ZBA Hearing - May 28, 2025

other multifamily I have in my notes of crossing streets as well, so it's not out of character to

have multifamily here. That's why we ask the boards to consider this as an opportunity to

start the redevelopment of this part of Philadelphia. Maps of the area, we acknowledge

that this is an RSA5 property, but there is a sprinkling of some RM1. There is CMX2. There is

a commercial corridor. Typically, when you're on a block or a block and a half away from a commercial

corridor, from a planning perspective, you do try to increase density to help support that commercial

corridor that's what we're trying to do here photographs of the property the front of the

property this is property based on google street view has been a vacant lot and it goes and goes

as far back as 2009 i'm sure it goes back even further this is what we can see posting proof

of posting north 24th street to the right of the property to the left of the property these were

original plans we'll skip over those but you can see at least here like we did try to introduce

the cornice line and the revised plans we removed the the balcony

cornice line and the revised plans we removed the the balcony in the front we

thought we want to put more eyes on the street in the front they wanted the

eyes in the back so but again we we took the the the comments of the community

seriously where we could we made changes and these are our revised plans again a

pronounced cornice line lentils nice light in there flat brick facades you

You know, floor plans, you know, you walk through a common vestibule area, you make a right.

Very interesting design here, which will provide a lot of light and air for the lower level.

But there's the interior staircases is actually hugging the front.

So that light and air, because of the staircases, you're going to see a lot of light and air go into the lower level.

But you have a living room, a kitchen, a bathroom, a bedroom in the rear.

And then you have lower level living here as well with a window well.

Instead of the first floor unit, which is a bi-level, you go up a second story, and that is a two-bedroom, one-bath, and then you have another two-bedroom, one-bath as well.

We try to focus on the fact that there's much light in there for the people who are living there in terms of the window placement.

And you can see here, even for the bedrooms that are hugging the middle, we use the breezeway with the windows to provide light in there for those bedrooms as well.

so there's enough light in there for everyone who's living there and again this these are just

the renderings you know from a massing point of view front and back this was the meeting notice

i don't think we need to go over the rest of the materials they're just the foreign materials but

like you know we did have a community meeting i would say maybe 10 people were there i mean

they were active this there was an active discussion but i don't know what happened

at that other meeting so with that being said i would ask that mr uh alex uh be sworn in i have

a few questions for him sir is that on the green light one yep okay sir could you please state

your name as bell for the stenographer uh how you doing my name is michael olex m-i-c-h-a-e-l-o-l-i-x

right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do

please proceed counsel uh yeah michael you heard everything i had to state today about your zoning

matter yes is it true and correct yes and do you adopt as your own testimony yep specifically can

you uh state like how we got here today in terms of your original attention to do single family

and why that cannot happen here um yeah i mean without dragging this on too long basically the

cost of money now is too high interest rates are outrageous it's i mean even at three units it's

going to be tough to be honest with you but you know it's something i've had my eyes on doing for

a while i i looked into doing it for a long time as a single family and it just didn't work it just

didn't pencil there's no i mean in that area it wouldn't have been a viable option to make my

money back on a sale of a single family house all right i have no further questions questions from

the board yeah oh so um i noticed like the rest of the block i know it's a lot of vacancy in a block

but there's a mostly two-story homes and i know like you can go up 38 feet by right so have you

thought about um you know a duplex in this particular space i mean just trying to look

at the concerns of the community right i mean i have and again it's one of the only ways that

it makes sense in a building that size envelope wise is to have more than as many units as

i can in that 38 16 by 50 space because like i said even at three units it's it's going

to be a push but it that's that's the really the only way it makes sense

other questions from the board well i i'll bring up the same issue i bring up anytime i see

you having to go through a bedroom to get

to the backyard. I think it's a

ridiculous layout. It's a horrible

way for somebody to live

to have to go through a bedroom to access

the backyard.

What's your

first floor?

I believe that our

first floor does include

a bedroom out there. I will

say that the focus was to provide

outdoor space for each of the units.

We have a backyard for the first floor unit.

We have a rear

area for the second floor unit and we have a roof deck for the third floor unit

you know again we we really try to work with what we have and we do believe that this is

a responsible use of this property and we hope that the board finds similarly okay i guess for

clarity the third floor is the only unit that has access to the roof deck correct what else is

happening in that pilot house because in the rendering it looked oversized i think the

I think the rendering is just a poor rendering.

rendering is just a poor rendering.

Gotcha.

Gotcha.

Okay.

Other questions from the board?

Questions from our attorney?

Not at this time, Mr. Chair.

Questions or comments from the virtual audience?

Yes, Chair.

I have a hand up from Strawberry Mansion Community Concerns.

I will promote them at this time.

Okay.

Please accept the invitation to be promoted.

Ms. Cummings?

Yes.

Good afternoon.

Can you hear me?

Good afternoon.

Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?

My name is Bonita Cummings, B-O-N-I-T-A-C-U-M-M-I-N-G-S.

Could you put your camera on, please, so we can see you?

Okay, one second.

Are you able to see me?

Yeah, thank you.

Do you swear or affirm that tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?

I do.

Ms. Cummings, please proceed.

