ZBA Hearing - November 29, 2023

and is having a hard time getting back in thank you all right um questions or comments from the

virtual audience. There are no aims, Chair. Planning Commission.

Good afternoon, Chair. Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.

The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RTA1 residential attached zoning at this

location. The property has a long documented history of use as multifamily. We feel the

applicant has demonstrated hardship accordingly the planning commission recommends the board

grant the variances thank you mi 2023 004 233 403 south 42nd street i vote yes thomas holloman i vote

yes ishmael shaheed my vote is yes thank you counsel you have your votes thank you very much

everyone take care okay let's see here okay we're okay we'll have free votes all right

mi 2023 005 680 5800 city avenue eileen quickly is the attorney um

recommendation of non-opposition from winfield residents association a letter of support from

council member jones and there is a c cdr that we've received a copy of eileen quigley has been

promoted thank you good afternoon good afternoon council could you state your name please and

spell for the court stenographer yes my name is eileen quigley e-i-l-e-e-n quigley q-u-i-g-l-e-y

i'm from ballard spar llp 1735 market street 51st floor philadelphia 19103 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 yes i'm here on behalf of saint joseph's university

and with me is joe kender from saint joseph's university he's senior vice president university

relations as well as tracy luckenbell who is principal at blackney hayes architects

our vice chair has a few questions questions good afternoon council do you agree to weigh the reading

of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy no for one specific reason uh we don't agree with the

lni's refusal of the crest which they've designated as signs

but in the also we believe they are in designating those as signs but in the alternative if the board

does not agree with that position we would ask for the variance understood have you emailed in

all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case

spot these in advance of this hearing yes we have and i i may have missed you chair bergman when i

was being elevated but we did receive a letter of support from council member jones's office today

which we forwarded to board council hillary emerson we also have a letter of non-opposition from the

coordinating rco that we have in our exhibits packet um i would like to share my screen

thank you miss quickly please proceed this year thank you

can everyone see the exhibits packet make it a little bigger okay

so we have provided a whole list of exhibits for the board we'll just mention the deeds

certificate of tax clearance. We have photos of posted zoning notices and photos of the site

and surrounding area. We've included the notice of refusal and referral, the applications for

appeal and special exception, and below the neighbor notice letters, the certificates of

mailing, the curriculum vitae, the resume of Tracy Luckinville, as well as, as I said, the Winfield

Residents Association coordinating RCO letter of non-opposition. With that, we would like to

proceed uh just by way of background first we're here today regarding the request for variance and

special exception related to the new residence hall at 5800 city avenue this process we have

been through the cdr process so we had a meeting in the summer with the rco and the community

In the summer, we concluded Civic Design Review in September of this year.

in the summer we concluded civic design review in september of this year

The master plan was amended for St. Joe's University and was approved by City Council in June of this year,

which allows for the residence hall that you see here.

I'm going to show a photo, an aerial photo now of the site.

So we're here today for variance and special exception as it relates to the new residence hall.

This new residence hall is really of vital importance to St. Joe's University mission, which is to move student activity and living accommodations away from the neighborhood and within the campus, and it will also replace to existing dorms that are already across the street.

So this will be a new, state-of-the-art, modern, environmentally sound and sustainable building at this site.

We just want to orient everybody. This is 5800 City Avenue. This is Cardinal Avenue. This is Overbrook Avenue. To the rear of the property is another St. Joseph's University property, and this is City Avenue, as I said.

so the first variance that we're requesting is for the setback so it's important to note that

the spins district in which this property lies does not require a setback or a front yard setback

but because the property abuts adjacent residential districts lni applies the most

restrictive setback which actually is from the rsd3 zoning district which is to the rear of this

property and is the st joseph's university property and that's a 25 foot setback the other

residential district is to the right we're over here by overbrook avenue and that setback is eight

feet the setback most of this building is within the 20 meets the 25 foot setback but l and i has

issued the refusal for these bay windows right here. So the setback from the bay windows to the

property line is 6.9 feet. If you were to go with the setback for the RSA district, which is eight

feet, this is really de minimis and is in keeping with the Villiger Hall and St. Joe's University

campus across the street. This setback is required. Actually, if we don't have the setback,

what happens is if you move the building back it number one encroaches upon the welcome the

wolfington welcome center here and then you have an overcrowding of the land in this area with the

building setback and also and more importantly due to the grading and the physical conditions

of the property back here if we weren't able to have this setback here this room right here really

allows for space to provide accessible slopes for the pedestrian pathways. So not having this space

creates a hardship in that way. The setbacks, as I noted, the property, the building from here to

