this commercial corridor that is on Allegheny Avenue and increasing this density responsibly
like we're trying to do which would be allowed by the zoning code if we took the affordable uh
housing density bonus uh makes sense under the circumstances by having these nine units and then
keeping a bedrock like miss scott's business there will only help matters for for this neighborhood
and then photographs of the property this is the existing building structure from 22nd street
This is the building structure from Whipping Cots. And then I just want to focus the attention. This is the corner of Whipping. So we're, you know, 29, 31, and 33. If you look at 33 here, we have full lot coverage.
so and we have no setback you know there is you know there is a setback and there is some open
area for the other portions of that building structure but the corner property there is no
setback issues I mean there is no setback and there is full lot coverage and you can even see
here further down on this block it's full lot coverage and down here you can see there's full
lot coverage so and over here you can see there's full lot coverage so it's not outsourced what
we're asking for and then just our plans and drawings again Chris Johnson 24-7 design who's
well known with this board his design is trying to be clean with a modern feel but like keeping
you know the the brick facades no bay windows you can see like there will be light and air
not just the residential units but Miss Scott's space and then you can see here this is the door
dedicated to the trash room so again with responsibly storing trash on the first floor
there is no basement living the basement space is merely for the residential uh excuse me the
commercial space and then here are the floor plans uh so you know they have an elevator here
because there is an older portion of this community and they're hoping that like many
of those members who eventually age out of their row homes would consider this especially given
the affordable housing components uh but if you look at this floor plan you have the uh you have
uh you can come off of lipping cots there's an open area for a lobby and an elevator and you can
in terms of the commercial space here uh you have it all on the first floor and then in the lower
level and you can see right here there's a trash room here there's a utility room here we're hoping
to you know make sure that the utilities are not seen from the outside in terms of aesthetically
and then the second through fourth floors are all the same floor plans there's three units
per floor and again you know you can for instance unit one is a one bedroom one bath here
unit two is a two-bedroom, two-bath, and then unit three is, I believe, a two-bedroom, one-bath.
We don't have a roof deck. It was, you know, again, perfectly clear to us because Ms. Scott
knows her neighborhood that roof decks are disfavored for recreational use. We just wanted
it for mechanical access. And then, again, we initially met with the community on June 21st.
And then, again, we initially met with the community on June 21st, 2022, at 6 p.m.
This was the only certified meeting where we actually sent out notices.
We were asked to attend another meeting, which we gladly did, but that was not a certified meeting of an RCO.
62 addresses were notified.
These are the lists of the addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses.
Our application for appeal showing that Amaru LLC is the owner of the property.
our notice refusal, our project information form, our deed to the property, showing that
Emory is the owner of the property, and then our certificate of tax plans. With that being said,
I would ask that Ms. Scott virtually raise her hand so she could adopt my testimony,
and that we'd be more than happy to take any questions. Also, I have Darnell Thomas in the
virtual audience, her partner, who's the general contractor who specializes in affordable housing,
as well as Chris Johnson, a 24-7 design, who's the architect for this project.
Ms. Scott, you're free to speak.
Hello. Hi. My name is Sarita Scott. I am the owner of Amaru. And my goal is solely to hire...
Hold on. Wait one minute. Could you spell your name for the court reporter, please?
Absolutely.
My first name is S-Y-R-E-E-T-A.
My last name is Scott, S-C-O-T-T.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Proceed, counsel.
Yes, Ms. Scott, you've heard everything I stated today.
Is it true and correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Forgive me, say the last bit.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Okay. And you started testifying. Please go on.
Well, my goal is, as it always been, is to hire more people. We just need more space for that
and to offer affordable living for my community. I've been in business for over 20 some odd years
and that has been my goal. Not so much offering affordable housing, but making sure that I hire
the people around me thank you thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience mr chair this is hillary i just had one quick
question um the refusal doesn't indicate can you hear me okay i'm getting a lot of feedback
can you hear me we can now okay i'm not sure what's going on
um so my question was on the refusal um it didn't mention the commercial space
please turn off the second device thank you
um so my my question was um the the refusal doesn't mention the the commercial space are
you seeking that as part of a separate application no we um miss emerson we actually are no that so
actually now I see that if we didn't provide a commercial space that wouldn't have been an
additional refusal so I think the the unfortunately the refusal is in artfully
uh described uh in terms of our proposed use so we did show it and I let me just confirm this
let me just share my screen and see what we have here in terms of the site plan
but I believe in the site plan we do show a commercial space
does it indicate a specific use on the site plan um let me see
it says ground floor commercial space that's all okay okay so you just may need to get a
use registration permit then for that piece okay all right i just wanted to clarify and make sure
i didn't miss something or misunderstand so okay thank you i guess with that being said i do have
an objection to the the status of the refusal um i would say that it it doesn't accurately state
that we are asking for commercial space as well right but i like you said i think it does imply
it otherwise you would be getting a refusal if you didn't have the ground floor an additional
if you didn't have the ground floor an additional refusal without the ground floor for cmx2 so but
refusal without the ground floor for CMX2.
it just doesn't have your commercial use in it so you'll have to apply separately for that yeah and
maybe the specific commercial yeah yeah if this board is so inclined i i would then ask for a
proviso if you feel is appropriate miss emerson uh you know separate like use registration permit
or ground floor or commercial space?
Yeah, I think that would be entirely appropriate
to say separate use registration or use permit.
What would you say use registration?
Separate use registration required
for commercial space on first floor.
But we're also using the basement level too.
Oh, first floor and basement.
Okay, yeah.
All right, we can do that.
That's not a problem.
Thank you.
Questions from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have, excuse me.
We have Sharon Manker.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Sharon Manker, M-A-N-K-E-R.
First name is S-H-A-R-O-N.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
So my name is Sharon Manker.
I am the National Supplier Diversity Manager for AmeriHealth Caritas, a Philadelphia resident,
and the chair for the Women of Color Committee for WeBank East, a subsidiary of the National
Women's Business Council. I can speak to the proposed use and uses that the shop has had
and the economic impact it's had on the community. In the outreach activities that
I have participated in over the years with the organization, there has been community outreach
as far as access to health wealth and wellness resources partnering with local and diverse
businesses that are minority women disabled and veteran owned who miss scott has graciously
opened up her space to let those individuals come into the building and also occupy a space to
either sell their wares or get resource information from national advocates as myself
As far as the economic impact of the resources at the organization, it creates new entrepreneurs
which aligns with the city of Philadelphia's Office of Economic Opportunity and advances
more opportunities through local public schools, like the partnership that they have with Dobbins
with their cosmetology program, which allows new entrepreneurs to be formed, new cosmetologists
to come and learn how to create their own LLCs and their own businesses.
