Everyone's in.
Lekisha we ready? Yes chair um 29 attendees so we can start when you wish. Okay thank you.
Good morning my name is Bill Bergman and I will be chairing this morning's EBA hearings.
With me is Carol Tenere our vice chair. Present Mr. Chairman. Ismael Shahid our board secretary.
President Mr. Chairman Thomas Holliman our board member President Mr. Chairman and James Snell our
board member President Mr. Chairman also present is Hillary Emerson our attorney and Lakeisha Dandy
our ZBA hearing supervisor before we begin here is our virtual format be advised proceedings are
being recorded by participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded a video will be
available by contacting tonyasunkett 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, if 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
for the property in question. And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for
a testimony. Any comments should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Sunke. Let's look
at what continuances we have this morning. Number nine. MI 2022-003-407-4811 Woodland Avenue
That case is continued. Number 10, MI 2022-003-514-5518 North Fairhill Street. That case
is continued. Number 12, MI 2022-003-409-4830 B Street. That case is continued. And case number
15, MI-2022-003-184-780 South 2nd Street. That case is continued until December 14th at 3.30pm.
Are there any comments or statements relative to the continuances?
Good morning, Chair. This is Yvette Benton. I see no hands at this time.
Are there any other requests for continuance?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Thank you.
I have several, no exhibits.
So number six, MI 2022, 003-480-150 East Champlose Avenue.
I have no exhibits first listing.
Champlose Properties is the listed owner.
i see no hands up at this time chair so mi 2022 003 480 150 east champleo street
that case is continued number seven mi 2022 003 026 173 west wing of hawkins street
Manuel Melendez is the listed applicant.
No exhibits, first listing.
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Thank you.
So MI 2022-003-026-173 West Wing of Hocken Street, that case is continued.
Number eight, MI 2021-000-129-521-Haverford Avenue.
this is the second listing no exhibits new link properties is the listed owner
i see no hands at this time chair no that mi 2021 001 129 5221
No, that MI 2021-001-129-5221 Haverford Avenue, that case is continued.
Number 11, MI 2021-001-198-3601 North 5th Street.
Paul Chang is the listed applicant.
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
No, MI 2021-001-198-3601-North Fish Street.
That case is continued.
Mark must be tried.
And number 16, MI 2022-003-410-123 Leverington Avenue.
Crystal Johnson is the applicant.
We're missing several exhibits.
I see no hands at this time.
So MI 2022-003-410-123 Leverington Avenue.
That case is continued.
We're going to start with number,
our regular list number five mi 2022 004 396 2901 grant avenue councilman brian o'neill is
the appellant adam labor is the attorney for the applicant could both come on please
Mr. Laver and Councilman O'Neill are coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Adam Laver of Blank-Rome.
I'm sorry, Chair, did you want Vern also?
uh i'm not sure that he is for this case he may be regarding another matter yeah i think yes yes
he is that's it's he's not on this case councilman o'neill
adam while we're waiting could you spell your name for the court reporter please
Sure. Adam Laver, L-A-V as in Victor, E-R.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Do we see the councilman in the audience?
yes he was promoted to panelist chair okay councilman o'neill can you please unmute yourself
i just thought i had um yes can you hear me we can't yes for the record could you spell your
state your name is spelled for the court reporter yes brian o'neill b-r-i-a-n-o apostrophe n-e-i-l-l
right do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do councilman uh you go you go first okay um this is a um uh a matter that the i believe it's
here on on the reconsideration it is and um the reason for that is and i and i think everyone
will agree um no one for whatever reason no one knew about this case um when it was listed no
one showed up i didn't know about it and that's the that's the reason for the reconsideration is
that uh the community did not receive uh receive notice or else we would have been on it this is a
case that i've known about uh for quite a while and um was ready to oppose for the reasons i will
state right should i go ahead with that i why don't why don't we go with the case we're going
to start right okay sure so can we do we go with uh uh mr labor putting on his case first
actually council councilman uh this is hillary yet because you requested the reconsideration
and it was granted we'll have you present first as to why um you would like the board to reconsider
their decision to grant in this case. And then Mr. Laver will respond. Okay. And we'll get a
recommendation from the Planning Commission as well. Okay. Well, as I stated, the reason
for the reconsideration was, one, we didn't. We, the community, the RCO, my office, didn't know
But the RCO, my office, didn't know about the original hearing, and it appeared to be an uncontested case when it came before the board many months ago.
about the
And as soon as I found out about that situation and that decision, I filed for reconsideration.
So this is an industrial zone, piece of ground abutting the Northeast Airport on Grand Avenue.
It's an industrial park.
It was one of the city's first.
It goes back to, I believe, 1974.
And it is a half mile or so, quarter mile from the boulevard.
As you approach the boulevard going west on Grant, after you get past the airport's clear zone, you come to Bluegrass Road.
You've got very big shopping centers on both sides of that street facing the boulevard and backing up to Bluegrass Road.
Lots of retail, commercial, supermarkets, you name it.
there's a whole lot of activity and available properties there for the kind of use we're
talking about, which is basically what we call fast food, but it's, I think, characterized as
a restaurant with drive-thru. That's going west. When you go east towards Academy Road,
which is about the same distance going east.
You have the Academy Road is the western boundary of the airport.
And there's retail on both sides of Grant Avenue,
fairly large shopping center on the south side of Grant and two large.
It was a former car dealer, and it's now a large Wawa with gas and a big CVS.
So this is strictly an industrial area.
On the south side, directly across from it, is Clement Muller, a very large beer distributor, a wholesale.
And they've been there for a long time, large employer.
And then next to that is a fairly new use. This is in, by the way, Councilman Driscoll's office, his boundaries and mine. He's on the south side of Grant. I'm on the north side where this property is. And there's a big Amazon warehouse that was recently built.
