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.