Thank you.
okay chair we have 36 attendees you can proceed as you wish thank you good morning everyone my
name is bill bergman and i will be chairing this morning's eba hearings with me is our
vice chair ismail shaheed present mr chairman our board member thomas holliman present mr
chairman and our board member james snell present mr chairman also here is hillary emerson our
attorney and also our executive director tanya sunkett here's our virtual format be advised
the proceedings are being recorded a video will be available by contacting tanya sunkett at phil.gov
for the benefit of our court stenographer we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves
before testifying. If you're participating by phone, you wish to testify, press star nine to
raise your hand and star six to unmute. To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and also the address of the property in question. And finally,
the question and answer box on the screen is not for comment or testimony. All comments should be
redirected to our executive director, Tanya Sunkett.
Let's look at our schedule for today, please.
So continuances.
Number two, MI 2023-005-273-761 South 51st Street.
That case is continued.
And number five, MI-2023-005-586-1206 Atton Street, that case is continued.
Number six, MI-2023-005-673-6350 Tarsdale Avenue, that case is continued.
and number 10. Mr. Chair, sorry, with number six, it's 6530 Torresdale Avenue. Just wanted to note
that for the record. Thank you. Thank you. And number 10, MI 2023-005-589-127 West Allegheny
Avenue, that case is continued. Is there anyone has comments relative to the cases that have
it continued? And are there any requests for continuances? Good morning, Mr. Chair. This is
Jason Hand. I will co-host for today, sir. Thank you. We have two hands raised at this time. The
first is Mr. Vern Anastaso. I've allowed him to speak. Sure. Good morning, counsel. Good morning,
mr chair uh just for the record state your name and spell it yeah sure it's verne anastasio v
as in victor e-r-n last name is a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o right do you swear firm to tell the truth the
whole truth nothing but the truth i do sir is the case you want to talk about mi 2021 004 387 6809
woodland avenue yes sir okay um this is the fifth listing so could you give us an update
i yeah i can and i apologize for the number of listings uh the uh this falls within the
southwest uh rco consortium uh and uh craig has had some uh some health issues that had prevented
us from getting through uh an accord it does look like though all the parties are agreeing on
the use. And I would just like a brief continuance, one last time, to put a CBA together
for the benefit of the RCO. All right. Thank you, sir. So MI 2021-004-387-6809
Woodland Avenue. That case is continued. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Do we have another hand
for continuances um yes sir we have mr ronald patterson with his hand raised i've allowed him
to speak good morning mr patterson good morning mr chairman
Good morning, Mr. Patterson.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
All right. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court's demographer?
Sure. Ronald Patterson, P-A-T-T-E-R-S-O-N.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
What case, sir?
Mr. Chairman, address 6331, I'm sorry, 636 Christian Street.
We want to withdraw that case.
Thank you. Thank you.
So hold on one minute.
Number 13.
Thank you.
So MI 2023-001-428-636 Christian Street, that case has been withdrawn.
Thank you, Mr. Patterson.
Great.
Thank you.
See you this afternoon.
All right.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Yes, sir.
We have a handout from Strawberry Mansion Community Concerns.
I have allowed them to speak.
good morning good morning mr chair this is bonita cummings um good morning miss cummings could you
just spell your name for the court stenographer please my name is bonita cummings it's b as in
boy o-n-i-t-a cummings c-u-m-m-i-n-g-s do you swear or affirm hold on do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do please proceed what case are
you interested in? 2203 Neutrona Street. I thought I saw a continuance letter, but you didn't call
that this morning, so I'm not sure if that's being heard today. Mr. Chair, we did receive
a complete exhibit packet for that case, but it appears that there's another meeting that will be
held, and I see Alex Goldberg raising his hand, so this may be a request for a hear and hold.
Let's bring in Mr. Goldberg.
Mr. Goldberg.
We've been allowed to speak.
Hi, Mr. Goldberg.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for this phonographer?
Alex Goldberg, A-L-E-X-G-O-L-D-B-E-R-G.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Is this 2203 North Natrona going to be a continuance, sir?
We'd like to present today.
We have agreed with Strawberry Mash and CDC to go back to them actually tomorrow night with one final revision.
So we'd like to do a resumptive hearing, hopefully next week, to incorporate the community's opinion based off our meeting tomorrow night.
So, Mrs. Cummings, we will hear this case today, but we will not vote on it until after the meeting.
Ms. Cummings
Yes can you hear me
We will hear the case
but we will not vote on it
Okay thank you
Okay any other continuances
I do not see any further hands Mr. Chair
So number three
MI 2022-007
458-5218
Art Street.
David Akta
is the attorney. This is the
third listing.
Ucta, if you're in the virtual audience, please
raise your virtual hand and wait to be sworn in.
Sorry, does not seem to be
in the virtual audience this morning.
a letter from the council
person on this form?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Councilmember Gautier's office
did request a continuance
because the RCO
meeting needed to be rescheduled.
Thank you. So MI
2022-007-458-5218
Art Street, that case is
continued, but is marked, must be heard.
13, number 15, MI 2023, 00168, 1613 North 33rd Street.
Scott Miller is the attorney.
There are no exhibits for this.
This is the second listing.
mr chair i do not seem to see mr miller and the virtual audience this morning okay thank you
so mi 2023 001 368 1623 north 33rd street that case is continued mark must be heard
And number 16, MI 2023.
And number 16, MI 2023-001-369-1432 Sterling Street.
Maria Tolentino is the listed owner.
No exhibit, second listing.
Mr. Chair, I do not see that person in the virtual audience either.
So, MI-2023-001-369-1432 Sterling Street. There are no exhibits. This is the second listing. The first listing, no one appeared. I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is to dismiss.
James Snell, my vote is to dismiss.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you. We're going to start with number four on our regular list. MI 2023-005-591-2938 West Flora Street.
Takeya Brown Dinwiddie is the owner. It's a pro se.
Should we be rejoining as a panelist, sir?
Thank you.
hi good morning good morning could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
uh dekaya brown denwoody first name is d-a-e-k-y-a-h brown like the color hyphen
denwoody d-i-n-w-i-d-d-i-e you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth? Yes. Could you please turn on your video? Oh, yes, I can. Okay. This application
is for the erection of a one-story addition above the existing second floor with eight-foot front
setback above the second floor as part of an attached structure for use as a two-family living.
There's a letter of support from Brewery Town Shardswood Community Civic Association.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you. Okay.
Good morning, ma'am.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to
proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
All right.
Can you see my screen?
We can.
All right.
So, the first document here is the actual refusal from LNI for the additional structure.
The second one is the meeting that I had with the association that happened December 1st.
Check in here. This is the email for the TALI, the support from the association.
This is proof of the notice being posted. I do have a time stamp here. This was January
January 27th at 12 24 p.m. This is the front of the property. Another timestamp. Another photo.
Timestamp. This is to the left of the property. And this is to the right of the property.
I do have my architect, a tiny green on the line. If you have any questions about the.
Why don't you describe it? And if we have any questions, we'll call him later. Okay.
Okay. Yeah, not a problem. So this is the drawing of the structure, the exterior of it. The first floor here is the basement area. This would be the first floor. When you enter the property here, this would be the first floor. This section here is the second. And then this is the addition that I'm requesting the third floor.
this is a drawing of the inside of the property so you will enter on the first level here
make a left into the living room area there's also the bathroom to the right
there's a bedroom over here to the right of the door in this area here and then this is the kitchen
area. The second floor you would enter here. Come in into the kitchen area to the left or you can
go straight into the bedroom straight ahead. And then this would be the living room area here.
The third floor, excuse me, I have to move this to the side here.
The third floor you would enter here. There is a living room area here and a bathroom as well up
And then you would enter into the roof area either here or here.
And then the basement would just be a finished basement or a clean basement.
I'm trying to zoom out here. Give me a second.
I'm trying to zoom out here. Give me a second.
And that's actually the last document.
Okay. So, Ms. Brianna, are there other multiple family uses on the block?
Yes. So, trying to get back to the picture. I'm sorry. I'm not great with navigating this. Give me a second.
No, that's okay.
um so there are additions here they build this three-story here with the parking in front and
then on the same block here they did the same with the setback and everything on the roof there
thank you um questions from the board no mr chairman no chair no chair no chair questions
or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson? Not at this time, Mr. Chair. Questions or comments
from the virtual audience? I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair. Planning Commission. Thank you,
Chair Bergman, and good morning. David Fecto, F-E-C-T-E-A-U, with the City Planning Commission.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do. Please proceed, sir. Thank you, sir. Chairman and board members,
the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning at this
location. The appellant seeks two dwelling units, an existing row home. This is a primarily single
family block face with a church about mid-block. There is no unique physical condition or
circumstance of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning
code. 2923 West Florist Street is the newest home on the block. It was built in 2016 as a single
family row the city planning commission recommends the board deny the proposed use variance for two
dwelling units thank you mi 2023-005-591-2938 west florist street i vote yes
thomas holloman my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes ishmael shaheed my vote is yes
You have your votes. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. We're going to go to number 17, MI 2023, 005-670, 1416 North 27th Street. Allison Hartram is the owner applicant.
There's a letter of opposition from the Brewery Town Chargerswood Community Civic Association.
They'll be rejoining as a panelist soon, sir.
Thank you.
Good morning.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the courts tonight?
Good morning.
My name is Allison Hartram.
It's spelled A-L-I-S-O-N, last name Hartram, H-A-R-T-R-U-M.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Okay. So, this application is for use as a visitor accommodation and single-room residence in an existing structure. You have one use refusal. The proposed use visitor accommodation is prohibited in the RM1 Zoning District. And the second is the proposed use single-room residence requires special exception approval in the RM1 Zoning District. Our Vice Chair has a few questions for you.
Good morning.
Have you emailed in all the required documents that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Yes, I have.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
I have a PowerPoint presentation.
Do I have permission to go through my presentation?
Yes, please share your screen.
Okay. So I'd like to thank everybody for granting me the opportunity to address the board. My name
is Allison Hartram, and I'm the property owner of 1416 North 27th Street. Today, I'm requesting
a variance for two short-term visitor accommodations within this property. In 2018, I acquired this new
construction home in Brewery Town, marking a significant milestone in my life. Words cannot
express how proud I am to own it. One year later, however, in the fall of 2019, my life changed when
I left my corporate job and began traveling. It was during this time that I first listed my house
on the Airbnb app as a means to supplement my income and cover the mortgage expenses.
My initial plans were to be away for only three months, but as we all know, the beginning of 2020
did not go according to anyone's plan. What I thought would be a three-month adventure has
turned into a four-year journey. Along the way, I met and married someone, but visa constraints
Along the way, I met and married someone, but visa constraints prevent us from living together
prevent us from living together.
in the United States. We're undergoing the U.S. visa process, hoping for approval to make this
property our home. In the meantime, hosting guests is crucial for covering the mortgage and utility
expenses. I'd like to go through the layout of the house. The basement is finished with a living
room, full bath, and bedroom. There's an emergency egress window on both the front side of the house
and also at the back of the house. This is the first room that I am proposing for short-term
room rental. Above the basement is the main floor, which has the kitchen and the living room.
This is where the front door is located, which is the main point of access to the house.
The second floor accommodates two bedrooms, a full bathroom, and the laundry room. The back
bedroom is the second room that is under consideration for the short-term rental approval.
the third floor makes up the entire master suite which also has a full bathroom and finally there
is an unfurnished roof deck that my short-term renters do not have access to here are photos of
my downstairs listing this has been the most popular booking option amongst my guests because
it gives them their own private floor within the shared house here you can see the living room the
full bathroom, the bedroom. Two guests are permitted to book this space. The first photo on this slide
shows the view upon entering the house through my front door. Guests would ascend the steps directly
to reach the second proposed short-term rental, finding the bedroom at the top of the landing.
In the second photo, I'm sorry, you can see the entire floor is visible. The closed door at the
end of the hall, it used to belong to a longtime friend and tenant who unfortunately moved out when
things became uncertain with this property. Now that bedroom is completely unoccupied.
There is a full bathroom on this floor and a maximum of two individuals are allowed to book
this back bedroom. Currently, there's only one person residing in the house. She moved in 2020
and occupies the master suite. The rent that she is paying is insufficient to cover the expenses
of the house, but we've maintained this agreement for three and a half years for various reasons.
She has commitments that require her elsewhere Thursday through Sunday, thus making her more
like a part-time resident. Nonetheless, she's been invaluable to me. She safeguards my belongings,
handles the mail, tends to the plants, and manages household tasks. In return, she pays a low rent,
making this an affordable living situation for her and a win-win for both of us given both of
our circumstances. Having a personally known and trusted tenant is essential. It facilitates
immediate handling of house matters and ensures prompt notification of any professional maintenance
needs. Before I dive into the details of my short-term variance request, I must emphasize
the gravity of my current situation. My Airbnb business is my livelihood, and without this
license, and I hope I don't cry during this, but I have suffered a significant loss of income.
Moreover, due to the uncertainties, my other tenant of two and a half years who stayed on
the second floor front bedroom abruptly vacated the property after the RCO voted against my request,
fearing that I would lose the house. Since then, I have struggled to cover the mortgage
and utility bills. I have been forced to liquidate my retirement account, which is a drastic step
that I never anticipated. My situation has reached a critical point and I am here today begging the
city to fully consider my request. The reality is severe. I face the risk of losing everything
including my husband's U.S. visa and our opportunity to move to the United States all hinging on
today's verdict. It's important to note that for my husband's visa they consider the assets in my
name and our intended place of residence, if approved.
If the variance is denied and I am forced to sell the house, it will significantly impact
our application process.
One distinguishing feature of my short-term rental is that my tenant and I adhere to a
vegan lifestyle.
To maintain this, both of my listings explicitly state that the kitchen use is completely off
limits.
This primary house rule is reiterated multiple times throughout the app and consequently
this restriction tends to attract a specific type of traveler. Many of the guests who book,
they do not intend to spend much time at my house. This includes professionals on work trips,
tourists who are exploring Philadelphia, or family members staying near hospitals.
Since these rooms are in a shared house, the guests expect other people to be present,
which discourages partying. Booking a shared house, which mentions other professionals,
booking a shared house which mentions other professionals deters those with malicious
deters those with malicious
intentions the guests that I attract are seeking a clean quiet and respectful environment
you might be wondering why my tenant hasn't considered finding additional roommates or
why I haven't opted to rent the property to a single family I wish the answer were that simple
the biggest drawback is the presence of my belongings the house is fully furnished and
contains everything that I own if I were to rent it to a long-term tenant my current tenant would
have to move out. I would have to fly to the U.S., pack all of my things, and rent an expensive
storage unit. Not an ideal scenario for either of us. The other option would be to find long-term
tenants to be her roommates. The challenge, however, lies in the fact of finding other tenants who will
adhere to the requirements of a vegan kitchen. In reality, and this is important, having two rooms
as short-term rentals is most ideal. With short-term renters not permitted in the house's
common areas, movement throughout the house is minimized, resulting in a quieter environment.
This restriction also fosters a cleaner space with only one tenant utilizing the entire area,
as opposed to a scenario where the house is fully occupied by long-term tenants.
And finally, the biggest advantage is the flexibility that it offers. It allows accommodation
if my family wants to visit Philadelphia. It also grants flexibility for when my husband's visa is
approved and were able to move in. Here are a handful of reviews from past guests. These
snippets are just a glimpse of the many reviews highlighting the peaceful atmosphere. Given that
my tenant works full-time and most guests are out exploring the city, the house is rarely at full
capacity. Even if it were fully occupied, we're looking at a maximum of five occupants in this
spacious four-story, four-bedroom house, which translates to a maximum of two people per bedroom
or two people per floor. I take immense pride in my listings as reflected in these reviews.
It's crucial to remember that this is my personal property, making it imperative that it's reserved
only for the right people. As a super host, I strive to provide an exceptional experience for
my guests, and in return, I attract exceptional guests. With hundreds of positive reviews on my
profile, potential guests are assured that this is a house to be respected. It showcases my
responsiveness as a host and the cleanliness and tranquility of the environment. By setting
these expectations, I consistently attract guests who align with these values. And should I receive
a booking request that doesn't align with the property's value, I reserve the right to refuse it.
In the rare event that a guest doesn't respect the house, I'm fortunate to have substantial
support team at my disposal. Trustworthy, great host, proactive. Isn't this the exact impression
we want our visitors to have of Philadelphia?
Don't we strive for outsiders
to truly appreciate our city,
especially the lesser known neighborhoods
like Brewery Town and actively promote its charm?
Many of my guests were unfamiliar
with Brewery Town before their stay.
Yet thanks to this opportunity,
they're not only discovering its hidden gems,
but they're also falling in love
with its unique character.
Their positive experiences contribute
to our local community
and also to Philadelphia's reputation
as a welcoming and vibrant city worth exploring.
hosting on Airbnb has heightened my dedication to property care the meticulous attention given
to maintaining the short-term rental has not only ensured its upkeep but it's also created
significant job opportunities within the local community providing steady work for those who
support me and its maintenance given the nature of this property immediate attention to any
necessary maintenance cleaning and repairs is always my highest priority for years I have hired
local cleaners to maintain the property, supporting small businesses in the community.
Keisha and Eric were my latest cleaners, diligently keeping the house in immaculate
condition and ensuring proper trash disposal. Unfortunately, they have lost their jobs while
we await this variance. My handyman Wes is always on standby, ready to tackle any projects that
arise. From electrical issues to appliance repairs, painting, and general maintenance,
he's a jack of all trades his expertise has been invaluable over the years allowing me to address
any maintenance concerns promptly and efficiently by supporting local professionals like Wes I not
only ensure that my property is well maintained but also contributes to the livelihood of community
members like him it's worth noting that managing this listing was a team effort my co-host Kelly
served as a liaison between all parties ensuring seamless communication however with this decision
pending kelly's role and income is also on hold my lovely neighbors ryan and megan moved in after
i had already begun my airbnb journey they've never known any other arrangement for this house
and they fully support my airbnb business they've extended their support by actions
They've extended their support by actions such as taking packages inside or checking on something at the house.
such as taking packages inside or checking
Thank you.
Once, when someone broke into their car and stole their Hyundai, it was one of my guests who witnessed the incident, promptly called the police, and caught the whole thing on camera.
As a result, their car was located and returned less than 24 hours later.
Megan and Ryan were extremely grateful to my guests and thanked me profusely for it.
At the current moment, these are my only neighbors.
There is a park in front of my house, there's a parking lot behind my house, and two empty
lots on either side of my house, where construction has recently begun.
Beyond the property line, this Airbnb has a positive ripple effect on the local community.
Guests visiting our area actively contribute to our community's revenue by patronizing
local businesses, shops, and eateries, boosting the local economy.
me. I have been hosting since 2019 without a single complaint from the community. There have
been no noise complaints, disturbances, excessive trash, or anything unusual. In over four years of
hosting with almost zero vacancy, this exemplifies the positive impact my Airbnb has had on the
neighborhood. It demonstrates that I am a responsible host who prioritizes the well-being
of my guests and the peace of the community. While I understand the city's concerns about
excessive short-term rentals saturating the market, that is not the case here. Converting
my property into a short-term rental was initially born out of necessity, but it has become something
that I deeply cherish. It benefits the local community, it supports my tenant, and it ensures
a safe haven for my belongings until I am able to return. If the city votes against my request
today, I can't even imagine that, I will have to sell the house and I will fall into even more
debt than I am currently in. I'll be forced to move everything into a storage unit. My husband
and I will miss out on the opportunity to live in a home that I have worked so hard for. My tenant
will lose her long-term residence, and my support team's temporary loss of income will become
permanent. Approving these two short-term rentals at 1416 North 27th Street will impact more lives
than just mine, so I am showing up today not just for myself, but for everyone who is counting on
this arrangement. I'd like to stress that I am just one individual trying to make ends meet.
I am not some big corporation trying to take over the city and disrupt the housing market.
This is my residence, a home that I am desperately trying to maintain.
While I await a verdict on this variance request, I am drowning and barely staying afloat.
Losing the ability to rent out my house to short-term guests has already been extremely difficult.
If this decision becomes permanent, it will be absolutely devastating.
I don't even have the words to truly express how much I am begging for your approval today.
Please consider the broader picture when making your decision.
This is not a typical short-term variance request, and I hope that's been made clear here.
Thank you for your time.
And I do have photos, additional photos, if you'd like to see those.
So let me ask you, when you went to the Brewery Town Community Civic Association, what was the vote?
the vote was um right here let me pull it up for you
here was the vote so seven people opposed and three people support it okay thank you
questions from the board no mr chairman no chair no chair questions or comments from our attorney
Hillary Emerson. Two things briefly, Mr. Chair. One, Ms. Hartram, if you could forward your
PowerPoint presentation to us so we have it for our files, that would be greatly appreciated
because I think there was information in there that wasn't in the documents that you submitted.
um second um so you your presentation focused solely on the visitor accommodations um request
but there was also a request for single room residence um are you still requesting a single
room residence or part of your property be used as single room residence are you requesting
that your entire property be used for visitor accommodations i am still requesting the single
room residence for my tenant who is currently living in the house and i do have a renter's
license for that already okay so so just for the existing tenants you mentioned one tenant
So just for the existing tenants, you mentioned one tenant moved out.
moved out do you want the rest of the property
Do you want the rest of the property for visitor accommodations, the other three bedrooms?
No, the one that the tenant moved out of, I'm just going to keep that empty and use it as an office.
Or when my husband and I get approved, we'll move into that room.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
mr chair i have a hand raised by a doris aldridge i have allowed them to speak okay
good morning my name is stars aldridge spell that please could you spell your name for the
court scenario yes d-o-r-i-s-a-l-d-r-i-d-g-e
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
I am the chair of the RCO.
Please proceed.
When Allison presented at our RCO, her project was not met positively, but the situation has changed.
We were mostly concerned about the sheer number of people in the House.
As she presented, there were two rental units and asking for two Airbnb units.
We were uncomfortable with the arrangement of that many unrelated people living in such proximity.
I don't have the power to change the vote, but I think her project is more amenable to our community, as she stated.
That's all. Thank you.
thank you thank you for taking the time to call us um planning commission
thank you chair bergman and good morning david effecta with the city planning commission
chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential
multi-family zoning at this location the appellant has shown that the proposed single
room residence will have no detrimental impacts beyond what might be expected however there is
no unique physical condition or circumstance of the property that would require it to be used
for visitor accommodation the 2020 zoning ordinance passed by city council which regulated
short-term rentals did not change the basic rules prohibiting full-time use of a dwelling unit as a
short-term rental this type of absentee management where the owner does not live in the unit has been
illegal since the first short-term rental zoning regulations became effective in roughly 2012
what's changed since the passage of the 2020 ordinance is that there is now a licensing and
enforcement mechanism the city planning commission recommends the board grant a proposed special
exception for single room residents but deny the proposed use variants for visitor accommodation
okay thank you um so miss hartram what i want to do with this is um i want to meet with the other
board members and next wednesday uh they will vote on where we stand um and we just want to
take a little time to try to figure out what this is and i want to work with our attorney too okay
i mean i know i know what you're presenting but we haven't had this single room residence
with visitor accommodation so i want to it's unique yeah i want to just really try to figure
this out where we stand and we will get back to you next wednesday okay we will vote at
9 30 next wednesday okay should i should i show up for them um you you could you you should listen
in, I would think. Yes, absolutely. I'm invited. Okay. Wonderful. Thank you. You're invited.
You'll be invited. Okay. Thank you so much. All right. Thank you. Okay. So we're going to now go
number
number seven
yes number seven
MI 2023
005 618
Bryan Street Steve Masters
is the attorney
there is a letter of non-opposition
from West Mount Airy.
And also there's
a petition of support
approximately 27 neighbors
nine from the 7200 block
of Bryan Street. Mr. Masters.
Good morning Mr. Chair
and members of the board. Mr. Masters
could you just state your name for the record and spell it for the
court stenographer? My name is Steve
Steve Masters, S-T-E-V-E, M-A-S-T-E-R-S, with the law firm of JustLaws.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and relationship to the property?
We represent the property owners, Itzik Lawrence and Elaine Blender.
And our vice chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
Good morning, Mr. Shahid. We do not stipulate to the accuracy.
In fact, we believe that many of the refusals are actually wrong, and we are going to present that in our presentation today.
So I would like to go through the refusals.
You don't have to.
I will agree to waive the reading of them because I'm going to go through them in my presentation.
Understood.
Looking forward to it.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we did.
THANK YOU. PLEASE PROCEED AND SHARE YOUR SCREEN.
ALL RIGHT. GOOD MORNING AGAIN, MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
WE ARE HERE TODAY. LET ME BRING THIS UP TO THE FRONT. OKAY.
This zoning appeal concerns a deck that was built some time ago in the rear of our client's
property and then when they bought the property, the deck was in very poor condition and they were
strongly recommended to reinforce it and to repair it, which they did.
And after that point, they received a code violation from L&I saying that the deck was not properly permitted.
We had originally believed that the deck was originally built according to a permit after the sheriff's sale
and the previous owner had purchased the property from the city.
That does not appear to be the case or we could not really verify whether this deck had originally been properly permitted.
So as a result, and we'll go through this, but we filed an amended application for appeal to basically reflect the fact that this was not a previously permitted deck.
The notice of refusal here has three grounds.
The first is in terms of the stairs.
As we'll see in the photos, there is a stairway that goes from the deck down to the rear of the backyard.
And the LNI examiner said that that stairway was not allowed when a deck was part of an attached building.
The other two are dimensional standards, and we believe that both of these dimensional standards are actually improper refusals.
We actually meet these requirements, and we'll go through that and show you that.
So there are three zoning refusals. It is our contention that only one, the first one, is accurate and the last two are not.
The petitions in support were also redone because our original petitions referred to the deck being previously permitted.
so now we circulated new petitions and got new signatures at the suggestion of the RCO
which basically addresses the story of how the deck was unsafe and how it needed to be fixed up
and now it needs to be legalized
all of these owners are very very close
many of them are literally on the same block as the property owners
So the Westman Airy Neighbors RCO voted to not oppose. There were five in support. There were two opposed, one abstained, and there were four in non-opposition. So overwhelmingly it was either in favor or non-opposition.
um their letter did go into some detail though about what i've referred to already uh the previous
understanding that we had that there was a proper permit for the deck and we have addressed it as
i've said by putting new petitions out to the neighbors not no longer referring to the deck
as being previously permitted and also um as we'll go through um putting any an amended
as we'll go through putting an amended application
application for
for appeal that doesn't reference the argument
that it was previously permitted.
So we do have an architect from OZ Collaborative
that's available if the board is interested
in exploring the design of the deck in any ways,
but these are the plans that were prepared on the deck.
so here we have um you'll you'll see these better with with the photos but um
but the deck has the here's the stairs that go down from the deck on
into the rear yard of the of the house um and
the deck framing
This is a more clear diagram showing the deck and then the stairs that descend down.
Here's a rear elevation view showing the deck and showing the stairs.
and some of these plans are are actually more of the building plans so they're they're not
they're they're much more detailed than than a typical zoning diagram
this is the underneath of the deck these are the stairs that go on the left of the
of the deck down to the rear yard.
Here's another view of the steps going up
towards the top of the actual deck itself to the right
and to the left is a door that connects to the kitchen.
This is the deck itself.
You'll see that the deck is not covered.
It has no walls, it has no ceiling.
It is a completely open deck.
This is a view from the deck towards the north showing the part of the portion of the stairs.
This is the kitchen door to the left, and this is, you have access to that from the deck
itself.
This is the footings of the deck, and this is the property boundary.
When we looked at decks, there are a number of decks, a handful, basically, in the surrounding block.
All of those decks also have stairs that go down from the deck level to the rear yards.
So here we have some photos that are going to be a bit better than this.
but we have a neighbor that's two doors down here
that has a deck with a circular stairway that goes down.
You can see that, well, this is a bird's eye view,
but I believe we have a better view here.
So yes, this is the neighbor's deck,
just two doors away that has a circular stairway that goes down.
This is our deck, but it's blocked by a large tree,
so you can't see it in that photo.
This is a deck around a few doors down in the other direction, showing this deck also has stairs that go down to, in this case, it's to the front of the property.
In Exhibit 6, we presented the RCO with an analysis of why the refusals were incorrect.