So this is so out of character and so much lacking in hardship.
It's an overbuild on this property already.
These properties originally had a 40-year setback, 40 years of de-restriction and a very large setback.
So the buildings are set back fairly far from Grand Avenue.
So that de-restriction ran out 10 or 15 years ago.
But this property is already built in front of the original building, a very large storage warehouse property, several stories high.
And there's a little bit of ground left that they haven't expanded to.
And if they were to expand with something more appropriate, we would probably be having a positive discussion about it.
But they want to go to pure retail, fast food type of business.
There is no user yet.
They want permission to go out and look. And I would just ask the board to
refuse to grant this variance or to remove it if that's the proper
procedure because this does not at all belong on this property or in this industrial zone. It's
totally um uh out of out of character and it's also it has ended a setback the required setback
for 20 feet on top of it so it's it's a um uh it's an undesirable um push the uh the rco met
uh by zoom on monday night i believe it was 13 to nothing against this uh councilman driscoll and
uh councilman driscoll and i have discussed this matter at length uh spoke to him about 10 minutes
I have discussed this matter at length, spoke to him about
ago he said he would try to get on the call but he said i could speak for him he is he is totally
opposed to this as the uh representative of the um uh south side of grand avenue as well that um
whose properties face this uh but this is on the north side this is on the north side correct
That's correct. And that's in my district. So, and PIDC historically has been opposed to any kind of retail in the industrial park areas. And there's quite a few of them.
And believe me, when the zoning code was changed 10 or 12 years ago, PIDC did a study of jobs in the city and the highest paying jobs.
And they're all over this area, from Grand Avenue up.
They're high paying jobs, family raising jobs, and there's a lot of them.
And part of their study was to make sure that we don't keep chipping away at industrial property and making it retail, commercial, or residential.
And that was their argument.
And they came through with flying colors in terms of the outcome of their study.
So I would ask the board to keep this industrial, not allow the variance for commercial, retail, fast food.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councilman.
uh mr labor uh good morning mr chairman members of board councilman o'neill uh it's it's a very
uncomfortable uh situation uh when uh a respected council member such as uh councilman o'neill uh
is unfortunately in this in this position but we we understand the matter of principle
that's here. And I have to put an objection on the record at the beginning regarding statements
of hearsay and statements that have gone beyond the strict limitations of the board's own
regulations at 6.3 on reconsideration matters. Also, we have not received any exhibits in
accordance with board regulations, and that's important to note. Having said that, and pardon
me for for for doing so uh i i we are we are in a very limited unusual uh situation on reconsideration
in as counsel for these uh boards stated we are looking at a narrow issue of what has the appellant
the councilman raised before the board. And what he has raised, as we heard it and saw it in his
papers, is that no one knew about this case. And that is why two years ago, when we appeared before
the board, apparently there wasn't representation from the councilman's office. Already in the
board's record you have a brief from blank room dated december 14th of 2020 which was shared with
uh councilman o'neill's office which has not only statements to the contrary but copies of numerous
emails and correspondences with counsel. So respectfully, there was knowledge. And what's
regrettable in this instance is that all of this discussion, commentary, and indications of position
should have occurred back on December 2nd of 2020, I believe it was, when the original
hearing took place and when the original determination was made by the board that there
was hardship. It's not appropriate to retry the case. There is a full record, and I understand
And from both prior counsel for the board who was involved with this matter, as well as Ms. Emerson, that the record from December has been incorporated into the board's review.
But most importantly, on the limited issue of knowledge, it's very clear in the record that there was knowledge.
I can go beyond that, which
I can go beyond that, which I don't think is necessary as a matter of law, but I'd like to do so briefly to talk about a couple other things.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair?
I have a piece of information that I'd forgotten.
I just spoke to Alice Udovich, who does my zoning.
I apologize, but it became crystal clear as soon as I just spoke to Alice, because I remember it.
Greg Waldman from the Planning Commission told my office, told Alice Udovich in my office, that this matter had been withdrawn.
That is the basis of why we didn't know about it, because we understood from the City Planning Commission, Greg Waldman, that this was withdrawn.
So as far as I'm concerned, this is cut and dry that we did not know about. How can you go ahead with a case when the Planning Commission and the applicant went ahead with the case, knowing that or should have known that the Planning Commission understood and had told my office that the case was withdrawn?
This is not a simple, where there were a bunch of emails.
We were very aware of this case and ready to attack it and go after it as, you know, as opposition.
But when you get told something is withdrawn and you get told not by some stranger, but by the Planning Commission.
Councilman, so you know, we have it in our notes that your office understood it was withdrawn.
Thank you.
Continue, Adam.
Thank you.
that's uh very troubling what was just shared in the first time that we're learning about that um
as a matter of record uh the planning commission did testify at the hearing below and in fact the
The presentation was in response to exhibits provided by the planning, recommendations provided by the Planning Commission.
But as I was saying a moment ago, 6.3 of the regulations on reconsiderations allows the board to rehear limited matters if there were special circumstances that were not known
and could not reasonably have been known by the requester at the time of the hearing.
In this instance, again, in the December 14th brief that was submitted,
We have communications dated August the 25th, August the 26th, September 1st, September 2nd, and forward September 21 and continuing on.
And so I really do wish that we had this full discussion and allowance for everyone to participate, which we had tried valiantly to do back two years ago.
It is simply not fair to a property owner to have this come up at this point in time.
um the record shows that the subject property itself is 375 000 square feet that the proposed
use would take a footprint of 1720 square feet a minuscule portion of the small campus
the record reflects that the campus does not have a cafeteria or food service use
to support the existing on-site businesses, this falls in with a property owner who has a track
record of industrial and keeping it that way. I'm not here to re-argue that, but simply to
refresh the board's recollection regarding its determination of hardship in this case
in allowing an existing Philadelphia business to continue as industrial into the future.