All of this said, we support and I support this expansion of their services and look forward and thank you all for letting me present.
Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Anyone else in a virtual audience?
Chair, we have Hugh Douglas.
Okay. Okay. Mr. Douglas, go ahead. Proceed.
Hello, and good afternoon.
And I'm not Hugh Douglas, the quarterback, but I am still at Hugh Douglas.
Hi, could you please spell your name for us?
H-U-I-E-D-O-U-G-L-A-S, but I go by Hugh.
H-U-E.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
All right.
In my number of years that I've been the assistant principal at Dobbins, I established a partnership
with Ms. Scott. And in that partnership, I asked her to give my students, juniors and sophomores,
an opportunity to work at a shop. She has extended herself and opened her arms to embrace my students
and really give them opportunities that they may not have necessarily had. I also know that Ms. Scott
has taken a special interest in helping my young ladies understand the importance of conducting
themselves in the means and manner and way that represents a woman that they and I apologize for
not having the pomp and circumstance in terms of certain things to say I didn't write this but
I'm speaking from my heart I appreciate what Ms. Scott has offered my students because it has
allowed them an avenue to really use and utilize their services that they're learning at my school
and though I'm no longer there there's been a number of students that still work there to this
day and I just wanted to give my vote of support in terms of Ms. Scott what she's doing in the
neighborhood and creating options for my students thank you thank you thank you for calling in we
appreciate it is there anyone else in the virtual audience yes chair we have a calling user phone
number ending in 3552. Okay. How could you state your
Okay. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, this is Adrienne Fernandez, Swamp Fuddle Neighborhood Parks and Association, RCO, and my name is...
Could you please spell your name for the court reporter?
Yes, A-D-R-I-E-N-N-E. My last name is spelled F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
yes proceed okay um swamp little neighborhood parts of the association is one of four affected
rcos for this address and we support this project um for low-income affordable housing
thank you oh hello yep go ahead proceed okay um i just wanted to state first
we did have three provisos listed in the written testimony the first proviso we want to delete that
there was a misunderstanding about that when it was presented at the public meeting
so we do have three provisos the other remaining two that are listed
mechanical use only for the roof because our neighborhood is very opposed to roof decks
and also trash and recycling stored indoors except collection times
And also, we would like to have a proviso that Mr. Notcheson mentioned about the commercial use first floor and basement.
We also agree with that proviso.
Thank you very much for calling in.
Is there anyone else?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
David Fecto, City Planning Commission.
the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning change to commercial mixed use 2.5 at this location
if the applicant had applied to use the mixed income housing bonus then they would have been
able to earn nine dwelling units as mr knockinson said the affordable units would be units that the
city would be able to enforce and verify the income of the tenants and which would be would
be included in the department of planning and development's annual affordable housing report
so we would argue that if the zoning board grants this variance it would deprive the city of an
enforceable affordable unit in exchange for units that no city agency can enforce nor verify the
income of tenants and which will never be included in the department's annual report so since the
applicant has not proven that a hardship exists that prevent would prevent them from building
six dwelling units allowed by right and six since they could provide three additional dwelling units
on site without a use variance the city planning commission recommends that the board deny the
proposed use in dimensional variances. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just would like to respond. So I
think I heard that the recommended use of this property is CMX two and a half, which again,
I haven't done the calculations, but if that was the case, I think we would fall. I mean,
the use, at least the quantity of units would be as of right. As far as the dimensional component
of this, again, what we're asking is not out of character for this property in this current
condition because we have full lot coverage on portions of the property where there is no setback
and then their surrounding property similarly situated right thank you mi 2022 002 816
3129 to 33 north 22nd street i vote yes with proviso
So roof deck for mechanical access only interior storage of trash and recycling and Hillary
what's our third?
The third proviso is separate use registration required for vacant commercial space on first
floor and basement.
Separate use requirement required for first floor and separate and basement.
For vacant commercial space, yes.
to make for vacant commercial space yes thomas holland my vote is yes with provisos
james snell yes with provisos
thank you thank you you have your three votes
we're going to go back to number eight mi 2022 002 882 1709 to 17 chestnut street
michael phillips is the attorney letter of non-opposition of the center city residents
association we'll hear this and then we'll take a short five minute break mr phillips
it looks like we have melanie lacy sir okay
good afternoon mr chairman members how are you could you spell your name for the court reporter
please that's melanie lacey m-e-l-a-n-i-e last name l-a-c-e-y right do you swear for him to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes uh could you identify your client their
relationship to the property yes i am accompanied well i represent the tenant that's starbucks and
accompanied by Andrew Kaufman, who is the project manager of construction and store development
for the Mid-Atlantic region. Thank you. Our board secretary has a few questions.
Good afternoon, council. Good afternoon. Do you agree to read the reading? Yes.
Melanie have you sent everything in it's difficult to hear but yes to all of the
And you have a letter.
You have a letter.
I do, which I will share.
Share your screen, please.
Thank you.
Are you able to see my screen?
It's coming up now.
Am I frozen?
Didn't come up yet.
yeah you're frozen
try stopping and starting again
I'm trying to stop nothing's happening
DPZ Zoom can use thank you okay okay Melanie is stopped
Try again.
If all else fails, let's cut your video.
Are we working this time?
Slowly trying.
It looks like it might be the same.
Any suggestion, IT Bill?
No, there seems to be bandwidth issues today.
Yeah, that's what I see, like everybody.
So as the chair wish, Melanie can proceed without the.
So is this this is a Starbucks takeout coffee?
It is.
Melanie, why don't you proceed?
OK, I think the exhibits would be helpful to depict the context, but I'll work with what I can.
Talk us through this.
OK, sure.
So as mentioned, my name is Melanie Lacey.
I'm with Claire Harrison Harvey in Brandsburg, and I represent Starbucks in their application for special exception for a new what's referred to as a pickup only location that will be at 1709 Chestnut Street.