So the first one, you'll recall, is around the stairs. And that one is correct. But our argument on the refusal for a stairway not being allowed on a deck that is an attached dwelling is, number one, the character of this area is that every single deck that is in this immediate area has stairs that go from the
the level of the deck down to either the front of the house or the back up so there are no decks
that don't have stairs but more importantly as you'll recall there is a door to the kitchen
that is kind of that without that deck would simply would be inoperable because you can't
exit a door that is one story above the ground so the our clients would be allowed to put a
the ground so the our clients would be allowed to put a stairway that would connect that that
kitchen door to the rear of the yard it would be virtually the same stairway it would maybe
be a few feet over so it's not that there wouldn't be a stairway uh in the backyard it would be
attached to a door as opposed to the deck and so that seems to be a meaningless distinction in the
code. The maximum occupied area, the violation is de minimis. It's only 35 square feet beyond
the maximum occupancy allowed of 92, 923.61 square feet. The lot itself is undersized,
which is a hardship basis for the dimensional variance. And in the mirror, the minimum rear
yard depth uh we basically are more than three feet away from the the rear property line in
section 14 6044 this is the section of the zoning code that deals with with decks it states that a
deck may not encroach into the required rear yard unless it complies with the following
a it's constructed so the floor level of the deck is at or below the floor level of the first story
which is fully above grade uh the rco agreed with us that uh that's what's happening here the the
floor level of the deck is is at level with the first floor of the house which is which um from
the street area is is at grade but the but the there's a slope in the property so that in the
rear of the house uh it's actually down to the to the basement level and then second it's not at any
point closer than three feet from a rear lot line and it is more than three feet so we believe the
examiner was incorrect in saying that there was a rear yard dimensional refusal in addition
the the code also states that decks are permitted between the rear wall of the building and the
rear property line as long as they are not enclosed by walls or roof above if a
deck is has a cover or a wall then it's considered part of the principal
building and it has to comply with all the yard and other requirements in this
case as you saw the deck has no wall has no roof it is therefore exempt from
require from complying with any of the of the dimensional requirements for for closeness to the
rear wall and um so it is not uh it doesn't apply to the minimum distance to the rear lot line um
and therefore the only issue is the stairway and as we said the stairway would be attached to the
kitchen door if it's not attached to the deck which makes which which is which which doesn't
doesn't seem to be any kind of a significant deviation.
We're gonna scroll through here.
These were some of the items
that we presented earlier on to the RCO.
This is our zoning notice posters,
our tax clearance,
the deed showing the ownership is with our clients,
This is our amended appeal in which we specifically reference the errors in the refusals and we
summarize those on the second page, which we've gone through.
So you have seen all of these arguments before.
There is no project information form, content required.
This is our RCO notice letter that was delivered to all of the near neighbors and our proof of mailing.
At this point, I would like to call Itzik Laurent and Elaine Blender so they can adopt my testimony.
Mr. Masters, just to go over one more time.
They bought the property.
The property had a deck that was in Rory Bad shape.
they replaced that deck they didn't they well there's some there's some dispute as to whether
uh it it wasn't a replacement they basically they basically renovated the deck and and
yeah okay fine fine so yeah so in other words it wasn't completely replaced it was shored up and
and made safe and yes and it was quite a bit more safe than it was in the original
bring one of your clients one please
Sure. Can either Itzik or Elaine raise your hand?
All right. Sir, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenography?
Itzik Lorand. I-T-Z-I-K-L-O-R-A-N-T.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth?
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Good morning. It's sick.
You've heard my testimony today.
Do you believe it was true and correct?
And would you adopt it as your own?
Yes, I do.
Very good.
Mr. Chair, are there any questions?
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney Hillary Emerson? Just a brief question. Mr. Masters,
are you asking the board to make a decision on whether the refusals are correct or you just
wanted to note for the record that you disagreed with the refusals? I think it's fine just to note
for the record that we disagree with the refusals. We were asked by the RCO if we wanted to send
this application back to L&I to correct it, and we felt that that was not necessary, and it would
unduly delay the resolution of this appeal. Okay. Thank you for the clarification.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair, I have Charles Richardson with the hand raised. I have allowed them to speak.
Good morning, Mr. Richardson. Good morning, Mr. Chair. Please state your name and spell for the
court stenographer charles richardson r-i-c-h-a-r-d-s-o-n office of councilwoman cindy
bass room 508 city hall you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth i do please proceed uh the councilwoman has no objection to granting the variance
thank you mr richardson for calling us is there anyone else in the virtual audience
i do not see any further hints at this time planning commission thank you sir and good
Good morning, David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential single-family zoning at this location.
The proposed dimensional variances are minor, and in keeping with the spirit and intent of the code,
the proposed stairs will not injure the use of adjacent properties.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the proposed variances.
Thank you.
So MI 2023-005-618-7238, Bryan Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ismail Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Mr. Masters, could you please stay on?
We're going to move on to another case that I see you're on.
MI 2023-005-360, 4310-14 Germantown Avenue.
There's a letter of support from the 13th Ward RCO Committee with some provisos.
Also, there's a petition in support signed by approximately 11 neighbors.
Mr. Masters, just for the record, state your name.
My name is Steve Masters with the law firm of Just Laws here on behalf of the applicant Donna Peterson.
Okay, thank you. And our vice chair has a few questions.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading or the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Good morning, Mr. Shahid. Today we're dealing with a referral, not a refusal, and we do agree to waive the reading.
sure have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to
proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes we have thank you please proceed
and share your screen thank you good morning mr chair members of the board we are here now
for a special exception for a very small assembly and entertainment use that would be
49 or less persons at any one time on the first floor of 4310-14 Germantown Avenue above the
first floor, which is vacant at the moment, are two apartments that are occupied and that are
that are zoned properly by the city.
The referral here is only for the proposed assembly
and entertainment use.
Because this is CMX2, it is allowed,
but it does need a special exception from the board
in order to move forward.
Our petitions in support were circulated and many neighbors in the very immediate vicinity
were happy to sign on and support this project. This will be Donna Peterson will be doing business
Donna Petersen will be doing business as A&K Playhouse.
This says A&K Playhouse.
It'll be a small event space that will be fairly occasional,
two, three, four times a month is the anticipation.
We did also indicate that the proposed hours were between 2 p.m. and 10 p.m.,
but for proviso purposes, we would ask that the proviso say 10 p.m. as the closing,
but we don't want to be held to a 2 p.m. opening hour.
We believe that there could be times
where an event might take place, you know,
earlier in the day than in the afternoon.
The 13th RCO did vote to support this use
in the special exception.
They did propose three provisos, which I'll magnify here.
The trash debris storage plan, we went through in depth the proposed trash storage plan. There is trash storage areas. There's a whole open backyard that will be used for trash storage.
and our client agreed to be responsible
for the prompt removal of the trash bins
after the city has picked them up.
As I said, the hours of operation,
we would be amenable to a 10 p.m. closing,
but not to a 2 p.m. opening
because we believe that needs to be more flexibility
for events that maybe take place in the morning.
In terms of the property maintenance plan,
we have no issues with that.
Our client is in support of maintaining her property
in a clean and safe condition.
The support shows, it was unanimous.
Seven of the attendees, all seven were in support.
We're now gonna go to the plans.
So the first four plans are really the only plans
that are relevant here since the,
as I said before, the upper floors are for dwelling units
that are not at issue in this appeal.
Also, there was no public use of the basement area.
So we have the first floor plan here,
which is displayed in this floor plan.
The second and third floor plans are for the dwelling units.
This is, as I said, a CMX2 lot and pretty much the entire,
both sides of Dermatown Avenue in this neighborhood
are all CMX2.
These are some more details on the floor plans.
Although, candidly, you'll be able to see much more
when we look at the photos.
We have some fire safety documentation here.
So this is a context view showing that, as you would expect, with CMX2 throughout this portion of Germaton Avenue,
there are many uses that are already dealing with food preparation and service along this corridor.
There have been also social clubs along this corridor as well.
This is the second floor apartment kitchen.
This is the second floor apartment living room, second floor bedroom, a bathroom on the second floor, a view of the kitchen into the living room on the second floor.
Here's the stairs that go up to the third floor, common hallway, and this is the first floor event space area.
Make that a little smaller, we can see it more completely.
This is another view of the main entrance
to the first floor event space.
This is a layout, this is not being used at this moment,
but it is configured for it to be used.
This is the event space restroom.
This is the events.
Here's the entrance number two.
This is the rear yard of the building, and so the events could also occur outside in this nice grassy area.
and here is um along the side of the of the structure and this is the this is
germantown avenue at the front there
and this is the this is the entrance this is this is the building the facade that faces germantown
Avenue. And again, a view from Germantown Avenue into the property. These are photos of the zoning
poster and the and the referral uh this is our uh we are still working on our on an updated tax
clearance but we have submitted to board council uh that there are no taxes that are owed on this
property at this at this point here's the deed uh to donna peterson our client
This is our application for special exception, project information form, and then the RCO
notice letter that was mailed to the addresses provided by the Planning Commission and the
PROOF OF MAILING AT THIS POINT I'M HOPING THAT DONNA PETERSON IS IN THE VIRTUAL AUDIENCE
AND SHE WOULD RAISE HER HAND DONNA PETERSON PLEASE RAISE YOUR VIRTUAL HAND IF YOU'RE IN
THE AUDIENCE
Jason, do we see her?
They've been about to speak, Mr. Chair.
I'm mute.
I'm mute.
I'm mute.
Oh, my God.
Are you kidding me?
Hold up.
Hold up.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
I'm so sorry.
yes good morning donna peterson b-o-n-n-a p-e-t-e-r-s-o-n do you do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth told truth nothing but the truth yes please proceed counsel good morning
miss peterson you've heard my testimony today um do you agree with it and believe that it's true
and would you adopt it as your own yes yes i would uh thank you and we're open to questions
from the board questions questions from the board no mr chairman no chair no chair questions or
comments from our attorney hillary emerson no mr chair questions or comments from the virtual
audience mr chair we have charles richardson with their hand raised i've allowed them to speak again
at this time. Mr. Richardson,
just for the record, state your name. You've already
been sworn. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Charles Richardson, Office of
Councilwoman Cindy Bass, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N.
Councilwoman
has no objection to granting the variance,
but only with regard to
the applicable
provisos that have been offered
by the
RCO. Okay. Thank you.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good morning.
David Vecto with the City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from commercial mixed use 2 to commercial mixed use 2.5.
The appellant has shown that the proposed assembly and entertainment will have no detrimental impacts beyond what might be expected.
The City Planning Commission recommends the board grant a special exception for the proposed assembly and entertainment.
Thank you. MI 2023-005-360-4310-14 Germantown Avenue. I vote yes, with proviso. Trash stored in rear yard. Assembly and entertainment space to close by 10 p.m.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes for Proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes, with proviso.
This is Shmel Shahid, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes for Proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. May I be excused?
You certainly can, sir. Thank you.
We're going to go to number 8, MI 2023-001-265-2203 North Natrona Street.
Alan Nockmson is the attorney.
Sherbury Manchin has issued a letter of opposition.
However, there will be a meeting on 222.
Discuss changes in this project.
Hi, Mr. Goldberg.
You've already been sworn.
Just state your name for the record, please.
Alex Goldberg, Nockmson, PC.
And could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
The client is Brotherhood of State Investments, and it's the owner of the property, and its representative, Gabriel Polishuk, should be in the virtual audience.
And our vice chair, Ishmael Shahid, has a few questions.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Mr. Goldberg, as we stated earlier, we will not vote on this today. We'll just hear the case.
Understood. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Okay. Again, my name is Alex Goldberg of Knotton City, PC.
I'm here presenting for 2203 North Natona Street.
The property is owned by Brotherly Love Real Estate Investments,
and its representative, Gabe Holishuk, is in the virtual audience.
We presented this project initially in front of Strawberry Mansion CDC in August.
We got some great feedback about some aesthetic changes.
We've implemented them in this presentation.
We'll sort of show the before and after.
We went back on January 25th.
There was one more tweak that we were asked to make.
We've done that, but we've been requested by the CDC to represent tomorrow night to show that change.
And hopefully they'll support and we'll come back to the board next week or ever.
So I'm going to jump right into it.
So here's the table of contents.
we've got the original and the revised notice of refusal they're actually exactly the same we're
just asking for one dimensional refusal here it's an rm1 property and while we are seeking
three units here that the density is allowed by right the third exhibit is the letter from
strawberry mansion cdc the fourth is the revised proviso plan form which incorporates the most
recent change we made was lower, which was lowering the height of the porch to be consistent
with the height of the porches on the rest of the properties on the block. We have a zoning use
permit, which was issued for this very property for the same use. So, and that was a buy right
at that time. The overlay, which is the cause of our refusal, was not implemented at the time of
that zoning permit's approval. I'd point out that actually what we're proposing here, while it's
the same density, is actually a more appropriate proposal than what was approved previously, and
I'll show that when I get to that exhibit. We have a zoning map, some photographs of the lot,
which is currently vacant, and the surrounding area, the original plans and the revised plans.
We have two different meeting notices in here, the one from the most recent meeting and the one
for the one. That's upcoming tomorrow night. We have an application for appeal, the deed,
and the certificate of tax clearance. So here's the original refusal. It was issued about a year
ago for the erection of an attached building for uses three units. And the one refusal that we
received, which relates to the overlay, essentially says that if your street is less than 50 feet wide,
your building height should should not exceed 25 feet we understand sort of the intent behind that
provision from the strawberry mansion overlay language purpose language itself in the code
you know essentially to paraphrase the design of the new building should be consistent with
character the character defining features of this overlay district in terms of height massing roof
lines or cornices, vertical and horizontal articulation, porch construction, fenestration
proportions, and building material. So I think the spirit here is that, you know,
We want to sort of preserve these two-story blocks, make sure that we don't have really tall buildings on narrow streets.
we want to sort of preserve these two-story blocks, make sure that we don't have really
tall buildings on.
What's different here on the subject block is that we're one of the last remaining vacant lots on this portion of North Natrona Street.
There's a lot of older structures there.
They all exceed 25 feet, essentially, as you'll see in our proposal.
We're just trying to match the existing heights that are within the character of this block.
our cornice lawn we'd like to be consistent with the property next to us and when you'll see
the photos of the surrounding block you'll see bay windows which we've incorporated front porches
which we've incorporated and a consistent height which is what we're seeking here's the revised
refusal which we sort of had to request authorization to add that porch in the bay window
and it didn't cause any additional refusals.
Here's the correspondence from the coordinating RCO.
I'll note that the letter references two-family use in an existing structure,
and that's prohibited in the zoning district.
We're proposing a new structure, and we're seeking three-family use,
and this is an RM1 property with a lot size of 1,371 square feet,
So that would allow our three units by right. Again, our refusal is to allow us to have the height that matches the rest of the block.
I'll note that there were three provisos, which we have no issue with for Jacob's Ladders.
We've lowered the porch, which you'll see upcoming in the presentation, and a trash plan, which we discussed with the community members.
Here's that revised proviso form. So we lowered the porch, which lowered the entire building.
uh about five inches um just to be consistent with the rest of the block and you can see that here
those numbers have been bubbled in um to show that our building is 34 feet 7 inches the height
was lower down to 3 feet 7 inches which we're looking forward to representing to the community
tomorrow night here's that zoning and use permit so this was issued as you can see in 2019 RM1
zone classification. It was allowed by Wright because this box is empty. It was for three
dwelling units. I'm going to show conveniently the plan was available to view on Atlas.
A couple things I'll note that are different from what we're presenting today from what was
approved a few years ago. Our building is about a foot shorter. You can see on this plan here that
this building goes up 35 feet, seven inches. It also has a standard 42 inch parapet. So it gives
the appearance of even taller. It also has a roof deck, which we know is no longer permitted
pursuant to the overlay, and we're not proposing a roof deck as a part of our proposal. So that
sort of is what differentiates us from them. Okay, here's a zoning map. You can see it's RM1.
We have an irregular-shaped lot, kind of makes a V with the property next to us, but again,
it's large over 1300 square feet are one parcel here's a google maps perspective showing that
we're quite close to the park some photographs so this is our lot it's been vacant for several years
and here's the notice posting you can see this is going to the right of the property
again bay windows which we've implemented uh front porches and you can see these are three
story structures with sort of intricate corners lines where we're just trying to match what's
already there this is to the left of the property okay here was our original submission that we
went to the rco with in august and what was originally submitted to lni and you can see that
no porch um we do we were with the consistent height in the chorus corners line but no porch
and no bay window we got some good feedback from the community group we went back to them
and this was the resulting revision you can see we now have a porch to match the neighboring
property we've lowered it to match the height of the neighboring porch and we've added this
bay window as well here's the site plan we are compliant with the rear yard despite its irregularity
Oops, sorry about that.
Despite its irregularity, we've met the nine-foot rear yard requirement on both sides.
Here's the floor plans.
It's a three-unit dwelling, so the first unit is a body level, and then the second and third
floor.
We've got ventilated trash closets in each unit as well to allow for trash to be stored
for those upper units that don't have access to the rear yard.
here's the rco meeting notice this was the one for january it was mailed to 89 neighbors
It was mailed to 89 neighbors. Here's the list of those addresses in the bulk mailing certificates.
here's the list of those addresses in the book
Here is the notice for tomorrow night.
Again, same amount of neighbors, same list of addresses.
Bulk mailing certificates by application for appeal.
The deed to the property showing brotherly love real estate investments is the owner of the property and has been since February of 2021.
and the tax clearance, showing that the only taxes that remain are those which are not yet due.
So with that, I'd like to call my client, Mr. Gabriel Polaschuk, to adopt my testimony.
Sir, can you see a hand?
jason um yes we have a tyrone williams with the hand raised i've allowed them to speak this time
let's let let let let's we're trying to see if he has his owner first yeah he he sent me a note
that he is on uh he made oh there he is okay sir could you state your name please and spell for
the court stenographer yes gabriel polishak g-a-b-r-i-e-l p-o-l-i-s-h-u-k do you swear
affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes please proceed counsel uh good
morning mr polisher testimony today good morning yes and was it correct yes and you adopted as your
Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
No questions or comments, Mr. Chair, but I do have a resumption date that we can announce at the conclusion of today's hearing.
Okay, we'll come back to you. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Tyrone Williams with their hand raised, they've been allowed to speak.
Hi, sir. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning. Reverend Tyrone Williams, Tyrone, T-Y-R-O-N-E, Williams, W-I-L-L-I-A-M-S.
You swear affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, Reverend.
Although we issued a letter of opposition because of the first plans that was presented,
I do give the developer and his team credit for listening to the feedback that was given at the meeting.
Mr. Goldberg and his team contacted us to let us know of their plans to present today without a vote being taken.
We and our process do allow for follow ups and our monthly meetings.
and Mr. Goldberg will be 2203 North.
The channel will be on tomorrow night's agenda
to allow the community to hear the changes
and vote at that time.
And that's my testimony.
All right.
Thank you, Reverend, for taking the time to close.
We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair.
um planning commission david do you want to hold the vote to see what the final plan is
no that's all right the cosmetic changes aren't something we typically weigh on it
okay thank you sir um uh so uh good afternoon or good morning david fechto with the city
planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location
from residential multifamily to residential single family all of the other buildings on
this block rise to three stories so the proposed height variance is in keeping with the character
of the block the city planning commission recommends the board grant their proposed
dimensional variance for height thank you hillary do you have the date we'll have a resumptive
hearing um yes mr chair one moment please mr chair uh well yes if if i may and i can wait
till hillary goes but i would like to respond to mr facto should i wait should i speak now
You can respond now. Go ahead. Yeah. So regarding the multifamily use, you know, in addition to the height they were proposing not being out of character, the use is not either 2205, 2207, 2209, in addition to several other properties on North Natrona Street, also are multifamily.
So the use and the sort of the aesthetics both fit the character of the block.
Thank you. Hillary?
Yes, Mr. Chair. The date that we have available is March 13th at 2 p.m. Again, Wednesday, March 13th at 2 p.m.
at 2 p.m. Again, Wednesday, March 13th at 2 p.m. And at that time, we will accept any updates from
the applicant, the RCO, and if the public has any further comment on the revised plans,
if there are any further changes. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Goldberg. Thank you.
We're going to move on to number nine, MI2023-001-348-4704 Wayne Avenue.
Donald Benedetto is the attorney.
Letter of opposition from the 13th Ward RCO and a letter of opposition from Solo Germantown.
they've been made a panelist mr chair morning council could you please state your name and
spell for the court stenographer morning mr chairman don benedetto b-e-n-e-d-e-t-t-o
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do could you identify your client the relationship to this property
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The client is Philly Continental Sales, which is a single-member entity owned by Akeem Presley, who's present here with me as well.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
I do, Mr. Vice Chair.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
The documents were sent in as exhibits over the weekend. I believe they were a day late.
Understood. Please proceed and share your screen. I believe we received them.
And can everybody see me okay?
We see you. Please share your screen.
There should be a green button at the bottom there. Hey, Art, you're coming up.
Sorry about that. I'm still an in-person guy, Mr. Chair.
That's okay.
So thank you, members of the board. So this is Mr. Presley's application for a zoning variance based on the notice of refusal he seeks to change for a variance from a single family home to multifamily home.
I'm not sure if the board wants to see each document individually, but included as a copy of the deed for the property, the tax clearance for the property, the plans of the property, the RCO.
opposition, as well as the appeal itself. If I could start with just to familiarize the board
with the property, it is a vacant lot located at 4704, which I'm showing you pictures of with the
postings right now. Mr. Presley or Philadelphia Continental Sales purchased a lot in this
condition. He did not create this condition, as you can tell by the steps still being there and
kind of the age and look of the property. He seeks to build in accordance with his plans
a three-story structure with a plus basement for three multifamily units.
I'm sorry, four multifamily units, including the basement, to address the neighborhood.
the space at 4702, 4700, and 4628 are all multifamily. 4628 was just granted a variance
to multifamily on July of 2022. 4625 is 15 units. And then in the last few years, members of the
board directly across the street from him, this has now been authorized, changed to the
zoning. That's 4,700 to 4,715, which certainly changes the nature of the neighborhood to
something more in line with the multifamily. But the street itself is multifamily. It's had
multifamily presence. It's fairly substantial at this point. And also 4,625 is 15 units.
um mr presley really doesn't have the ability to develop this in any way other than to do
multifamily just because of the economics involved we're not rehabbing a structure
that exists and asking the board to give us a variance so we can change it to multifamily
as you can see from the image of the lot this is a ground up build um and just the price points
wouldn't be something anybody could manage in that neighborhood i mean you'd be looking at
building a three-story residence and pricing it probably close to a million dollars
um mr presley is from the germantown neighborhood his grandmother still lives
right in the neighborhood he's done i believe seven or eight rehabs right in this neighborhood
He's done, I believe, seven or eight rehabs right in this neighborhood.
So it's something he's experienced with.
so it's something he's experienced
experience.
These are good homes that are, you know, frankly, going to be affordable units for people to live in.
I understand the concerns that are traditional about parking and changing things from single family to multifamily.
But I think as we can when we look at the addresses surrounding, you know, that change has already started to happen.
I'd like Mr. Presley to be kind of treated the same way.
And he is different than them in that he hasn't created his economic hardship.
As you can see, these lots are free, you know, are vacant.
It's certainly not going to decrease the neighborhood values to have a nice new construction in that space rather than, you know, while he keeps it up as required to be a clear lot.
Certainly having just a vacant lot fenced in like that certainly isn't helping anything.
um the nature and characteristics too when you look at the scope of what is directly across the
street um i mean this is wayne avenue right here and this is what's facing these units now
or i'm sorry if this side is wayne avenue um and it's just very substantial just to kind of give
you a further idea of what is right there um my apologies
so this side is the wayne avenue side this is literally what's now facing 4704
um the plans are relatively straightforward the renderings are relatively straightforward
but I will draw one note of attention to them again real quick
it's a traditional structure there's nothing outlandish about it um it's keeping it the look
in the feel of the neighborhood, as you can see, there is a slight, we do seek a dimensional
variance from the allowed 50% of the lot coverage to 53.4. That's for architectural reasons so that
the building can be properly fitted out as the three floors that it needs based on the architect's
kind of view of it. We certainly don't seek to overwhelm the lot or do anything of that nature.
And I believe the other basis for our refusal is the straight up single family to multifamily
conversion with the parking issue i'm happy to address any specific questions and mr presley's
here as well why don't we have your testimony adopted if i could at this point mr presley
if you could yes all right mr presley could you state your name please and spell for the
court stenography akeem presley a-k-e-m last name presley p-r-e-s-s-l-e-y
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Presley, you heard my testimony that I just gave to the board?
And is everything I said true and accurate?
And if you had testified, would you have said the same?
And do you adopt my testimony as though it was your own?
Mr. Chairman, is that adequate?
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
um just briefly um mr benedetto there were a couple of um renderings that you showed that i
don't believe were in your exhibit packet that you submitted so if you'd like them included for
the record uh please submit them by close of business tomorrow thank you is that the the
architect renderings miss emerson i believe so yes that you showed from the for the larger building
across the street. Oh, okay. Yes, for the larger building. Understood. I'll send those right along.
Thank you. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair. I have a hand up from Charles Richardson. I've allowed them to speak.
Mr. Richardson, you've testified several times a day. Just for the record, state your name.
Certainly. Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass,
room 508 city hall um councilwoman is going to oppose this and stand with the rcos on this on
this uh case uh i believe we're going to be back here this afternoon at 3 30 for uh for another
case right next door uh which is you know very similar to the to what they what they're proposing
for this one so that's not just four apartments that's eight apartments essentially um you know
And from my understanding, I was not able to attend the RCO meeting
I was not able to attend the RCO meeting, but reading through both of the letters, the presentation was very poor, and the applicant was not there at the presentation at all.
by reading through both of the letters.
So the Councilwoman is opposed to granting this variance.
Thank you, Mr. Richardson.
Additional questions or comments from the virtual audience?
yes allison weiss has the hand raised i have a lot of them to speak
good morning miss weiss state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
allison weiss a double l i s o n w e i s s solo germantown civic association you swear or firm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do please proceed yes um i would
first like to set the record straight the building across the street at 4701 wayne avenue
was a buy right project that was not a variance that was a buy right project
and the community was very upset to have that number of apartments
um so i just wanted to make that very clear okay um this property happens to be in very close
proximity, a couple of houses from a playground, a recreation center, ideal for a single family
situation, as well as two nearby public schools within walking distance,
the Fittler Academics Plus and the John B. Kelly Elementary School. This is a wonderful location
for single-family home. There are many single-family homes on the blocks that intersect
as well as on Wayne Avenue itself. The community was not given any reason that there was not the
possibility of building a single-family home. This is a lot that's ideal for single-family home.
It's been a single-family home before it was demolished, unfortunately, but they presented no reason that the community should not want to have a single-family development on these two lots.
Additionally, the renderings that we saw were not very detailed and certainly don't characterize the architecture in the neighborhood.
So they didn't fit.
And we would certainly agree with the community that this development should not happen at this location.
Thank you, Ms. Walsh.
very much like to see single-family homes. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
There are no further answers, Mr. Chair. Planning Commission. Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good
morning. David Fecto with the City Planning Commission. Chairman and board members, the
comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from residential single-family
to residential multifamily.
The proposed four dwelling units
would be allowed by right
under the proposed zoning.
The City Planning Commission recommends
that the board grant the proposed use variance
for four dwelling units.
So MI 2023-001-348-4704 Wayne Avenue,
I vote no.
no. Thomas Holloman, my vote is no. James Snell, my vote is no. Ishmael Shahid,
my vote is no. Thank you, counsel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Number 11, MI 2023-005-585-2216 Frankfurt Avenue. Adam Laver is the attorney.
There's a recommendation of non-opposition from East Kensington Neighbors Association.
Vote was 10 to 0.
A letter of support from Fishtown Kensington Area Business Improvement District.
And a letter of non-opposition from Council Member Squilla.
There's also additional letters of support from multiple neighbors along with a petition and support signed by nine neighbors.
Mr. Laver, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Adam Laver, L.A., V.S. and Victor, E.R., Blank Rome, 1 Logan Square, counsel for the applicant, the owner-occupant of the subject property.
counsel for the applicant the owner occupant of the subject property
you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes do yes i do mr chairman thank you could you identify your client please
yes uh blank room represents hero panazono h-i-r-o-e h-a-n-a-z-o-n-o the owner occupant
of the subject property and our vice chair has just a few questions sir thank you good morning
uh do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy
good morning mr vice chairman yes i do i've emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that
is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes mr shahid thank you
mr labor please move forward and share your screen thank you
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, I'm here this morning to represent Hiro Hanazono, the owner-occupant of 2216 Frankfurt Avenue, along with her fiancé, Craig Ebner, EB and ER as well.
With us is James Campbell of Campbell Thomas Architects, a renowned adaptive reuse architect who has appeared before the board many times.
Hero purchased this property in 2012, which became, through Sweat Equity, her residence and her ceramics studio.
In the photograph before us, we can see the view along Frankfurt Avenue, which would be the entrance to the ceramics studio.
And here, I'm using my cursor just to define the property.
rather it's right here next to just to the left of the beige property. So we just saw a moment
ago the front of the property on Frankfurt, commercial Frankfurt Avenue, and the rear of
the property more residential in nature on Blair Street. The subject of this application will
really focus on Blair Street and in addition. So the property fronts on Frankfurt Avenue runs
through to Blair Street. It is owned CMX2. Here are some photos of the existing property.