We would be pleased to answer any questions or speak more specifically, but we return to what is a narrow issue of law, that on reconsideration, we are limited to the councilman's grounds for reconsideration, which I'm trying to address.
One last note, which I think is slightly.
One last note, which I think is slightly confusing, is why did this take two years to get back to the zoning board?
The zoning board determined in December of 2020 that there was hardship, granted a notice of decision, a permit was obtained.
Councilman O'Neill's office did request reconsideration.
As a procedural matter, we believed that the reconsideration request was not appropriate based on 6.3.
We went to the Court of Common Pleas on that procedural issue.
The Court said, yes, it is within the Board's purview to grant reconsideration and to look at the narrow issues.
So that is where we are.
was reconsideration appropriate mr chairman and members of the board based on a purported
contention that no one knew about the case uh in the months preceding or not and i think that the
record is quite clear uh that there was appropriate communication thank you questions from the board
yes mr chairman could council give us what's a vote for yes means and a vote for no means
on this case tom we're going to hold the vote okay thank you mr chairman we're going to hold
the vote for executive session okay thank you any other questions from the board
hillary should we open this to the virtual audience
no mr chair um this is a reconsideration um hearing that it was limited to one planning
yes we do want we do want planning because it is it is okay um consideration hearings they get
they do give um their opinion mr chair could i could i just make one final comment you can
okay thank you um council mentioned that um it's not fair to the property owner
i would just ask the board to balance that against what's fair to the community to the
other business owners to the um area at large and uh this is something that fortunately um
There is no lease. There's never been a lessor. It's something that's going so far outside.
I don't have one retail in forget 300,000 or whatever it was square feet or that that this is.
I have stadiums of of industrial ground in the industrial parks all around the far northeast, starting at Grand Avenue and going up thousands of jobs.
There is not one retail fast food operation in any of those.
And there's a complete lack of hardship.
But the fairness issue really struck me because this is fortunately something that wasn't built.
We don't have somebody operating.
They're just looking to make more money.
And I think the fairness has to be weighed on both sides.
Thank you.
I understand.
objection to that statement i i understand counsel uh planning commission
good morning chair bergman members of the board ian hegarty representing the philadelphia city
planning commission last name spelled h-e-g-a-r-t-y you swear a firm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you and thank you chair good morning board
members um with regards to the merits of this case the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the existing i2 zoning at this location zoning variances for retail and consumer oriented uses
in industrial zoning have a negative cumulative impact on the viability of the city's industrial
centers variances like this although they may appear insignificant have substantially eroded
available industrial land throughout the city this proposed variance directly conflicts with
both the comprehensive plan and the city's industrial retention policy we recommend that
board deny the variance thank you so mi2022-004-396-2901 grant avenue we will hold for
review an executive session and vote on 11 30 22 at 9 30 a.m thank you council thank you
Mr. Chairman, may I have the opportunity to just briefly question Mr. Haggerty?
Sure. Go ahead, Mr. Haggerty.
uh good good morning mr haggerty just just a a question on um the uh planning commission's
Good morning, Mr. Haggerty.
apparent uh change in uh opinion are you aware that the revised proviso plans that had been
approved to the board incorporated all of the planning commission's suggestions regarding the
proposed use yes and uh is it a fair statement that uh the applicant worked uh with the planning
commission regarding that presentation that provides presentation that had been previously
submitted it is thank you very much nothing further thank you thank you chairman board members
uh councilman o'neill and staff all right thank you so this will be held for review in executive
session and voted on 11 30 22 at 9 30 a.m thank you mr chair this is hillary i just i want to
interject because um i forgot to to reference this earlier and mr labor reminded me thank you
um the record from the prior hearing and in december is incorporated um into this hearing
i just wanted to state that clearly for the record thank you mr labor and the brief following please
Thank you.
Thank you.
We're going to go to case number one, MI 2022, 003-518-1340 Alter Street.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
Letter of non-opposition from Paschal Square Civic Association.
Mr. Anastasio is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
Morning, counsel.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Vern, V-E-R-N, last name A-N-A-S-T-A-S-I-O, Anastasio.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Chair, before we start on this case, I had my hand raised for 780 South 2nd Street,
which was continued until December 14th.
Yeah, I did it.
that would be the fourth listing and i i was just i raised my hand earlier asking that the case
be marked must be tried since it was the fourth listing um i will mark that must be tried thank
you thank you i just wanted to clarify this is hillary i just wanted to clarify the for
the record um we actually we have that as the third listing not the fourth listing for this case
um but we can we can mark it must be tried thank you seems like four bern could you identify your
client and relationship to this property yes uh i represent satchco llc sassine abdujada is the
um primary of satchco okay our vice chair has a few questions thank you
hi mr anastasia do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
i do have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the
refusal or referral photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing
and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes to all of that okay great you may
proceed and begin with sharing your screen and i just want to mention one other thing council
Council member Mark Swill has non-opposition to this case.
Thank you.
If he is in the virtual audience, could you please promote architect Ian Toner?
Do we see him?
Yes, he's coming back in as a panelist chair.
Thank you.
Good morning.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
good morning is the architect there
yes he's um coming in as a panelist i'm not sure why it's taken sure thank you
hi everybody hi could you state i'm finally in yes well that's good could you state your name
and spell for the court reporter sure ian toner of toner architects i-a-n-t-o-n-e-r right do you
swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes proceed counsel thank
you mr chairman this is a 1340-42 altar street it's for the complete demolition of an existing
a two-story row home, and for the construction of an attached structure with a roof deck, roof access.