Overbrook Avenue is over 340 feet. From the back of the building to the property line, which abuts

the other residential property owned by St. Joe's, is more than 280 feet. And it meets the setback

here of course from city avenue because it's over 25 feet i'd like to move on to the next

slide to show you a site section so you can see as i said here's a north site section

here's city avenue here's the side of the proposed residence hall the driveway

here's the property as it slopes to Overbrook Avenue and as I said that distance from this

proposed building to Overbrook Avenue is over 340 feet and here is the proposed building

here's Cardinal Avenue and here's Villager Hall which is also a St. Joseph's University property

and these are very close to one another so it's really makes more sense for this setback to meet

what is happening across the street we understand what setbacks are typically used for so there's a

consistency with the buildings but in this case this building is really a standalone within

acres and acres of property so not to have that setback as i mentioned before would really create

a hardship next we move to the variance for the fencing we're proposing fencing to meet the height

of the existing fencing now we're moving the we have a new entry gate here at the intersection

of cardinal avenue and city avenue and the new fencing meets the existing fencing so they added

to create that whole coordinated and consistent frontage it has to meet the existing

coordinated and consistent frontage. It has to meet the existing fencing. It's eight feet. It

will all be consistent. It doesn't create any danger to the public health, safety, or welfare

in making this the same height. Similarly, and I'll move to the special exception. There's a

special exception required for the removal of heritage trees. Now, in this case, there are

certain heritage trees that are being removed because they are dead, but those heritage trees

that are being removed to allow for the construction of this new residence hall there there are 11

and in replace to replace those 11 heritage trees we are planting about 111 trees throughout this

site and on campus as needed but there will be additional trees planted on this site so it also

so it maintains and actually enhances the on-site landscaping so we don't believe that there's any

detrimental impact to the neighbors with the removal of these 11 trees because the new

plantings of 111 trees actually exceeds the required caliper inches that would be needed.

We're planting about 1,100 caliper inches with the new trees and removing about 1,000,

replacing about 1,000 inches. So we are exceeding that requirement.

uh finally i'd like to move to the renderings which show these are the crests that l and i

is designated as signage these are part of the building fabric these are really reliefs of the

building it's a saint joe's crest it's not illuminated as i said it's really a building

relief there is one here at the intersection of cardinal and city avenue

here's another good view so you can see the setbacks here

and how really consistent it looks coming down cardinal avenue from city avenue

this is the interior of the space and here's the second crest that l and i has designated as a sign

again we don't believe these are signs but if the board does not agree with our position we would

ask for a variance in the alternative with that we would like to state that obviously there's no

specific or detrimental impact with the removal of the heritage trees as it's being replaced

in kind and in excess of what's really required and the grant of the variances really would create

hardship especially with the setback so we believe that this request the special exception

and variance meet the criteria set forth in the zoning code and with that we'd like to elevate

joe kender and tracy luckenbill

tracy luckenbill is allowed to speak could you please state your name and spell for the court

stenographer good afternoon my name is tracy luckenville spelled t-r-a-c-i-l-u-c-k-e-n-b-i-l-l

do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth

i do um do you want to swear in your other client at the same time yes please

i don't see the other client uh miss quigley what was the name joe kender k-e-n-d-e-r okay thank you

so there he is joe joe k-e-n-d-e-r yeah i got it joe kinder is he's going to be allowed to speak

also thank you all right mr tender could you please state your name and spell for the court

sonographer yes my name is joe kender j-o-e joseph k-e-n-d-e-r do you swear for him to tell

the truth the whole truth is nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel thank you chair uh first

tracy i would like you to confirm that your curriculum vitae or resume is attached to your

exhibit 18 and that this is your resume that is my resume yes thank you and also um miss luck

bill you heard my presentation correct i did and is it accurate miss quigley i think there's just

one thing i may have misheard we're actually replacing 311 trees on this parcel so i just

want to make sure that that was clear we're adding a total 376 um for the 11 that we're removing

other than that yes i agree with it i apologize for that uh mistake maybe i misheard it but

I want to make sure that's clear.

No, so we were planning many more than I said. So I appreciate that clarification. So other than that, it was accurate?

No, so we were planning many more than I said, so I appreciate that clarification.

Yes.

And if you were to testify, would you adopt my testimony as if you were testifying today?