What's there right now? Here is residence, her professional studio on Frankfurt Avenue. It's
right here to the right of this awning, which is not her property. This property right here
that I'm indicating is the subject property. She's a very well-known ceramicist. You can come right
into her studio and see her work. In addition to those two uses, there is a third floor rental
apartment. Just going through some additional photographs to give you a lay of the land,
if you will. We're looking along Frankfurt Avenue. The property itself is towards the rear right here.
This is a streetscape. And now we've turned to Blair Street in the back, and you can see our
posting there's an existing accessory garage an existing curb cut at the rear of the property
right above here and infill in the courtyard in between is what we'll be speaking about momentarily
some additional streetscapes on long blair just so you can see
that there's no on-street parking there's a lot of off-street parking and you'll see the residential
nature. Again, the subject property to the left.
Property is right here where my cursor is. I'll pause for a moment. So the proposal itself
concerns the erection of a rear addition with roof deck and documentation of that existing
off-street parking, all for owner-occupant use. The infill that I had mentioned would be
here in the foreground of the photograph. That would take us right up to this level,
and Hero and Craig would be able to walk out at rooftop level right onto the proposed deck.
Here are some interior photographs just to give you a sense of the care that the couple
takes to the property.
The proposal itself, if I may, in the left-hand corner, we can see the existing one-story
garage which we seek to document, one-car parking there, proposed addition of the roof deck above.
Here, where I've highlighted the courtyard, would be a proposed one-story addition with the roof deck, and I had explained that they could walk out right onto it.
Here where I've highlighted the courtyard would be a proposed one-story
This shows the first floor, where my cursor is, first floor layout, showing additional living space for the couple.
And the rooftop, towards the bottom of the page, you can see some elevations.
and Jim Campbell has nicely shown us some additional photographs of Blair Street just
to give us a better sense. The notice of refusal itself has a number of issues. One, the roof deck
must be set back at least five feet from the front building line. However, Blair Street members of
the board does not function in layperson's terms as the primary street and the Campbell Thomas
design has respected the streetscape and actually added a measure of security and
livability through the proposed roof deck. There is a refusal for maximum occupied area. We are
seeking only a 263 square foot de minimis variance, so the impact would be quite minimal.
There is no setback proposed in keeping with the existing conditions, the non-conformities along
Blair Street, and there's also a very technical refusal on the parking stall depth, which will
only impact the couple within the existing garage, and that's only a 2.5-foot variance on parking
stall depth. Here you can see unanimous support from the coordinating RCO East Kensington
Neighborhood Association, followed by the other RCO Fishtown Kensington area bid,
which notes that the proposed use would enhance quote the quality of the existing structure
without changing the mixed usage of this building the garage which faces blair street does not
impact the commercial corridor frontage on frankfurt avenue the roof deck and garage face
blair street so the proposed lot changes will not affect or remove parking spaces nor impact
motor vehicle or pedestrian travel end quote council member squilla has uh added his non-opposition
There is extensive near-neighbor support which actually continues to pour in since my submission. The next-door neighbor here at 2214 Frankfurt supports the proposed improvements. Here we have a member of the community, Carrie Nelson, who notes that the property was once uninhabitable and that Hero has worked to improve it inside and out.
uh the letters go on and on for the for the in the interests of time i'm not going to go through
each letter i'm just showing them on the screen along with the petitions of support i believe
there may be one or more near neighbors who have stayed with the hearings for the last two hours
and may wish to testify mr chairman and members of the board the proposal fits into the surrounding
neighborhood as evidenced by this extensive support proposed variance relief would represent
the minimum variance that will afford relief and represent the least modification possible
of the regulations at issue. The grant of variance relief 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 will not adversely affect transportation or unduly
burdened water, sewer school, park, or other public facilities. There are no environmental issues.
Hiro is here today in the virtual hearing room and is present to adopt and affirm at the appropriate time.
And similarly, Mr. Campbell is here if the board has any technical questions on the architectural plans.
Why don't we bring your client on and adopt your testimony, Mr. Labor?
Thank you.
Hiro Hanazono, would you kindly raise your virtual hand to be recognized?
there she is
could you please state your name
and spell for the court stenographer
please unmute Kira
there you go
could you please state your name
and spell for the court stenographer
my name is Hiroe Hanazono
it's H-I-R-O-E
last name is H-A-N-A
Z-O-N-O
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, Mr. Laver.
Thank you, ma'am.
Have you been present for the entirety of the virtual hearing before the Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment this morning?
And would you adopt and affirm the testimony that I've offered as your own?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chair.
No, Mr. Chair.
questions or comments from our attorney
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emberson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments in the virtual audience?
Mr. Chair, there is a Kerry Nelson with their hand raised.
I have a question to speak at this time.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court sonographer?
Hello?
jason any other hands ms nelson submitted a letter of support which is in the record
that's fine thank you sir any any other hands jason um no but uh kerry nelson
seems to be muting and unmuting they may be having a okay that's fine we have a letter
from her anyway we we know exactly where she stands thank you uh planning commission
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good morning, David Vecta with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed-use zoning at this location.
The dimensional variances for rear yard depth, occupied area, and parking stall depth all relate to an existing garage.
The appellant has shown that removing the garage to comply with these standards would pose a hardship.
However, the appellant has not shown that not following the roof deck setback standards will have a detrimental impact on the appellant's property.
So the City Planning Commission recommends the board grant all proposed dimensional variances except for the roof deck setback.
Thank you. Mr. Lavery, would you want to make a quick comment?
Yes, if I may, Mr. Chairman. The nature of the nonconformity is that the subject property provide no true outdoor space. And this actually is an effort to meet the scope and spirit of the code. The support of all interested parties speak to the granting of variance relief being appropriate in this situation. Thank you.
Thank you. So MI 2023-005-585-2216, Frankfurt Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, I vote yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Mr. Laver.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Number 12, MI 2023, 005-345-1742 West Erie Avenue.
Sherman Toppin is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from the 13th Ward RCO with a proviso.
Mr. Toppin, good morning. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Well, good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. My name is Sherman Toppin,
T-O-P-P-I-N, last name, 1800 JFK Boulevard, Suite 300.
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 this property?
Yes, my client is an LLC.
Well, my client should be David Gold.
He is a member of the LLC that owns the property.
And Mr. Gold, if he could be advanced as a co-panelist
or available to speak at the appropriate time.
Please.
I already swore you in, am I right?
No, no, you have not.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth?
yes i do and our vice chair has just a few questions sir
good morning council do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy
i do have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to
proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing i have thank you council
please proceed and share your screen okay i'm sharing my screen now do
okay is my screen present yeah it's a it's a it's the beach scene right picture of a beach scene
here is what it is all right i think it's wrong i think it's on the wrong side i have two screen
that's where i want to go okay that's fine it gave us a little break uh do you see the screen
correct? I can, sir. Okay. So I'm pleased to be talking here today about 1742.
Okay. So I'm pleased to be talking here today about 1742 West Erie Avenue. This particular property has been before the board. And let's just talk a little bit about the overview here. My typical exhibit package is present. The refusal, of course, I've already waived the remaining of the refusal.
But we're simply seeking three-family, multifamily household living in this existing structure.
Two years ago, in fact, let me just give the whole background.
This particular property has been before this board three times.
In 2018, it was denied.
The property was purchased in 2017 in the sheriff sale.
At that time, it was configured as five units.
The client sought zoning approval, zoning variance to develop the property as four units.
It was denied at that time.
I represented the client again in 2019, and this zoning board approved the use of the property as three units.
But of course, 2020 was a very tumultuous year for us all, as well as this applicant, the owner of this property.
And the owner of the property could not continue financially with the development of this property.
And so, as you can see, it was granted with provisos, and the proviso was that it could be granted with the permission of being a multifamily use with a maximum of three units.
A building permit was obtained.
This is our exhibit number three.
Building permit was obtained in 2020 in August.
We know what the world was like at that time.
the client could not continue with the construction that permit expired and the zoning permit was
never obtained years later my client has now rebounded and is seeking this very exact same
relief sought in 2019 today this is simply I guess logistically because it expired we have
to start from the beginning and so that is somewhat of the tragedy of this situation
And so I have in my exhibit package, the deed, of course, granting the property to YAY Real LLC. We have the tax clearance there. We have the application for appeal in which we state what I just testified to. And that is basically that the requirements, the property was purchased at a sheriff's sale configured as five units granted in 2020 for three units. And we're back here today.
The property, here it is, indicated on this zoning map. It's RSA 5, which requires us to be here in order to have multifamily use.
And the aerial of the block, again, here's the indicated by this balloon, blue balloon.
All the properties on this on the side of the street are really identical in shape and configuration and set up the property immediately to the, I guess, the left of the subject property is a blighted property.
also configured within as multi-unit, but vacant, no occupant and blighted at this time.
There's a vacant lot on the other side on my client's property.
As far as some exterior photos, here we are.
This is what the property looks like today.
Of course, from the outside, it looks like a single-family residence, except it has two doors.
We'll talk about what the interior layout is briefly, and there's three mailboxes for the three units proposed within.
As I mentioned, there's a blighted property next door also seeking similar relief.
We have no idea where they are in the process.
As we go into the property in the interior, it is configured.
This is the common first floor hallway, which takes you to the first unit or upstairs.
We can begin by, there's a lot of pictures here.
I'll just scroll down through them for the board to see.
This is the reverse of the entry, the entry stairwell reverse, first floor.
living room. This is going back in the first floor. There's the kitchen. And some better
pictures have been obtained, and I included them here. And I will be emailing you, Hillary,
this PowerPoint presentation. It has some updated pictures. And this is, again, we're going to
bathroom on the first floor. Going up to the top, the second floor, you have, this is one of the
units going back there. This is where we are with the property right now. It's configured as three
units as we'll discuss uh shortly with the plans and i believe this is gets into the top floor unit
and each the top floor has two bedrooms we have some clearer pictures of some of the features of
the house again this is a clear clearer picture of the second floor front and second floor second
floor rear second floor more pictures of that and just sort of i guess the board can
you can get the gist of where it is.
It's basically near finished, but not complete.
The only way to access the basement area
is through this rare doorway.
is through this rare doorway and when you go down there you basically it's not very safe there to
enter the picture taker did not go further in to see what the lower level appears to be beside this
because it's a lot of debris the steps have been so this it has not been completed in the basement
but those are basically the pictures of what we've got what will be in this particular property this
This is the elevation that is envisioned for the property, and here is the layout as far
as the plans.
Again, the basement will have nothing but mechanicals for the units, accessible here
in the rear.
On the first floor plan, there will be a doorway into the first living room, and then there's
a second entrance.
This will take to the common stairway up to the units.
So the first unit is the first floor, all along from the front to the back.
living room here, bathroom, kitchen in the middle, and an existing one bedroom, an existing bath
in the back. As you go up to the second floor plan here, you come up this stairway here,
there's a door to the third unit is actually bi-level. It includes this front living room
and the top of the third floor. And the second unit is a smaller unit is the rear of the back.
So the rear unit or this rear second floor unit is basically about 430 square feet.
The largest unit is the first floor unit, which is about 830 square feet, and about 770 for the bi-level third unit.
And this is what is envisioned as this is the layout as it is right now.
So we did present this to the RCO.
This is our meeting notice that we sent out to these 130 addresses in the affected area.
And we have the addresses in our exhibit package as well.
And we have a certificate of mailing, of course, of all of these.
It goes on for several pages in our exhibit package there.
And we have the posting of the ZBA notice hearing on the front door of the property,
which you can clearly see even from the edge of the property.
You can see that there.
So, in this particular case, when we went before the zoning, before the RCO meeting, the same chairperson, Charles Karn, presided, he remembered vaguely the property from four years ago when the same RCO did approve it for the three units, and he approved it again.
And the meeting was, I think, in the last, there was not many members of the affected community, but the board had nine members, all in support, and there were two members from the community that did support.
So we had unanimous support as far as that goes. And the board, the RCO did include, and we did commit to various items of, well, these are recommended by the RCO.
And if they are suitable for provisos, legal, which the board can determine, we are in agreement with all of them, the board.
The RCO wanted Jacob's Ladders in the rear windows, as well as all windows from the second and third floor, which we agreed to.
They also wanted there to be trash compactors in all units, and we have agreed to that.
And that's already envisioned in the development plan.
And as far as the rear yard, there will be an enclosed rear yard, and there will be no trash that's going to be out on the front of the property except for trash stay at the curb.
It will be kept in the compactors or in the rear of the property itself.
So we do have a trash and debris removal plan, which we've agreed to, an egress and safety plan with the Jacobs Ladders, and the property maintenance plan, which will make sure that there's a third-party property manager that will visit the property to keep it clean, to make sure that the common elements are tidy, and that they won't leave it up to the tenants to do any trash removal, or if need be, that that will happen by the property managers.
So with that, we believe that this is basically, again, we're just coming back a second time to say the same thing we said years ago in 2020 before this board.
And I'd like to bring this.
Please bring your blind one.
Yes. Mr. Goal, are you present?
I believe he.
It's been enough.
You can raise your.
Sir, sir, could you please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer?
My name is, people call me David Goldberg.
My name is Dimitro Goldenberg.
Could you spell him, please?
Yes, my first name spelled is D-M-Y-T-R-O, last name Goldenberg, G-O-L-D-E-N-B-E-R-G.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Yes, Mr. Goldenberg.
ah yes mr goldenberg and have you heard the testimony that i've made on behalf of the
And have you heard the testimony that I've made on behalf of the property?
property here 1742 west erie avenue yes i did and do you agree with the the content of my testimony
regarding this pro application in this property yes i do and is there anything you'd like to add
to it or we um pretty much have we said everything we needed to say yes you said everything we need
to be said thank you okay will you adopt oh will you adopt your testimony as your own
Sorry, do you talk to me?
Yes. Will you adopt my testimony as your own?
Yes, I will. Yes, I would.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Sure. Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Just quickly on the proviso, Mr. Toppin,
they indicated they gave some options for trash storage,
but they did not want it stored on the front.
um so are you okay with a provider of the board grants that the trash is not stored at the front
of the property uh yes yes all right thank you questions or comments from the virtual audience
um yes i have a hand up from charles richardson again i have allowed them to speak
again mr richardson please just state your name four times the charm i guess there you go
Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, Room 508 City Hall.
Councilwoman has no objection to granting the variance.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I do not think there are any further answers.
Okay, Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good morning, David Effecto, with the City Planning Commission.
Chair and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location
from residential single-family to residential multifamily.
The proposed three dwelling units would be allowed by right under the proposed zoning.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the proposed use variance for three dwelling units.
Thank you. MI 2023-005-345-1742 West Erie Avenue.
I vote yes, proviso. No trash storage at front of property.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number 14, MI 2023-005-683-1306, Calla Hill Street.
Adam Laver is the attorney.
there's a letter of support
non-opposition from
the Calahill Neighborhood Association
and a letter of non-opposition
from Council Member Squilla
Good morning Mr. Chairman
You've already been sworn just for the record
could you please state your name?
Adam Laver
L.A. V.S. and Victor
E.R. Blank Rome 1 Logan Square
Could you identify your client, their relationship to the property?
Certainly, Mr. Chairman.
Blanchrome represents LLCP Callow-Hill LLC and its principal, Michael Wax, W-A-C-H-S, owner of the subject property.
And our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Thank you.
Counsel, do you agree to waive the reading of the refuse or stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, Mr. Vice Chairman, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, Mr. Shahid, I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and show your screen.
Thank you. Thank you very much.
On the screen before you is the subject property.
It is the under construction property here with green insulation, green building materials.
just to place it in context for you. As members of the board are familiar, this section of the
city was formerly very industrial in nature, and you can see the amazing buildings surrounding like
this property just to the north and other tall
masses of structure which are non-conforming in nature and leave something of a canyon effect
in this area. But it's a neighborhood that's very desirable to people who have been there for long
and people who want to come and make it home. By way of background, the board previously approved
the new construction that you can see here under construction, completing construction of a seven story.
see here uh under construction completing construction of a seven-story multi-family
apartment building with 181 residential units round floor retail commercial along callow hill
interior loading and 55 off street interior accessory parking spaces the record reflects
past support for the project which has been renewed as i believe mr chairman you mentioned
at the start of the hearing, I'd like to mention the prior position of support from the coordinating
RCO, which was, quote, the CNA board supports the project unanimously, and we appreciate the
density at this long vacant lot in our neighborhood, end quote. The application before the board today
concerns accessory signage only, accessory signage to make this project successful in the community
and in the greater Philadelphia area. The property itself is approximately 34,233 square feet in size.
And you'll see in these photos running on Callow Hill Street and here on the left or to the east
13th Street. To the west is the Hanover Apartments of Parkway Corporation Development
And sharing a party wall with the subject property is Reds and Sons, a beloved by many auto mechanic that's been there for quite some time.
Here's another photograph just to give you a sense.
The subject property is owned CMX4.
The proposal, as I mentioned, concerns accessory signage.
Two signs, one that I'm indicating with my cursor, a projecting sign along Callow Hill Street at the eastern portion of the facade, three feet wide by 17 feet, eight inches tall, total projection of three feet, 10 inches, 15 feet, six inches above grade.
In addition, along that shared party wall with the auto body, a leasing banner facing east along 13th Street, 18 feet wide by 27 feet tall between the second and fifth stories.
Here you can see a rendering of the leasing banner. I'd like to note that this has been revised following discussions with the community and depicts the name of the building, Hannah, and the muse, if you will.
And here you can see the proposed projecting sign in an elegant Art Deco-like black and white.
I bring up a letter that was shared with the community concerning low-level lumens.
This is dated December 14, 2023, to which ownership absolutely will abide.
The notice of refusal concerns the tight restrictions on signage, restrictions that this board has deemed appropriate for variance for other projects in the area, likely based upon the nonconformities that I mentioned and the uniqueness of the properties there.
The scale of the proposed signage in the context of the existing site and surrounding nonconformity structures meets the scope and spirit of the code.
There is support documentation from the coordinating RCO.
We appreciated the collaboration with Callow Hill Neighborhood Association.
And I note that their letter states that the association, quote, finds the size, height, and projection dimensions of the signage to be acceptable.
We appreciate that the applicant took our recommendation to redesign the marketing banner sign, end quote.
This sentence goes directly to the nature of the variance relief being requested, and Council Member Squilla offers his non-opposition as well.
Mr. Chairman and members of the board, the authorization of variance relief will not alter the character of the neighborhood or district or be detrimental to the public welfare.
Indeed, should the board grant the requested relief, it will allow a project to succeed where hardship had previously been determined on the site.
The proposal fits into the surrounding neighborhood as evidenced by the non-opposition of neighbors, which speaks to the granting of relief being a benefit to the public and within the spirit of the zoning code.
The proposed variance would represent the minimum variance to afford relief and will
and will represent the least modification possible of the regulations at issue.
represent the least modification possible of the regulations at issue.
The grant of variance relief will not substantially increase congestion in the public streets,
increase the danger of fire or otherwise endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare.
In fact, it would be legitimate to note that actually having these two signs will allow the
property to be more easily identifiable and be a benefit to the safety this will not adversely
affect transportation or unduly burdened water sewer school park or other public facilities
there are no environmental issues mr wax the owner is here to adopt and affirm at the appropriate
time thank you bring him on mr labor mr wax would you kindly raise your virtual hand to be
acknowledged by Chairman Bergman. They've been allowed to speak. Good morning, Mr. Wax. Could
you state your name, please, and spell for the sonographer? Michael Wax, W-A-C-H-S. Right. Do
you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed,
Mr. Laver. Thank you. Mr. Wax, have you been present during the entirety of the virtual
hearing before the city of philadelphia's owning board of adjustment in this matter
i have and would you adopt and affirm the testimony that i've offered this morning as your own
i would thank you questions from the board
no chair no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillograms
Ms. Laver, just one quick question.
You mentioned that there were some changes made as a result of community feedback.
Did any of those changes impact the location or size of the proposed signs?
Mr. No, Ms. Emerson.
The revisions addressed content in a way that was favorable to the community, and we were
pleased to have the opportunity to do that.
Ms. Thank you.
Of course.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further answers, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good morning, David Fecta with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed-use zoning at this location.
The signed standards in the Vine Street area overlay district were designed to comply with PennDOT requirements.
Since this building does not front on Vine Street, the City Planning Commission believes the variances for maximum allowable wall sign area and maximum allowable wall sign height, the two variances triggered by the Vine Street overlay, are supportable.
With regard to the other three-dimensional variances for maximum allowable sign area, sign height, and sign projection, the proposed signs would appear to be needed to signify that the building is residential.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant all of the proposed dimensional variances for signs.
Thank you.
MI 2023-005-683-1306, Cal Hill Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Mr. Laver.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
it. Have a good afternoon. Thank you. Is there anyone in the virtual audience who had a case
at 930 and the case has not been called? Mr. Chair, Sherman Toppin has his hand raised again.
I will love him to speak at this time. One more. Yes, Mr. Chair, 28, 2908
Carnwath Street, I believe is scheduled today. I must have missed that along the way. I'm sorry
about that that's fine mr top and this is hillary that case is on the 330 list this afternoon yeah
yeah yeah i thought i missed it sherman i'm sorry about that oh i probably had both of them on my
calendar at the same time so that's that that's understandable good is there anyone else whose
case has not been called i do not see any further answer mr chair thank you everyone see everyone at
two o'clock. Thank you very much. Thank you.
You know, we're at you. Yeah, chair. We have 53 attendees. You can proceed as you wish.
Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's
CBA hearings. With me is our Vice Chair Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also here is our Board Member Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our board member, James Snell.
And our Board Member James Snell.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Present also is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and our executive director, Tanya Sunken.
Here's our virtual foreman.
We advise the proceedings are being recorded.
Video will be available by contacting TanyaSunken at phila.gov.
For benefit of our court stenographers, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To win an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email and address to the property in question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken.
Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
Number three, MI 2023-006-620-5421 Baltimore Avenue, number TA-445876.
That case is continued.
Is there anyone who has comments relative to that case?
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. This is Jason Hand. Once again, I will be the co-host for today.
Thank you.
Hal Shermer has his hand raised. I've allowed him to speak.
Yes. Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Shermer, how are you? Could you state your name for the record and spell it for the court
reporter?
Yes. Name is Hal Shermer, H-A-L-S-C-H-I-R-M-E-R.
Go ahead. I'm sorry.
Sorry, swear me and forgot.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
What case do you want to speak of, sir?
This is in regard to 1954 Patterson, FDR Park.
It's MI-2023-006162.
I'm actually filling in.
I know that another attorney is working on the case, has requested a continuance.
I believe the two RCOs have requested a continuance.
So I am here to make sure that that request got in front of the board correctly.
Why don't we do this?
Let's there's two other attorneys involved.
Meredith Trago and also Leonard Reuter.
Mr. Chair, this is Hillary.
I just wanted to note for the record, I received a response from Meredith Trago,
who's working with matt mcclure on this case who has his hand raised i received a response to a
request for continuance but we the board never received a request for continuance so we're not
we're never clear that there was one and who was making it but mr shirmer if you could just clarify
who you're who you're representing because it we're aware there was one out there but it never
got sent directly to us and it wasn't clear who it was from. Oh, right now I'm representing two
neighbors, Rich Guerrilla and Anissa George. My understanding is that the RCOs submitted requests
for continuances and another attorney had been working on the case, Mr. Sam Stratton,
who had put in a request, but we weren't entirely certain whether it had gotten through and
apparently it hadn't yes no no no requests came directly to the board i only got a response and
it was hard to tell who had submitted the original request so okay the original should have been from
mr stretton so i'm okay here essentially uh short batting for him to make sure that the request went
through i'm glad that i no that's that's fine thank you thank you may i may respond hi hi mr
mcclure could you state your name please and spell for the courts the knocker thank you mr chairman
I'm Matthew McClure, M-A-T-T-H-E-W, McClure's M-C-C-L-U-R-E, with the law firm of Ballard Spahr, B-A-L-L-A-R-D-S-P-A-H-R, at 1735 Market Street.
I'm here with my colleague, Meredith Trego.
Hold on one minute.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Okay, let me get Leonard on, please.
Leonard?
Leonard Reuter, if you're in the virtual audience, please raise your hand.
They've been allowed to speak.
Hi, thank you.
I don't believe I've swore you in yet today.
You have not.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the courts and arms?
Sure. Leonard F. Reuter, that's R-E-U-T-E-R, senior attorney for the city of Philadelphia.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. Leonard, I'm going to start with you first. You want to make a statement relative to this case?
Leonard, I'm going to start with you first. You want to make a statement relative to this case?
Sure. I just want to say that I'm primarily here as an observer and also to answer any questions the board may have with respect to the matter before you in terms of the authority of Mr. McClure's client to proceed with the application.
I can just say that they do have written authorization from the city to proceed with the application and to proceed with this request for a special exception.
And their client is the Fairmont Park Conservancy, who has the agreement with the city to proceed with the project.
The city is the property owner, but it's Fairmont Park Conservancy that's proceeding with this matter.
So, again, if there's any specific questions about that, that's all I'm here for.
But otherwise, I'm not planning on participating.
Mr. McClure.
Mr. Chairman, again, Matt McClure and Meredith Trago.
This is the second continuous request for this case.
Our client opposes this request.
In your exhibit packet, you'll see a letter from Council President Johnson, who talks about the robust public process we've had here.
The RCO meeting was last week.
It took us over three months to get the RCOs to have an RCO meeting.
We originally had a meeting in January of 2023.
Then we had a referral in October of 2023.
The RCO period expired in December of 2023.
We sent three notices to literally hundreds of residents.
There has been robust public outreach.
There has been editorials in the Philadelphia Inquirer.
you would have to be under a rock not to know this was going on. With that, we have several
witnesses here. We're ready to proceed. We've been working, obviously, with the City of
Philadelphia, as well as the Council's President's Office, and I'll hope that we proceed today.
Mr. Shermer? Well, Your Honor, Mr. Chairman, the concern is I was not able to attend the RCO
meeting, but I have heard concerns that the neighbors at the Reserve, which actually backs
up to an enjoy and adjoins the property did not get notice i have seen my clients have noted that
they were concerned about not getting enough notice this is a major part in the city of
philadelphia and i was just notified as of yesterday mid-morning that i might have to be
presenting for this case so i understand that it's a concern for the city of philadelphia
through the Fairmount Park Conservancy to try to move this forward, but this is a major project
and getting as much information and making sure that the people who are adjacent neighbors
or contiguous neighbors actually got notice is a concern. Having a little bit more time to
discuss this and look through the information is beneficial. The RCO meeting only happened
last week the the neighbors are still coming together and are still very much interested in
this uh continuance wouldn't be it should not be a problem whether it took a while to get this
project done i know that it's been in the works but this is changes to one of the major parks in
the entire southwestern section of philadelphia mr chairman may respond sure i think this is
nothing but a filibuster. We sent out three notices. A notice did go to the reserve. Whether
or not the HOA properly distributed amongst their members, I can't say. Obviously, there has been
postings around the property. There were numerous notices going to Packer Park Civic Association.
We were in constant contact with them, as well as the friends. And Mr. Wheeler is saying in one way,
He couldn't go to last week's meeting, but he just found out yesterday he had to be here today.
Which one is it? Because they're totally two inconsistent statements.
OK, so so. Mr. McClure, Mr. Shermer, we have a great deal of people who responded to us today with letters of support, someone opposition.
We're going to go on with this today. Everyone knew about this case.
We're going to go on with it today.
What I'm going to do is go finish with a couple of cases I have to list, and then we'll be back to Mr. McClure and Shermer in a short period of time.
Thank you both very much.
Okay, so is there any other requests for continuance?
Chair, I have Thomas Bruno with her hand raised.
I have allowed them to speak at this time.
Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court sonographer?
Please unmute.
please unmute thomas bruno
oh i'm sorry i yeah thomas bruno i'm an attorney 1315 walnuts street uh fifth floor
philadelphia mr bruno just for the record could you spell your name for the sonographer
yeah first name is t-h-o-m-a-s last name b-r-u-n-o do you swear for him to tell the
truth and nothing but the truth. I do. What case are you talking
about, sir? I'm talking about
2644 North 22nd Street, which is
MI2023006847.
What number is that, Hillary?
If you know. That is number one,
Mr. Chair. We have David Denenberg currently listed as the attorney.
Yes, I'm from David Denenberg's office.
Okay, sir.
So do you want to continue that case?
Well, we got an email from the Swamp Poodle Neighborhood Parcels Association, RCO, that they were requesting continuance.
We do not oppose it.
I just want to make sure that, you know, you got the email that we received.
I did not see that email yet, but Mr. Bruno, we do not have any exhibits for this case.
Nothing came in yet.
well that would be another reason to ask for continue to get a continue sure that's just so
it's the first listing so what i'm going to do is mi 2023 006 847 2644 north 22nd street
our case is continued but it's going to be mark must be heard thank you mr bruno thank you have
a nice day are there any other requests yes steven ukta has their hand raised i've allowed
them to speak at this time.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell
for the court's stenography?