And for the construction of an attached structure with a roof deck, roof access, multifamily household living for three dwelling units.
This is the property in question. This is what would be demolished.
And as this green line indicates, it'll take 340 and 342. It's basically a double lot.
This is pictures of the rear.
and this is interior photos of the existing row home there's a street view looking east
street view looking west
as you can see there are taller buildings here a three-story building here
now these are proof of posting
and we also have the deed and what should pass for a tax clearance in this case
and with that I'm going to pull up the plans
basement is utilities we have a den and a bedroom with a access well
the first floor is a large living room dining room kitchen open sort of layout another bath
and a bedroom second floor we have again large open space living room dining room kitchen
for one of the units the rear is the second because of the center stair
You would access the third unit.
The property itself does not exceed height requirements.
And if Mr. Toner would like to weigh in on the design itself, I will leave that up to him.
sure uh i mean the the upper i think if you move up on the page there verne you can see the third
floor plan also i think you missed that as you were summarizing but i think you're right um these
are all three units are two bedrooms all three units have outdoor space uh the reason we're
doing the bi-level units on the upper floors is so that each of those units can have access to
the roof. The ground floor unit has a private portion of the rear yard that is fenced off from
the public portion of the rear yard. The public portion of the rear yard to the right is where
all the trash cans will be, so they'll be back off the street but outdoors so that they're not
in the building. We have an access way at the ground level from the sidewalk to that portion
of the rear yard for both egress and for bringing the trash through so that there's no issues with
bringing trash through the building or any reason why any of the tenants wouldn't want to use the
trash area and i think by all other measures aside from it being three units we're meeting
all the dimensional requirements of the code so the only thing we're on a double wide lot
So instead of having two single-family homes, we have one triplex proposed.
And I think Vern, you have the rendering there if they want to see that on the next slide.
And that's the exterior rendering. It will eliminate a vacant, neglected lot and rehab
a completely dilapidated shell of a single-family home and be a real upgrade to the block.
and the RCO agreed.
We have the community straw poll
and the committee vote
voted six to zero
in non-opposition.
Here's proof of mailing
to 75 individual households
of the flyer that went out.
Here's a copy of the flyer.
And the system was down,
but we were able to, in fact,
get a screenshot that we did pass for the tax clearance.
And with that, I'm going to ask my client to raise his virtual hand.
Sir, please unmute yourself and excuse me.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
My name is Sassine, I'll try to see how it can work.
Sorry, do you have two devices on?
Sorry, do you have two devices on?
Yes, I do.
Yes, I do.
Yes, you have to mute one because we're getting feedback.
Okay, can you hear me?
It's still giving feedback.
Maybe you need to move away from the other device.
can you hear me now yes could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
that's spelled s-a-s-e-e-n last name is a-b-u-j-a-w-d-e-h right do you swear a firm to tell
truth the whole truth is nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel thank you mr chair sissy did
you hear my presentation to the board this morning yes i did and was it true and accurate to the best
of your knowledge yes and would you will you adopt it as your own testimony yes thank you
mr chair um i have nothing further other than in a wrap uh because this use is uh consistent with
other multifamilies on the block because we are taking an abandoned vacant shell and also
a blighted lot combining them both to provide three excellent housing products I respectfully
request so council the the other large properties that you showed on the block were they multifamily
there are multi yes the real tall ones are multifamily right okay thank you questions
from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual
audience i see you know he is chair planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty
for the philadelphia city planning commission board members the comprehensive plan recommends
no change to the existing rsa 5 single family zoning on this block the single family zoning
has been in place on this block face since at least 1988 we don't feel the applicant's hardship
claim has been supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or conditions of this
property and so the city planning commission recommends that the board deny the variance
thank you so mi2022-003-518-1340 altar street i vote yes carol tennery my vote is yes thomas
holloman my vote is yes james snell my vote is yes ishmael ishmael shaheed my vote is yes
thank you thank you thank you council
so mi2022 number two mi2022 003 461 3161 richmond
katerista belasca is the owner pro se this is the first listing we've been notified of a possible
withdrawal i see no hands at this time chair
hillary i'm going to continue this until we hear from the the uh the owner okay
Yes, Mr. Chair, thank you.
So MI-2022-003-461-3161 Richmond Street, this case is continued, and Mark must be tried.
Number three, MI-2022-003-481-1638 South 18th Street, Henry Clinton is the attorney.
At this point, we're still waiting on an RCO letter.
we also have a petition signed by approximately 19 neighbors in non-opposition
morning mr chairman members of the board
could you state your name please
right um do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do could you identify your client in relationship to the property
Sure. My client is Xing Shang Hang. That's S-H-I-S-H-E-N-G-H-A-N-G. And Mr. Hang is on the call with me.
Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good morning, Mr. Clinton. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with required documents consisting of proof of ownership tax compliance,
a copy of the refusal or referral photos under plans of the property five days in advance of
this hearing and have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter yes to all the above except
Yes, to all of the above, except the letter from the RCO. I don't know that it's in the package yet. I just was on the phone with the president of the Point Breeze Community Development Coalition, and he said the letter will be forthcoming.
the letter from the RCO I don't know that it's in the package yet
So, but we do have there's non-opposition and or support.
Okay, great. You may proceed and begin with sharing your screen.
Thank you, Mr. Neri. Morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Is that visible?
Yes, it is.
So this is 1638 South 18th Street.
This is my presentation package containing exhibits AA to A11, which I ask to be admitted into evidence.
And the refusal is the key document.