I wanted to say that the required public meetings were met, more than one was met. The first meeting took place as a Zoom meeting, which because of the opposition from the Zoom meeting of the block captain and the residents of that community,

it was considered to do another meeting, which would be in person. That in-person meeting was

a meeting that Alex Goldberg attended along with the developer, the applicant. That meeting

also attended by a very close block, several blocks. People were very consistent. They were

not interested in what was being proposed and they wanted further communication

with their councilmen as to how to preserve their interests and what they want as

as harmony for their block. So the two meetings that, public meetings that were required to be

held, or at least one public meeting required to be held, was held as a Zoom meeting. The

community extended another meeting that was attended by the attorney and the applicant was

held. And the third meeting, the community wanted to talk to each other. They wanted to talk,

you know, amongst themselves to get clarity, consistency, which is what was meant.

They had the councilmen of that district come to that meeting.

And with that, they hope to be able to preserve their block in the manner in which they are accustomed.

And the designs right now, even with the changes, are not what they are accustomed to.

And it just does not reflect, as I have mentioned, those values that they spoke of that are mentioned in the opposition letter.

So the opposition letter is based on that community saying that they were opposed.

There was no acceptance of even considering less than three units, so the developer has been in that community with the representatives of that community, and their last meeting, they voted to stay consistent with the meeting that the attorney, Alan Nockmson, and Alex Goldberg was well aware was opposed.

It was opposed from the very first public meeting, and there was no change or no correction based on the design.

Roof decks, it started out with six units, things that they were just opposed to, and they want planning.

They want the opportunity to plan for their future and their block.

And it was hoped that the developer would continue to work with them and along with a planning strategy that would be more conducive to helping that block redevelop itself.

would be more conducive to helping that that block redevelop itself so the these accusations

are not accurate because we met the requirement as a registered process with one meeting and that

one meeting was opposed it would they were even further accommodated with a second meeting and

And that community really worked to try and really work out anything that they could to accommodate development moving forward in their block.

And this particular design is not what that is.

It is my hope that the block captain of that community is on.

He's a very consistent young man and was very concerned with this development and worked very hard with the residents of that community to continue to come together over the 30-something number of people over three meetings that did attend.

So they have a right to meet amongst themselves, and particularly since the meetings required were met. And that is what took place for them to have a conversation, to get their own ability to see the objectivity or who's opposed or who's for it, was anything overlooked.

And that was what was done at the April 23rd meeting, and it was done, you know, with their leader, the head of their district, to try and work out for their future, in the harmony of their health, welfare, and safety, what will work best in that block.

So I have done nothing wrong. The committee, RVCO Committee of Strawberry Mansion Community Concern has done nothing wrong. We are not, we are in compliance in this particular 1826 North 24th Street address.

Some of these cases have been reassigned because some of the RCOs are not responding, and there may be some trails of emails that came even to the board asking that they get responses.

And some of those, the 32nd Ward had been suspended for a while or removed itself.

So some of these things are as a result of that.

So I don't, you know, these accusations are just not appropriate and they're not correct. And there were meetings met, and I can't say it enough, based on the rules and regulations, that community made a decision.

And that decision was relayed per the responsibility of the ROCO in a letter of opposition from three meetings.

This is not a doing of the ROCO.

This is a doing of that cohesive block of people in that community.

I think I hear you.

Can I just knock on one and one?

Mr. Knock on one and one.

Yeah, I do.

Ms. Cummings, do you have a copy of the notice that went out to the community for this meeting?

The notice that went out to the community from that meeting was generated by the block captain.

He wanted his community to be more involved.

He generated a notice, and that notice was hand-delivered to households in that community, particularly focusing on the most affected people, which was the residents of the 1800 block of North 24th Street.

So the residents of the 1800 block of North 24th Street are the ones who primarily got that notice?

No, that notice went, to my understanding, around to many blocks.

But the most affected people are the residents of the 1800 block of North 24th Street.

So did the notice go to the residents of the address?

Again, to my knowledge, it went to the...

Can I finish my question?

Thank you.

So did the notice go to those same addresses that the City's Landing Commission believes are effective properties for this project?

To my knowledge, the notices went to the understanding of the block captain to what those addresses were.

So that's what I can speak to.

All right.

But you don't know because you didn't prepare the notice or distribute that notice, correct?

Exactly.

Okay.

And where did the meeting take place?

At the same place it took place when your Alex Goldberg was in attendance along with Mr. Alex.

So it took place at 1909 North 24th Street.

Did you take a sign-in sheet of the individuals who showed up that day for the meeting?

There was a sign-in of the individuals that attended that meeting, yes.

So where is that?

remember you're under oath

What do you mean, where is that? There is a sign-in sheet that was retained by my person from that meeting. So yes, I did have an accounting to be able to give an accurate summary of the three meetings.

what do you mean where is that

there is a sign

there is a sign in sheet

All right, so I would like a copy of that sign-in sheet.

Will you provide a copy of that?

Sure.

All right, great.

Now, did you, in terms of the sign-in,

did you check IDs of the individuals

who allegedly signed into this meeting?

IDs are not checked at any RBCO meeting.

So what is that question about?

Where are we checking IDs at any RBCO meetings?

When we have our meetings virtually,

you make sure you go around the horn

and you make sure you talk to,

at least ask, who are you?

Where do you live?

What's your relationship to this project?

Every single meeting.

Well, when you say it like they needed to show me identification, people did demonstrate who they were in that meeting, if that's what you're asking.

And how do they demonstrate who they are?

By going around asking who people were.

Okay, so you went around.

They identified themselves, yes.

Okay, so remember, you're under oath here.

So if we eventually have to go to another, like, proceeding here, and we have witnesses here, you're stating on the record that you went for every full person.

People will be able, yes.

People will be able to say that they said who they were, what their names were, and any capacity in which they were in that community, yes.

Okay, I have no further questions.

All right, thank you.

Anyone else in the virtual audience?