That concludes my business.
May be excused.
Thank you.
Yes, sir.
Have a good day.
Number five, MI 2023-002-087-7356, Frankfurt Avenue.
Zen Jin is the attorney.
Letter of non-opposition from the May 4th Civic Association with unenforceable provisos.
The applicant also provided a petition of support from 32 neighbors.
Mr. Jin.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon, sir.
Could you state your name, please,
a spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N, J-I-N,
1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838,
Philadelphia PA 19103.
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? Yes, my client is
Great Choice Housing Services LLC. Ms. Winnie Jung will be
representing the company. All right, and our vice chair
has a few questions for you, sir. Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the
reading of a refusal and stipulate towards accuracy? I do.
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. Thank you. Please proceed and
share your screen. Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the documentation previously
submitted in support of this application. Can the board see my presentation on the screen?
We can, sir. Thank you. So this is an application with an amended refusal. The original refusal and
amended refusal really makes very little difference when it comes to the actual basis for the refusal.
However, the original application said it was a vacant commercial space on the first floor.
That space has since been occupied by a retail store, essentially an antique shop, which is an accepted use within that district.
However, we are back still with the original refusal item, which is the addition that was built on this property by my client changed the covered space, maximum occupied area from 75% to 78%.
So there's a 3% increase in coverage.
So to better understand what had been done here, we do want to point to that Mayfair Civic looked at this application and came out with non-opposition.
The neighbors in general are also in support based on our petition of support.
But what we did for this property, this is a CMX2 property facing Frankfurt Avenue.
The way the property is designed, it is actually a storefront with a second story above single-family residence.
This picture shows the space that we're talking about, the addition.
Essentially, this property has the commercial space in the front and then a rear garage.
What my client did is my client connected the front building to this existing rear garage,
both of which were originally a part of the property when it was purchased.
But this was because they were having problems with people utilizing the open space in between
for various purposes that were pretty detrimental to the owner and to the neighbors,
such as, you know, doing drugs or going back there throwing trash.
The garage itself was broken into multiple times as well.
They built this addition with the help of a Chinese contractor who apparently did not pick up any permits.
License and Inspections noticed that this is the addition.
In fact, the plans show it clearly.
It is a small addition relative to the overall size of what's existing.
relative to the overall size of what's existing.
But the main goal of the addition...
But the main goal of the addition was, again,
to connect the two so that they can walk safely from inside,
from the front building to the back garage.
Mayfair Civic had reviewed this application with us.
They pointed out a few things.
There's a shared alleyway in the back.
They would prefer not to have trash cans blocking that
because vehicles, emergency vehicles need access.
we agreed to, I understand their provisals are not really enforceable by the ZBA. However,
we are still going to agree to those provisals and we'll make the effort to make sure all those
provisals are lived up to. So essentially what we're asking the board for is a small percentage
of additional coverage on the property to increase the safety for the ownership of the property. And
also, in essence, for the neighboring property as well, because they also do not like to
have the open space, and they actually signed the petition in support.
With that, to better understand, the 3% is about 100 square feet, low over 100 square
feet extra coverage than what is permitted on a 1,000-plus-square-foot lot.
So I'm happy to answer additional questions or redirect to any part of the exhibits that
the board would like to see again. Thank you. Do you want your client to adopt your testimony?
Yes, please. Ms. Jung, J-I-A-N-G, Winnie, should be here. Please raise your hand virtually to be
identified. Ms. Jung, you're able to speak. Please unmute yourself. Hi, could you state your name,
please, and spell for the court stenographer? Sure. Can you hear me? Most certainly. Good.
Thank you. Thank you, Judge. My name is Shin Jiang, X-U-A-N, and last name is J-I-A-N-G. Thank you.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Wendy, did you see my presentation on the screen and also hear my representation to the zoning board?
Can you verify what I have represented to the board is true and correct and adopt my testimony as your own?
Yes, it is true and correct.
Thank you.
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 see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission?
Thank you, Chair Bergman, and good afternoon.
David Fecto with the City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed use zoning at this location.
The proposed dimensional variance from the occupied area standard in the zoning code is within 3% of what is required.
So under the Planning Commission staff's policy, this is a minor variance in keeping with the spirit and intent of the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the proposed dimensional variance from the occupied area provision in the zoning code.
Thank you. MI 2023-002-087, 7356 Frankfurt Avenue. I vote yes with proviso per amended refusal dated 9-22-23.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell. My vote is yes with Proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed. My vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you. Have a good evening.
Okay. Number eight, MI 2023-005-708-6401 Wayne Avenue. Steve Masters is the attorney. There's a letter of non-opposition from the West Mount Airy neighbors.
and the applicant also provided a petition
and support signed by approximately eight neighbors.
Mr. Masters.
Mr. Masters is coming back in as a panelist.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Masters, you've already been sworn.
Just for the record, could you state your name?
Steve Masters from the law firm of JustLaws.
And could you identify your client,
their relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is a LLC, 6401 Wayne Avenue. Today, I have two representatives of the ownership entity with us to testify, to adopt my testimony and to provide additional testimony. And that will be Jim Cassidy, who is also the architect on the project, and Walter King.