This is a CMX zoning district.
and the request is that the existing commercial space on the first floor and the two apartments
above, which have been in place for at least 10 years, be legalized. Basically, you're permitted
in CMX1, as Chairman knows, commercial on the first and one unit above. This is a large corner
property, as I'll show you from the photographs, and there's two apartments above the commercial
space, and we're asked that that be legalized. These are the signatures in support of the
application. As the chairman mentioned, this is an aerial photograph of the corner property.
You can see it's 100% lot coverage. It's a three-story property, a pretty large footprint
on the second floor and on the third floor. There's separate entrances for the commercial.
This is not a garage. This is a commercial space with a roll-down gate just to protect the glass
on the front and the side. And there's entrances for the apartments to the rear.
Just some photographs of the other corners. Excuse me, this is still the property. This is
looking west. Commercial space on the first, one apartment on the second floor.
another apartment on the third floor. This is one of the properties across the street. I'm just
trying to give the board a flavor of the corner properties at this intersection.
And then some interior photographs to show you that this property is indeed already commercial
on the first floor, which is currently vacant. And then this is one kitchen on the second floor,
stairs leading up to the other kitchen on the third floor this is the basement wanted to show
the board that there's already three panels actually four panels one for the common usage
and one for the commercial and one for the two apartments which are occupied and there's leases
in place we also have floor plans again as I said to the board the basement is for the mechanicals
and there is a powder room there.
On the first floor is an existing commercial
with a powder room, a small office area.
And here's the entrances to get upstairs to the apartments.
Second floor, two existing bedrooms,
bath and a kitchen.
And on the third floor,
there's also two existing bedrooms.
elevations, front side, and I just wanted to show the board that this historically has been
three uses. I found a zoning record from 1984,
which is at the end of my package, just indicating from 1984 that at one point this was
a drugstore on the first floor, an office on the second floor, and one family above.
So we're asking the board, in light of the fact that there's a unique situation that my client did not create,
we're asking that this non-conforming use be granted a variance.
It's basically not altering the essential character of the neighborhood.
We're not imposing any development restrictions on adjacent properties.
It doesn't affect any properties, light or air.
It's in harmony with code, and it's in harmony with the community group as we met with them.
And with that, Mr. Chairman, I would rest and entertain questions.
You want to have your testimony adopted, Mr. Clinton?
Mr. Hange, can you raise your hand, please?
Mr. Hange, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
H-A-N-G
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Mr. Clinton. Mr. Shig, good morning. Hi. Did you hear my testimony concerning the
application for variances at your property at 1638 South 18th Street? Yes. If you had the
opportunity to testify would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct yes thank you
mr she questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman thank you questions
or comments from the virtual audience i see no hands at this time chair planning thank you chair
bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission board members the comprehensive
plan recommends no change the existing cmx1 zoning on this corner property as we've seen
this is a legalization of a long-standing non-conforming use and the variance represents
the least modification necessary since it conforms to the existing building and with
a prior legal use city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variance
thank you and um hillary we have mr clinton's testimony that he spoke with the rco and they're
in favor so we can call for a vote right uh if that is if that is what the chair would like to
do that is fine thank you so mi2022-003-481-1638 south 18th street i vote yes carl tenary my vote
is yes thomas holloman my vote is yes jane snell my vote is yes
thank you counsel thank you mr chairman for that accommodation and members of the board it is
appreciated thank you so the next case will be we're going to hear two together will be number
four and number 13. Number four, MI 2022-003-506-2013 Germantown Avenue, Parcel A. And number
13 is MI 2022-003-511-2013 Germantown Avenue, Parcel B. We have the Nars Square Civic Association
letter of support and we have a letter from the seventh district council person letter of support
mr knockamson is the attorney yes good afternoon uh mr chair members of the board
alan a-l-a-n class name knockamson n-o-c-h-u-m-s-o-n one two three south wide street
suite 1600 philadelphia pa 1910 thank you do you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth i do could you identify your client in relationship to this property
please yes each of these properties are owned by h and m developments llc and in the virtual
audience i have uh seaton sasmas as the owner's representative okay our vice chair has a few
question counsel hi mr knockamson do you agree to we avoid the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy i do have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance
the copy of the refusal or referral photos under plans of this property five days in advance of
the hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes in all respects okay great
you may proceed and begin with sharing your screen thank you this has been declared alan
knox someday i know i see the afternoon it's actually a little stressful to actually have
well the chair declared it earlier oh he did when you see you by the way a little while ago you said
good afternoon i did say good afternoon well you got your afternoon on your mind because of all the
work you have this afternoon i know you know what i don't do morning hours this is very this is
infrequent that i actually do the morning so i'm on autopilot just like miss tenary the vice chair
tenary is on autopilot when she asked me these questions i just think it's afternoon all right
so let's pretend if there's it's afternoon somewhere in the world that's right so i'm here
to present together which we did give separate presentation materials but for purposes of this
presentation to streamline the process we're going to combine them 2013 germantown avenue parcel a
2013 germantown germantown avenue parcel b and which is also known as 2010 north randolph street
in the presentation materials you'll see our notices of repusal are uh
In the presentation materials, you'll see our notices of refusal, our letters of support from Norris Square Community Alliance, as well as the letter that you've referenced, Mr. Chair, from the 7th Councilmanic District, also in support.
Nearby CMX two residential multifamily properties.
The reason why I indicated that in my presentation materials is this is a CMX property, two property, where two residential units are allowed, but also a commercial unit.
And all we're asking for is not, we're not even trying to swap out the commercial unit for a residential unit.
We're asking to absolve us of our requirements of having a commercial unit altogether.
These are rather small lots.
Also, it would be out of character to have a commercial unit either facing on Randolph Street or Germantown on this block.
So you'll see that as well.