So we met with CCRA on May 24th, and they submitted a letter of non-opposition dated May 25th, which I included in the exhibit package that was submitted last Thursday.
and Starbucks will be a new tenant at the vacant commercial space that was previously leased by
Chow Pizza. So I'm sure many of you are familiar with that restaurant strip on Chestnut Street
between 17th and 18th Street. It's bound by Ranston Street at the rear and the property
is zoned CMX 5 but it's also within the Chestnut Walnut Overlay District which requires special
exception approval for takeout restaurant uses, which is the only reason for the referral and our
hearing this afternoon. So I'd like to just explain a little bit about the pickup only location. What
that means is that patrons will place their orders through the Starbucks app, and they'll walk over
to the store, pick up their purchases. And this is a growing concept that Starbucks has rolled out
in 20 other markets, but it will be the first location in Philadelphia. Many of you may be
familiar with pickup areas within the existing stores in the city, but in this new pickup store
concept, about 90% of the orders will be placed through the cell phone app and only 10% will be
made on site as credit card transactions. There'll be no cash accepted. So this means that patrons
are in and out of the store. There's no seating for them to dine inside. It cuts down on lines
and it's very efficient. The only entrance will be on Chestnut Street and the employees would also
use that mean entrance. So if you could see the beautiful, the beautiful renderings, I would show you.
If you could see the beautiful renderings, I would show you that it is a very simple and minimalist design.
It's a very modest size area. The lobby would be 282 square feet where patrons would pick up their orders and in some cases, maybe add items to a purchase after the fact.
There are ordinarily two partners at the counter to assist with the handoff and verify the purchasers, and the rest of the space would be for employee use only.
There would be food preparation and a barista area, but even though a typical menu, including sandwiches, would be available, the food items would be prepackaged and heated up without cooking, and there will be no exhaust on site.
So as for operations, I'll just briefly state that there are expected to be five or six employees on site, hours of operation from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m.
And the building will have exterior security cameras provided by the landlord and interior 360-degree cameras installed by Starbucks.
In connection with our discussions with CCRA, who was a coordinating RCO, we provided a litter cleanup plan that entails storage of the trash in trotters and doors and daily commercial pickup.
So that summarizes the presentation.
As you can see, it meets the standards for special exception relief because there's it's a pickup only location that won't cause congestion and won't overcrowd the land, impair adequate supply of light and air.
and it'll be a community amenity that won't cause any negative impacts.
So for these reasons, we respectfully ask the board to approve our request.
So Melanie, so you know, somebody just sent us your package.
Oh, wonderful.
We got to see all your photos and things of that nature.
So would you want to have your testimony adapted, please?
Yes, Andrew Kaufman should be promoted.
i'm sorry could you could you please have him raise his virtual hand
yes andrew can you hit the raise hand button on zoom
i have him you can just unmute yourself sir
hi sir could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter
Mr. Kaufman please unmute yourself
Melanie you're an officer of the court we'll take your testimony it's fine
okay um questions from the board no Mr. Chairman no no Mr. Chairman questions or comments from
the virtual audience i see no hands chair planning commission good afternoon mr chairman and board
members david fecto city planning commission comprehensive plan recommends no change to the
commercial mixed use zoning at this location the applicant has shown that a takeout restaurant
will have no more of an impact than a takeout restaurant would be expected to have so the city
planning commission recommends the board grant the special exception for a takeout restaurant
Thank you. MI 2022-002882-1709-17 Chesson Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Let's take a five-minute break. We have two cases left on here, and then we'll go right into the last section. Take a five-minute break.
dpc zoom okay we're back everybody um number 10 mi 2022 002-886-2309-33 carpenter street
sean whalen is the attorney um letter of support from the south south of south neighborhood
Association and letter of support from Councilman Johnson. Good afternoon, Chairman. How are you?
Could you state your name, please, counsel, and spell for the court reporter? Certainly. Sean
Whalen, W-H-A-L-E-N. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
I am representing the owner and developer, St. Anthony's Senior Residences Associates, LP.
Our board secretary has a few questions.
Paige?
Can you hear me?
excuse me mr chairman do you want me to do it yeah if you're if you're if you're
your computer's stronger please okay i can do it
good afternoon counselor good afternoon mr hallman do you agree to waive the reading of
refusal and stipulate to his accuracy yes i do did you email all of the exhibits and the documents
as required such as proof of ownership tax clearance copy of refusal or referral pictures
or drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing and did you meet with the rco
Do you have a letter?
Yes to all.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you very much, board member.
Hopefully you can see an aerial picture right now.
I can't tell what you can see.
We can, we're good.
So what you're looking at, the large building right there is 2309 Carpenter Street.
that is the existing senior residences. It's an affordable housing senior residence
that's been in existence for many decades. That is staying. And what we're doing is actually
talking about the rear portion of the property right here. So I'll show you this piece right
here is the existing senior residence building that's going to stay the same. This is the
portion of the property that we're talking about right now. It has a street frontage along South
24th and then extends deeply along Montrose Street. So this will give you a better indication.
This is phase two of a development of this property, frankly, which we expected to finish
last year. Phase one included the subdivision of this parcel right here into 10 separate townhomes
on South Bonsal. At the same time, we attempted to subdivide this piece, which is parcel L,
the piece we're talking about today, into six separate parcels for townhomes. When we attempted
to do that, we discovered, much to the surprise of the streets department, that this block of
Montrose right here from 23rd Street to 24th Street is somehow not open on the city plan.
The streets department went back over 100 years. They can't determine why it's not open on the city plan. However, it is maintained by the city as an open public street. It has vehicular access. It has public sewer and utilities underneath it. It has public sidewalks.
um so our refusal today is simply and only that or our hardship rather is that this p this one
block of montrose street is not on the city plan and therefore we were not allowed to subdivide
and put separate townhomes onto directly facing onto montrose street that is the basis for the
hardship today and the only reason why this project is not by right. So in essence what
we're looking to do is here's the existing building of St. Anthony's. You can see these
are 10 approved townhomes on Bonsal that are actually already under construction across the
street from existing single family homes. There are also existing single family homes that all
front on Montrose Street here, even though it's closed. And this right here, these are the five
new townhomes that we're hoping to get proposed and approved today. This single family home
at the corner of Montrose and South 24th is already approved previously. And so all we're
asking to do right now is create a PUD right here that would allow each of these five townhomes to
be constructed. So this lays it out a little bit better. We're talking about the five homes
in dark orange right here. This is Montrose Street, and this is the one block that is not
included on the city plan. What you can see when you go back in time, Montrose Street actually had
22 units, all single-family homes historically. This is back to 1962. And as late as 1994,
we also found that it was fully built out and had existing single-family houses there.
At some point thereafter, they were demolished. And what you have now is, I'll show you very
quickly. This is the existing senior living facility. This right here is the corner of
This right here is the corner of South 24th Street, and Montrose Street goes back this way, and you can see this is the portion that we're talking about right now.
South 24th Street and Montrose Street.
So here are the houses across the street. We have no refusal for height. We are actually only building to approximately 33 feet in order to mirror and match the existing townhomes on the other side, and this is looking back up.