Yes, Devin Uchtdahl.
D-E-V-I-N
U-Q-D-A-H.
Right. Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth?
And I have, wait a minute, I think.
So your case is
4140 Hopper Street?
Yes. Okay.
So as you know, sir, this is the fifth listing.
This case must be heard the next time.
Understood.
So MI 2022-005-303-4140 Poplar Street.
There's no exhibits.
This was the fifth listing.
The case is continued, but marked must be heard.
Thank you.
Number two.
MI-2023-004-105-1708-West Tioga Street, Parcel A.
No exhibit, second listing.
I do not see any hands for that case, Mr. Chair.
Okay, the listed owner is 1708 Tioga LP.
No hands.
No, sir. No hands.
Okay. Thank you. So, MI-2023-004-105-1708-West Tioga Street, Parcel A, 1708-Tioga-LP. This case is continued. Mark must be tried.
9. MI 2023-004-009-230-West Rittenhouse. This case has been withdrawn.
Number 14, MI 2021-004-012-225-E Springer Street, that case has been withdrawn.
And number 15, MI 2021-004-011-223-E Springer Street, that case has been withdrawn.
on. I'm going to go to our add-ons. Number one, MI 2023-005-755-1201-Linley.
i vote yes
thomas holloman my vote is yes yes james now my vote is yes
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes number two am i
Number two, MI 2023-004-039-6223-Bayton Street.
I vote yes.
Proviso, approval use is multifamily household living, four dwelling units, with one existing accessory parking space.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes, with proviso.
That's it, Chair, I'm not a vote on that.
Mr. Holloman, what was your vote again?
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
All right, thank you.
The next one, number three, MI2023, 006-539-2220 North 20th Street.
The vote on this is Thomas Holloman and James Snell.
I vote no.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
James Snell, my vote is no.
Number four, MI 2023-006-462, 1832-46 Germantown Avenue, number TF203431.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Revised plans, three pages stamped by ZBA on February 21st, 2024.
Approved uses for commercial space are
Business support, prepared food shop, takeout restaurant, personal services, visitor accommodation, and commissaries and catering.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Stout, my vote is yes with proviso.
Number five, MI 2023-003-669-1700 Reed Street.
Ron Anastasio is the attorney.
This is a resumptive hearing.
Mr. Anastasio.
Mr. Chair, they've been promoted to panelists.
Afternoon, Mr. Chair. If I remember, did I swear you once this morning? Yes, sir. State your name for the record.
Sure. Vern Anastasio on behalf of Arden Textology, text and then you 1700 breed. He's the owner.
All right. Am I understanding where we stand with this? There was we're waiting for a letter.
RCO letter was the only thing outstanding.
They sent it over, and I also sent it over, and they are in full support.
Is there anyone from the RCO in the audience?
Mr. Chair, I have Anton Tomkovich.
I've allowed them to speak.
sir could you please state your name and spell for the court's monographer
anton tamkovich a-n-t-o-n last name is t-a-m-k-o-v-i-p-c-h you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes are you from the point breeze neighbors
yes proceed um i am calling um in this meeting about 2117-19 uh north 7th street um i'm a
resident of the community and i am i don't know sir sir sir no this is 1700 reed street sir
oh sorry okay thank you very much
so vernon there's no coordinating rco i'm going to go right to public testimony for 1700 block of
ridge reed does anyone have any comments
chair i do not see any hands raised at this time planning commission thank you chair bergman and
good afternoon david effecto city planning commission chairman and board members uh the
comprehensive plan recommends no change from the commercial mixed-use zoning at this location.
There is no unique physical condition or circumstance of this property that would
It would prevent it from being used to conform us with the zoning code.
prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code. The City Planning Commission
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board deny all variances.
recommends that the Board...
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I want to move the RCO letter into evidence.
If it hasn't been already, that is a unanimous support for the proposal.
As it's zoned, it's not serving the neighbors at all, and I think this up zone will help them.
Thank you.
MI 2023-003-669-1700 Reed Street.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We're going to go to our regular list, and we're going to start with number 11, MI 2023-006-162, 1954 Patterson Avenue.
Mr. McClure, Mr. Shermer, and Mr. Reuter.
Meredith Trego has been promoted to panelists along with Mr. Reuter, sir.
Good afternoon, Sherman. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. My name is Meredith Trego. That's T-R-E-G-O. I'm here with my colleague, Matthew McClure, who already introduced himself with Ballard Spar.
All right. Just for the record, can you identify your client?
Sure. The Fairmont Park Conservancy is our client.
Okay. Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Mr. Chair, is Mr. Shermer available?
Shermer, please raise your virtual hand.
All right. Chair, this is John Kelly, the reporter. I'm not certain that Attorney Trego was sworn in.
Okay, we'll get to that. Okay, thank you.
I'm not sure if I promote it as well, sir.
Okay, thank you.
Meredith, do you swear or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Okay, thank you.
Someone just notified me that my audio was not good. Can everyone hear me okay?
I can hear you. I hear you pretty good.
And Mr. Shermer's on, right?
My colleague is Mr. McClure.
Well, there's another attorney who was representing a neighbor.
Yes, I'm here.
All right.
Thank you, Mr. Sherman.
Townsend Trego, please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Can everyone, oh, there it is.
It's coming up.
Can you see my screen?
Yeah, it's fine.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman and members of the board,
We are here today with a request for a special exception for the removal of 48 heritage trees
within FDR Park.
Like I mentioned, we are here on behalf of Fairmont Park Conservancy, who has an agreement
with the City of Philadelphia to act as the contractor for the FDR Park improvements that
are proposed.
The Conservancy is a 501c3 organization that supports city-owned parks and playgrounds
and programs in partnership with the City of Philadelphia.
The Department of Parks and Recreation, which is the owner of the property, is also here
today and will be testifying in support of the project. Just to reiterate, we have filed all of
our exhibits, numbered 1 through 26, with the board. These exhibits include all of the required
information, including details about the need for a special exception, a tree survey and landscaping
plan, an affidavit from a certified arborist detailing the condition of the existing trees
in the project area, as well as documentation of the notices that have been provided to the community.
We'd like to specifically highlight the letters of support in Exhibit 18, which include a
letter of support from City Council President Johnson, as well as 260 petitions of support
from near neighbors and several letters of support from community organizations.
To document our record for the appeal, we'll be having the following witnesses speak on
this matter.
Allison Shepker, who is the project manager with the Fairmont Park Conservancy, Aparna
Palantino, who's the Deputy Commissioner for Parks and Recreation, Charles Neer, who's the
landscape architect for the project, Michael Trumbauer, who's the project's restoration
ecologist and consultant, Brian Saladin, who's our arborist, and additionally, Mara McCarthy,
who's the Executive Director of the Conservancy, will be available for any questions from the
board. Just to orient the board, FDR Park is a three hundred and forty
Just to orient the board, FDR Park is a 348-acre public park located west of Broad Street in
South Philadelphia. As you'll hear today, the restoration of the park represents a significant
public investment that will enable the majority of the park's 348 acres to return to nature as
lakes, wetlands, meadows, and nature trails. The outer edges of the park will then be raised in
elevation, allowing those areas of the park to be used for athletic fields, playgrounds,
concessions, and other active recreation uses.
Our zoning application before you today concerns only the removal of 48 heritage trees, which
is permitted as a special exception under the zoning code.
The removal of these 48 trees is necessary to bring this phase of the plan, which is
also called the picnic and play phase, into fruition.
Specifically, the removal is necessary for the construction of five multipurpose fields,
four basketball courts, a playground, a picnic grove, and much-needed parking facilities for the park.
It's important to note from the start that the trees proposed to be removed are located on an abandoned golf course
in the northwest corner, which permanently closed in 2019, due in part to frequent flooding of the golf course.
Prior to its permanent closure, the Department of Parks and Recreation and the Conservancy had already begun a years-long planning process for the restoration of FDR Park.
The resulting park plan represents a once-in-a-generation opportunity to reimagine how this park can serve today's Philadelphians, while also adapting the park to the realities of a hotter and wetter climate.
As you'll hear today, our application meets the criteria required for the removal of these heritage trees.
that criteria is found in section 147051F.2 of the zoning code. Our witnesses will testify to
the satisfaction of these criteria, including that we have satisfied all of the tree replacement
requirements contained in section 147051G, that we have satisfied the general criteria for special
exception approval found in 143037 of the zoning code. And lastly, that there are no practical
alternative designs that would prevent the removal of these trees. We'd like to also note that
notices of this project, in addition to being mailed to the community, have also been mailed
to the director of the Office of Sustainability, which is required under the code. We point to the
board to exhibits 14, 15, and 16, which demonstrate compliance with all notice requirements.
To introduce our witnesses' testimony, I'd just like to relay a few facts about the property.
The project area is a 348-acre active recreation park located in South Philadelphia.
As shown in our Exhibit 2, the property is zoned SPPOA for active parks and recreation.
And as shown in the hatched overlay, indicates that it's also located in the 100-year floodplain.
FDR Park currently consists of active and passive recreation uses, and the project area was, until 2019, a golf course.
That's this area right here.
inbred. Lastly, we'd like to just address up front the letters of opposition that have been
provided to the board by two RCOs in particular. As you may already be aware, following our February
13th, 2023 RCO meeting for this application, two RCOs, the Packer Park Civic Association and the
Friends of FDR Park submitted letters of opposition. We'd like to briefly add some context to that in-person
meeting, which was hosted on February 13th. As stated in the RCO's letters, a majority of their
289 votes that were counted at the meeting voted against approval of the special exception.
But we'd like to note that voting at the RCO meeting was not necessarily restricted
to attendees living near FDR Park or even residents of the city of Philadelphia. Friends
of FDR Park is an RCO that permits any member of its organization to vote on an application,
and it does not restrict membership to a geographic area, unlike many other RCOs in the city.
So further, we understand that both RCOs restricted voting to dues-paying members only.
So this was a $25 fee that was required in order to cast a vote at that meeting.
As such, any attendee or a person who was present and was not willing or able to pay
that membership fee was excluded from casting a vote that evening.
Instead, we'd like to draw attention to our Exhibit 18, which includes our letters of support from the council president, petitions from over 200 near neighbors, along with several letters of support from various community organizations who support youth athletics across Philadelphia and who enthusiastically support this project.
We'd like to thank you all in advance for your time and attention to this matter, as we do feel the need to assemble a detailed record demonstrating our compliance with the special exception criteria, given the potential opposition to the application.
given the potential opposition to the application um i'd like now to elevate allison shatker who's
I'd like now to elevate.
the project manager for fairmont park conservancy as a panelist hey meredith i may interrupt for one
second mr chairman can you hear me yeah uh mr chairman uh i wasn't elevated to just now but
mr schirmer is uh attending and if he is going to seek party status the ability to cross-examine
witnesses, I would like to voir dire his client before he does so. Mr. Shermer? If we were in
court, that would make sense. But this is the zoning board of adjustment. The rules of evidence
don't apply. Mr. Shermer, that is not correct. The rules of evidence do not apply. That is correct.
But you do have to show up with your client if you seek party status.
Your client can comment, but to participate as in a council in a hearing, in a quasi-judicial hearing under Pennsylvania rules, you have to have your client be present.
And I have to have the opportunity to voir dire them to see whether they can have standing for party status.
If you did not show up with your client because you were seeking a continuance, that is not our client's or all the other folks here issue.
That is your own issue.
So is your client present?
He is logging in now.
Thank you.
Is there a member of Fairmount Park?
They are certainly here, and you're certainly allowed to cross-examine them when they come up, provided the board gives you party status.
Mr. Chairman, is your client on?
Mr. Chair, I have a Christy Glazer and a Richard Guerrilla with their hand raised.
Are they your clients?
Richard.
Yeah, okay.
And he is a neighbor?
Correct.
okay so we'll we'll get to him when we get to him all right well so merdith why don't you start
yeah thank you um mr chairman sorry thank you um yes i'd like to elevate allison shatker
with the conspiracy as a panelist
they'll be rejoining as a panelist shortly sure thank you
allison yes can you hear me now yeah i can could you please uh good afternoon by the way could you
state your name and spell it for the court stenographer yes my name is allison schapker
s-c-h-a-p-k-e-r you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I do. Proceed, counsel. Thank you. Ms. Schotker, can you please describe your position at Fairmount
Park Conservancy and briefly summarize your professional background? Sure. I'm the Chief
Project Officer with the Fairmount Park Conservancy. I am trained as an architect and a landscape
architect and I have over 19 years experience delivering large-scale multi-phase projects in
the public realm. Thank you. What is your role with the FDR Park Project and how long have you
been involved with this plan my role for the fdr project is to function as the project manager
representing the city of philadelphia in the fairmount park conservancy to our consultants
i've been involved with this project since june of 2018 when the community engagement phase began
thank you i'm going to turn to our exhibit three which is a aerial of the fdr park area
can you please describe the location of the proposed improvements and tell us about how
this area of the park has been used in the past yes so exactly your cursor is indicating the
location of the picnic and play phase this is primarily a large soil stockpile about half of
a former driving range in a portion of one of the fairways of the former golf course this part of
the park was originally four fairways and a driving range, and today it is used as an informal dog run
and a soil stockpile. Thank you. Turning to exhibits 4A and B, can you tell us a little bit
about the existing conditions of the park? Absolutely. It's important to understand FDR
Park to understand how it is affected by groundwater and stormwater. FDR Park is represented
and the heavy bold line on the image on your page. You should think of that line as the rim
of the bathtub where most of the park sits below the rim of the bathtub. The areas in pink represent
portions of the park that are below the existing floodplain. These areas are going to experience
These areas are going to experience groundwater flooding.
groundwater flooding. This is the floor.
This is the flooding that occurs when the high tide in the Delaware River is higher than the ground elevation in the park.
That means that even without rain, these areas are going to be wet.
Additionally, the park experiences stormwater runoff from 95, from Broad Street, and from portions of Patterson Avenue.
You can see along the edge of the park, there are a few remaining white areas.
these are the part of the park that are out of the floodplain and you see in the southwest corner a
larger area of white. This is a construction waste area that was in the park until 2022 and has now
been restored into a 30-acre tidal wetland. This helps to restore the original drainage and creates
the soil that is in the stockpile of the image we looked at previously. Thank you. Between 2019 when
was closed when the golf course was closed and today how has that area been used and maintained
since its closure so a portion of the golf course has been allowed to um uh become overgrown um it
has experienced invasive species pressures the city did allow um residents to use the existing
cart paths for walking as a COVID relief measure. You can see here that the former fairways continue
to flood from groundwater. Is it accurate that the Department of Parks and Recreation
and the Conservancy initiated the planning process for FDR Park prior to the permanent
closure of the golf course? That is accurate. Fundraising for the planning process began in 2016,
full three years before the golf course closed. I'm turning now to Exhibit 4C. Can you please
tell us about the purpose of the FDR Park Plan? Absolutely. When the planning process began,
the park was essentially divided into two halves. The eastern half of the park had some
recreational amenities that largely ate into the historic landscape created by the Olmstead
brothers. These amenities, the fields, and the courts experienced flooding. The roads and the
parking areas were difficult to maintain because of their location in the floodplain. The western
half of the park was a 148-acre golf course with, again, that 40-acre waste site in the southwest
west corner. The golf course was suffering from dwindling use, largely due to ongoing flooding
that rendered portions of the course unusable. The park as a whole was really unable to accommodate
the changing climatic conditions and the changing recreational trends nationwide and in Philadelphia.
um and then uh what was the community engagement process that took place in connection with the
creation of the park plan yes the community engagement process was fully 50 of the park
planning budget and our goal with this engagement process was to meet people where they are and so
that included five different planning done in five different languages meetings in communities
and neighborhoods at different times of the day, stakeholder interviews. And our goal was to make
sure that we talked to everyone regardless of their ability to use social and digital media,
but to meet them in their churches and their schools and in their rec centers.
Thank you. And what were the results of the community engagement process? How are the
priorities of that process reflected in the proposed plan?
well the main the main revelation of the community engagement process is that no one was interested
in playing golf at fdr park in the future and so this revelation opened up the opportunity for us
to reconsider what that 148 acres of parkland could be and so as a result we have the potential
to deliver the multi-purpose fields and also to deliver the basketball courts that were the number
one write-in request of community members. Happily though, in 348 acres, with a diversity
of landscape types and conditions, almost all of the experiences requested by community
members can be delivered in the full park plan. Thank you. I'm turning now to exhibit
six, which shows the improvements for the overall park. The phase we're talking about
today, the picnic and play phase, is just one piece of the larger park plan. Can you
Can you briefly tell us about the overall plans for FDR Park as shown on Exhibit 6?
Right.
The overall plans for the FDR Park are about making sure that this park, all 348 acres
of it, balance activity, nature, and water to meet the needs of Philadelphians today
to meet the needs of um philadelphians today and into the future and so this includes a park that
and into the future.
is unified across its eastern and western halves a park that has almost 200 acres of what we call
the ecological core balanced by active recreation around the edges and we're excited because with
the exception of golf this park plan offers more trails more natural areas more fields more recreation
amenities than what is reflected in the park when we began the planning process.
Thank you. You mentioned the sort of blue-green sort of center of it. And as you previously
noted, the park is mostly located in the floodplain. Can you please explain how the floodplain
impacts the proposed plans and the design? Absolutely. It's really important to understand
and go back to thinking about that image where parts of the park were pink and then the very
edge of the park was white. The area that you see in pink, that is the active edge. These are the
areas of fields, courts, playgrounds, parking, buildings that need to stay high and dry so that
Philadelphians are able to access and use them. These are types of programs that we wouldn't
necessarily want to see get flooded however the plan for this park is always to balance
activity nature and water so the blue green area of the park represents the parts of the park that
we will allow to be impacted by groundwater flooding represents the areas of the park that
will be managed for their habitat that represent the part of the park that can act like a sponge
for the rest of the landscape. And the way that this is going to happen and is already happening
is the portion of the park in the southwest corner that you see called the wetlands,
that was the 40-foot tall hill of construction waste material. That material was lift, sits on
the low part of the park. It was lifted up and placed in the footprint of the picnic and play
site our project site for this meeting that hill will be spread out to elevate the picnic and play
phase and when we elevate that landscape we are able to now get storm water management under those
fields in those parking lots that further help us protect what's coming off the surrounding surface
roads and help us protect that blue-green ecological core. So basically the active urban
edge of the park not only provides important amenities, it also helps us protect the ecological
core of the park from the stormwater that's impacting it today. Thanks. Can you briefly
tell us a little bit about the specific improvements that are proposed for the park
picnic and play phase the picnic and play phase includes five multi-purpose fields
four basketball courts a baseball and tennis cloverleaf and tennis or pickleball courts
critically it also provides the amenities that we know are really important to make
sure that caregivers and families enjoy the youth sports experience as well so we have
accessible parking, we have two large picnic areas, we have a playground, and we have plenty of shade
trees. Thank you. Why was this particular site selected for the proposed athletic fields and
courts? Because a large portion of this site is already a soil stockpile and the remaining portion
of this site was former fairways. It has a low ecological value and using the existing soil
stockpile we're able to elevate the landscape include storm water management and in at this
site in doing that here we don't hit wetlands we don't hit high value habitat areas that have
been identified elsewhere on the park plan thank you um our passive and recreation uses such as
trails and open spaces um are are those provided for within the park plan absolutely we have 348
acres here, and I will just draw your attention to Area B. This is the first part of the ecological
core, 30 acres of which are already under construction in the tidal wetland, and the
balance of which is in design currently, and this includes the soft surface trails that are so
important for folks to gain access to these valuable natural areas. Thank you. Ms. Schapker,
based on your years of experience working on this project, are you aware of alternative practical
designs for the proposed improvements that would prevent the need to remove these 48
heritage trees without compromising the other important goals of the plan, including flood
without compromising the other important goals of the plan,
including flood management, programming,
management, programming.
and the protection of other ecologically sensitive areas?
I am not.
Thank you.
Does the board have any other further questions for Ms. Shepker?
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
I think I think we're fine.
Thank you.
We'd now like to elevate.
hold on hold on one minute um hillary do you want to have mr schirmer take uh
questions okay prepare questions forgive questions um i believe that would be appropriate i understand
yes mr chairman i do okay um i actually do have a couple of
of visuals. So if I can pull these up. And if I can, well, I guess first I would ask,
as far as designing this project, is there some ordinance or resolution from city council
that authorized Fairmount Park Commit, Fairmount Park Conservancy to make these changes?
The Conservancy has been working in partnership with Philadelphia Parks and Recreation on this
project, and each phase of work that we do with the City of Philadelphia, we enter into
an agreement authorizing that work with the Philadelphia Parks and Recreation.
uh are those agreements in the record yes they are they're exhibit uh 26 that have been provided
to the board okay i i had requested copies of the exhibits that were put in but hadn't been
able to review them uh would like to request to the board that i if i can share my screen briefly
a lot quicker murdiv can you take yours down sure yes thank you kindly
this thing
did mine on chair or no
mr chairman
thank you have the addresses of mr shirmer's clients just so we
could at least understand where they're from?
I asked you originally
what neighbors. Do you have your clients
where they live? What blocks?
Yes. If I
can call
Rich, I think if they can put
their hands up.
Do you don't know where your clients
live? No, Rich has
I do not know the exact locations.
Rich has his hand up
if we could have him
okay put on to get out to speak okay hi could you state your name please and spell for the
court stenographer my name is richard garela g-a-r-e-l-l-a right do you swear or affirm to
tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do miss gerald could you please give us
your address it's 1642 south bancroft street philadelphia pa
that's a
1600 block south you're saying yes so you're not you're not necessarily a neighbor
i'm not an immediate neighbor but it's on the large park nearby
may i ask the question of mr uh mr grella sure mr grella how many blocks are you away from the
park um i guess about 12 to 15. i'd have to look at a map 12 to 15. over a mile
um yeah i think it's over a mile you live in packer park no i object to um mr mr
grello being a as a party and as such i object to any ability to mr sherman to participate as
attorney for Mr. Gorella. Mr. Gorella, obviously. Okay. All right. Okay. Mr. Sherman, do you have
response to that? I mean, do you have a client that lives near here? Well, first the response,
this is being touted as a regional area, a regional draw. And if the input from a neighbor
who is not immediate neighbor is rejected, then I would ask that the board reject all the letters
of support who are coming from people who are not immediate neighbors either there's one standard
Either there's one standard and anybody who is going to be benefiting from this, whether they're throughout the entire section of Southwest Philly, then that standard should apply for standing.
and anybody who is going to
If the applicant is going to say these are people who will benefit from it and they can be from anywhere, the people who will be receiving or are harmed by it can be from that same area.
If not. Excuse me, Mr. Chair. This is Hillary. I just want to interject. The zoning code does permit anybody who to appear at the hearing and testify.
So certainly Mr. Shermer can testify on behalf of his clients, but I it is up to the board to decide whether they will be considered a party or not and would have the ability to cross examine.
but his client certainly can participate as public testifiers at a minimum.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, if I just add, we have no objection to his client testifying as a neighbor during the public comment period,
but to have a party status, you have to have an interest greater than the general public.
So the general public certainly has a right to comment, but for Mr. Schirmer to act as an attorney here today and be able to cross in.
So, Mr. Schirmer, I agree with that.
Both your clients can have access when we open it up to the public, but I think I agree with Mr. McClure and that, you know, your active role cannot take place.
Well, Mr. Chairman, you haven't heard from the other client yet.
I asked you right away, where does the other client live?
If I can get Ms. Anissa on, if she can raise your hand.
they've been allowed to speak as well hi could you please state your name and spell for the
court stenographer my name is anisa george a-n-i-s-a george like the curious monkey
yep do you swear do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do where do you live i live at 1232 reed street which is a couple blocks north of rich
and I do agree that this is a regional park
and it serves a model area.
So what we're going to do is
when we open this up to the public,
you will have a chance to comment.
Mr. Shermer, you're not going to be able
to take an active role in this.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Shermer.
Please continue, Meredith, with your client.
Thank you.
So we'd like to elevate Aparna Palantino, who's the deputy commissioner with the Department
of Parks and Rec, to panelists.
And I will go ahead and reshare my screen.
Is Aparna on?
No, we got you back, Meredith.
Thanks.
Thank you.
Is Ms. Palantino?
Oh, I see her.
I'm here.
Could you please state your name and spell for the courts the number?
Certainly.
Aparna Palantino, A-P-A-R-N-A, Palantino, P-A-L-A-N-T-I-N-O.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Aparna, do you have a video?
Could you come on?
I'm not sure why.
Staff, can we promote her to panelists?
Jason, thank you.
There we go.
Lower left-hand corner.
Okay, she'll be rejoining as a panelist.
Thank you.
She didn't have the capability.
She's coming back.
Can you hear me?
We can.
We're trying to see you.
I can see myself.
Okay, why don't we start the test now?
Ms. Valentino, can you please describe your position at the City of Philadelphia and summarize your professional background?
Yes, I'm here today as the Deputy Commissioner overseeing capital infrastructure and natural lands management for the Department of Parks and Recreation.
I'm trained as an architect with over 27 years of design and construction experience and have worked in the public sector for 22 years.
Thank you. What is your role with the FDR Park Project and how long have you been involved in this plan?
So in my current role as Deputy Commissioner, I'm responsible for oversight of real estate, as well as all major design and construction projects for assets comprising Philadelphia Parks and Recreation's portfolio.
for assets comprising Philadelphia Parks and Recreation's portfolio.
I have been involved with this particular project at FDR since 2017,
when we began the master planning process in partnership with the Fairmount Park Conservancy.
Thank you. I'm going to go to Exhibit 4D.
Can you please tell us a bit about what this shows, what we're looking at?
Essentially, this shows that there are 27, sorry, 21,000 children living in this area
and that there are insufficient number of fields to service them all.
Do you agree, based on your professional experience with the department,
that there is a need for additional fields and courts in Philadelphia?
I certainly do.
We often have to turn away permit requests due to unavailability of fields in our system.
Additionally, the fields that we do have are significantly overused,
and this impacts the quality of those fields.
A recent analysis of our fields by Temple determined that at least half of our fields were rate below average with a rating of 2.5 on a 1 to 5 scale.
This results in poor quality facilities for our children in Philadelphia compared to surrounding cities and counties.
Who does Parks and Recreation anticipate will primarily use the proposed fields at FDR Park?
The recreational amenities in FDR Park, including the fields, will follow current PPR policy, which prioritizes local youth teams and PPR, or Philadelphia Parks and Recreation-led leagues, for permitting the fields.
And permit fees are waived for local youth sports organizations.
Do you have a sense of how many people or children are anticipated to use the proposed athletic fields each year?
Yes. Based on a utilization study, it is anticipated that these fields could serve over 60,000 youth athletes annually.
And that's for the combined five fields proposed as part of this field?
Yes, correct.
Are you able to just briefly discuss the benefits that youth sports and active recreation amenities like these provide to the city?
So research has shown that participating in youth sports can provide significant mental, physical, emotional, and social health benefits for youth, their families, and communities.
These benefits include an improvement in overall physical health, a reduced risk of diabetes, improved cardiovascular health.
We also see lower rates of anxiety and depression, lower amounts of stress, higher self-esteem and confidence, a reduced risk of suicide and substance abuse, improved social skills, as well as higher levels of academic achievement.
Right. Included in our Exhibits 18 are letters of support from several youth sports associations in Philadelphia.
Can you tell us about some of these organizations and summarize the statements that are expressed in these letters?
Certainly. These organizations and individuals work diligently alongside our staff to facilitate positive structured activities for our children.
These organizations often go above and beyond to provide these services so that all Philadelphia children can experience the benefits mentioned previously.
Obviously, in some instances, as we've often witnessed, this is the only structure, youth sports, that is for these children.
Sometimes it's their only present parental figure that these children have.
Lack of facilities in their communities often results in challenges for access for the most vulnerable youth.
Many of these organizations that have submitted letters do not have means to pay for high-quality facilities or travel, putting local use at a disadvantage on a regional as well as national level.
Thank you.
Ultimately, we've heard that 12 full-size multi-use fields are proposed for the entire FDR park, along with baseball, softball diamonds, basketball courts, and tennis courts.
In your professional opinion, do you believe that the proposed 12 multi-use fields will be enough for Philadelphia to meet the demand it has for athletic fields?
I do not believe they will be able to meet the demand across our system, but it is the first step to addressing the need.
Thank you. Do any members of the board have further questions for Ms. Palatine?
Questions from the board.
Why don't we move on?
No, Chair.
Okay, thank you.
We'd like to elevate Brian Saladin, our arborist for the project, as a panelist.
They will be rejoining as a panelist shortly.
Can you hear me?
Yeah, Brian, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Brian, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. My name is Brian Saladin, B-R-Y-O-N-S-A-L-L-A-D-I-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Mr. Saladin, can you confirm that your resume is included in the exhibit package as Exhibit 22?
Yes, it is.
Can you briefly summarize your professional background?