Maps in the area, photographs of the property, or plans and drawings, or RCO meeting notices or applications for appeal or deed to the property,
showing that they are owned by H&M Developments, LLC, and our certificates or certificate of tax clearance.
showing that the properties are in good standing with the city of Philadelphia as it relates to
real estate taxes. Again, in the virtual audience is Mr. Sazmaz, who will adopt my testimony,
adopt what I say as his own testimony at the conclusion of my presentation.
All right, so our notices of refusal. Again, these are both CMX2 properties.
You know, the first one is facing Germantown 2013 Germantown Parcellet, but it's really
2013 Germantown Avenue, and we're looking to put a duplex there. And because it's a CMX2 property,
we have the refusal for eliminating the commercial components. Again, out of character to have
commercial on this block of Germantown, and you'll see that from further along in my presentation.
We also have two slight refusals for dimensional reasons.
First is our rear yard setback is 8 feet, 9 1⁄4 inches, and the requirement is 9 feet.
Again, de minimis request here, modification of the Philadelphia zoning code.
Again, these are not large lots to begin with, and that's one of the reasons why we're asking to remove the commercial component.
we just want to have a functional floor plan having a commercial component and furthermore if
we were required to comply with the very yard setback requirements we just want to have a
functional floor plan even for the two remaining residential units and then the open area
requirements 75 percent open excuse me maximum area requirement 75 percent maximum area is
required at 669 square feet for this property. We are asking for 82.6 square feet of
occupied area at 737 square feet. Again, de minimis under the circumstances,
and it's really to provide a functional floor plan for those two residential units.
And then you'll see 2013 Germantown Avenue, Parcel B, which is also known as 2010 North
randolph street again same refusals uh one for use uh because we're asking to eliminate the
commercial components again out of character and you'll see from the zoning map too uh especially
with north randolph uh that block beside the block is mainly rm1 uh and would be out of character to
require commercial on that side of uh the block uh additionally we have the maximum occupied area
refusal similar to the first matter as well as the minimum very yard as well again both
de minimis requests and then our letter of support and you know again the north square community
alliance recognized the fact that you know eliminating the commercial component makes sense
because we're having roomier residential units and also they would be out of character to require
commercial component on a on a building structure facing both germantown and that avenue on that
block as well as north randolph street and then due to the community support the seventh district
council office also issued a letter in support of this these projects and then just to give you
an idea of you know what we're doing is not out of character based on what's you know there more
previously approved by this board. 2055 Germantown Avenue is full residential, even though it is
CMX2. 2047 Germantown Avenue is full residential, even though it's CMX2. 2045 Germantown is full
2045 Germantown is full residential, even though it's CMX2.
residential, even though it's CMX2.
This 2036 Germantown Avenue has been approved in 2021 under calendar number MI-2020-003084
to allow for full residential, even though it's CMX2.
And then you can also see 2021 Germantown Avenue as well under appeal number ZP-2021-008824 has also been vetted by this board and approved for full residential, even though it's a CMX2 property.
And then maps to the area where we are on Germantown Avenue and on North Randolph Street.
As you can see, it's kind of a crooked lot.
I think maybe that's why we have some of the dimensional variances that we have.
But basically, even though this block is all CMX2, there are many examples on the Germantown Avenue side of it having full residential, as noted before.
And then, as you can see from the North Randolph Street side, again, it's kind of out of character to have commercial there, just like Germantown Avenue, and there is a significant RN1 presence there as well.
And then you can see from the photographs, there's not much commercial here, even though this is primarily commercial zoning, again, would be out of character to have this requirement on us, especially with lots that are, what's what the lot sizes are?
The lots are the Germantown Avenue side's 891, the lot size, and then the North Randolph Street side is 892.
So these are rather small lots to require a commercial component, plus two residential.
That's why we're trying to eliminate the commercial components.
And then photographs of the property, you know, these are vacant lots.
This is from the Germantown Avenue side.
This has been a vacant lot.
Again, Google Earth only goes back as far as 2007, but it was a vacant lot back then as well.
So it's been a vacant lot for approximately 15 years or more than 15 years.
This is the Randolph Street side.
Again, a vacant lot.
And as you can see, it has been a vacant lot for some time.
Notice was sent or posted properly for both of these properties.
Just want to get proof of posting for both of them.
And then this is German Town Avenue to the right of the property, German Town Avenue to the left of the property, North Randolph Street to the right of the property, North Randolph Street to the left of the property.
And then our plans and drawings, the properties mimic each other. They're both three-story brick facades of particular notes. There's a breezeway that's been incorporated in the front of both sides, so easy way for people from emergency egress situations, but also to move the trash to the front of the property, as you can see from this side as well, from the North Randolph Street perspective.
And then this is just an arrow view just to show the properties as well.
And then this is the site plan for both.
And then simple floor plans.
These are two bi-level units.
So unit number one, and this is for both properties.
The floor plans are the same.
You walk into a vestibule area.
You make a right.
There's an open floor plan of a kitchen, living room, and a bedroom.
Lower level, there's a flex space and an office.
If instead of going to the first unit, unit number one, you go up the flight of steps.
Unit number two is a three-bedroom, three-bath.
You get into an open floor plan of a living room, a kitchen, and a bedroom.
And then there's two bedrooms and two baths above.
Meeting notice was sent out on August 30th for a meeting that was scheduled for September 14th.
106 addresses were notified, the list of the addresses, proof of mailing.
For the other property, same thing, 106 addresses, notified, proof of mailing, deed to the property
showing that H&M Development LLC is the owner of the property.
Our applications were appealed to the Board for both properties.
and our certificate of tax credit showing that no money is owed to the state of Alveda.
With that being said, I would ask that Mr. Sazmaz virtually raise his hand
so he can adopt what I stated as his own testimony.
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
It's not going to send you an officer to the court.