So the development of new townhomes would be on the left and would match in size and stature with stoops and whatnot, the houses on the other side.
we received two refusals as this board knows when reviewing a PUD the underlying zoning district
here is RSA 5 and when reviewing a PUD it is reviewed as a parcel in its entirety not as
you're intending to use it and so we received one refusal for multifamily household living
Again, we are not proposing multifamily household living. We are proposing five individual townhomes to be included along the Montrose Street frontage. And we also received a refusal for multiple principal buildings. This is the already approved corner property, corner house, and the townhomes properties behind it.
So if I go back to here, you can see this is the zoning map for the city.
And as you can see, everything in white are the open city streets on the public map.
And actually Bondsville Street is almost entirely open, but not just right at this corner.
And that's why this portion of the road is actually colored in yellow.
um again what you'll have is this unit at the corner is already approved there will be public
public there will be private access for parking off of carpenter one single drive aisle that's
already approved for all of the bonsall street homes you will turn left off of that drive aisle
and have rear access parking for each of the proposed homes
again and this is just showing that we're we're maintaining the uh the height of the street and
not extending that street um and uh most importantly we presented to sasna and they
provided a letter of support uh they appreciated the lesser density than uh of only five additional
townhomes and that we were maintaining the uh the street frontage and the the height and scale of
the buildings along that side. With that, I would call my witnesses to adopt my testimony,
but I'm happy to answer any questions the board has before that. I want to adopt your testimony.
Certainly. And I guess I should say very quickly for the record before they adopt it that
given as this is an RSA 5 district, single-family housing, and we are proposing single-family
housing, there is no detriment or adverse impact to the public health, safety, welfare
of the neighborhood and this is also the least minimum variance satisfied because you know there
were previously up to 22 homes in this area and we are limiting our request to five again with
only the use variances and no variances for dimensions if i could i would call
brad ingerman brad if you would please raise your hand
can you hear me yes please could you state your name and spell please for the court reporter
sure it's brad b like boy r-a-d ingerman i n g e r m a n you swear for him to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel thank you chairman uh mr ingerman
you're here on behalf of the owner and developer for this project correct yes and did you hear all
of the testimony that are i already presented in this matter i did and do you believe it to
be true and correct to the best of your knowledge and information i do and would you adopt it as
your own testimony i would thank you very much mr ingerman uh chairman i have no further questions
for this witness i'm happy to have him answer any questions the board may have questions questions
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chairman, I would simply ask to have my architect adopt my testimony as well.
Very quickly.
Mr. Cattarucci, are you on?
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Name is Greg Cattarucci.
Name is Greg Cotarucci, G-R-E-G, Cotarucci, C-A-U-T-E-R-U-C-C-I, Senior Project Manager with JKRP Architects.
Do you swear for him, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, Sean.
Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Cotarucci, you're here as the project architect for this project, correct?
That's correct.
all right and did you hear all the testimony already presented in this matter i did and do
you believe it to be true and correct to the best of your knowledge and information i do and would
you adopt it as your own testimony uh yes i would thank you very much mr cadarucci uh board chairman
that concludes my presentation here i'm happy to answer any questions or comments from the
virtual audience i see no handshare planning commission good afternoon mr chairman members
of the board, David Fecto, City Planning Commission, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the
residential single-family zoning at this location. The applicant's proposal closely mirrors the
development pattern of the surrounding block, and the applicant has shown that a clear hardship
exists that would prevent them from using their property in conformance with the zoning code.
So the City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the proposed variances.
Thank you. MI 2022, 002-886-2309-33 Carpenter Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Okay. Thank you, counsel.
Thank you very much for your time today.
Number 19, MI-2022, 002763, 1930 South Broad Street.
Alfred Fiscaldo is the attorney.
Letter of support from Councilman Johnson.
Signs had received approval from the Art Commission.
Letter of support from South Broad neighbors.
counsel could you state your name and spell for the court reporter please yes mr chairman alfred
fiscaldo f as in frank u s as in sam c a l d as in david o right do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do um could you identify your client in relationship
to the property yes i represent clinical care associates of the university of pennsylvania
health system they are the tenant at the property a tenant at the property okay mr hallman could
you ask the appropriate questions please good afternoon good afternoon do you agree the reading
of the refusal and simulating to its accuracy yes did you email all of the exhibits and documents
as required such as proof of ownership tax clearance copy of refusal or referral picture
or drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing and did you meet with the rco
and do you have a letter yes to all please receive and share your screen thank you i i have i have
shared my screen hopefully everyone can see it it's up you're good perfect uh thank you um this
This is an application seeking variance relief to permit the installation of two projecting
signs at the Penn Urgent Care Facility at the property.
The variance will permit the signs to extend above the second floor windowsill line of
the building.
The property is located surrounded by Mifflin Street to the north, South 15th Street to
the west, McKean Street to the south, and Broad Street to the east, and the locations
of the signs are at the northwest corner of uh mckean and broad street here at the at the lower
right hand corner of the screen one sign on broad street one sign on mckean street the applicant
operates in urgent care at the property in about 5400 square feet of space these signs
shown here are for the purpose of advertising the location of the urgent care facility
both on McKeon Street and on the Broad Street sides in order for families and patients of
families traveling to the urgent care vehicles to be able to better identify the location
of the facility. There are two signs. The Broad Street sign is double-sided and internally
illuminated and 29 foot four inches to the top from the sidewalk. The McKean Street sign
is double-sided, not illuminated, and 26 feet.
is double-sided not illuminated and 26 feet five inches to the top of the sign
as the chair noted we have received approval from the art commission that letter is at tab six of
the packet and we have met with the rcos at a meeting headed by the south broad street
neighborhood association as lee rco their letter of support unanimous support is attached to the
exhibit packet at tab seven. Um, so we agreed to, uh, the provisos that the, there'd be no after
hours illumination of the signs when the urgent care is closed. Um, and we also agreed that the,
the, uh, the sign on McKeon street would not be illuminated. That was part of the application
because it does face a residential portion of the block.