Sure. Currently, I'm a senior environmental scientist for an ecological restoration
consulting firm called Biohabitats. I've got over 25 years of experience in natural resource
inventories, evaluations, monitoring, restoration design and management, both in natural and
modified urban settings. I've been a certified arborist with the International Society of
arboriculture for 17 years, and I hold the ISA Tree Risk Assessment Qualification.
Thank you. I'd like to introduce Brian Saladin as a certified professional arborist.
Thank you. Mr. Saladin, can you please briefly describe your role in this project?
Sure. I've been on this project for about two years, serving as a senior environmental
scientist and certified arborist for the design team, which included conducting natural resource
and valuations for this specific project, but also for other projects that are continuing
across the park, including wetland delineations and additional tree surveys.
Thank you. Exhibit 10 of our packet, the zoning code requires that any project seeking a special
exception for the removal of heritage trees also complies with the code's tree replacement standards
found in section 147051G, which are showing on the screen. Are you familiar with the tree
replacement standards of this section of the zoning code? Yes, I am. Can you tell us what
constitutes a heritage tree under the Philadelphia zoning code? Sure. A heritage tree is an individual
tree greater than or equal to 25 inches in trunk diameter. That is one of a species of 31 species
listed on the City of Philadelphia heritage tree list. Does the zoning code exempt certain trees
from the replacement requirements?
Yes, trees that are determined by a certified arborist
that are dead, damaged, diseased,
or are in an undesirable species in a present location
or individuals that also pose a potential danger
to life or property are excluded from the heritage tree list
and therefore tree replacement.
Okay, I'm going to turn now to exhibit 8B
or H8A and B, which are tree and landscape plan, as well as a map depiction of the trees
for the site. Can you please tell us about the tree survey that you performed as part of this
project? Sure. Conducted a tree survey over about, it was three days in 2023,
one day in March and the other two in May. The survey included identifying, measuring,
and evaluating the condition of all trees over two and a half inches in diameter that
were within and in close proximity to the limits of this proposed project, which I believe
is about 32 acres.
So for the evaluation of each tree, we used a ground-based visual assessment using the
Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers Condition Assessment Protocol. This involved examining all
visible parts of each tree, looking for defects in each portion of the tree,
defects that might indicate poor health or a compromised structure, and then applying a
numerical ranking to each of those parts, one through four, with one being the worst or four
being the best. And then accumulation of those numerical rankings are used to develop an overall
condition with a potential of 100% being a perfect tree. You prepared an affidavit or
summary of your tree survey, which we've included as exhibit 8C in the record. Do you attest that
this affidavit accurately summarizes the results of your survey? Yes, it does.
I'm going to turn now to the tree impact table, which was included as a summary on the tree
plan that demonstrates the results of the tree survey.
Can you provide us with an overview of the results of your tree survey?
A total of 648 trees were identified across the survey area for a total caliber inches
for a total caliper inches of tree that equaled 7,743 caliper inches.
of tree that it that equaled seven thousand seven
About 180 of those, or roughly 30%, were in poor condition.
And also of those 648 trees, 73 heritage trees were identified,
with about 25 or a quarter of those being excluded from replacement
due to being in poor condition.
All right. Ultimately, how many caliper inches of tree will be replaced or need to be replaced
on the property? There are 2,556 caliper inches of replacement required. And do you agree that 48
heritage trees are required to secure special exception approval as part of this plan? Yes,
that is true um thank you uh do any members of the board have any further questions for mr salad
any questions from the board no chair thank you thank you no chair you're welcome you want to
move on to your next client um yes uh we'd like to elevate mr michael trumbauer the restoration
ecologist for the project to panelists how many more how many more witnesses do you have uh we
have Mr. Trumbauer and then one more. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. We thank you all for your time.
Oh, sure. Are you able to hear me? Yes. Good afternoon, sir. Could you please state your
name and spell for the court stenographer? Yes. Michael Trumbauer. T-R-U-M-B-A-U-E-R.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. Please proceed, counsel. Thank you. Mr. Trumbauer,
Can you confirm that your resume is included in the exhibit package as Exhibit 21?
Can you please briefly summarize your professional background?
I'm a senior restoration ecologist and team leader for the Chesapeake and Delaware Bay's
bioregion at Biohabitats, a nationally recognized leader in restoration ecology.
I have over 20 years' experience in restoration ecology, which involves the recovery of damaged
ecosystems. For people not familiar with restoration ecology, what I do is best described
as an ecosystem doctor that assesses the health of the system and determines what is needed
to make it more functional and resilient. Thank you. Have you ever been introduced as
an expert in restoration ecology in Philadelphia? Yes. I'd like to introduce Mr. Michael Trumbauer
as an expert in restoration ecology. Thank you. Mr. Trumbauer, can you please briefly
describe your role in this project? Yeah, my work started in FDR Park in 2019 with the airport
wetland mitigation project, which was recently constructed in the southern portion of the park
near I-95. I served as the project manager and senior restoration ecologist for that project.
As part of that work, biohabitats delineated wetlands throughout the west side of the park
to identify the stockpile staging and sorting areas for the wetland construction that would
not impact these valuable resources. In 2021, we were formally brought on to the master planning
team to help them quantify the project's resource impacts and assist in redefining the ecological
core for the western side. Thank you. I'm going to turn back to Exhibit 5B. We heard from Ms.
Shapker about the intent of elevating the edges for FDR Park. Can you tell us a little bit more
about the rationale for this design? Based on our assessment work, we defined the areas in the center
of the property to contain the more significant ecological resources. So these were things like
forest, wetland, wildlife habitat. As you move out from this corridor to the perimeter of the site,
the quality of these resources diminished as they became disconnected from that larger
contiguous core habitat. The areas along the perimeter consisted of former fairways with
individual trees dividing them. And overall, this was a heavily disturbed area and was adjacent to
the urban edge, which also diminishes the ecological value. Thank you. I'm going to turn
to exhibit 4B, which are some historic aerials of the project site. Can you please tell us a little
bit about the trees that are shown here? And this is an aerial taken about 20 years ago in 2004.
Yeah, this appears to be a very highly managed landscape with a number of open-grown fairway
trees. These open-grown trees can grow quickly and get large quickly because they don't compete
for light and other resources like they would in a forested condition. Overall, this area is
dominated by individual trees or clusters of trees, and it was managed as a golf course for so long
as a forest would be a more naturalized setting with larger groupings of trees
with varied age classes, a canopy, and understory and herbaceous layers that forms a diverse and
complex ecosystem. Thank you. Is it accurate that the site of the formal golf course experience
Thank you. Is it accurate that the site of the formal golf course experiences regular flooding?
Yes, we can see signs of the regular inundation in the aerial signatures from the Google Earth
imagery when you scroll through time. This is one of the reasons that prompted us to recommend that
the airport perform a more comprehensive look at the wetlands on the entire west side of the park
in order to locate their soil hill. We also measured water levels in Shedbrook Creek from
august 2020 to may 2021 and the water level in the creek which is normally around elevation zero
rose to uh rose by one foot more than four times during that period and the west side of the park
is uh very flat and low so when the creek level is high when it raises by a foot large areas get
inundated by water and the flooding is also a result of the poor drainage in the park because
of the very uh flat topography the water just doesn't drain off into the creeks there's poor
soils and a high water table that also influenced the ability for the landscape to drain.
Thank you.
What are some of the impacts that we'd expect to see on the existing trees, given the regular
flooding at this site?
Yeah, many of the trees, especially the pine trees, cherry trees, and some of the oak
species are not well adapted to having wet feet with that high groundwater and high water
table perched at the surface.
So these trees would become stressed and in time would decline in health.
Thank you.
Can you please tell us about how the proposed improvements address this flooding issue?
Yeah, in the areas of the proposed park improvements, the elevation is going to be raised above the elevation of the regular creek flooding.
As part of this, the entire site will be graded to better drain, and stormwater infrastructure will be installed to further improve the drainage and treat the stormwater runoff from the fields and parking lots.
In the process of filling the land, the soils in the tree planting areas will be amended to better support new plantings, and the plantings will include a diverse selection of native trees and other native vegetation that are adapted to the proposed conditions and more resilient to the climate change.
Thank you. Is it correct that following the community planning process for the park, which began in 2018, your firm then engaged in a detailed survey of the park's wetlands and ecological features?
Correct. As I previously mentioned, our work started with the wetland assessment of the west side of the park for the airport in 2020, and work with Fairmount Park started in 2021.
We work with Fairmount Park tied all that previous work together and demonstrated where the high-value ecological resources were located.
And are those the resources shown here in Exhibit 5A?
Correct.
Thank you.
And at the time of your survey, Parks and Recreation and the Conservancy had already created an initial draft plan for FDR Park, which is also shown here on the exhibit underlaid beneath the ecological resources.
Did the results of your survey conflict with the original 2019 park plan?
It was clear from the original park or the original park plan was developed without the benefit of a detailed ecological survey.
The original plan appeared to be mainly about making sure their program elements could fit within the park.
It did, however, include a smaller ecological core and a space for nature and passive recreation.
In your professional opinion, does the current plan minimize the impact of the proposed athletic fields on the park's ecological resources?
Yes, the current plant cites the fields and supporting infrastructure in one of the more damaged and least ecologically sensitive areas of the park.
In your professional opinion, would raising the elevation of the formal golf course give future trees and landscaping a better chance to thrive at this location?
Yes, the proposed trees and landscaping will consist of species adapted to this environment and will be installed in amended soil so they will thrive in this location.
Is it correct that doing nothing to address the flooding and elevation of this area will ultimately lead to the further loss of healthy native tree canopy in this part of the park?
Correct. Many of the trees that are not adapted to the wetter site conditions will be stressed and start to decline.
And based on your extensive knowledge of the park's ecology, could the placement of the proposed fields and parking be practically changed to avoid the tree removal without compromising the other important goals of the plan,
including flood management or programming and uh protection of other ecologically sensitive uh
areas no not without impacting other ecological resources uh thank you uh that's all for mr
trumbauer um do any of the members have members of the board have any further questions i'll do it
Okay. All right. We'd next like to elevate Mr. Charles Neer, who's our landscape architect for the project.
We'd next like to elevate Mr. Charles Neer,
who's our landscape architect for the project,
to panelist and Mr. Neer is our last witness.
Thank you for joining us as a panelist.
Hello, can you hear me?
Mr. Chairman, you're muted.
I'm sorry, I'm unmuted.
No, not you, Chairman.
Sir, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Charles Nier.
C-H-A-R-L-E-S-N-E-E-R.
You're breaking, sir, you're breaking up.
Could you try again?
You're breaking up.
I'm having an unstable connection.
My name is Charles Neer, last name N-E-E-R, first name Charles.
Charles. C-H-A-R-L-E-S. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth? I do. Please proceed, counsel. Thank you. Mr. Neer, can you confirm
that your resume is included in the exhibit package as Exhibit 20? Yes, it is. Can you
please briefly summarize your professional background? Yes. I'm a principal at WRT
where I've worked for over 25 years. I'm a registered landscape architect for the past
18 years. I have a master's degree in landscape architecture from the University of Pennsylvania
and an undergraduate degree in architecture from Washington University. I'm a member of the
American Society of Landscape Architects, City Parks Alliance, Urban Land Institute, and World
Urban Parks, and a board member of the McCard Center at the University of Pennsylvania.
Thank you. I'd like to introduce Charles Neer as an expert in landscape architecture.
thank you uh mr near can you please briefly describe your role in this project
for the past six and a half years i've been a project manager for the fdr park plan
and the subsequent implementation projects this picnic and play project is one of seven
implementation projects currently underway at fdr park thank you aside from the need for a
special exception due to the removal of 48 heritage trees from the site is it accurate
that the proposed project is otherwise code compliant?
Yes, this project is co-compliant
and has been reviewed by the city.
Thank you.
Looking again at the exhibit shared on the screen,
we heard previously from Mr. Trumbauer
about the ecological study that he helped undertake
following the original 2019 plan for FDR Park.
Mr. Trumbauer testified that the original plan
was revised to reflect what was learned
in the ecological study of the park.
Can you tell us specifically
about how that plan was revised?
Sure. After the 2019 park plan, several things changed that required us to revisit the plan.
First, the first T decided to leave the park, which opened up over 12 acres of land to be included into the ecological core.
Secondly, we learned that Bel Air Manor belongs from the historic register and requires a more significant landscape setting.
And third, we audited the entire site to identify where the high-quality habitat existed and where
we had the potential to develop new high-quality habitat. This was the work that Mike Trumbauer
mentioned previously. The resulting 2022 park plan has significant revisions that expands the
ecological core to 60% of the site, which is over 200 acres, to maximize the environmental benefits
to the park and therefore to the city as a whole. The multipurpose fields have been pushed even
further to the edge of the park and have been cited to avoid the identified areas of high-quality
habitat that Mike Tronbauer has spoken about. The fields are raised and they're aggregated into
groups for efficiency of construction, for use, and maintenance, while opening much of the central
lower portion of the abandoned golf course for the nature phase project within the ecological
core that Allison spoke of earlier. We made the decision to prioritize the areas of high-quality
habitat over the 48 individual fairway trees that we can provide a much larger ecological benefit
to the park and therefore the city. For this project, we have to balance social equity with
ecological resilience. Thank you. I'm going to turn to Exhibits 8A and B, which show our tree plan
for the proposed project. Did you help create the proposed planting plan?
Did you help create the proposed planting plan?
Yes, WRT created this plan.
Was an effort made during the course of designing the project to preserve or save as many trees in the site as possible?
Yes, we're saving over 120 trees. Given that the fields in the recreation areas need to be raised as much as 8 to 10 feet in places, we have limited practical alternatives to avoid the 48 fairway trees.
It is best practice to align the fields north-south. We can't impact Bel Air Manor, we can't build over Shepard Creek, and we can't impact the more sensitive, higher quality areas of the habitat that are adjacent to this location or in other parts of the park that Mike already spoke of.
We were able to save as many trees as possible around Bel Air Manor and places east of the manor when routing the alignment for the Maltese Trail. This is an area where the grays are already relatively high and we do not need to fill any further.
Thank you. In order to comply with the tree replacement requirements of the zoning code, how many trees are proposed to be planted as part of this application?
We are proposing 1,025 new trees.
All of the trees are proposed to be 2.5 inch DBH, which means diameter at breast height. Can you tell us why this size tree was chosen?
Well, 2.5-inch caliber trees are the minimum required tree replacement size, as indicated in the Philadelphia Zoning Code listed in Section 14-705 tree replacement requirements.
But 2.5-inch caliber trees are also an ideal size for tree planting.
They have shown to have less issues acclimating to new sites, have less root disturbance when being transplanted from nurseries,
are easier to move around on site, and most importantly, may outgrow a larger caliper tree
planted at the same time within five years. A larger caliper tree would be more expensive,
require more robust equipment to move them around on site, and they do not establish as quickly as
smaller trees. Thank you. Will the new trees planted differ from the trees that are proposed
to be removed in terms of species or other attributes? All the new trees specified for
the project, all 1,025, are from the City of Philadelphia approved tree list. They are all
native and will be well adapted to a hotter, wetter future that we are already facing in the
city. The biggest difference is that these new trees will be planted in ideal growing conditions
that will allow them to survive and thrive. Raising the ground out of the constant presence
of water and providing well-drained soils with room for roots to grow will give all of these
trees the best chance to significantly add to the urban tree canopy and the city. The challenge
with the current fairway trees is that they are all growing on poor urban soils with constant
water inundation. That will only get worse. Tree roots do need water, but they also need nutrients
and air, and they can't get them if they're constantly being drowned. The newly proposed
trees will be better suited to a more resilient future and will play a large role in jump-starting
the ecological recovery process in the park. Thank you. I'm going to turn now to Exhibit 10,
which includes the zoning code's requirements for special exception approval for the removal
of a heritage tree. Are you familiar with this section of the code? Yes, I am. One of the
requirements includes compliance with section 147051G for tree replacement requirements.
Are you familiar with this section of the code? Yes, I am. Okay. Is it true that
all trees uh 2.5 inch dbh or larger proposed to be removed and the proposed replacement trees have
been indicated on the site plan included in exhibit 8a yes they have all been indicated on
the site plan is it true that the total caliper inches of replacement trees exceeds the total
caliber inches of all trees proposed to be removed from the lot
yes the total caliper inches of the proposed tree planting exceeds the total inches of dbh of all
the trees proposed to be removed from the lot thank you is it also true that each replacement
tree is proposed to be at least 2.5 caliber at planting yes all retracement replacement trees
are 2.5 inch calipers indicated in the philadelphia zoning code and can you confirm that the proposed
replacement trees will be located on the same lot as the trees proposed to be removed?
Yes, all proposed replacement trees will be located on the same lot as the trees proposed
to be removed.
Thank you.
An additional requirement for the special exception approval for the removal of heritage
trees is that we comply with section 143037, which are the general special exception criteria
within the code.
And that provides that the special exception will not cause specific detrimental impacts
to the neighborhood beyond which that might normally be expected from the proposed use.
Mr. Neera, are you familiar with section 14.3037? Yes, I am. In the present matter,
Yes, I am. In the present matter, the proposed use is the removal of the 48 heritage trees.
the proposed use is the removal of the 40.
In your professional opinion, is it correct that the grant of the special exception will not cause
congestion in the public streets or transportation system beyond that which normally might be expected
from the proposed use? Yes, that is correct. Is it correct that the grant of the special
exception will not cause overcrowding of land beyond that which normally might be expected
from the proposed use? Yes, that is correct. Is it correct that the grant of the special exception
will not impair the supply of light and air to adjacent property beyond that might normally be
expected from the proposed use? Yes, that is correct. The proposed project is located in a
large city park. Therefore, no negative impacts to the surrounding area are anticipated. Is it
correct that the grant of the special exception will not burden water, sewer, school, park, or
other public facilities beyond which might normally be expected from the proposed use?
That is correct. The proposed project will be permitted and coordinated with PWD,
PADEP, and other reviewing agencies. Is it correct that the grant of the special exception
will not impair or permanently injure the use of adjacent conforming properties beyond that
which might normally be expected from the proposed use? Yes, that is correct. Is it correct that the
grant of the special exception will not endanger the public health or safety by fire or other means
beyond that which might normally be expected from the proposed use?
Yes, that is correct.
Is it correct that the grant of the special exception will not be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan?
Yes, that is correct.
And is it correct that the grant of the special exception will not cause general detrimental impacts on the neighborhood
beyond that which might normally be expected from the proposed use?
Yes, that is correct.
In your professional opinion, do you agree that the project cannot be practically redesigned
to protect the heritage trees without compromising the programming or impacting the other important
ecological features of the park? In my professional opinion, I believe the project cannot be practically
redesigned to protect the 48 trees proposed to be removed. Locating the elevated program elsewhere
in the park would result in greater environmental impacts. Aggregating the recreational program to
the edge of the park and keeping them high and dry and usable allows the rest of the ecological
core to provide the maximum ecological benefits and services to the park and to the city.
Thank you, Mr. Neer. Those are all my questions. Do any members of the board have further questions
for Mr. Neer? No, no questions. We would like to move applicants exhibits 1 through 26 into evidence.
share your mute
counsel one of the things we're going to do is that we know we have
people in the audience on both sides of this who want to express themselves yes want to have to
have a resumptive date for a further hearing you've presented your case we'll come back
and we're going to have a we're going to get a date as soon as we can and we'll have a resumptive
hearing we'll make sure that all parties are notified of where we stand um but it's just too
much to try to get in today because we have so many other cases that's still here today
mr chairman may i ask just a clarifying point and we totally understand um well at least when
it comes to the record and the ability for new parties to come with new evidence as opposed to
testify as to a neighbor or whatever when it comes to public comment is that the record is
closed for opponents in opposition as opposed to testify well what i'm saying is there's no one
else left other than we open it to the public and when the public when the public comes they will
express their voices both ways either for or against although we we do know there's a lot
of people who want to testify.
Understood.
If someone shows up at a later date, they're not going to be happy.
We have to call witnesses back so they can be cross-examined.
We're going to try not to have to call anyone back.
Thank you.
And Mr. Chair will also take the recommendation of the Planning Commission at that time.
That's right.
So we'll open it up to the public, take it from the Planning Commission, and vote.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you very much. And thank you. Thank you, witnesses for us. We appreciate your presentation, but we will make sure the next time we have a little bit more time to concentrate on this and get it through.
Thank you.
See here. Number number five.
Let's see here. Number five.
Hillary, are you muted?
Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. What was your question?
No, no, I'm ready for it. We're going to move on to our regular list again.
Number five, MI-2023-006-619-1214 South 22nd Street.
Darwin Beauvais is the attorney.
There is a letter of support from the Point Breeze Community Development Corporation
and also a letter, applicant provided a petition in support.
Tom Bovet will be rejoining as a panelist, Mr. Chair.
Hi, Mr. Bovee. Could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court stenographer?
Yes. Darwin Beauvais. Darwin, B-E-A-U-V-A-I-S. Beauvais, B-E-A-U-V, as in Victory, A-I-S, as in Sam.
I'm from the Obermeyer Law Firm at 1500 Market Street.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, their relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is 1214 South 22nd Street, LLC. The representative is Khaliq Rees. He should be in the audience if he can identify himself by keeping his hand raised throughout my presentation.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibit five days in advance to proceed
with this case? I have. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen, Council.
can the board see we can oh first and foremost mr chairman um we do have an issue with our tax
clearance certificate so if the board can just hear our case and hold it while we rectify that
Okay. All right. Thank you. So, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, it's an honor to be here. I represent the owner of 1214 South 22nd Street. We submitted Exhibits 1 through 14, which includes not only our refusal deed, plans, prior permits, but also photos.
Like I mentioned, we have Faleek Reese, who is the owner of the property, and he is here with us today.
I would like to direct your attention to, and let's just start with Ariel.
Here's the property, 22nd Street.
This is Manton Street here.
The property is where the red dot is.
And also, if you can see, there's it looks like there's a car legally parked on on the sidewalk, which tends to be common in South Philadelphia.
You can see further up across the street, cars are parked, but also want the board to notice the small little alleyway, which will be significant as part of our presentation.
If I could orient the board to what our property looks like, first and foremost, let me just inform the board that this is a project where we're already under construction to converting what was a two-story building into a three-story single-family home.
We sit in an RSA 5 residential district, and we found the opportunity to redevelop the property and create what will be a beautiful home.
This is a permit showing that we're adding an additional story and creating a roof deck.
um as a result we're before you today because we've decided to also create a small garage
on the side where in fact let me just go back where
In fact, let me just go back where this illegal parking is.
We're creating a small garage.
Also, for the board to note, there is no parking allowed on that side of the street.
Parking is allowed on the opposite side.
And although we front 22nd Street, all the activity happens on Manton.
let's go to our photos this is what the property looks like currently we're in the middle of
construction again because we've already started redeveloping a property we I guess the need to
park on the side has uh has been deterred by fellow uh visitors of the block and
we are happy about that here's a rear view of the construction
here interiors
And this is on 22nd Street, and as I mentioned before, all the activity happening on the side street.
As you can see, even if you look past our property, there's parking on, which there shouldn't be parking.
here's evidence of our posting and this is across the street so as i mentioned there's parking a
long side of manton on the opposite side
but i want the board to note that there is a garage directly across the street
um this is what we believe is the approval for that garage as you can see here are other garages
along in the neighborhood
the permit for that as well other garages down the street
permit for that as well
Which leads us to me giving the board's attention, wanting the board's attention to our plan.
So here's 22nd. If the board remembers the face of our construction and Manton Street, which is where all the action takes place, we're proposing to have a garage where our open space used to be.
We believe that our refusals were generated because we don't have a shared driveway or an alley where everyone can access.
However, we do have an alleyway.
It's only three feet, so we're not disrupting anyone's rear access.
No one could come through our open space anyway.
and the fact that we're looking to have a roof deck on top of this garage,
we do believe that we're not taking away any open space on behalf of the residents.
So the other refusal focused on the fact that we have a 16-foot garage and not 18 feet.
18 feet is a standard parking stall and what we're proposing and what we're suggesting that you only have enough room for compact for a compact car, which is the clearances 16.
We did meet with the community on January 24th, that's their letter of support.
And I will have to say the most supportive piece of evidence showing that we don't have any negative impact are the 45 signatures supporting this request.
supporting this request. And you can see here. And none of them are, and they're all nearby neighbors.
You can see here.
So, as evidence of our notice, proof of mailing, and with that said, I would like to identify
my client and have him speak before the board
pardon me what is your client's name
Calique Reese
okay he's been allowed to speak
sir could you please state your name and spell for the court's stenographer
Calique Reese
K-A-L-I-K last name Reese R-E-E-C-E
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Mr. Reese, have you heard everything I've said before the board today?
And would you adopt it as your own testimony?
Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
I rest my case if the board has any questions.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
not at this time mr planning commission thank you chair bergerman good afternoon david effecto
with the city planning commission chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends
no change to the residential single family zoning at this location there is no unique physical
condition or circumstance of this property that would be prevented from being used in conformance
with the zoning code a vehicle parked in the proposed off street space would likely block
the sidewalk creating a safety hazard for pedestrians there is no way that the city can
guarantee that this or future owners will only own a compact vehicles the city planning commission
recommends the board deny the proposed variances for off street parking and for maximum occupied
area and again mr chairman i i would say the the nature and the uniqueness of the building
does create the 16-foot stall, which if the reasonableness of a new owner were to come in,
I don't think they would try to fit their 18, 20-foot pickup truck inside that parking garage.
So I appreciate Mr. Fecto's position.
Second, when it comes to the open space, as you can see from our already approved permit, we're providing a roof deck.
The rear yard roof deck, there's no impact on light and air as a result of creating this garage.
And also that I would have to say in furtherance that the fact that we do or we're providing this garage, I think it will be a deterrent for illegal parking.
I appreciate Mr. Fecto suggesting that our use will create pedestrian conflicts, but the use that you can tell, and I believe that was along here, you can see people, individuals, residents, visitors will park in their pedestrian conflicts.
I submit to the board that if there's a clear parking space here, already we're not impacting or taking away a parking space because parking is not allowed.
But creating this parking space will prevent pedestrian conflicts because it's only one car.
It's only one car that all the residents and therefore the visitors will also know.
And besides, even if you look at this clear example that was taken randomly by Google shows that it's nowhere near where we will have our parking.
Our parking garage will be here near the rear yard.
But double that with the parking that you see along here, you know, I again, I appreciate the comment, but I don't think this will this will encourage pedestrian conflict.
With that said, we we ask that the board hold our oldest decision and why we get our tax clearance and.
and why we get our tax clearance and look forward to.
We will hold the decision on this until the tax issue straightened out,
and then we will come back and vote, okay?
All right, thank you.
Thank you.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair.
I'm sorry to interrupt you, but there was a call-in user who had their hand raised.
Do you wish to hear them speak?
Understood.
call on user four please unmute your phone
hi tiffany green concerns to the point breeze hi we're having a hard time hearing you could
you raise your voice yeah tiffany green concerns to the point breeze all right could spell your
name for the court stenographer please t-i-f-f-a-n-y-g-r-e-e-n do you swear or firm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes sir please proceed there was a real concern
regarding the garage issue um and and so that's why um we're i'm calling up we're calling up to
talk about the garage um mainly at this point in terms of uh wanting to create another garage
as i stated before uh the community came together and had a garage um ordinance put together in
place because of the lack of parking, the issues regarding many people using their garages
and leave the car in the middle of the walkway.
A lot of times children have to walk out in the street on their way to school or elderly
have to walk out in the way out in the middle of the street to get around the cars.
A lot of times they may park in the garage and then have another car parked outside in
the walkway.
And, you know, it's no one there monitoring that, but it becomes an issue.
And also regarding the parking, the lack of parking, South Philadelphia is a residential area,
but most people do do off-street parking, and there is no real hardship for this.
This hardship seems to be self-imposed.
It seems to be purely for financial gain, and there is no hardship at all.
And so I asked the board to not approve this garage, because if we're going to go,
if the community is going to speak in terms of not having garages and do an ordinance,
then I think that the community wishes should be at least upheld to that extent,
since we have no control regarding the additional three-story addition or the rooftop deck.
So we do have a say in garages.
So that's my testimony for the day.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, again, nothing's stopping cars from parking, and I think that will serve as a deterrent.
Two, we have 45 neighbors that signed a petition, and at the RCO hearing, we got a majority of the votes.
We have that.
All right. Thank you.
Thank you, sir.
We're going to move on to, I want to hear number six and seven together.
So MI 2024, 00272, 3401 Grace Ferry Avenue, number TB595367.
Joseph Catuzzi is the attorney.
And case number seven is MI 2023-007-099-3401 of Grace Ferry Avenue, TB 595367, same attorney.
And there's a letter of support for both of the cases from Residents Organized for Advocacy and Direction.
Mr. Cattuzzi should be rejoining as a panel shortly, Mr. Cattuzzi.
Sure, thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Cattuzzi.