We will take your testimony.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
planning commission
thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
board members in 2021 the zoning map was amended in this area in accord with community requests
and recommendations from the comprehensive plan spluck was intentionally kept as cmx2
We feel that dimensional variances are commensurate with the lot size and do not conflict with
the purpose and spirit of the zoning code, and we also believe that the proposed use
variance, we recognize that there are unique conditions of this block that limit the viability
of commercial use on the ground floor on both parcels, parcel A and parcel B, and so the
City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the variance for 2013 Germantown
Avenue, Parcel A, and grant the variances for 2013 Germantown Avenue, Parcel B.
Thank you. MI 2022-003-506, 2013 Germantown Avenue, Parcel A, and MI 2022-003-511-2013
Germantown Avenue, Parcel B. I vote yes to both. Carol Tenere, my vote is yes to both.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no to both.
James Snell, my vote is yes to both.
Yes, M. Shahid, my vote is yes to both.
Thank you.
Thank you, counsel. See you later this afternoon.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called?
Chair, we have a Julie Bernstein with her hand up.
Ms. Bernstein, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Mr. Chair, this may be number 14, which we are now hearing, 245 East Johnson Street.
Okay, you're right.
You're right.
All right.
Thank you.
We now have all the exhibits?
Yes, we do, Mr. Chair.
We have received all exhibits, including a letter of support from East Mount Airy Neighbors,
and Councilman Cindy Bass has taken a position of non-opposition.
Okay. Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
She's coming back in as a panelist now.
Good morning. Julie Bernstein.
Okay. Could you spell for the court reporter, please?
First name Julie, J-U-L-I-E, last name Bernstein, B-E-R-N-S-T-E-I-N.
Do you swear for them to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Are you for 245 East Johnson Street?
Will you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
So my clients are Leah DiMatteo and Joel Thomas, and they are the owners of the property.
Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. Can you just read the case into the record, please?
The MI number as well as the address.
It's MI-2022-003-484-245 East Johnson Street.
Good morning, Ms. Bernstein.
Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral,
vote is under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Okay, great. You may proceed and share your screen.
Okay, can you see my screen?
We can.
Okay. So good morning, members of the board. My name is Julie Bernstein of Kaplan Stewart, and I'm the attorney representing the applicants, the owners of the property at 245 Johnson Street. This property is zoned as RSA 2. It's a large property improved with a historic single family residence that is vacant and in a state of disrepair.
The applicants are seeking to use the property as a birthing center for prenatal labor, delivery, and postnatal related care to be operated by an established midwifery, the Philadelphia Midwest.
to be operated by an established midwifery the mid the philadelphia midwife collective which is
defined as a group practitioner use and which is not permitted in this district the adaptive
reuse of this large property will provide a much needed service to the community and will benefit
the neighborhood as the property is in a state of disrepair which would need significant monetary
commitment that may be largely unattainable for a single family resident this is also evident by
the fact that the property has remained in this condition. This adaptive reuse will help revitalize
the neighborhood without impacting the character of the residential neighborhood, as will be
discussed further, because the goal of a midwifery is to provide health care services in a home-like
setting for prenatal, birth, and postpartum care. As a result, this use will preserve the residential
feel of the neighborhood, and the proposed use represents the lease modification to the possible
code to support this use of the property, which, again, is in significant disrepair
and requires extensive and expensive updates to remodel the building for any use.
To streamline the process, I'd like to incorporate our exhibits and exhibit list into the record.
I also have Stephanie Brown, who's the operator of the Midwife Collective, with me today to help
discuss the use and proposal. And then briefly, I'm going to go through the exhibits. So first,
we have the deed, which indicates that Leah DiMatteo and Joel Thomas are the owners of the
property and have standing to bring this appeal. We've also included the tax clearance. I also
have, although they happen to be on this call as well, the owner's letter of authorization for me
and Stephanie Brown to speak on the owner's behalf. Leah DiMatteo, kind of appropriately for
this application is pregnant and due to deliver at any moment, so they were unsure if they'd
be able to attend, but they are here in case there are any questions for them as well.
We've included the notice of refusal, which again demonstrates that a group practitioner
is not permitted in the RSA 2 district. We've included our appeal to the Zoning Hearing
board as well and a project information form and then the postings for the property.
And here we go.
And we have this illustrative aerial of the property. As you can see just from this aerial,
It's located with its frontage is towards East Johnson.
It's between Magnolia and Musgrave.
And the house is actually set quite far back off of the road.
This is also shown in the photographs of this historic home, which again is quite large and set back off the property.
There's plenty of parking in the back.
But as you can see, when you get more particularly into the inside, the property really requires a significant amount of work.
It's in really poor condition.
We've included street views that show that even though this is a technically residential neighborhood, there are some other types of buildings here that don't appear fully residential.
This is actually right next door to the property in question, and this is a view from across the street.
So here, there's a large parking lot.
This shows that, you know, the location of this house is set quite far back off.
So any kind of use is going to be quite far away from any of the neighboring properties
and is unlikely to kind of impact anyone that's quite nearby.
We've also included just the zoning overlay map showing where it's located.
And we have our RCO documents, so our near neighbor notification letter,
and then all of our certificates of mailing to everyone.
I actually was not in attendance, but the applicants and the midwifery practice did what I heard, a beautiful presentation of this to the East Mount Airy neighbors, and they obtained a letter in support.
The majority, the large majority of neighbors overwhelmingly supported this application, 36 and eight near neighbors. There were a few that didn't, but again, a ton were in support.
They also got a petition of 209 signatures of people in the neighborhood and kind of the adjacent neighborhoods that would be using this support that all are like very much so in support of this use.
Many of them specifically note that they live in the neighborhoods that the birthing center is going to support, such as Mount Airy, Germantown.