okay um that's the incentive it's a pretty simple application and would you want to have
your testimony adopted as your client here yes uh with me is uh if she could uh virtually raise
her hand donna walden she's the director of operations at penn medicine
okay hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter yes sir my name is donna walden
first name d-o-n-n-a last name w-a-l-d-e-n do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel thank you donna were you present for
the recitation of the facts of the application as i presented them yes i was and was that
recitation true and correct and do you adopt it as your own testimony yes i do questions from the
board no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience mr chair this is hillary um
i just wanted to um clarify with counsel so there there are two provisos you agree to one that the
now only one illuminated sign um that sign would only be illuminated during business hours and then
this this sign on um mckean street would not be illuminated at all is that correct yeah okay
that second proviso i was not aware of so i just wanted to make sure we had them correct
the non-illumination and i apologize if i was confusing the non-illumination on mckean street
that was that was part of the application from the start um the the no okay no after hours
illumination for the broad street sign was a proviso um along with uh proviso that the hours
of the urgent care be 8 a.m to 8 p.m monday through saturday and 8 a.m to 3 p.m on sunday
which they currently are okay yeah and and and i had mentioned to the board and i'll put it on
the record that because this is only an application for signage and um not for the use um we don't
feel it's appropriate to put a proviso for the hours of operation um but we can we can if the
board decides to grant put a proviso regarding the illumination and thank you for clarifying that
only one of the signs is illuminated so we don't need a proviso for that if that's already in the
plans correct thank you questions or comments from the virtual audience chair we have peter zutter
Hi. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Sure. My name is Peter Zutter, P-E-T-E-R-Z-U-T-T-E-R. I'm president of the South Broad Street
Neighborhood Association and live at Forty South.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
I have nothing further to add to what was already in our letter.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you for taking the time to call, sir.
anyone else in the virtual audience i see no hands here planning commission thank you mr
chairman david fecto city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change
from the commercial mixed use zoning at this location the proposed static illuminated
projecting signs are consistent with prior permits granted for this property so the city
planning commission recommends the board grant the dimensional variances for the placement of
the static illuminated project and signs. Thank you. MI 2022-002-763-1930 South Broad Street,
I vote yes with proviso. Signs only illuminated during business hours.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso. James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, yes with proviso. Thank you. Thank you, counsel. Thank you.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose 2 p.m. case has not been called?
I see no handshare. We're going to go to
the afternoon 3 30 list. My name is Bill Bergman and I will be chairing this afternoon's meeting.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's meeting. With me is Ishmael Shahid, our board secretary.
With me is
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thomas Holliman, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
James Snell, our board member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our executive director is also here, Tanya Sunkit, and our board attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Be advised, proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. A video will be available.
by contacting TanyaSunkett at phila.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer,
we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are participating by phone, if you wish to testify,
press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and your address of the property in question.
and finally the question and answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony
all comments have to be sent to our executive director tanya sunken before we start i have
a couple announcements to make effective july 18 2022 if the case is continued attorney or
applicant moving party, the attorney or applicant has 90 days from the date the cases continue
to enter a request, a new hearing date, ask for an extension of moving party status,
or withdraw the case. If ZBA staff is non-contacted, by the end of the 90-day period,
the case will be automatically listed for a new hearing date. Please note, extension for moving
party status must be sent to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkett, with Board Attorney
Hilary Emerson in copy. Two, ZBA staff is currently sending out letters to listed applicants on
appeals filed prior to 2019 if the case has been pending and hold status. If an applicant or their
attorney does not contact ZBA staff to discuss the next steps for their case within the time period
stated in the letter, the case will be considered abandoned administratively closed. Questions about
either of these policies should be directed to Executive Director Tanya Sunkett and Board
Attorney Hillary Emerson. So let's look at our continuations. Number two, MI 2022-002-118-2305
Palthorpe Street that case is continued. Number three MI 2021 004660 1233 East Luzerne Street
that case is continued. And number seven MI 2022 001 988 5452 North Fish Street
that case is continued attorney moving part so anyone has comments relative to the cases that
have been continued i see no handshare are there any other requests for continuance
i see no handshare we're going to move right to case number one mi 2022 02119 945 north
40th Street. Lynn Nichols is the attorney. Letter of support from East Parkside Residence, RCO.
However, they have some concerns about overcrowding and rear entrance to basement apartments.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Hi. Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter,
please. Lynn Nichols, L-Y-N-N, last name N-I-C-H-O-L-S. Right. Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes. Could you identify your client
and their relationship to the property? Yes. Mr. Kelton Phillips, he's the owner,
Philip, he's the owner of the property. Thank you. Mr. Howellman,
could you do some follow-up questions for me? Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents required, such as proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of the refusal, referral, pictures or drawings of the property, five days in advance of this hearing, and did you meet with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, we do.
yes we do thank you please proceed and share your screen if it uh may i have permission from
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
the board to stop my video i'm concerned that i might have some lagging sure thank you
you're up thank you um members of the board in my presentation as you can see
The property is located at the corner of 40th near Wailusing Avenue.
We have in our packet the zoning permit, the application for appeal, the project information form, the deed showing that the property owner purchased the property in 2007.
We also have the certificate of tax clearance. Here is a photo looking across from 945 North
40th Street. This is a view of where it's located at the corner near 40th and Wylusing.
Here's a view of the property looking to the right of 945 North 40th Street towards Girard Avenue.
this is a view looking to the left of 945 north 40th street in the left of this photo you see
the entrance to apartment a which is up the steps this is a view looking at 945 north 40th street
and you see the entrance of the property which is here where the gray part of the building is
located that's for apartment a this is a side view of 945 north 40th street you're seeing here
the entrance to apartment B, and in the rear is the entrance to apartment C, which I'm now
showing you a photo of. This is the entrance to apartment C. These are the impacted neighbors that
we notified. This is the proof of mailing, the zoning notice that was posted, as well as the
refusal. As you can see, we're asking for a multifamily dwelling. These are the plans,
which I'm going to now turn so that you can see them.
This is another view of the plans.
As you can see from the plans,
the space in the building is sufficient
to accommodate the applicant's request.
Here we have, and it's just, okay,
We have 1,000, approximately 1,035 square feet in apartment C.
We have sufficient space in apartment A as well as apartment B.
On this page, we have the notification from the RCO regarding their position on this property.
While I know that there were concerns about the development of the property,
this is a developer in the neighborhood who is known and respected.
and he worked with the RCO to address their concerns.
At this time, I would like to note for the board
that it would be an economic hardship for the applicant
if this variance wasn't granted.
This is a unique property in terms of the size
and the physical characteristics
and it would present an economic hardship for him
if this variance weren't granted,
as well as the fact that the variance we seek
represents the least modification of the code
to provide relief,
as well as no action on our part will increase congestion in this neighborhood. If you look at
one of the photos of the property, I'll go back to, it's located next door to two vacant properties
that are not developed at all. You see in this picture, there are two vacant properties next to
it. So it's not going to increase the congestion in the neighborhood and it won't substantially
permanently harm any of the neighbors or their use of the properties or impair lighter air,
nor will it increase traffic congestion in the public streets or place an undue burden
on the water sewer or other public facilities. It won't increase or create environmental damage,
pollution, erosion, or danger of flooding. And as stated, I can't, you know, state enough that
it would be an economic hardship if this variance weren't granted for him to continue as he has done.