Could you stay with me, please, and spell for the court's stenographer?
Absolutely.
Joseph Cattuzzi, C-A-T-U-Z-Z-I of the law firm of Stradley-Ronin, represent the applicant in this case.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Chairman.
Could you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
Philadelphia Pennovation LLC is the applicant, colloquially known as Longfellow, and they have an agreement to develop this site with the property owner, which is technically the trustees of the University of Pennsylvania.
All right. And our vice chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Yep, we'll stipulate.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibit that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, sir.
Yes, sir.
Thank you. Please proceed to share your screen.
Thank you. Please proceed to share your screen.
Great.
Great.
Okay, can you see on the screen it says Longfellow Real Estate Partner?
It should come up. It's up now. Yes, proceed.
Great. All right, so first of all, thank you for your time in hearing our appeals.
We're here today on two consolidated zoning appeals for a project down at 3401 Grace Ferry Avenue.
What I'd like to do for you today is to provide a brief overview of the project and tee up
our two-dimensional variance requests.
The project involves the construction of a new R&D building for life sciences in two
phases, hence the two appeals.
The developer, which you'll meet shortly, is Longfellow, and they're a national leader
in the development and operation of life science R&D projects.
They both develop and operate these R&D facilities.
So that means they're not going to just come and build and leave.
They'll be in Philadelphia for a long-term commitment.
They have a proven track record of success in cities across the United States, and they
have a history of bringing jobs, community engagement, and attracting investment into
the cities they operate in.
The use that we're talking about for life science and R&D, it's not a heavy manufacturing,
so we're not going to have like a Merck plan, a high-volume facility like you would have
out in West Point in the suburbs.
Rather, the use is targeted and it's limited and focused on research and development type
Longfellow recognizes that the city of Philadelphia is well-suited for this type of R&D use.
We have leading educational institutions that are renowned in science, technology, medicine,
and Philadelphia is really a natural place where the brightest minds in science technology
should stay.
People who study in our universities, people who want to develop and incubate new ideas.
Philadelphia has a rich history and tradition in technology, in science.
And this, hopefully, this project will operate as a catalyst to continue that development and to continue that tradition.
To orient the board, we're down at the Pennovation site, the property itself, and we're at the corner of 34th Street and Grace Ferry Avenue.
The property itself is zoned I-3 industrial.
The R&D use is expressly permitted.
So the actual use that we're talking about, the life science R&D, that's permitted by
Wright.
The project that we're talking about, and again, here's just another view of the plot
of land within the Pennovation campus and where it's situated.
The project itself has been discussed for the better part of the last two years. We started with discussions with the Planning Commission representatives. We also had robust community meetings and meetings with the leadership of the RCOs outside of the zoning process.
We have a robust community development benefits agreement, which we'll share with the board.
We've also had a collaborative and productive relationship with L&I.
We've satisfied all of their conditions, and we, well, with the exception of these two
variance requests, which we're here today to discuss.
The first request that's before you is a dimensional variance.
It's a slight reduction in the size, specifically the length of loading spaces.
The code contemplates 60 feet, and those spaces are not needed because there will not be vehicles and there will be a representation to this effect that will be 60 feet or longer.
The project is not going to incorporate these types of excessively long tractor trailers.
Rather, as you can see on the exhibit here, the project will mainly incorporate the delivery of box trucks and some standard tractor trailers.
And the site, the 40 to 50 feet that we are providing is more than ample space.
And you'll also hear testimony today that the proposed sizes are consistent both with the developer's extensive experience within the industry.
It's also consistent with approvals previously granted by this board for other R&D uses,
and it's also consistent with general industry standards.
The second variance component that we're talking about are two rather de minimis, we'll call
them terraces, they're characterized as roof decks, but essentially what we have here is
small fraction of the six floors floor area will have access and it'll be a view out to the city
of philadelphia so you see on the screen here it'll be facing the skyline as i mentioned at
the outset what longfellow is seeking to do here is to design and ultimately develop and operate
a r d facility that attracts and retains the best thought leaders the the greatest minds
in science and technology, and we want to entice companies and investment into this site
companies and investment into this site to incubate and research and develop their ideas.
to incubate and research and develop their ideas.
Having these terraces on the sixth floor for the board's reference will also be like meeting rooms,
presentation rooms. These types of outdoor spaces and amenities are signature amenities for the
developer, and they're critical to developing and actually bringing the investment and the users
into the site. Notably, I'll note just as a legal issue with the zoning code,
roof decks are compatible with R&D uses. And what I mean by that is that the zoning code
does recognize that R&D buildings can have roof decks if it were in another zoning classification.
There's a variety of different commercial zoning classifications, and actually the IRMX
would also permit roof decks for R&D uses.
So R&D and roof decks, this type of feature is compatible.
It's just the I3 zoning district.
And that's why we're seeking just a reasonable adjustment to the code.
So with that being said, and I will be brief, Chairman,
I would like to call just two representatives of the developer
and our project architect.
I believe Casey Angel of Longfellow should be in the audience.
if he could raise his hand is he going to adopt your testimony he probably will and he'll just
kind of probably also verify a few that the documents we'll be quick chairman
do we see his hand yes they've been allowed to speak sir okay could you could you please state
your name and spell for the court stenographer. Yes, my name is Casey Angel, C-A-S-E-Y-A-N-G-E-L.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Is there a second person with him? Sure. There should also be Dan Rice,
who's the Director of Construction and Design for Longfellow. Dan, are you there?
Well, why don't we, why don't you do Jason, why don't you do Mr. Angel first, okay?
Great. Thank you, Chairman. All right, Casey, you are, in fact, employed by the developer here, Longfellow?
Yes, I am.
And what's your title for the board?
I am the Director of Corporate Communications for our national and international portfolio.
Great. And did you hear my description of the project?
Yes, I did. And that is correct.
And was it accurate? And would you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, I would.
Can you just let the board know, does your company, in fact, do they have a history of successfully developing
and managing similar projects across the country?
Absolutely.
Longfellow Real Estate Partners is, as you said,
a long-term investor, operator, and developer
of life science buildings throughout the United States
and United Kingdom.
We were founded over 15 years ago in Boston
and have expanded to various bio-innovation hubs,
such as New York City, Research Triangle, North Carolina,
San Diego, San Francisco, and now Philadelphia.
Great.
And I'm trying, for some reason, it's a little slow,
But can you just describe to the board your engagement with the community in advance of this project?
Yes, absolutely. So back when we announced this project in the summer of 2022, we started to engage with the Philadelphia market in a deep engagement process that included conversations with Philadelphia City Council, School Board, State of Pennsylvania, and the adjacent registered community organizations.
Those four RCOs that were involved in these deep discussions were the Grays Ferry Community Council, Tasker, Morris Neighborhood Association, Philly, Thrive, and Road, which you just talked about, the residents organized for advocacy and direction.
Through these discussions with the neighborhood RCOs and other key community stakeholders, we were able to finalize and implement a robust community benefits agreement, pilot agreement, and career-connected learning plan that will benefit local charter and public school children.
Great. And as part of that, agree. And if we look at Exhibit 5 in this package, which you've seen, is this the community benefits agreement that you have with the community?
Yes, that is correct.
And as part of this agreement, Longfellow is committed, as I understand it, to working with the local schools to provide exposure to life sciences, real estate and STEM careers?
Absolutely. Yeah, we look forward to promoting these industry careers to local charter, public schools, as well as adult earners.
We've actually accomplished this in several of our established markets and look forward
to bringing this about in our latest project here in Philadelphia.
Great.
And also, just for the record, too, is Longfellow, in fact, committed to hiring local members
of the community for the construction and also willing to work with the RCOs to expose
members of the community for long-term jobs at the site?
Yes, absolutely.
This was noted by all of the RCOs we worked with, as well as city council and other key
stakeholders, that this was one of the most important parts of this project.
So we are excited not only for the prospect of hiring local members of the community for the one-time construction positions as the building is created, but also the continuous jobs in the annual ongoing operations of this building.
but also the continuous jobs in the annual ongoing operations of this building for years and years to come.
Great. And the RCOs, they've committed their support to the project as memorialized in the agreement?
They have. All four of those that I mentioned before sent in their letters of support
through the Keystone Opportunity Zone extension process that I referenced earlier last summer.
So all four sent in their letters of support.
and then we actually had meetings over this past month both with their leadership and with the
community at large and they've sent in their letters of support for the two variances you're
talking about today. Great and is your understanding that that's at Exhibit 4 in our package
that we have we did in fact meet for multiple times with the RCOs as part of the process?
Yes that is correct. Okay all right Casey if the board has any other questions then we'll flip it
over to Dan to talk a little bit more about the hardship here for the variance.
who's next the construction manager yep okay his name is jason jason hand i'm sorry dan rice
yes he's been allowed to speak hi mr rice could you please state your name and spell for the
court stenographer yes chairman dan rice d-a-n-r-i-c-e do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do chairman please proceed
Great. Thank you, Chairman. Dan, your title, as I understand it, you are employed by Longfellow first?
That is correct.
And you are the Director of Design and Construction for Longfellow?
Yep, that's correct, Joe.
And can you just tell the board your academic pedigree and how long you've been in the construction industry?
Sure. So I hold a Bachelor's of Science in Industrial Technology. I've been in the construction industry for over 18 years.
Great. And were you personally involved in the design of this project?
Yes, I've been involved with this exciting project right from the start, which is probably a little over two years now at this point.
Great. And during that time, you cooperated with the various city agencies, Planning Commission and L&I?
Yes, absolutely. They've been a pleasure to work with. We've had various meetings with them, you know, dating back to August of 22.
too. Great. And you heard my description of the proposed R&D use? I did, Joe. Yes. Great. And
it's true and accurate. Would you adopt it as your own? Yes, I would. Okay. So, and is it your
understanding that the R&D use is permitted by right? Yes, it is. Okay. So, just briefly here,
in terms of the variances, can you, and I'm trying just to get to the picture here where
the loading docks are. Can you explain for the board why you're seeking the relief for the
loading space lengths? Sure. So based on our experience, you know, most tenants will utilize
a box truck for most of their deliveries. You know, our loading dock here can still accommodate
a tractor trailer, a WB40. You know, in addition, the size and quantity of our loading spaces is
in line with other as-of-right lab office developments, Joe.
Great. Based on your experience actually designing this project and other projects for Longfellow,
are these consistent with the lengths of the loading spaces that you've received approvals for?
Yes, absolutely.
Okay. And based on your, just for the record too, based on your lengthy experience,
is that consistent with just, not just Longfellow, but the industry standards?
That's correct. That's correct. And just, you know, Jacobs might get into it more.
But if this was in, you know, a district where a lab office was, you know, a fully permitted used on an I-3 industrial district, I mean, this would be kind of typical of what you would find.
Great. OK. And then as a condition, I think I mentioned earlier, Dan, that you're not going to be bringing on like these 70, these larger than 60 foot trucks.
Would you agree that that's going to be the case in the operation of the facility?
That is correct.
I didn't mean to talk over you, Dan.
What was your testimony?
No, I said you are correct.
Great.
And then can you just explain for the board the basis for why you're seeking relief for the terrace, those two terraces?
So, you know, Longfellow, we pride ourselves on our amenity spaces.
Having an outdoor space for a tenant to enjoy is a huge marketing feature that attracts them.
You know, for example, we have a campus here in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Cambridge Park Drive.
We have a robust outdoor space that includes terraces, and it is a very popular feature at the property.
So, you know, we'd like to bring that here.
you know, we feel it attracts tenants and, you know, we're hopeful the board will agree to it and allow us to have them.
you know, we're hopeful that the board will agree to it and allow us to have them.
And as a condition of developing this, will you fully comply with all of Philadelphia's safety
construction requirements, as well as any other federal requirements, construction related?
Absolutely.
Great. And will you also comply with any noise and other regulations
set forth by the City of Philadelphia?
Yes, absolutely.
Great. And in terms of the location, I mentioned earlier that
these docks are actually facing towards the river and the skyline?
That's right, Joe. That's correct.
Okay. And you agree just generally, Dan, as a representative of the company here,
that the relief, if granted by the board today, will conform to the testimony that's being
provided? That's correct, Joe. Great.
All right, Chairman, I have one other witness. I will be exceedingly brief.
It's our project architect, Rob Brumberg.
Is he going to be different than what we just heard?
I think I will just be direct with Rob. Rob has, Rob has designed other projects within Philadelphia or has some industry experience within Philadelphia for these, just to provide the board with some assurances that this is, in fact, these types of characteristics.
Just, please, please, bring them on, please.
They've been about to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the course stenographer?
My name is Rob Rumberg, R-O-B-R-U-M-B-U-R-G.
Great. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Chairman. Rob, I'm going to be really direct here. Can you just thank for the board
how long you've been a registered architect?
Yes, I've been registered for seven years, working in design and construction for 14 years.
And for the board, have you developed what you would consider to be like a specialty in these types of R&D buildings?
Yes, I have.
So that you have, in fact, designed and been involved in the development of other similar projects?
That's correct.
Okay. With respect to loading spaces, is the size that we're providing consistent with your experience for these types of buildings?
Yes. Yes, it is. I would note the 3001 Chestnut Street project designed by Jacobs. It's in an I-2
district. They sought a variance for number of loading docks and provided three 40-foot-long
and 330-foot-long loading docks with a similar use as this project, as well as one in North
Carolina designed for Longfellow with two 45-foot-long loading docks, which incidentally
also has a roof terrace great um and so to the loading docks at least from your experience and
in professional opinion they conform with the industry standards for these types of r d buildings
and needs they do is the relief that we're seeking um and that we've presented to the board the
minimum amount of relief necessary so that the uh the property can be reasonably used yes they are
appropriate for this building and without relief would um other portions of the property in other
was just wrong, the lines on the ground be adversely affected? Yes, I think it would affect
our usable interior space and the usable space within the dock. Great. Now I just want to jump
to the terraces. Have you designed, or based on your experience designing these projects both
within Philadelphia and elsewhere, have you developed similar roof terraces for other R&D
buildings? Yes, we have. Okay. And briefly, do you know where those are? Can you give any
examples for the board? Well, the previous mentioned project in North Carolina featured
roof terraces, much larger than this, in fact. Currently in the Philadelphia area, I can point
to a few other locations, 12-1 Normandy and the Navy Yard and 3151 Market in Philadelphia. Both
are both feature balcony spaces, outdoor spaces to entice tenants. Great. And I know there's two
phases which are shown on the screen, 620 and 432. Do you see those, Rob? Yes, I do. Percentage-wise,
can you just explain to the board how this stacks up percentage-wise for overall floor area?
They're less than half a percent of the overall floor area. Great. And Rob, have you reviewed the
comprehensive plan for the uh for this the south district uh yes i have great i'll represent to the
board that's attached to exhibit nine and is it your understanding that the um one of the goals
set forth is to actually implement the pennovation works plan and bring out flex tech and office space
yes i think that these go along with providing the types of space uh that attract uh tenants
and are more in demand in new workplace designs.
Great. And then just to do a few cleanups based on your experience, are you aware of-
Great.
And then just to do a few cleanups based on your experience,
are you aware of-
That's all I'm trying to say.
That's all. Council, council, I think you've repeated a lot from the past construction person.
I will, I'll wrap it up, chairman.
I guess at this point, I'll open to the board if the board has any questions.
Why don't we do that? Questions from the board?
No, chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
i do not see any further hands mr chair planning commission thank you chair bergman and good
afternoon david effecto with the city planning commission chair bergman and board members the
comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location from industrial three heavy
industrial to commercial mixed use three the appellant has shown that the proposed loading
space variance is in keeping with the nature of the proposed use and under the proposed zoning
of CMX-3, roof decks would be allowed with a special exception. The City Planning Commission
recommends that the board grant the use in dimensional variances. Thank you. So I'm going
to vote both at the same time. Number six. Mr. Chair, sorry, can I just clarify with Mr. Fecto
that that recommendation was for both appeals? Yes, Ms. Emerson, thank you so much for that
question. It was for both appeals. Thank you. Thank you. We're going to vote them both together.
So number six, MI 2024, 000272, 3401 Grace Ferry Avenue, TB 5935367, and number seven, MI 2023, 007099, 3401 Grace Ferry Avenue,
number TB 595367. I vote yes to both. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes to both.
Jane Snell, my vote is yes to both. Jane Snell, my vote is yes to both.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes to both. Thank you, counsel. Thank you very much. Have a nice
State Board. Okay. Thank you. So number eight, MI 2023-004-440-2117 North 7th Street.
Alan Knockamson is the attorney. Letter of opposition from APM.
The applicant has provided a petition and support signed by dozens of neighbors along with five
foreign letters um waiting for tax clearance
i'm back in as a panelist hi mr knockamson could you please state your name and spell
for the court stenographer uh yes alan a-l-a-n last name knockamson n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-n
do you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth
I do. Could you identify your client relationship to this property?
Yes, my client or clients are 2-1-1-6-7 LLC and 2-1-1-9 and 7th LLC. And in the virtual audience
is Dmitry Kordetsky. Dmitry Kordetsky. Thank you. And our vice chair has just a few questions,
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
I do. I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have. Yes, we have.
Please proceed.
Thank you.
So, I'm here to present 217 North 7th Street and a couple cleanup items. First is the notice of refusal. My understanding is that Ms. Emerson wants an updated refusal because it does not specifically reference the proposed consolidation of these two lots, even though it has been applied for and it's in Eclipse.
So my understanding is that the board's going to hold this matter under advisement until that notice of refusal is updated.
Also, I do believe we now do have the certificates of tax clearance.
I believe in the transfer of me to a panelist, I thought I heard somewhere where it was indicated that there were no certificates of tax clearance.
We do have them now in our session.
But during our presentation, we're going to review the current notice of refusal.
the current notice of refusal and there was actually a notice refusal that existed before
And there was actually a notice refusal that existed before that.
then uh which um also it stated you know which where we modified the project to make it closer
in conformance to the philadelphia zoning code and we'll show you what we mean by that we do
have correspondence from apm the coordinating our sale it was not a well-attended meeting
there were four individuals who voted, one in support and three not in favor.
I attended that meeting, so I actually only saw three people, but neither here nor there,
there weren't that many people there. We did canvass the neighborhood both before and after
the meeting. So we were actually very surprised that the individuals in attendance were not in
supported this project because the people that we talked to were actually enthusiastically in
support of this project. I would also state that during the meeting, no zoning-related matters
were discussed. It had more to do with the poor workmanship of properties being built in the
neighborhood, about how expensive the rents were, but had nothing to do with the merits of this
pending zoning appeal. Then we're going to look at comparable projects that this zoning board has
approved by way of variance in the neighborhoods. And then we'll review the Philadelphia 2035 Lower
North District Plan, where our project and the Spiritist contract project fulfills the needs
of Philadelphia 2035. We'll then review maps of the area. And I'd like to point out that these
these are RM1 lots. We're just asking for greater density. That's allowed on the right.
Then we'll review photographs of the property in the surrounding area, our plans and drawings,
our RCO meeting notice. And again, there weren't that many people that showed up to that meeting.
Our applications for appeal, the deeds of the property, showing that 21167 LLC and 2119N7 LLC
are the owners of the property and their certificates of tax clearance. And again,
in the virtual audience, I do have Dimitri, the owner's representative, who will answer a few
questions I have about this project to confirm my testimony as his own. Notice of refusal. Again,
just to highlight, these are RM1 properties. We're looking to put 16 one-bedroom units
in here, and we have three refusals. First, the unit count, based on the size of a lot of the
property, we're only allowed to build eight units as of right. What we're looking to do is have
16 one-bedroom units. If we did not consolidate these properties, we would have two quadplexes
here. And as I will go further in my presentation, those type of projects have been very unsuccessful
in the neighborhood. It was discussed at the community meeting about how there's so many
vacant apartment units in this neighborhood of like the duplex, the triplex, and the complex use.
We are looking at a different business model here to have 16 one-bedroom units. And it's actually
reflected in the summary of the meeting that APM gave to the board, but we'll go over that when we
go over the letter that they sent. The second refusal has to do with the maximum occupied area
where 75% is allowed and 84.68% is proposed. We'll review the prior notice of refusal where
We had a greater variance request after our office reviewed it with the client and the architect, and even prior to the community meeting.
We proposed to have a project that was more responsible from a variance standpoint, so we decreased the amount of variance there unilaterally.
And then same thing with rear yard depth, where, you know, under the code, we're required to have rear yard depth of nine feet, whereas we're proposing seven feet, four inches, you'll see from this next notice of refusal, where zero feet was proposed.
And, you know, again, our office with the architect and the client looked at this and, you know, we did not believe that that was a responsible use of the property and, you know, the least modification allowed or desirable under the Philadelphia zoning code.
So we increased the amount of rear yard depth to try to meet the requirements of the code.
But because of the configuration of the apartment building, and in order to provide more spacious units, we're asking for this to minimize variance.
We're asking for this, the minimus variance.
So this is the original.
So this is the original notice of refusal that we filed with, you know, or that we received and we filed as part of our original zoning appeal.
We did not, you know, change the amount of units.
We think 16 units, which would be 16 one-bedroom units, is responsible for using this property given marking conditions in this neighborhood.
um the second refusal again the the you know maximum occupied area was you know proposed of
82.7 percent which again we decreased that variance by way of this update previous up
previously viewed updated refusal and then the rear yard depth originally we proposed zero rear
yard depth again you know talking to the architect and my client i stated you know we need this rear
yard for two reasons. We need it. We're not proposing a roof deck, but we need a common
area for all the residents to congregate. In addition, we need an area of the outdoor space
where there is, you know, common access from front to back to allow for responsible trash
storage. So again, we pointed out to our client and the architect, it was really important to
make sure we met those two needs, create a sense of community within this apartment building,
and also responsibly store trash. And that's why we increased the rear yard depth for those two
purposes. And then again, the rear yard area was originally 144, was supposed to be under the
Philadelphia code, zoning code, 144 square feet, whereas zero square feet was proposed. Now we're
over 500 square feet of a rear yard area. And so again, not only do we meet the Philadelphia
zoning code, but we have created a sense of community by way of these modifications to the
project. So we met with APM. Again, there are only four people that showed up. One in support,
three not in favor. And again, when I looked at the audience, there were only three people who
actually voted but i'm not going to say i don't care if it's if it's four or three that's clearly
not a mandate by this community um if one person would have changed their vote it would have been
a tie um but what if you look at what you know they stated and this is what i'm gonna state to
the zoning board uh we you know what we've been hearing from the community and many communities
like this is that um people need to responsibly uh downsize like there are a lot of members of
this community who no longer want to take care of their single-family homes, but they want to
remain in the neighborhood. So we built this property on grade. So there are a number of
all the units on the first floor would be accessible to the more senior members of the community.
What we also heard is that there's really not that many one-bedroom apartments in the
neighborhood again you're dealing with a lot of these duplexes triplexes fiveplexes where you know
in order to justify its existence you're looking at minimum two-bedroom units and most of them are
three-bedroom units and they're not very efficient that you know they don't have a common area for
people to congregate on ground level they don't have a place to store their trash on ground level
responsibly so and again most people don't want to be in two bedrooms or three bedrooms they don't
want to take care of that much and it's not affordable and this community even stated that
there are so many two-bedroom apartments and three-bedroom apartments they're just been
buildings are vacant and so my client is looking to you know to accept PHA vouchers for this
16 one-bedroom units where you know the elderly portion of this neighborhood could responsibly
downsize and then in addition you know you have like their kids who may not want to live with mom
and dad, but they want to live nearby and they want affordable housing. And so that's the other
demographic we're looking at. We're looking at the elderly who are looking to downsize and we're
looking at the younger generation who are trying to keep close to their parents who may need that
additional assistance, but they don't want to live with their parents. So, and again, by taking
PHA vouchers, this will make it a more affordable project for all involved. And then, so my clients,
i i think did an excellent job of of canvassing the neighborhood um and you know before the
community meeting he did a great job when he saw that he only got when he got one person to support
at the meeting and three against he did he went back and hit as many of the properties as he could
um you'll see that there's a lot of vacant lots around here um we're near a commercial quarter
We're near a commercial quarter, which, you know, this extra density will help support that commercial quarter.
which you know this this extra density will help
But you can see he got a lot of addresses in support.
And this is the petition.
Letters to support he also got separately.
And then comparable projects.
So this board heard 2215 North 7th Street for increase of density.
These were CMX2 properties.
So the only difference is one of the refusals had to do with basically swapping out the commercial unit for residential use.
But the density was not there based on the square footage of the lot.
This board actually approved that variance request under similar circumstances in 2020.
And then the Lower North District Plan, right?
So this is what the Lower North District Plan states.
Encourage development assets. The gap tooth effect of numerous vacancies makes for an inconsistent and at times unsafe public realm. The lack of populated edges and eyes on the street is especially a concern around destinations such as park and recreational facilities, commercial corridors, and shopping centers. Local communities could benefit from prioritizing these areas for redevelopment efforts.
Again, we're very close to Germantown Avenue, which is supposed to be a commercial corridor, which has not been able to get, you know, its footing.
I think that adding these amount of units, 16 one-bedroom units for, you know, for people who are downsizing the community, some people who want to move back into the community, the kids, creating these smaller households will hopefully help this commercial corridor out.
And then it talks about commercial corridors and shopping centers.
And we're not that far from like Sixtenburg's where Cousins is like that shopping center to commercial quarters and shopping centers.
Population loss has reduced the foot traffic that normally support stores and businesses.
Large areas of large areas of vacancy, vacancy adjacent to existing businesses also detract from the levels of activity that normally make a quarter feel like a destination worth visiting and a place to stop.
Prioritizing commercial and residential development on and adjacent to the corridor could assist in restoring street life and customers, as well as raising perceptions of safety.
Again, this community, like many communities in Philadelphia, is struggling because of that lack of eyes on the street.
Vacant lots, unfortunately, encourage bad behavior within those vacant lots.
My client's always trying to, there's a ton of dumping on their lot.
They're trying to always clean it up.
They try to fence it up, but then the fence gets broken down.
I think at least one of these lots has been vacant for some time.
I think the time has come.
These are RM1 lots.
We just need extra density, you know, to be able to build this.
We're not going to get financing without having this extra density.
And, you know, that's the 2035 plan.
And then we recently found this article about urban blights and how like having vacant lots or not having vacant lots more appropriately reduces firearm violence.
And there's been studies about that. So in order to make our city safer and our neighborhood safer, we do have to responsibly develop our properties.
We're looking towards the zoning board to say, hey, not everyone wants a 2,000-square-foot residential unit.
Some people only want 1,000-square-foot residential units.
They want one bedroom, one bath, open floor plans for living room and dining room with nice amenities as well as nice finishes, and that's what we're looking to do here.
And in the maps of the area, I mean, this is as multifamily a neighborhood or at least zoned multifamily a neighborhood as you can see here.
But because of the restrictions of the zoning that currently exists, it's not feasible to build multifamily under current market conditions.
And again, here's Germantown Avenue.
We're like a block and a half away from Germantown Avenue, which should be a thriving commercial corridor.
And then photographs of the property were a vacant lot.
You know, here's our proof of the orange notice poster that we posted to the property.
And then this is the property, one of them, that's been vacant for some time.
And then as you can see from the aerial view, this is the neighborhood in a nutshell.
We got this off of Atlas, but there's a lot of, a lot of vacant lots here.
We're hoping that some of these projects that are being approved with additional and responsible density will encourage other builders to build as well, which will then help support the commercial core.
This is our property from both the left and right perspectives.
And these are our plans and drawings.
And these are our plans and drawings. As you can see, you know, we're staying within the height limitation. We're building on grade, like, you know, on the first floor. We're trying to do a responsible project. And you can see on the right-hand side is where everyone will have access during, you know, alongside a gated walkway to the rear of the property.
As you can see, we're staying within the height limit.
and you can see here like there's a significant open area of 524 square feet a rear yard
does not meet the nine foot rear yards you know depth that's required but the rear yard
itself is over over 500 square feet
trying to
listen it there we go
and then this is just our
trying to get the
oh this is our survey
which shows how we're consolidating the two lots
Just get it to work. And these are our floor plans. Again, each floor has four units. There were four floors to this building. The first floor also has a lower level, so those are bi-level units.
and then again there's no roof deck here
and again we met with the community on february 8th
and we emailed the notice to the community groups um on uh january 26th we also mailed it out
january 26th 160 addresses were notified this meeting four people showed up to vote
again i think it has to do with a lot of vacant lots people don't feel safe you know coming to
out to community meetings at night sometimes in this neighborhood but we mailed it out
you know on behalf of of our client
and these are deeds their property and most importantly let me just get the tax clearance
so it shows that 2117 no money's owed and then 2119 the only amount that's owed is $1,536.98
with coincides with the real estate taxes that would be due for the 2024 tax year
with that being said I would ask that Dimitri virtually raise his hand
they have been allowed to speak hi sir could you please state your name and spell for the court
stenographer hello uh dimitri gordetsky last name g-o-r-o-d-e-t-s-k-y first name d-m-i-t-r-y
do you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do sir please proceed counsel oh yes uh dimitri you heard everything i had to state
today about your zoning matter yes i did and is it true and correct absolutely and do you adopt
this in your own testimony i don't thank you questions from the board
no question is there comments from our attorney hillary emerson
um just briefly mr chair um mr dockamson is there um is this a project that is going to involve
uh the housing authority at all or or partnering with them in any way i'm just asking for a conflict
check for one of our board members? No, but what I state is my client's business model is to accept
vouchers from PHA. Okay. All right. No problem. Thank you. And are there revised plans? I thought
the RCO letter mentioned there were some changes, but I didn't see any revised plans in your
submission. Yeah. And I was going to mention that. So I think they misunderstood. So we had
original plans on the original refusal we updated our refusal to increase the rear yard depth from
zero feet to seven feet four inches we also by doing that eliminated the refusal for rear yard
area as well as as well as lessened the refusal for occupied area so i think they misunderstood
So I said I before we had zero rear yard. Now we have seven feet, four inches.