Okay, and our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do want to go over the refusal just because there was some confusion with multiple appeals on the case, but we do not contest the accuracy of the refusal.
I do want to go over the refusal just because there was some...
Understood. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have. And we also sent in a corrected version of the exhibit binders that was separated by the two applications that were originally put in for this appeal.
Thanks, counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you. All right.
Good afternoon again, members of the board. Let's see. Get my screen to work better here.
All right. We are here on 6401 Wayne Avenue. This is the main building on this lot. And then we also have a carriage house, which is next to the main building.
The main structure on the lot was converted into a school for emotionally disturbed children back in 1966, and it has not been used as a single-family residence for at least 60 years.
We contend that an unnecessary hardship exists here because the premises as built and as existing cannot be converted into a permitted use without demolition and extensive reconstruction.
We cited several cases for that in our application for appeal. In addition, as we'll show you, the lot is surrounded mostly by large multifamily apartment buildings. And so the surrounding area has dissimilar and disharmonious uses to a single family home.
And finally, we have some refusals dealing with the off-street parking. We're providing eight off-street parking spaces. There were originally four at the property, but because of the size and the location of where the driveway is on the lot, we can't accommodate the van accessible parking.
And one of those eight off-street parking spaces goes into the front side, the front yard, the front setback.
And so for those reasons, the physical nature of the lot prevents us from being able to comply with those parts of the code.
I'm going to start with our refusals.
So, as I mentioned in the beginning of my comments, there was some kind of a miscommunication
between our expediter and LNI, and we were asked to submit this project in two applications as
opposed to one. We have withdrawn that first application because this second application
that we have the refusal in front of us is essentially all of the refusals that are proper
here. So we have a refusal for the construction. We're adding to the carriage house, creating a
dormer so that it can be converted into livable space for one of the units. And we have a refusal
for extending a non-conforming structure that's, it's basically right on the property line. So
it's too close. It's too much into the rear yard. We have a refusal for two primary structures.
We have, of course, this was a school. This was never, it hasn't been a single family home for
over 60 years, but the carriage house would be a second primary structure for that one
apartment. And then seven apartments will be in the main building. We also have some refusals
on the parking that I mentioned earlier, and those are because we're putting in all eight
parking spaces that are required for the eight units, but they're just encroaching on the
front setback and we can't create a van accessible spot because it's too close to the property
boundary. And then the multifamily use is a refusal because this property, despite its historic use
as a school, is still zoned single-family. These are our petitions. You'll see that
two of them, 361 West Johnson, is literally the adjoining property on the east side of our
the east side of our project. And we also have a signature from the Wayne Avenue Realty Partners,
of our project, and we also have
which is the adjoining property on the north side of the project. And Mr. King will be
testifying a little bit more about those signatures. This is our letter of non-opposition
from westmanary neighbors uh it wasn't an extremely well attended meeting but uh there
was one neighbor from somewhat from somewhat far a farther distance there was no near neighbors
we do have those near neighbor uh signatures on the petition but most of the attendees at the
meeting were either in support or not opposed um or abstained there was only one um opposed who was
as a neighbor and one vote in opposition from the RCO itself.
I'm going to ask for Jim Cassidy to be recognized and promoted.
I'd like him to walk through the plans with me at this point.
Jim Cassidy has been allowed to speak.
Please unmute.
Sir, could you please state your name and spell it, please, for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Jim Cassidy.
It's J-I-M-C-A-S-S-I-D-Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Good afternoon, Jim.
So would you like to start with this presentation here?
Yeah, I think so.
Okay. First, can you just tell the board where you're employed and what your background is?
I'm an architect and I'm the owner of C2 Architecture. We've been practicing architecture
in Philadelphia for over 15 years. And would it be fair to say that this project is to preserve
a historic, not necessarily designated historic, but a legacy historic property in the neighborhood?
Yeah, I also live in this section of Germantown, Mount Airy, and this is typical for these
oversized homes that are 7,000, 8,000 square feet that just don't make sense for modern
living and they end up being apartments. And often they're long stay. I live next door to one
building like this. All right. So what we're looking at here, Jim, is this is the main building
and the carriage house. Could you tell the board what the dimensions are of those two structures?
uh no because they're not listed on the plan right now okay should i scoot over to a different
i think if we get into the uh here we get into the square footages
okay all right so we'll we'll we'll pause on that question um
this view is an existing view of the property?
It is.
And this is the proposed changes to the property?
Correct. And here you can see the setback line going through the carriage house,
um necessitating that variance and then because this building sits on a corner we have two front
yard setbacks so you can see how parking spaces one and half of parking space two
are on the wrong side of that setback if it was a side yard setback they would have fit so
and how many parking spaces were required by the code
one per one per unit right which would be eight yes okay
go to now we're going to be looking at some of the floor plans yeah go to the first floor plan
this is all right first floor yeah so there
Seven units in the building. There are two on the first floor with a common space.
You can see unit two is in the pinkish color. It's about 800 square feet.
You can see unit two is in the pinkish color. It's about 800 square feet. It's a one-bedroom