He's taken well care of this property in this neighborhood, as you can see.
So at this time, I would like to call Mr.
Phillip to adopt my testimony.
Hi, Mr. Phillips.
Hi, Mr. Phillips, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
Yes. Philip Kelton. P-H-I-L-I-P-K-E-L-T-O-N.
Yes, Phillip Kelton.
P-H-I-L-I-P.
I apologize. I've been calling you Kelton.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, to hold truth, nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Good afternoon. Have you heard my testimony here today?
I have.
Do you agree with and adopt the testimony as it's been presented to the board?
Thank you. I have nothing further. Does the board?
Counsel, tell me the setup of apartment C.
So apartment C, if I could show you the photograph here.
The entrance is over in the back.
Correct. So it's a split level apartment.
It's not all on one level.
part of it begins in the back of apartment a um which is located the apartment a as you can see
from this photograph is here and the beginning of apartment c starts in the back of apartment a so
it's split level it's and it goes into the basement part of it does yes where's the bedroom
um i believe one of the bedrooms are in the basement okay and there's appropriate exits
out of the basement? No, there's an exit that if you want to see the plans, I can show you the
plans again. Yeah, sure. So as you can see here on the plan, this is apartment A. Can you see where
my arrow is? This is apartment A. There's a stairway that leads up to apartment B. Apartment C
is here and there's an exit in the rear of the property and there's an exit on the side of the
property as well which is the one that i showed you okay thank you questions from the board
no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no handshake planning commission may i stop sharing my screen you can thank you
Planning Commission. This is Ron Bednar, first name Ron, R-O-N, last name Bednar, B-E-D-N-A-R.
Do you swear, affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Proceed, Ron. While this property is currently indicated for commercial mixed use
on the city plan, given the physical site conditions, we have no objection to the grant.
Thank you.
MI 2022-002-119-945 North 40th Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheen, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Have a good day.
Number four, MI-2022-001-937-1122 South Broad Street.
Sean Ward is the attorney.
Letter of support from South Broad Street Neighbors Association
with proviso commercial use on first floor only.
Letter of support from Councilman Johnson.
Mr. Ward is coming back in as a panelist.
Thank you.
Sorry, Mr. Chairman, a little slow getting.
Everybody's a little slow today, Sean.
It's not getting in today.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Yeah, first name is Sean, S-H-A-W-N, last name Ward, W-A-R-D, attorney for applicant. My address is 331 East Street Road, Trivos, PA, 19053. Here on behalf of the owner applicant of the subject property.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, tell the truth, nothing but the truth?
I most certainly do.
Could you identify your client, please?
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I represent the Del Borello Realty 1122 LLC, the owner of the property and
Del Borello Financial Group, which is the applicant operator of the subject space.
Mr. Holloman has a few questions.
Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to his accuracy yes I do with one note as I would get to in my
Yes, I do. With one note, as I would get to in my presentation, that the proposed use listed for the second floor is not business and professional. It is a dwelling unit.
I didn't file the application, Tom, so I can't bear responsibility for that one.
Okay, no problem. Did you email all of the exhibits and the documents as required, such as proof of ownership, tax clearance, copy of refusal or referral, pictures or drawings of the property, five days in advance of this hearing, and did you meet with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of the above.
Please proceed.
Thank you, Tom.
Mr. Chairman, I've submitted my typical exhibit packet, which includes A1 as the notice of refusal.
Again, the application was submitted for a permit for a personal credit establishment at the first
floor, which would include a check cashing and buying and selling of gold. And it included a
business and professional office at the second floor with a dwelling unit at the third. However,
I note to the board that we do not propose any business or professional use at the second floor,
as it's going to be a dwelling unit which is permitted by right in the district and as is
for that matter business and professional office however the proposed use is as a dwelling unit
at the second floor. The application resulted in two refusals one is that a regulated use is
prohibited within 500 feet of a residential district or a religious property. 205 feet
approximately down South Broad Street is a Roman Catholic church. And the other was for personal
credit establishment prohibited in the district. Accordingly, we see use variances today. A2 is
the ZBA application of appeal. A3 is the project information form. A4 proof of ownership. A5 proof
of tax compliance. A6 are floor plans on the first floor, proposed use. A7 are photographs.
A8, separate from the packet, is the letter of support from South Broad Street neighbors.
A9, if submitted, would be Councilman Squilla's letter, and I would ask that that be marked as
A9 if so. A10, as far as zoning, relevant zoning history, beginning back in 1960 up through about
1982, it was used as a beauty shop and either one family, three family or two family. In 1982,
auto tags agency and three family, 83 and 99, again, a business office for auto tags and three
family. With regard to the current location of the applicant, they are directly across the street at
1123-25 South Broad Street, where we appeared before the board years ago to obtain a variance
for that use. However, pursuant to our agreement with South Broad Street neighbors, we are going
to file an application to abandon that use and discontinue it upon approval of this one. So 812
would be the zoning map and 813 is the aerial photo. Not to waste the board's time or be labored
a point we have the refusal as discussed the application of appeal the project information form
copy of the applicant's deed
proof of tax compliance as you can see all real estate taxes are paid through 2022.
with regard to the floor plan at the first floor we propose uh there is a dedicated entry
on the right side of the facade for the lobby of the business where there would be a service
counter window for the check cashing and business use. Behind that would be an office area,
a general area for storage, and a small kitchenette at which the employees could
have their breakfast, lunch, or afternoon snacks. Moving on, as far as the front facade of the
property it's going to remain unchanged we have we have a nice brick facade building there is a
dedicated entry to the right as i stated for the business use a dedicated entry on the left
for access to the upper floors for the residential use we have our
posting as you can see clearly displayed in the front window this is a view from across the street
another view from across the street the properties to the left include beauty town two
The properties to the left include Beauty Town 2, looks like a retail store, and the, I'm sorry, looks like the, some sort of other non-residents are used there.
I can't quite tell from that picture.
To the right is some sort of auto-related use.
Here is a Google angle shot from above. As you can see, this is St. Rita de Cachia, located about 200 feet, 205 feet, give or take, from the subject property.
Right across the street is our current location for our United Check Caching.
This is a view of Broad Street facing north, as you can see the high rises in center city.
A view of Broad Street facing south.
And then I attached in my packet copies of all of the zoning permits for the subject throughout the years.
Again, there is a photograph of the current property across the street, which is basically vacant, but for the use as the United check cashing pawn jewelry store use, which is going to relocate across the street.
Again, that permit was granted pursuant to a ZBA variance back in 2014.