Got you. Thank you for the thank you for the clarification. And with the with the tax clearance on 2119, it looked like there were still other balances listed on there from other years.
I know it says on the top one thing, but then it has other balances listed underneath.
I know it says on the top one thing, but then it has other balances listed underneath.
So I'm-
So, yeah, I don't know.
So, yeah, I'm confused, too.
Like, so I saw that the amount that was due, if I don't reshare it, hold on a second.
Let me go to the last page.
So, my client, so as you can see, oh, wait, hold on, I got to share my screen.
So, as you can see, the amount that's due for taxes for the 2024 tax year is $1,536.98.
That's what's showing the balance.
I give it to you.
Like, I don't understand why this is still showing up, but this is my client purposefully
paid everything but this current year's taxes.
Hold on, Mr. Goldhurst, you're going to go to the next page.
Oh, wait, hold on a second.
There's another page.
Oh, here you go. So there, that's why you have Mr. Goldberg. I guess there's a second page there after which shows that no monies do.
So I had not gone on the city's website independently myself, so I don't know if we went on there. That's what it would show, but I assume that's the case.
Okay, that's fine. I'll take another look. Sometimes if balances have recently changed, it takes a minute to add things all set. So thank you.
You're welcome.
Questions from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good afternoon.
David Fecta with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential multifamily zoning at this location.
The zoning in this neighborhood dates to 1933.
3. The appellant proposes double the number of dwelling units allowed in about half the space
required. There are also requests and refusals for rear yard area and depth and more than the
allowed occupied area. The appellant also stated their desire to house tenants with PHA vouchers
absent a signed agreement with the housing authority. The city has no ability to verify
that voucher holders will live here. The city planning commission recommends the board deny
that proposed use in dimensional variances. Okay. So we're going to hold the vote on this
until the amended refusal, and then we'll just take a look at the tax again. Okay. And then
we'll get that straight before we get back. Okay. Mr. Chair, can I just quickly respond
to the recommendation? Sure. So if you look at it this way, there are eight units that are allowed
as of right. Each of those units can have two to three bedrooms general. If you compare those
numbers of 16 units, 16 bedrooms to 24 bedrooms, that is equal to or more than the 16 one bedrooms
that we're proposing. I think you got to look at it from that perspective. And then that's the
reason why sometimes the zoning code doesn't make sense. It's like, what are we looking at? We have
a certain amount of units allowed per square foot of the lot, but ultimately we're concerned about
the density that we're creating here. So if we're proposing 16 one-bedrooms, that means 16 bedrooms,
and the code allows us to build eight units where typically you have two bedrooms units and three
bedroom units, there could be potentially more people in the building and the community would
be worse off. Plus, like I said, as stated previously, these two bedrooms and three bedrooms
are not being rented out. It's not fulfilling the needs of the community and they're more expensive,
which is, which is hurting this community even more. But thank you.
Thank you. So cases closed other than waiting for the amended refusal on the tax.
And I think we need you again, Mr. Nockmson.
Number 10 MI 2023 006 569 1300 South 6th Street.
Mr. Klein.
Letter of non-opposition from Councilmember Scuola with provisos requested and letter of non-opposition from Paschung Square Civic Association.
I'm going to defer to Mr. Klein from my office to handle that matter.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Klein will be coming back in as a panel shortly.
hi mr klein all right just for the record state your name certainly jared klein k-l-e-i-n
right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes i do did you identify your client the relationship to the property
certainly my clients are the owners of the subject property could you mention their name
Certainly, my clients are the owners of the subject problem.
Could you mention their names?
Oh, yes, my apologies.
Dimitri Miozovic.
Okay, and our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you.
You can continue and proceed and share your screen.
Thank you very much.
And I will endeavor to be as brief as I can,
given the letters of support we have
and the board's lengthy agenda today.
So this is 1300 South 6th Street.
It has frontage both on 6th and on Wharton Street.
And the proposal is to create a two-family dwelling.
As I get into the photos,
you'll see these buildings are connected through a wall that runs behind this area here.
So it is one single building, previously a single family home, and we are making it into
a two-family unit. That's what this proposal is for, while the buildings will remain connected.
The refusals that we got are for the two-family household living. It's a CMX1 zoning designation
because it's a corner property. So we have the refusal for the use and then the dimensional
standards. There is a nine foot rear yard requirement. We're building the proposals
to build the addition on top of an existing non-rear yard condition. So this refusal was
generated for the second and third floors of that build out. But the rear yard or lack thereof on
ground floor is not changing as a result of this proposal just to orient the board uh as to where
the project is located this is the this is the property here um the area has not changed this
is back in 2004 so it has looked it has looked as it's looked for some time um it's located here
across from gold star park um and this is the side view of the units as they exist now um so
you can see there's this connection across the top this rear was previously used as a garage
that was the proviso uh that the chair mentioned as he was noting the communities letter um there
is no parking as part of this proposal um so we were abandoning this this prior use as a garage
to make this a fully residential development.
These are the views looking down 6th Street
to the right of the property
and views 6th Street to the left of the property
and views on Wharton Street,
which I'm sure the board is very familiar with.
These are the photos of posting.
We posted both on 6th Street and on Wharton Street.
Make sure everyone was properly advised.
and I will show the this is the zoning site plan this is the proposed area of the of the addition
this is the existing structure here towards the front this is our side elevation just to give
some context to this because this is a two-dimensional rendering so this deck although
it will exist here is not sort of floating between the two buildings there is a wall behind here
through a courtyard and you can more easily see that here so there's that deck that you're seeing
there's a stairwell for ingress and egress within this wall that connects the two buildings back
here so there's what the plan is is to build this balcony have a courtyard here between the
two buildings entrances and exits so this front property will have an entrance here
and an entrance there and same for this rear property
side elevation for some more context these are the stairs that I referenced as sitting behind
that wall running up the length of the building and the floor plans of the units as they're
proposed to be apartment one being in this front building apartment two being in that rear building
As I think the chair mentioned, as I was coming in, we did meet with the passion square civic association.
They voted in non opposition and noted that they urged the board to approve this variance.
Their proviso of no parking was absolutely fine with us.
As I mentioned, it was never it was always intended to abandon the parking as part of the project.
And we received a letter from Councilman Squilla echoing the thoughts of Pass Young Square Civic.
With that, I'm going to ask Dimitri to raise his virtual hand, if he's still online, to briefly adopt my testimony.
With that, I'm going to ask Dimitri to raise his virtual hand if he's still online.
Mr. Chair, I've got three hands up from Dimitri Mazovic.
Let's take him, please, Jason.
Understood.
Thank you, sir.
You better not speak.
Hi, sir. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Dmitry, please unmute.
Yes. Can you hear me, guys?
Yes, we can. Please state your name and spell for the court stenographer.
Okay. My name is Dmitry Mezovic, D-Z-M-I-T-R-Y. Last name M-I-A-Z-H-E-V-I-C-H.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Dimitri, did you have a chance to hear my presentation this afternoon?
Yes, I did.
Do you adopt my statements as true, correct, and your own if you'd have a longer opportunity to speak?
All right. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, the final note I have is there are revised plans, one page that were sent to Ms. Emerson along with the proviso form earlier today.
Those just update the location of the balcony.
Thank you. Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman. Ish?
Questions or comments for our attorney, Hillary Emberson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
yes mr chair i have two hands raised one ending in a number 7809 i can allow them to speak
sure thank you stood why could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
star 61 mute please
Hello?
We go to the other one.
The other hand is from Caitlin Daly.
I've allowed them to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Caitlin Daly, C-A-I-T-L-I-N, last name Daly, D-A-L-E-Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
All right.
Please proceed.
Are you a neighbor?
I am a near neighbor.
I live on the 600 block of Sierra Street.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
I like the project.
I love the two family.
I'm really excited to hear that you're not going to have parking involved, but I'm also
confused about why when you reinstalled the sidewalk, you installed a curb cut, why there
appears to be a cutout for a garage door um and why there is a empty sign post that would appear
that that you would put a no parking sign um in front of it directly adjacent that curb cut
those were items that were there under prior ownership for different iterations of the
proposal the the proposal we're doing now will not have any any parking okay so so that they
were constricted then you changed the proposal and so you're gonna you're not gonna do that
Right. We are not having any parking. The area that appears to be a garage at this time is going to be converted into the living room for what we're calling a parking too.
Okay. Well, thank you very much. That's all I have to say, and good luck on your project.
Thank you. Thank you for calling. We appreciate it. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No, there are no further hands, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good afternoon. David Efecto with the City Planning Commission.
chair and board members the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed use
zoning at this location commercial mixed use one zoning the rear yard depth variance appears to
document an existing condition the city planning commission recommends the board grant their
proposed dimensional variance however there is no unique physical physical condition or
circumstance of this property that would prevent it from being used for one dwelling unit the city
planning commission recommends the board deny the proposed use variance for two dwelling units
thank you um mi 2023 006 569 uh i vote yes proviso revised plans one page stamp by zba
february 21st 2024 no accessory parking on property thomas solomon
no accessory parking on property. Thomas Solomon, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Snell, my vote is yes with provisos. Ishmael Shahi, my vote is yes with provisos.
Thank you, Mr. Klein. Thank you all very much. Have a good afternoon.
Number 12, MI-2023-005-883-6331-41, Caster Avenue.
Ronald Patterson is the attorney.
Letter of non-apposition from Take Back Your Neighborhood with provisos.
He'll be rejoining soon, sir.
Hi, Mr. Patterson.
I think I spoke to you earlier today, probably, and swore you in once, right?
Yes, sir.
Why don't you just state your name for the record?
Ronald, R-O-N-A-L-D, Patterson, P-A-T-T-E-R-S-O-N, Claire Harrison, 1835 Market Street.
And could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
The client is the owner of the property is Royal Real Estate of Pennsylvania LLC.
Principal is Sonny Ho, H-O, which I'd like to have promoted as a witness today.
And our vice chair has a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance?
of this hearing? Yes, I have. Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Great. Thank you.
Okay. So, this regards 6331 Castor Avenue. It's at the corner of Castor Avenue and Levick Street,
which is right here. The property is this blue building, which was formerly a bank.
It's vacant.
It was a bank with a drive-thru.
Next to it is a Dunkin' Donuts store, which Mr. Ho currently operates from.
It has no drive-thru.
It's been there for 30-plus years.
And Mr. Ho probably has more than 40 stores in the city.
He purchased the property next door, the bank property.
to move the Dunkin' Donuts from the current location next door to this location.
The property is located in a CA commercial zoning district.
In November of 2022, I filed a zoning permit application
to initially move the Dunkin' Donuts from next door to this bank building.
And that application applied for both as a takeout restaurant and as a drive-thru.
We received our referral letter.
We filed a zoning appeal.
We also received streets approval for the drive-thru.
We had met with the civic group back then in May of 2023, take back your neighborhood, and they supported the application.
While we were waiting for the zoning hearing, we went ahead and parallel and filed a building permit application.
That triggered another streets department review.
The zoning permit application triggered one for the parking and the curb cut location, which were already pre-existing.
And during that review, it involved, through the developer services meeting, it involved traffic, highway, and also PennDOT.
But I would say incredibly, even though we had approval on the zoning plan, the streets department would not approve the same plan now because of curb cut issues.
We were unable to resolve it, and hence what I did is I withdrew that application and filed a new one, this application, which was solely for the takeout sales and no drive-through.
And as I mentioned in the beginning, I'll show you a picture of the Dunkin' Donuts next door did not have a drive-thru.
So filed that appeal, and so here we are.
There's been no issues with the Dunkin' Donuts at the next door address at 6323.
There were no adverse impacts then.
nor do we expect them to be any now.
We may have considered some for a drive-through,
but there's not going to be any greater density here
then there would be next door. As evidenced by the community group's position, they submitted an email letter in support back in January.
than there would be next door.
As evidenced by...
They chose not to meet again because we had met in May of 2023, and here's where their conclusion rests, that they support the application.
And so we believe that there's be no greater impact here than it would be at the bank operating, since we're not far from where we're operating currently.
With that said, I'd like to ask Mr. Ho a few questions.
Mr. Ho?
You can unmute yourself.
Mr. Ho, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Hello, my name is Sonny Ho, S-O-N-N-Y-H-O.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Hi, Sonny, good afternoon.
Good afternoon.
You've heard my presentation.
Would you agree that it's true and accurate?
Yes, it's true.
Thank you.
Would you adopt this if it were your own?
yes oh yes okay great thanks um few questions do you expect the same usage here then you experience
next door yes it will be the identical pretty much okay and what are the hours of operation
you're proposing we open about 5 a.m to 9 p.m okay seven days a week yes and how many employees
uh possibly about 20 the most okay and trash stores uh trust you know we'll have a dumpster
similar you know the same like you know we have with currently okay thank you mr ho that's all
i have all right questions from the board no mr chairman no chair no chair questions or comments
from our attorney hillary emerson not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the
I do not see any further answer, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chairman, and good afternoon.
David Effecto with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial area one zoning at this location.
The appellant has shown that the proposed takeout restaurant will have no detrimental impacts beyond what might be expected.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the special exception for a takeout restaurant.
M-I-2023-005-883-6331-41 Castro Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
James Moore Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Mr. Patterson.
Thank you. Have a good day.
All right.
Number 13, M-I-2023-006-589-1933-35, North Lithgow.
Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
No RCO letter at this point, but a meeting was held on 214-24 by the Norris Square Civic Association.
There are also three letters of support from neighbors.
Mr. Nockamson, you've already been sworn.
Just state your name for the record.
Alan Nockamson.
And could you identify your client?
And the relationship cost property. Yeah, my client is RCH 1933 and let gal LLC. And then the virtual audience is.
Ramit far, far, who is it's member.
Our vice chair has a few questions. Council, do you agree to read another refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
I do. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
All right, so I'm here to present 1933-35 North Lithgow Street, a pretty straightforward
project. We're going to review this. Originally, we were looking to do three units on these two
lots that were combined. After looking at the project more carefully and after community input,
we believe that two units is the appropriate amount of units. We did do a proviso plan form
plan form where we revised the site plan to indicate two units. We would also ask the board
where we revised the site plan to indicate two units.
to, not only if they're so inclined to grant this variance request, to have a proviso for the
revised site plan, but also to indicate a proviso maximum two units. We do have letters to support
of nearby neighbors in this North Square area. And it's not uncommon for the zoning board to grant
of variances for RSA 5 properties for multifamily use.
If you look at the Philadelphia 2035 plan, this property is slated
to be R1, which will allow
this property's use of two units
to be a matter of right. Then we'll review maps of the area,
photographs of the property, our plans and drawings, our RCO meeting
notice, our application for a PLRD to the property,
and our Certificate of Tax Clarence.
At the conclusion of my presentation,
I would ask that Ramit virtually raise his hand,
be sworn in, and I'll have a few questions for him.
As I indicated, what we're looking to do
is take these two lots, each RSA-5 properties.
Given the configuration and dimensions of these properties,
it would be rather difficult, if not impossible,
to make functional floor plans for these RSA-5 properties
as single family. We think it's more appropriate to combine and consolidate these lots and have
two units in them so we can have functional floor plans and such. And so our refusals are
for the unit count where these are RSA 5 properties, each one. And instead of having
two single families, which I don't even think are buildable, we're going to ask for a two-unit
building. And then secondly, just where the pilot house is located in the rear, we have a technical
refusal with regards to that. Again, just how our staircases are running and given that this
property is not that wide even combined, it's rather difficult to fulfill that obligation
under the Philadelphia zoning code. Just so for your information, each of these lots are only 421
square feet. That's why we're looking to combine them and make them
into a two-unit building. And then
again, we have not received a letter from the community
group, but again, we've asked them repeatedly.
I think that based on the community input, I think that two units
is the appropriate use for this property. And given the 2035 plan
as well, that has this as an RM1 property, which
two units would be allowed as a right. We ask that the board vote on this matter and grant the
variance request. And again, what we're doing some cleanup here is that our site plan indicates that
this would be a triplex. We changed our site plan to confirm that we're only seeking two units.
So if this board does grant this zoning variance request, not only should there be a proviso for
this revised site plan, but also to indicate two L&I maximum two units. And then we did, you know,
we did, you know, circulate a petition and letters to support to surrounding property owners, and we
have, I believe, a few here. And then it's not out of character for this board to grant variances
under similar circumstances. 409 West Houston Street was granted, and that was granted to allow
for two family dwelling units. 411
West Houston Street, actually that was for three dwelling units.
413 West Houston Street
was two units. And then, you know, Norris Street,
which is, again, one of the more major streets, allowed
for three units. And then 1812
Germantown Avenue also allowed for multifamily use
of nine units. And then 1917 North Lawrence Street as well, three
units. And then the 2035 plan, where
this is pointing, this would be orange, which would be RM1 for our property.
So the Philadelphia Planning Commission also believes
that RM1 is the more appropriate zoning
classification for this property or properties. And then
maps of the area, we're an outlier, and I think that's why
you know, the zoning is, you know, going to change for these properties. And by combining two
properties into one, we're asking for two units. So we just cannot build two single family homes
here. They're just too small. And then some photographs of the property, you know, proof
of posting for these properties. And then this property has been vacant for some time.
And then this property has been vacant for some time.
This is the oldest photograph we can find on Google Earth.
This is the oldest photograph.
But as you can see, you know, there's not much been going on here.
And then in terms of not much going on here, this is an aerial view.
And you can see on Lithgow, there is not much going on here to increase the use in eyes on the street for Lithgow Street.
And then this is Lithgow Street for the left and right.
And then our plans and drawings, this is just a survey, which shows the consolidation.
And then this is some presentation materials from Apartment Deutsch, the architect for
the project, kind of similar in look to what we showed you here, showing that the massive
amount of vacant lots for this area.
And then again, we're not asking for a height variance.
We're not asking for any dimensional variances.
We're just asking to allow to use two lots, combine it for two units.
And then these are the floor plans for the triplex.
We did not update them.
This was after we met with the community.
But, you know, there'll be three floors above grade, one below grade.
And we're doing two bi-level units.
And then all trash will be stored outside.
because every unit owner will have access to that as well.
We met with the community on Valentine's Day at 6 p.m.
We emailed that notice a few weeks beforehand,
emailed it to the community groups,
but we also mailed it that day to 187 addresses,
listed the addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses.
Our applications for appeal that we followed on behalf of our client
are RCH1933N with Gal LLC.
the deed to the property, showing that it owns the property, and its tax clearance.
Again, $14.73.99 is technically owed, but that's for the 2024 tax year, and that is
not owed until March 31st of 2024.
With that being said, I would ask that Ramit virtually raise his hand.
They've been allowed to speak.
Sir, could you please state your name and spell for the court's sonographer?
Yeah, Ramit for Waha.
So that's R-A-M-I-T-F-A-R-W-A-H-A.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Yes, Ramit.
You heard everything I had to state today about your zoning.
And is it true and correct what I stated?
and do you adopt it as your testimony yes thank you questions from the board no mr chairman
no chair no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
okay mr chair we have a hand up by rodolfo santos i've allowed them to speak
could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
hi my name is rodolfo santos r-o-d-o-l-f-o santos s-a-n-t-o-s do you swear or affirm to
tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor yes okay please
proceed please proceed sir i'm also a part of the north square community alliance rco great um
i sent you guys the letter on saturday i apologize for that i'm not sure if you guys
received it um i'm just here to say that on valentine's day we were presented with three
units and um i i applaud alan for getting us all the information and uh switching it over you know
with the switch over to the two units but uh the community feels uh like really displeased with
that and i'm just here to reiterate our letter of opposition to this project
so so they went from three to two and you thought that was worthwhile but the community's still
against it um we were opposed we opposed the three units right and we never got to vote on
the two units. Oh, I see what you're saying. Okay. All right. Thank you, sir. And thank you
for taking the time to close. We appreciate it. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the
first audience? I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair. Mr. Nockmson, do you want to respond?
Yeah, that's why we did hear that three units was unacceptable to the community.
Yeah, that's why we did hear that three units was unacceptable to the community.
That's why we're choosing the least modification possible under the Philadelphia zoning code.
We're taking two lots, we're combining it, and putting two units.
So it's essentially a zero-sum game because the lot size is just so small that we couldn't have a functional floor plan for two single-family homes.
planning commission thank you chair bergman and good evening david vecto with the city planning
commission chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends a change in
zoning of this location from residential single family to residential multifamily however in a
2021 zoning map change the civic associations requested that this block face be rezoned to
residential single family. The appellant requests two dwelling units on an 842 square foot lot.
The small size of the lot and its odd shape would be perfect argument for dimensional variances for
one unit, not for two. And the roof deck access structure does not meet the required setback
provisions. Roof decks are not necessary to ensure economic use of the property. The City Planning
Commission recommends that the board deny the proposed use variance for two dwelling units
and the variance for roof deck access structure setback.
Mr. Nackamson.
Yeah, again, it would not be economically feasible
to combine these two lots to create a single family home.
Nearby properties under similar circumstances
have reached out to the Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment.
And the Board of Adjustment has seen the undue hardship
that the property owners have faced.
And under similar circumstances,
the board has allowed for a combination of units
under those circumstances.
But now, as you said, Alan,
you could just build two houses here, right?
There's no difference.
We couldn't.
Functionally, we can't.
Like, again, there's-
But it works better, you're saying, if it's two?
It's two on the scene?
But you want to build a duplex in the two, right?
That's right.
What I'm saying, what's the difference space-wise?
It's a 421-square-foot lot that's irregular shaped.
Like, it's not even a square lot.
As the Planning Commission indicated, that's an irregular shaped lot.
We couldn't build on 421 square feet.
You know, that's rectangular.
That's not a rectangular shape.
All right.
Thank you.
MI 2023-006-589-1933-35 North Lipscow Street.
I vote yes.
revised plans, one page
stamped by ZBA
February 21st, 2024
maximum two dwelling units
Thomas Holloman
my vote is no
James Snell, my vote is yes
with proviso
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with proviso
Thank you
Is there anyone in the
virtual audience
who a 2pm case has not
been heard
I do not see any answer, Mr. Chair.
Okay, we're going to take five minutes.
We're going to come back and we'll finish the list, though, the 3.30 list.
Thank you, Chair.
Good afternoon.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's ZBA hearing.
With me is our Vice Chair Ishmael Saheed
Present Mr. Chairman
Our Board Member Thomas Holloman
Present Mr. Chairman
And our Board Member James Snell
Present Chair
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our Attorney
And our Executive Director Tanya Sunkit
Here's our virtual format
Be advised if proceedings are being recorded
The video will be available by contacting
TanyaSunkit 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 and 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 comments or testimony.
All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken.
Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
Number one, MI 2023-005-620-708 Sampson Street.
That case is continued.
That case is continued.
Number six, MI 2023-005-622-137, West Seymour.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
The RCO is requesting a continuance.
Mr. Anastasio.
And Mr. Chair, just for the record, there is a continuance request from Solo Germantown.
that's supported by space cdc and councilman bass okay um and i believe um mr richardson maybe
yes he's here as well okay mr anastasio good evening mr chair i've you've already been sworn
today um we have a request for a continuance yep from two of the rcos and the council person
I'm not going to object, even though we've been to at least one, so long as if the board would be so kind to ask the staff to assist me in what would be a shorter than usual continuance.
We will ask the staff for that.
Thank you. And can it be marked, must be heard, please.
I will take care of that.
So, MI-2023-005-622-137 West Seymour Street. That case is continued. Mark must be heard.
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Are there any other requests for continuance?
Sir, I got a hand raised from a number indicating 3552.
number ending in 3552 please press star six to unmute
hello hi uh what case are you interested in hi this is adrian fernandez oh okay um i sent a
letter in didn't know if you saw it for um i think it's three rcos three affected rcos
asking for continuous i think it's 2602 north 30th street
um we we do not have why we do not have um uh exhibits for that anyway okay we asked if it
could be dismissed i think it was must be heard all right thank you all right you're welcome
okay um any other requests for continuance
several cases that we do not have
exhibits number four
MI 2023
005 623
St. Vincent's
Zhang Wang Jin is the listed owner
this is the first listing
Mr. Chair they're not in that
virtual audience
Okay. So, number four, MI 2023-005-623.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair. Sorry, Vernon Anastasio has his hand still raised. I don't know if he has another case or if he just has his hand raised in error.
Oh, he does? Okay.
He's Vernon Anastasio.
Good evening again, Mr. Chair. I do have another case that the RCO has asked that we submit for a brief continuance.
3213 Clifford Street.
Okay. Hold on one minute.
So that's going to be continuing, right?
Please. And again, I ask that it be marked must be heard in the next
listing. And if I could get a shorter than typical
continuance, we have met with this group. This is the third listing.
It'll be the third listing. Thank you.
Thank you. So MI 2023-001-775-3213, Clifford Street. That case is continuing, Mark, must be heard.
Thank you.
Go back to number four, MI 2023-005-623-3031, Vincent Street. There's no one with their hand up.
oh wait a minute sir i have a hand raised by uh peter mcdermott i will now have them to speak at
this time i'm mr mcdermott
i'm sorry peter mcdermott please unmute
yes how you doing this is mr mcdermott i'm with the mayfair civic association which is the rco
where 3031 saint vincent came before us do me favor could you spell your name for the
word sonographer yes my name is peter p-e-t-e-r mcd
Yes, my name is Peter, P-E-T-E-R, McDermott, M-C-D-E-R-M-O-T-T.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
So we do not have exhibits for this case, Mr. McDermott.
And it does not appear to be anyone in the audience.
This is the first listing.
I'm about to continue the case, and Mark must be heard, okay?
That sounds good.
Thank you, sir, for calling.
We appreciate it.
So number four, MI 2023-005-623-3031 St. Vincent Street.
Cases continued.
Mark must be heard.
Number five, MI 2023-005-621-254 South 54th Street.
CGI construction is listed applicant.
No exhibits first listing.
Anyone in the audience?
Once again, Mr. Chair, I do not see any hands raised for this matter.
So MI 2023 005621, 254 South 54th Street, this case is continued.
Mark must be heard.
Number eight.
MI 2023-001-417-2602-North 30th Street.
Listed owner Joseph Patton is the applicant, third-party professional,
owner's AEB Holdings.
This is the second listing.
No exhibit, second listing, and no one has peered at the first listing.
again mr chair there are no hands raised so mi2023 001 417 2602 north 30 street this is the second
listing no one appeared at the first listing i vote to dismiss thomas holloman my vote is to dismiss
James Snell, dismissed
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss
We're going to go to our regular list
Let's see, Vern was Clifford Street
How many did I have to say?
So Vern was Clifford Street
And Seymour, right?
So number three
MI 2023-005-745
245-441 West Roosevelt Boulevard.
Vernon Anastasio.
Coming back in as a panelist soon, sir.
Evening again, Mr. Chair.
You ready to go with this one, Vernon?
Yes, sir.
You already been sworn.
Just state your name for the record.
Yep, it's Vern Anastasio on behalf of my client. Court of Common Police Judge Deborah Canty.
Thank you. Our Vice Chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, sir.
thank you council please proceed and share your screen
mr chair members of the board 441 west roosevelt boulevard we're here to
uh get approval for the uh construction of a new fence around the property
and that's why we're here uh the application is for the removal of the existing fence
and for the construction of a front and side yard fence that will be eight feet in height
which will include a four feet a four foot retaining wall of a brick and then four feet
fence above that the rear yard fencing includes a six foot side fence and a six foot
sorry six foot rear yard fence facing a street for the use as a single family dwelling
I'm going to come over here to, as you can see, several dimensional variances are required because of the lack of, the height, of course, is not compatible with the code, and there are some issues with opaqueness.
and there are some issues with opaqueness and let me explain to you what's there right now is
is what we're looking at here
i'm gonna pull out to show you the property this is the entire property and the fence will surround
four sides actually three sides of the property in question
And this is what we're dealing with currently.
There have been numerous issues with loitering on the property for quite some time.