I would.

Thank you. Mr. Kender?

Yes.

Did you hear my presentation today?

I did.

And would you agree that it was accurate?

Yes, I agree that it was accurate.

and specifically as it relates to the vital importance of this residence hall and the

granted this very these variances and special exception uh would you believe would you um

state that that is also accurate that is accurate and if you were to testify would you adopt my

testimony with regard to the vital importance of this project as your own yes i would thank you

mr kendra um questions questions no chair no chair comments from our attorney hillary emerson

not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience

no hands here planning commission good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission

the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the special use institutional zoning at this location

this proposal was presented in front of the civic design review board where it was positively

received we feel the applicant has a demonstrated hardship regarding heritage tree removal

accordingly the planning commission recommends the board grant the variances and special exception

thank you hillary how about the one issue that uh miss quigley raised about

she where she disagreed do we have to add anything um i mean the if the board wants to make a finding

on that then we should probably hold it and discuss it because i wasn't previously aware that was an

issue um if um otherwise the board can just vote on it and and proceed as if it you know a variance

was needed but it is up to the board whether they would like to make a separate finding on

that particular issue why don't we just approve this today okay mi 2023 005 680 5800 city line

avenue i vote yes thomas holloman my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes ishmael shaheed my vote

is yes thank you counsel chair before i leave may i move my exhibits into evidence please

absolutely absolutely thank you that concludes my business may i please be excused

after yes you can thank you thank you all very much for your time

number 13 mi 2023 003 725 1 crescent drive robert careless is the attorney

recommendation of non-opposition from the veteran stadium neighbors civic association

Robert Kerales has been promoted.

Mr. Kerales, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?

Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Robert Kerales, C-A-R-E-L-E-S-S.

Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do.

Could you identify your client and relationship to this property?

my client is one crescent holdco llc the record owner of the property

our vice chair has a few questions for you sir sure good afternoon counselor do you agree to

the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do have you emailed in all the required

documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case by these in advance of

this hearing i have thank you please proceed and you have already shared your screen yeah thank you

and then just one quick note that we have a referral not a refusal um but the answer is

still the same um and thank you this we're here on one crescent drive otherwise known as parcel

7c of the philadelphia navy yard the subject property is currently comprised of an existing

office building as a surface accessory parking lot of approximately 300 spaces uh we're here

before you today due to the proposed subdivision of the property into parcel 7c1 and parcel 7c2

7C1 will contain the existing office building and 58 accessory spaces.

Parcel 7C2 will contain the remaining 242 spaces.

And by virtue of the proposed subdivision, will become a non-accessory surface parking lot and thus require a special exception approval from this board under its CMX3 zoning district.

So, with that background, we have our exhibits.

I'll go through them briefly.

Exhibit A1 is our deed into the property.

Exhibit A2 is our Certificate of Tax Clearance. Exhibit A3 is our Application L&I. Exhibit A4, our Appropriate Referral.

Application L&I, Exhibit A4, our appropriate referral for the non-accessory parking lot use. Exhibit A6 is our application to this board. Exhibit A6, I'm sorry, Exhibit A6 is the posting of the property. Exhibit A5 was the application, excuse me, the application of the board.

exhibit a7 just for orientation purposes for the board we are here at the navy yard

where my cursor is is the boundary of the property we have what crescent drive to our north south

13th street to our east intrepid avenue to our south exhibit a8 is the drawings that we submitted

to l and i and then for the board's ease of reference we have the the drawings overlaid

with a mark here so the board can easily see what we're proposing in the blue solid boundary is the

property line that exists today part in the purple color here is proposed parcel 7c1 that is not

before the board today but that would be the existing office building with the 58 accessory

spaces and the green is what is before the board today we're asking for the special exception

due to the subdivision of this from the overall parcel that will become a non-accessory

parking lot however it will continue to function the way it is today part of the reason why we're

asking for this is that the 2022 master plan for the Navy does eventually call for a building site

in this general area with parking mid-block. But that is down the road. And then for the subdivision

purposes, the parking lot will continue to remain and operate as it is today. Exhibit A-9 is our

letter from the RCO. We met with the RCO on October 9th. We have a letter of opposition from

Veterans Stadium Neighbor Civic Association. And Exhibit A-10 is my list of witnesses. Mr. Chairman,

this is a straightforward special exception i know the board is has heard a lot today so

i'd like to just promote mr mark seltzer and miss elizabeth norton as panelists if they