Here is a copy of the zoning map.
As you can see, the subject property is zoned CMX2 commercial.
Directly across the street is CMX2 commercial.
One of the reasons for the generation of refusel is that we are within 500 feet of a residential zone,
which is on the other side of Ellsworth Street.
And then, as normal, I always include a Google aerial just to show the location of the property with building and perspectives.
So it's located between Washington Avenue and Ellsworth Street.
The South Broad Street Neighbors Association issued two letters, one which had some typos in the last sentence, which were corrected by Anthony Bertiniti.
and there was two provisos proposed. One was that the first floor be used for the check cashing
business while the residential uses were on the second and third floors, no business uses above
the first floor. And they referred to our reference or recommendation and representation
that we were going to file an abandonment or discontinuance of the personal credit
establishment use across the street. Obviously, they don't want two of those in close proximity,
and neither does my client. He wishes to just relocate from one side of the street to the other.
So presently, I have in draft in Eclipse the application to change the use, to abandon
then I discontinue that personal credit establishment use at the first floor at 1123-25.
So that is the sum and substance of my application and presentation. I do have Peter Delvarello
who is in on the call. Peter, if you can raise your hand virtually by clicking the
uh center of the bottom of the screen um we would then have you uh brought in so you can testify
sir could you please unmute yourself
hi could you state your name and spell it please for the court reporter
yes uh peter delbarolo d-e-l-b-o-r-r-e-l-l-o do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel thank you mr chair uh pete you've heard my
representations to the board today yes are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge
information and belief they are and you adopt them as your own testimony as if you had been
called to testify today i do thank you very much questions from the board no mr chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no excuse me i have peter zutter yeah i was going to say peter peter was
set in on the previous case i wouldn't miss good good you've already been sworn sir just state your
mr zutter please unmute yourself okay can you hear me you've all you've already been sworn in just
okay can you hear me you've all you've already been sworn in just state your name uh my name
state your name. My name is Peter.
is peter zutter is uh peter p-e-t-e-r zutter z-u-t-t-e-r proceed counsel
peter go ahead oh yeah i i have nothing new to add i just wanted to make sure that the right
letter was in there um that was really the main reason i wanted to come to this um apologies for
that little error um all right but i have nothing to add over what uh mr ward thank you for calling
in we appreciate it anyone else in the virtual audience i see no handshare planning commission
so ron bednar city planning this property is indicated for commercial mixed use on the city
plan given the physical site conditions and the surrounding use context we have no objection to
the granting of the barriers. Thank you. MI 2022-001-937-1122 South Broad Street, I vote yes,
proviso. Commercial use on first floor only. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, we provide so.
James Snell, yes, we provide so. Ishmael Shaheed, yes, we provide so. Thank you. Thank you very much,
Chairman, have a great day. Thank you. Number five, MI 2022-002-125, 1337 East Pashunk Avenue.
Vern Anastasio is the Attorney, Letter of Non-Opposition from Pashunk
Square Civic Association and Letter of Non-Opposition from Councilman Squilla.
good afternoon good evening Mr. Chairman you you have already been sworn to state your name
sure Vern Anastasio A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O could you identify your client and the relationship to the
property I represent Ms. Tracy Wong who is the owner of the property in question at 1337 East
past yonk avenue mr holliman thank you counselor uh do you agree oh good afternoon counselor
do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy i do sir did you
email all the exhibits and documents as required such as proof of ownership tax clearance copy of
the refusal referral pictures of drawings of the property five days in advance of this hearing
and did you meet with the rseo and do you have a letter yes to all that please proceed thank you
this application is for uh legalization of a two-family dwelling pre-existing non-conforming
use and i want to show you here here is a plot plan of the property in question i'll pull out so
you can see this here is the property at 1337 east pass yonk it is a side yard that is used
for the first floor apartment for trash storage and then i'm going to pull out here
so you can see the rest of the building
here's a again here's a one apartment here on the first floor on the second and third floor we have
a four-bedroom apartment. Off the kitchen, there is a large room where there's not only
space for a laundry facility and also trash storage right off the kitchen on the second
floor. This property is on a street. The 1300 block of East Passchunk Avenue is what we
would consider a transition block. It is a one block in the city of Philadelphia, in
South Philadelphia, that essentially connects East Passhunk Avenue and that commercial corridor
with the 9th Street Italian Market and that commercial corridor. And therefore, this block
is a healthy mix of multifamily dwellings and commercial uses. As you can see here, we've got
garages that have been converted into eating and dining facilities. We've got other
multi-family dwellings and industrial sort of uses we've got a bike shop here across the street
we've got a party store a barber shop we even have a cbd at tanning and teeth whitening store
right next to a a small supermarket so it's uh it's got lots going on it's mostly multi-family
and commercial mixed use. Here's proof of two electric meters accounts, two gas meter
accounts, and two hot water heaters. So this has been
And two hot water heaters. So this is a long standing multifamily mixed use sort of property. Here's the flyer that went out to the community, both invited them to the neighborhood meeting on May 10th.
And of course, to today's, this evening's hearing, we have proof of mailing. 146 individual households were mailed. And as a result, we've got a letter of non-opposition from the Passion Square Civic Association, which, as we all know, are pretty on point when it comes to monitoring variances.
So with that said, because of the transitional nature of the block, because of the multi-uses, not only multifamily, but also commercial mixed use on this particular block that connects East Passion Avenue to the 9th Street Italian market, I respectfully request the granting of this variance.
And with that, I have Tracy Wong, who I would ask that she raise her hand to be recognized.
hi could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
do we see her hand yes chair but it's not allowing me to
allow her to speak or she's not able to speak okay um counsel you're an officer of the court
your testimony is fine yep uh for the record i just want to make sure that i put on the record
that she would adopt my presentation as her own testimony thank you mr chair
no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience no
planning commission this is uh ron bednar city planning its properties indicate for residential
on the city plan given the surrounding use context we recommend the request for advance
be granted. Thank you. MI 2022-002-125-1337 East Pashunk Avenue. I vote yes. Thomas Holloman. My
vote is yes. James Snell. My vote is yes. Ishmael Shaheen. My vote is yes. Thank you all. Have a
good evening. Thank you. Number six, MI 2022-002-132-3111 West Allegheny Avenue.
Letter of support from Ridge Allegheny Hunting Park Civic Association and letter of support
from Councilman Curtis Jones. Good afternoon, Chairman Bergman and members of the board.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Adam Laver, L-A-V-E-R, Lank, Rome, 1 Logan Square.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I do.