A client not only wants to put something in it that's going to be aesthetically pleasing for both her and the neighbors,
but also something that will discourage folks sitting anywhere near the fence.
Also, and here's proof of posting, by the way.
The original wood fence that you could not see through in the past was approved as well.
Now, this fence will allow for passersby and anyone on the sidewalk to see through into the property and also will allow anyone in the front or side yards to be able to see through to the sidewalk.
And that's the difference that the neighbors did appreciate. 130 individual households were in fact mailed. And we have the two page letter of RCO notification and inviting folks to the hearing today.
I also want to share with you, if I can find it, I had it queued up, and now let's see if I can get that.
There it is.
The RCO letter of support, unanimous opposition.
I'm sorry, unanimous support, non-opposition.
And we've got a letter from Shanty Lindsay to Councilmember Bass, letting everyone know that this is fully supported by the RCO.
It was pretty well attended by the community.
And Judge Canty would just like to improve her property in a way that both enhances the neighborhood and also detracts from any loitering from occurring in the future.
And with that, I'd like to have Judge Canty raise her hand.
Hello?
Safe and I'm allowed to speak.
Judge, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Deborah Canty, D-E-B-O-R-A-H, last name C-A-N-T as in Tom Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Your Honor, did you hear my presentation to the board this evening?
I did.
Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, if we were to build according to code, it would pose a health and safety risk for the client,
And it just would be inconsistent with the safety measures that the immediate neighbors would like to see on that corner.
So with that, I kindly ask that the board grant the variance. Thank you.
Is there comments from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Two quick questions.
And, Mr. Anastasio, the deed that was provided said the property was owned by Donald and Charlotte Canty.
Is Judge Canty?
They're her parents.
They're her parents.
And you mentioned there was opacity issues.
However, the fence was at least partially see-through.
can you just explain because i didn't see that on the refusal i just saw the refusal for height
um where where it is over 50 opaque yep i'm sorry i didn't i didn't understand your question
ms emerson i think i think vermin what she said is you said you could see in through the fence
and see out through the fence that's correct could you explain what that fence looks like
right well and you mentioned there were some opacity issues but i didn't see those referenced
but I didn't see those referenced on the refusal.
on the refusal. So if that was missed on there.
So if that was missed on the refusal,
I just want to make sure that was noted for the record.
If it was more than 50% opaque.
No, I think I may have misspoke.
What I meant was as opposed to what was previously approved,
which was complete solid fencing,
this new fence will allow passersby to see into the property and folks on
the property to see through to the sidewalk.
got it thank you you're welcome questions or comments from the virtual audience
i have a hand raise from charles richardson i've allowed them to speak
hi mr richardson good evening mr chair yes we started earlier this morning please proceed
we've been together all day uh charles richardson office of councilwoman cindy bass r-i-c-h-a-r-d-s-o-n
room 508 city hall councilwoman has no objection to granting this variance thank you very much is
there anyone else in the virtual audience i see no further answer mr chair planning planning
commission uh ron bednar city planning first name ron r-o-n last name bednar b-e-d-n-a-r do you
swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do please proceed
This property is indicated for residential use on the city plan.
Our adopted district plan recommends no change existing zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformity with the fence requirements of the code, but we recommend the request of Venice not be granted.
Thank you.
MI 2023-005-745-441-West Roosevelt Boulevard, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Stone, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
number seven
MI 2023
001 349
Wayne Avenue
Donald Benedetto
is the attorney
what was the address
we did this morning
it was
i cancel you've already been sworn just state your name for the record
being everyone uh donald benedetto on behalf of the owner b-e-n-e-d-e-t-t-o
all right could you identify your client sure my property the uh client is philly continental
sales llc he is the uh that is the owner of the property and the principal akeem presley is here
joining me okay our vice chair has a few questions council do you agree to weigh the reading of the
refusal or stipulate to its accuracy so waived and stipulated mr vice chair understood have
you emailed in all the uh prior proper documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this
case five days in advance of this hearing they were sent over the weekend mr vice chair which
i believe would make them actually one day late but they are complete and in your possession
thank you please proceed and share your screen thank you
and is everyone able to see we can sir great thank you and uh good to see you again mr chairman
uh in the same day i apologize for not getting these listed together i didn't realize they were
split until the notices were out um to be as brief as possible at the time you should have
a complete exhibit package which includes the tax clearances required the plans and specifications
the close-up views and the curve views of the posting the and the um rco recommendation of the
or the the opposition i should say of the um coordinating rco um just to re-familiarize you
with the property this is the neighboring lot to the other lot it is a vacant lot it was not made
vacant by my client. It was demolished long before he owned it. If I could, to address the
refusal, we're seeking to change a single-family zoning to multifamily, specifically four units.
We also are looking for variance for the dimensional standards. We're proposing 54.5%
of the occupied area from 50, which will also impact the required parking in the residential
district. Members of the board, the main issue with this is that because this is a vacant property
and you can see the condition of the vacancy, it does present some uniqueness to the owner of the
lot. Times have substantially changed from the neighboring properties when they were built and
Times have substantially changed from the neighboring properties when they were built and the economic viability of those.
the economic viability of those.
To construct a single family residence in this neighborhood on these type of lots would just be economically not feasible for my client.
They're just frankly not something that could be reached in a price point in that neighborhood that you could ever hope to complete.
You're looking at spending at least $400,000 or $500,000 in construction alone, which would
just put it unattainable when you consider that somebody needs to make a profit and so
forth.
This will not alter the neighborhood in any way.
There are several multifamily units right on this block, specifically 4702, 4700, 4628,
4625 is a 15-unit structure.
4628 is six units, which was just granted on July of 2022.
As I let the board know this morning, directly across the street is this large 90 unit proposed structure that's under construction.
So to say that my client seeking to build four units is somehow going to substantially alter this neighborhood.
Just couldn't be accurate to give you further idea of what this looks like.
This is Wayne Avenue right here at the bottom. My client's building is right here. As I mentioned, 4628 was just recently granted, fairly recently. And considering that Mr. Presley's application is for a vacant lot, I think he's showing uniqueness of his application for what he's trying to do.
um i really can't uh emphasize enough just how not viable it is to do any other project here
one thing i will note which is different from this morning's hearing i was presented
i guess apparently the solo rco uh who spoke at the hearing this morning sent a notice last night
i wasn't aware of that it was forwarded to me this morning was sent to attorney ritala which
I think may have been a substantial factor in the other lot not being approved, I subsequently
conferred with Mr. Ritalo, who was the owner's representative at the meeting, who says that
all the plans were made available.
I also note that that meeting was held on January 16th, 2024, and we never received
any subsequent requests for changes to our plans or anything else of that nature.
So I also think the fact that we only became aware of their opposition this morning is just not something that we could possibly or conceivably address.
Obviously, we're willing to make any type of reasonable accommodation that any of the RCOs have.
And if that necessitates further speaking to them in light of this letter, if their position is they're here today and their position is to be opposition, we're certainly willing to do that if it'll further the project.
but i do think that including it in you know the opposition to the to this project at this point
is something that frankly is prejudicing mr presley and not something that we can adequately
respond to um if i could just go back to the package pointing just again to the same structure
and just to make clear this is not to combine these lots or to make this in any type of single
structure. This is its own standalone building from the neighboring property of 4706, or I'm
sorry, 04. They're separate, they're apart, they're not to be confused as a single entity or a single
project. I would like to, and another note, the large property 4701, or 4700, which is across the
street, while it was done as a right, the most, the prior last zoning entry in the city system
back in, I think that it is 2008, you know, that was changed. So it's like we're applying
one set of circumstance to Mr. Presley, but, you know, we can do 90 units right across the street.
Mr. Presley's from Germantown. He grew up a short way from here. His grandmother lives there. He's
probably done seven or eight of these types of projects in his neighborhood where he grew up.
I'd ask that the board give him this variance.
And with that, I'm ready to call Mr. Presley unless you have direct questions for me.
I want to bring Mr. Presley in to adopt your testimony.
Mr. Presley, you've already been sworn.
Just state your name for the record.
I can't even Presley.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Mr. Presley, you heard my testimony?
It was everything, to the best of your knowledge, truthful and accurate?
And do you adopt that testimony as it was your own?
And may I also ask Mr. Presley a few questions, Mr. Chairman?
Mr. Presley, have you done other similar projects in this neighborhood?
And are you aware of this street's makeup in terms of multifamily to single family?
and is there a substantial amount of multi-family variances have been granted on that street
And is there a substantial amount of multifamily variances have been granted on that street?
yes is there anything different from your project with what has happened with those properties no
thank you mr presley questions from the board no mr chairman
no no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
Yes, we have a handout from Allison Weiss.
I haven't allowed them to speak at this time, sir.
Hi, Ms. Weiss.
Yes, hello, good afternoon.
You've already been sworn.
Just state your name for the record.
Yes, Allison Weiss, Solo Germantown Civic Assistant.
Ms. Weiss, did you hear the attorney's conversation?
Ms. Weiss?
Ms. Weiss, are you still available?
Ms. Weiss.
She's unmuted, Chair, but she's not responding.
I think she's having a technical issue.
Right.
Ms. Weiss?
this way so he's still available
yeah again sir she must be having technical difficulties if you'd like you can move to the
next hand is there another hand yes charles richardson i've allowed them to speak hi mr
richardson good evening again mr chair charles richardson r-i-c-h-a-r-d-s-o-n office of
Councilwoman Cindy Bathroom, 508 City Hall.
This property is the twin to one that was refused this morning.
The 13th Ward was the coordinating RCO.
Due to the poor presentation, they are opposed.
Solo is an affected RCO who also sat in on that presentation, and they are opposed.
okay the councilwoman is still opposed to granting variance for this property okay thank you very much
planning commission this is uh ron bednar city planning while this property is currently
indicating excuse me one one moment um ron uh mr chair we did have one other hand that was raised
yes it's where my number ending in one two three two i've allowed them to speak sir
all right please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer
good afternoon this is pamela bracy a member of p-a-m-e-l-a
could you state your name could you state your name please
Pamela Bracey
and spell it for the courts
alright thank you
do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes I do
please proceed
I am a member of
SOLO and as Mr. Richardson
stated we did have a meeting
but the meeting did not go well
we were stating that
there are a lot of multifamilies
on Wayne Avenue
but we think we're being inundated
with that and we did have some problems with the 90 units being built across the street so we're
not saying oh that's fine okay thank you very much for taking the time to call us we appreciate it
thank you planning commission
Ron Bednar, City Planning. While this property is currently indicated for single-family residential use on the city plan, the adopted comprehensive plan recommended multifamily residential at this location.
The proposed use is consistent with our adopted and implementing plan recommendation. Therefore, we recommend that the request of variance be granted.
thank you mi2023 yes i'm sorry to interrupt you again but miss weiss have their hand raised again
okay miss weiss
yes hello i don't know if you were able to hear me because i was
If you were able to hear me, because I wasn't able to hear what was going on.
All right.
So, Ms. Weiss, you've already been sworn in.
I don't know for what kind of technical issues there were, but was I able to be heard?
Ms. Weiss, you were already sworn in this morning.
Ms. Weiss.
Hello.
Hello.
Ms. Weiss.
is anyone able to hear me we can hear you miss weiss i i no longer can hear okay so why don't
why we're gonna move to excuse me chair if i may miss what she's able to hear us but she
she can't respond she can't um uh she's not i can't hear anyone yeah i'll put something in the
I'll put something in the chat.
Tell her in the chat.
Mr. Chairman, if I could, before we go to a vote, I would just like to respond to the
councilwoman's argument when I have a moment.
Please proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair, I believe, you know, what was pointed out was the poor quality of the presentation is being an issue here.
And I don't think that's something that Mr. Presley's prior counsel, you know, should be held against a presentation wasn't up to everybody's standard.
And especially being made aware of that on essentially in writing the day of the hearing.
Mr. Presley remains happy to revisit this with any RCO.
I am always available, and my office has received nothing, nothing since the meeting and nothing before the meeting.
Okay, thank you.
Has Ms. Weiss, have we gotten contact with her?
Not as of yet, Chair, but we do have a hand.
Okay, good.
I saw you said you're going to have her send the letter.
Okay, thank you.
So we're going to go to a vote.
mi20230013494706 wayne avenue i vote no thomas holliman my vote is no
ishmael shahim my vote is no thank you thank you counsel
i believe um mr snell had to leave for the record thank you thank you we have we have the three
votes. Thank you. We're going to move to number nine. MI 2023, 005-619-2908 Karnwath Street.
Sherman Toppin is the attorney.
He'll be rejoining as a panelist, sir.
well good afternoon mr chair members of the board you were already sworn this morning and uh
yes um just state your name for the record the sherman topping once again spending the day with
the cba okay well and uh could you identify your client the relationship to the property
Yes, my client, he should be Yvonne, Mr. Yvonne DeSalva.
He has been, he may be online now.
I'm not sure if it's, it will be his name or his translator.
He is a Brazilian-American and he has a translator that is with him to understand all that's being said.
Well, yeah, I don't, Hillary, we don't usually use a translator like that, right?
well so i mean if he has if he has a personal translator so he can understand what's going on
that's fine but we can't accept his translator if he wishes to testify we we you have to request
a translator in advance and we would provide one yes yeah he i'm sorry he won't need to a translator
to communicate he he understands pretty well and he can respond she's there for him um in his but
was just mentioning that because her his cell phone might be her cell phone that's the all right
perfect all right uh our vice chair has a few questions now so do you agree the way the reading
of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy yes i've emailed in all the documents and exhibits
Have you emailed in all the documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this call, in this case, five days in advance of this hearing?
that is needed to proceed with this court
I have.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
And I will be sharing my screen at this time.
And is the board able to see my screen?
We can.
Okay, wonderful.
So I'm here for 2908 Connorth Street.
this is in lexington park in the northeast just to orient the board with where we are today this
is a pretty pretty straightforward and simple uh simple type of zoning application and only affects
the home that you see on the picture and the left and to the right um these are his neighbors this
2906 um this is 29 i wait of course here in the middle the the applicant property and uh 2910 and
I'll go through and I'll explain exactly why. We're here on a refusal that involves two
particular things. The erection of a garage that does not have a three-foot setback between it and
the property line. And on the other side of the property line, there is a side yard where there's
a canopy that is developed to the other end of the property line. So that's what we're here to
talk about, those two items. The deed, of course, is here. I'll just move through the exhibits
quickly tax cert is here and i'll move through our appeal which i'll be able to speak through
is here as well as our project information sheet these are all our basic
exhibits here the zb of course this whole area is zoned as rsa3 single family this is single
families there's no issue as to its use as to as far as that's going we're not even going on
into the inside. This is an older picture, but the subject property is here, and all of the
development happened in the backyard, and that's what we'll be talking about in a few. So let's just
go right to that, and I'll change the configuration of these pictures so you can see.
So this is what we're here to talk about. Here's the subject house off to the right,
And this common driveway between 2908 and 2910 is where the first conversation we'll have.
This is the garage in the back here.
The garage, this is just a reverse of that shared driveway.
The garage is here.
And as you can see, the garage is only 11 feet wide.
And Mr. DeSalva, he's a tradesman.
He wanted a garage in the rear of his property to store his commercial vehicle and tools
So he wouldn't have to park it on the street and risk there being theft or something going on there with his tools in his vehicle.
So he wanted this driveway.
As you can see, the existing driveway ends right here at the end, and the width is exactly in front of it.
Like this is the only position where this garage could be.
As you can see, the brick wall here limits exactly, exhibits any other way in the end of the house, really constrains the garage to being in this spot.
Now, if the garage were moved three foot over for the setback, he would not be able to actually have this garage.
So that is one of the reasons motivating his decision to plant the garage there.
This, of course, is a zoning application to legalize the positioning and the erection of this garage.
And I'll show you some more pictures that deal with it.
So here's, again, a picture of the straight-ahead garage.
As you can see, it goes right to the property line.
I have a closer picture so you can see the distance.
There's just about a foot between the actual property line and the edge of the garage.
But the concrete pad in which it sits cuts into that.
So we were talking about maybe six, only six to eight inches that it's between the property line and the concrete pad.
And that's where the variance.
And this is just another picture showing how there really is not room between there as it moves back for anyone to get through.
It's right on the property line.
And this is the reverse of that.
The neighbor has all of this debris and was building along the property line on his side.
These two gentlemen have talked and have been, you know, have or in agreement as to the positioning of this.
And so there's been no issue with the 2910 neighbor.
This is the end. This would be the egress point, ingress point to the backyard right next to the garage, which you see.
And so this is there. And on the other side of the house, this is where the eight foot sit back sit back is missing.
So you hear that from the house to the green fence here is exactly eight foot.
So this canopy is where the issue is. We're looking to legalize the positioning of this canopy and the patio that's paved that runs right to the end of the property line on the other side of the house.
As you can see, the 2906 neighbor has a similar fence coming into the property.
Six neighbor has a has a similar fence coming into the property. And, you know, my client opted to do the canopy, but has the same fence on the other side. So they coordinated in that way. And this is just the the rear of the house showing both the entrance to the detached garage and the the canopy that runs to the other side of the property line.
more pictures and so you can get a sense of exactly where we're talking about so this is
from the street this is all neighbors really do see so the affected neighbors are really the 2906
and the you know 2908 as far as who truly is affected by this particular uh these two things
on either side of the house and let's go back into the plans and you can see from above we've
got the positioning of the driveway, you can see that the driveway end is lined up right where the
end of the house is here. And if it could not be placed over, if it was placed over,
cars wouldn't be able to get into it on an angle. And that's one of the reasons motivating
the positioning of that garage. And these are just, the plans also just indicate other
um other you know other visuals on the other side you can see the patio the patio goes matches the
the width of this um this is an above the ground pool here but the patio paved surface runs to the
property line and this is the eight foot setback relief that we're seeking uh relief from here
and uh so that was basically the long and short of what this particular zoning application is all
about going back to our exhibit package and um we brought this matter before the community
we had a community rco meeting with the mayfair community center and the mayfair um community
association on january the 22nd and had a pretty good conversation with the with the with the board
there um and here's our this is these are the three exhibits which show the uh that we mailed
to the community 48 affected neighbors here receive this particular letter here in lexington park
and these are their addresses again and and this is our certificate of mailing
and this is how the meeting went i mean do we have any results of it yeah so we have not i
requested a few times um to from the may from mike over at the mayfair and actually mr mcdermott
testified in a couple hearings prior to he was there at that meeting and he indicated that the
board would that the Mayfair Association would speak and make a decision regarding its support
or any proviso questions concerning it we did get I sent a letter to Mr. Servanson advising him that
the neighbor 2906 indicated and wrote an email in support of and this is this is just his letter
This is my letter from my conversation with the neighbor. And I'm sorry, this is his letter saying, Mr. Kevin Clancy, he's a fireman. He lives next door. He has no objections to the canopy on his side of the property. At the meeting, the landowner on the 29010 was present, and he was there in his position. He had a no opposition position.
I can tell you that in the meeting, the vote was held based on the discussions of Mayfair Civic Association. There was nobody who voted and opposed. There was one in support, and everyone else, I think there was 10 who voted supporting with the proviso, and the proviso was to be determined by Mayfair Civic Association.
and they have not provided that to us so we're kind of here not knowing the the clear position
of the of mayfair but we know what the vote turned out to be because we were there for that
and um and that's why we don't have that exhibit 15 at the end of our package okay um
so at this time i'll move to questions i'll i'll invite uh mr da silva to adopt your
advance. Yeah, to adopt my testimony. If he's there. Mr. De Silva, if you could raise your
virtual hand so that we know he's been around on the hearing the hearings all day. Hopefully,
he is still present. He's been about to speak. Okay, perfect. Sir, could you state your name
and spell for the court stenographer my name is um ivan i-v-o-n-e last name silva s-i-l-v-a
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes sir please proceed counsel uh yes mr da silva you've heard my testimony on your behalf
for 2908 carnoff street and will you accept that testimony as your own yes and is there anything
you'd like to add to my testimony as to to supplement what i've said no i'm okay okay
no i'm okay okay well with that um mr chair we'll ask any questions questions from the board no mr
well with that you um mr chair
chairman ish no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
all right at this time mr care questions or comments from the virtual audience
mr chair i have a hand raised from peter mcdermott i haven't got them to speak
okay hi mr mcdermott you've already been sworn in once today
good evening can you hear me yeah mr mcdermott you already sworn in earlier so you can
just state your name and testify yes uh good evening my name is peter mcdermott p-e-t-e-r
m c d e r m o t t um i did i coordinated with uh i'm the zoning chair and i coordinated with
mr servison who was our president who typically submits the letters i sent him over an exhibit
the photograph exhibit number one showing an aerial photograph looking northeast which is
dated April 10th, 2023. That photograph is just six weeks after the settlement date,
which you can see on the deed of February 24th, 2023. The homeowner, who is also a contractor,
failed to submit documentation and obtain the necessary permits for both the garage
and the patio canopy. Excavation and civil site work had already started on both projects,
which is evidenced by the photograph which was on that exhibit the garage is situated off of an
existing asphalt driveway which you could see in mr sherman toppin's exhibits the garage is large
with an area of 320 square feet it's 16 by 20 the garage is a prefabricated metal shed
referencing the applicant's exhibits and the submittal which on page 36 which is drawing
sheet four of five the shed manufacturer themselves which is referenced as new teen carports llc
clearly state on their drawing please send photo of the finished site and the copy of the permit to
sales at new teen carport.com based on the location of the existing driveway which mr
the topic has referenced, and the purchase sheds width, which is 16 feet,
the Mayfair Civic Association continue to accept the claim for a hardship for that garage and shed,
which would avoid demolition of the shed, its substructure, and the concrete apron,
which the applicant poured due to the existing physical characteristics and the location of that driveway,
which is situated along the southeast facade of the residential dwelling.
Please note, the applicant and attorney both stated at the meeting
that the homeowner parks the work vehicle inside the new garage and shed,
which Mr. Toppin just referenced as well to avoid theft of tools and vehicle.
The Civic Association board officers, including myself,
have visited the site a minimum of 10 evenings.
I'm currently out front of the house right now.
Since our meeting on Monday, January 22nd, 2024, during all of these visits, the white work van slash truck has never been parked inside the shed.
We do not oppose the shed. We do accept the hardship for the shed.
Exhibit number two is an aerial photograph looking southeast the other direction, which is dated April 10th, 2023.
And for the record, these images were obtained legally from Eagle View Technologies Incorporated, to which I have a subscription, and the program is known as Connect Explorer Pictometry.
This photograph is the same, just six weeks after settlement, February 24, 2023.
The homeowner, who was also a contractor, failed to submit documentation and obtain permits again for the garage and the patio canopy.
Excavation of civil site work has already clearly started on both projects, evidenced by this photograph.
This overextended canopy atop the patio abuts the property line when the code calls for an eight-foot side yard setback.
The lot dimensions are 65 feet wide along the front, which you can clearly see on his drawings, as well as the deed,
and 156 feet 10 inches along the southeast boundary and 190 feet 10 inches along northeast boundary
doing the math and based on the existing dimensions of the lot and the fact that the lot is almost three times
And based on the existing dimensions of the lot and the fact that the lot is almost three times as deep as it is wide,
we take 190 feet, 10 inches on that side of the property, divided by 65 feet, and we're at a factor of 2.94.
There's no hardship for the overextended canopy atop the patio.
The swimming pool, patio, and canopy could have easily been oriented to comply with the code
if a design professional was consulted and the proper permits would have been applied for
by the applicant or their representative. Based on these lot dimensions and the exhibits from
Mr. Toppin and the deed and the survey, the Mayfair Civic Association denied a claim for
hardship for the patio canopy. The Civic Association is okay with the garage, but we are
not okay with the canopy. In Mr. Sherman Toppin's testimony, he stated that the canopy is eight
feet from the structure. It's at least nine feet eight, probably closer to 10 feet six inches when
I put an architectural scale on the drawing. Thank you for your, I mentioned your testimony.
We appreciate it. Chairman Bergman, and to add to this, Mr. Toppin is correct,
Based on the documents that we had provided to us at the meeting, the majority was non-opposed with provisos.
However, when we got the exhibits that were submitted to the ZBA and we could clearly see the dimensions on the drawing, which we could not see from the exhibit shared with us.
And when we looked at these aerial photographs and we did all the dimensions and based on the fact that the physical characteristics, particularly the lot dimensions, easily allow for the comforts and opportunities that the applicant would like with a patio, a canopy and a swimming pool.
this could clearly be done going the opposite direction rather than going out to this across
the 65 foot frontage where there's at least 150 156 feet 10 inches and 190 feet 10 inches
on the side where this canopy is uh it's it's it's a a large overreach by a contractor
who should know how to pull permits and should know how to follow code okay um thank you mr
mcdermott we appreciate all of your input um mr chair i just want to interject briefly um
mr mcdermott if you could if you have um a written letter from mayfair and any exhibits
that were not things that you referenced
that were already shown by Mr. Toppin.
Can you please submit those to the board
and Mr. Toppin for the record?
Counselor Armisen, that's not a problem.
I'll send them both.
The only thing I could see that may have been a hindrance
was and where they didn't go through
is these images are TIFF files
that are downloaded from this Connect Explorer pictometry
and they're extremely large.
They're 76 megs.
Oh, yeah, that would be a problem.
Yeah, I did compress them,
But I don't know if the compression was to a level of a of clear passage through email.
OK, yeah, we would we would need generally around like 15 megabytes, maybe could do a little bit more.
But yeah, things do have to be pretty compressed.
OK, I'll compress. I'll recompress.
I would like to I would like to make a few comments to respond.
Yes, yes, please.
Yeah, I'll be brief, but I do appreciate the thoroughness of Mr. McDermott.
He's definitely a sharp guy, and that was evident in the board in the RCO meeting as well as the full board.
And we do appreciate their support of the garage structure, and he does use the garage, perhaps not in the days that it was being used.
But the whole purpose motivating the garage was his work, and that is when you roll that garage up, it's got tools and everything else in it for his trade.
So I've seen that, and I would represent to the board that that's not something that he's –
But going to the orientation of the pool and the canopy and the existing concrete patio that's here, Mr. McDermott has made indication that the orientation of the pool, if you look at the plans that I've got in front of you, the pool could go the other direction.
but this is a retaining wall that drops down about eight feet from the surface downward.
That's not evident from where Mr. McDermott is watching, but this is not level to the grass.
This is like a retaining wall here. That's why you've got these steps walking up to it.
So if the pool was oriented differently, it would come out here. That drops off even further down.
So the cost of doing exactly what he's proposing.
So the cost of doing exactly what he's proposing, which would mean starting the patio back here and orienting the pool going in this direction, would have a more severe, and that's where the feasibility came in.
And by no means do I think that because he is a tradesman, he perhaps is not a tradesman in all trades, but I agree the permits should have been pulled.
This is a legalization zoning hearing, but I do think that this orientation of the pool is motivated by the cost of doing it the other way.
So that being said, we would, you know, if need be, it would be great to perhaps see the actual proviso.
We didn't get the benefit of the proviso or the comments of Mr. McDermott prior to the hearing.
we would have we would have had to perhaps had some time to have more discussion but
that just didn't happen so that's where we are today we submit this to the board so planning
commission this is uh ryan bednar city planning the property is indicated for residential use
on the city plan or adopted district plan recommends no change in existing zoning at
this location the applicant's hardship is self-imposed therefore we recommend the request
surveillance not be granted. Okay, thank you. Mr. McDermott, I see your
hand up, but let Mr. McDermott, I see
your hand up. We're not going to debate this all night. We know where you stand.
We know what your issues are, and we know where the
Sherman top it is. Let Mr. McDermott
speak in a minute.
Still able to speak.
Yes, I just wanted to add something.
so without a professionally licensed survey or sealing a drawing i don't think we should talk
about elevations in the rear yard of being eight feet or greater than eight feet without an actual
professionally licensed survey drawing it's just hearsay i would i would rather see a drawing that
actually showed that with cut excuse me with cut and fill sections showing that this would have
created some hardship immediately after the purchase of the property this excavation was
started. You said that, Mr. McDermott, and we understand. I'm just reaffirming it. Okay. Thank
you very much. We appreciate it. There's been a lot said about this case. I'm going to hold a
vote for this, and I'm going to talk to the executive committee, the board, to figure out
where we want to be with this. I've heard both sides of it, and we'll vote on this, not next
week two weeks from from today on wednesday at 2 p.m that's wednesday march 6th mr chair 2 p.m
yep the record is closed everything everything is closed everything is yeah other than the
submission of the documents that mr mcdermott referenced in his presentation and thank you
thank you counsel um is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called
i do not see any further hints mr chair look thanks everybody you know we got we got a little
tied up with a long case today i do appreciate what everybody did um sometimes you get these
cases they're just they have to be what they are they people got to do what they what they think
is important for the case so i appreciate your help and things like that and i'm sorry we got
a little late but um thank you all no problem bill thank you thank you mr chair
good night everyone good night everyone