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
yes i represent 571 pbhq associates llc which is the owner of the subject property i further
agreed to waive the reading of the notice of refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
in addition mr chairman and members of the board we submitted all zoning board of adjustment required
documentation to counsel for the zoning board five plus days in advance of this hearing including a
letter of support from the coordinating rco which followed a public community meeting in this matter
mr labor start sharing your screen please yes sir
mr chairman members of the board uh the current ownership purchased the property in late 2020
with plans for the adaptive, community-oriented reuse of the structure.
With us this afternoon is Anthony Bates on behalf of the ownership,
along with Christopher Tantillo of Tantillo Architecture.
On the screen before you are aerial photographs of this site.
The developer's vision calls for the repurposing of the former Pep Boys Headquarters industrial property
located on the 3100 block of Allegheny Avenue, which is seen in the foreground of the photograph
wrapping around to 32nd Street. It's very difficult to see, but the tower here
still has the Pep Boys logo. Here's another aerial photograph showing you Allegheny Avenue.
Allegheny Avenue. And here is looking at the property from the inside, the industrial inside
And here is
facing out. The property has been significantly underutilized as the neighborhood's industrial
path has shifted and residential living has expanded. You can see the residential living
to the right and up really wrapping the property. The immense complex itself begs for revitalization
to reemerge as a living, breathing part of the vibrant residential neighborhood that surrounds the site.
Here you can see the front of the property fronting on Allegheny Avenue.
And to the left of the photograph is the subject property, just giving you a sense of the full span of Allegheny.
And another photograph here wrapping around on 32nd Street.
The property itself is five stories, as you saw in the aerial photographs.
The ownership seeks to meticulously preserve this property with the help of Tantillo architecture, and you can see a conceptual rendering for a mixed use conversion on the screen in front of you.
I had mentioned support letters. Pardon me. On the screen before you is a support letter from the coordinating RCO, Ridge Allegheny Hunting Park, RAH Civic Association, as well as the following letter of support from Council Member Jones.
zones.
Moving to the site plan, the large parcel is zoned ICMX industrial commercial mixed use,
as shown here also on the zoning map.
The proposal calls to restore the entire property inside and out to convert the use to 165 residential
apartments, 73 Class 1A bicycle parking spaces, and 185 off-street parking spaces. There are
additional buy-right uses at the property as shown on the plan in front of you. The ownership
is very proud that Easter Seals, a well-regarded non-profit organization, is in the process of
converting space here at the corner of 32nd and Allegheny at the ground level. There's also
artisan industrial and business professional and related uses at the ground level. It's an immense
structure for which the full 100% industrial use is no longer viable, creating the need for
adaptive reuse based on the existing structure in place. The project fits into the neighborhood
vision as demonstrated by the record support that I've mentioned. Moving, if I may, to the notice
of refusal. The language is long, but there's only one refusal, and that is residential household
living of any type is not permitted in the district. The district, which we've already
shown, actually has a good bit of residential around it. So we're looking for compatible uses,
and we're very appreciative of the support and the working relationship with RAH.
Here you can see photographs of immediately surrounding properties. This is 32nd Street looking along Willard Street. And another photograph also there. So continued industrial use at the location is not practicable.
The glance at the zoning map, the aerial photos, the neighborhood photos shows that the surrounding properties are mixed, skewed towards residential, with the need for the mixed use that's being proposed thoughtfully by the developer for this immense site.
The 2035 plan, the neighborhood strategic plans, the partnerships in place recognize that the proposed mixed use is the highest and best use of the site, not the maintenance of an outmoded warehouse.
Here are some additional renderings showing a dedicated residential apartment entry off of Allegheny.
Through the use of landscaping, estate style fencing, this mix of uses that I've described is very thoughtfully able to coexist with one another.
In partnership with the architectural team, we have found a way to preserve and enhance the building, to convert the property, to benefit the neighborhood, desiring of increased opportunities for compatible residential living.
here is that entrance to the residential and in the back separate and apart are the other uses
that coexist the the light industrial if you will the commercials etc moving to the floor
Moving to the floor plans, and I'm almost finished. I know the hour is late. The first floor calls for the mix of offices, Easter Seals, as I had shown, the warehouse at the rear, and the entry, the dedicated entry to the proposed apartments.
plans and I'm almost finished I know the hour is late the first
the second through fifth floors of the existing structure would be a mix of 29 studios 125
one-bedroom units 11 two-bedroom units that breaks down to approximately 46 apartments per floor
studios beginning at 515 square feet approximately to the two bedrooms at 1100 square feet
approximately the authorization of variance relief will not alter the character of the
neighborhood or district in a detrimental way. It will only enhance what the neighborhood has
been working for. The proposal fits into the surrounding neighborhood as evidenced by the
intent of coordinating or speaking to the PCPC vision, the neighborhood vision through the
coordinating RCO support, and the district council members support. Speaking of relief being a benefit
to the public and within the spirit of the zoning code. This is one variance, one single variance,
and this will represent the minimum variance to afford relief, the least modification possible
of the regulation at issue. This will not substantially increase congestion in the public
streets, increase the danger of fire, or otherwise endanger the public health, safety, or general
welfare. This Pep Boys headquarters site, which is a defining part of the neighborhood, will be
upgraded uh in a way that uh is good for the neighborhood good for the property owner good
for future uh tenants based on the condition of the property this will be a tremendous improvement
this will not adversely affect transportation or unduly burden water sewer school park or other
public facilities there's an abundance of parking available and dedicated and we're very proud to
have the opportunity to move this forward. Mr. Bates is available. Mr. Chairman, when you say so
to raise his virtual hand. Why don't we do that right now? Okay, Mr. Anthony Bates, would you
kindly raise your virtual hand? I see it's raised. Hi, could you state your name and spell it for the
court reporter, please? Hi, I'm Anthony Bates, A-N-T-H-O-N-Y, Bates, B-A-T-E-S. Right. Do you
swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes. Proceed,
counsel. Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Bates. Have you been present for the entirety of this
virtual hearing? Yes. Would you adopt and affirm the testimony that I have offered as your own?
Yes. Thank you, sir. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I say no handshare.
Planning Commission.
We're on Bednar City Planning.
While this property is currently indicated for industrial commercial mixed use on the city plan,
given the physical circumstances of the site, we support its regeneration fully consistent with our 2035 comprehensive plan.
And therefore, we recommend the requested unity of use variants be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2022-002-132-3111 West Allegheny Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Sullivan, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ismail Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Laver.
Have a good evening.
is there anyone from the 3 30 list in the virtual audience whose case has not been heard
i see no handshare thanks everyone a little late tonight but we got an awful lot done i appreciate
it thank you all okay goodbye good night good night