That the birthing center is going to support, such as Mount Airy, Germantown.
They indicate that the services needed for the community, like number 44, I believe a birthing center would be a welcome and much-needed addition to our area, 68.
Please let this amazing resource for birthing people to come to our neighborhood.
There also were a number of people who actually had gone to this midwife collective and successfully had their babies delivered by them and felt that they would be super helpful to everyone in this neighborhood.
So as you can see, there's just a lot, a lot, a lot, a lot of support for this use.
Additionally, Cliveden, so this was historically part of the Cliveden property.
Cliveden is a community-oriented historic site that advocates for responsible stewardship
of historic buildings in their neighborhood.
And this letter discusses the history of the particular property and comments on how many
buildings in this area are vacant and neglected, such as this one.
The preservation writer, director writes, it is wonderful to see a community and preservation
minded project like the Midwifery Practice Birth Center that was historically part of
the Clifton Estate and that the Philadelphia Midwife Collective couldn't be a more worthy
enthusiastic steward, literally bringing life into the neighborhood by establishing an active
center for affordable and accessible reproductive health care to the community by activating a
large empty historic home. Lastly, I've included a couple of the slides that were presented to
the RCO, just to kind of give a little bit of an overview before I introduce Stephanie Brown to
discuss further the midwifery practice. But this shows that this is an accessible, safe,
and integrated birth center and highlighting the midwifery's goals to restore and renovate the
property while honoring its history to provide these services, which are intended to be provided
in a home-like setting. As mentioned, I have Stephanie Brown with me of the Philadelphia
Midwife Collective to adopt my testimony and provide some more information about the proposal
and to answer any questions you have. Ms. Brown, can you raise your hand so you can be unmuted?
Chair, we have someone with their hand up with the phone number ending at 1366.
that's fine that's fine yep
caller with the phone number ending at one three six six please unmute yourself and wait for the
chair good morning could you state your name hi this is stephanie hi could you state your name
and spell for the court reporter please sure stephanie spelled s-t-e-p-h-a-n-i-e last name
Brown, B-R-O-W-N. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth? I do. Proceed, counsel. Great. Thanks so much. Hold on. Did you just hear the presentation
I made to the board? I did, yeah. And do you agree with and incorporate what I just said as
your testimony? I do. And then before I turn this over to the board, can you now provide the board
with a brief overview of your proposed use.
So thanks so much for hearing our case today
for 245 East Johnson.
I'm just going to contextualize a little bit
about why we're proposing this variant
to permit a group health practice.
So to start, a little bit about
Philadelphia Midwife's Collective.
PNC is a small private midwifery practice.
We currently offer home and hospital births
to people wanting evidence-based,
trauma-informed, safe care, regardless of insurance status or ability to pay. So,
PMC has been operating out of Germantown and Mount Airy for over five years. I am
the chair of our board. I'm also a lactation consultant, so I work directly
with the collective. Our midwife is a certified nurse midwife. So, nurse
midwives are licensed and recognized within the state and federally, and they
have over ten years of experience. We also have a formal collaborative
relationship with the Jefferson Einstein Medical System. Both of us work within the hospital system
as well as doing the out-of-hospital work that we do. So we also offer auxiliary services. So I
offer infant feeding support. We run free groups that happen at our current office,
which is located on Germantown Avenue in Mount Airy. We have referrals if we need to refer care
out and other services that we provide you know within our office space we have
a chiropractor etc so a little bit about birth centers over center is a health
So a little bit about birth centers, so a birth center is a health care facility in
care facility in a home like setting equipped
a home-like setting equipped for prenatal birth and postpartum care.
We also offer other services like I just mentioned, like general well-person gynecological care,
things like that.
We also are offering HRT hormone therapy for queer and trans people.
So birth centers are statistically safe options for out-of-hospital birth for low-risk pregnant
people, which is a very important piece of this.
birth centers are only seeing people with low-risk profile, and they're safer statistically
for systemically marginalized people, such as BIPOC individuals or queer people, of which
our practice tends to center.
Philadelphia has an unnecessarily high Black maternal and infant mortality rate, and in
this country, 98% of births take place in a hospital setting.
So these numbers are coming largely from the mainstream medical system, and birth centers
serve to take low-risk people out of the system and give them care in settings that might be safer
for them. So currently Philadelphia only has five labor delivery units for the entire city.
Most major cities have multiple freestanding birth centers and Philadelphia currently has zero.
We have an example of a very successful birth center on the main line which is Lifecycle Women
Care. They opened in 1978 and they operated out of an old home for the first 20 years of their
existence um they're very high volume at this point um we plan to be much lower volume
um and to kind of put it in the context of the property itself 245 east johnson street
meets a lot of our very unique needs so i mentioned before um first center basically
we are trying to make them a non-critical setting and offer clinical care um so the house has been
empty for many years um and it's salvageable but it needs a significant build out um like julie
mentioned, it's set very far back from the street. I actually live a few blocks away and I never
really even knew the property was there. I've walked by it a million times and provides ample
parking on site for our needs. So I mentioned being low volume, we just aren't going to have
that many people on site all the time. We can fit at least seven to eight cars on site, which is
going to be more than enough for us. Most of the changes needed will be inside the state and any
the external changes that we plan to make um are only going to make the building more accessible
and safe so we plan to put like a small ramp in the back to make it um handicapped accessible and
for disabled folks um and we plan to put a fire escape on the side of the building um in order
for uh folks to um safely get out if they need to and that's part of our licensure which i'll
discuss in a second um so the property sits on over a half an acre of land which is a large and
very rare lot size in this neighborhood. So in our community in the northwest, in Germantown on
Mount Airy, we're seeing historic properties torn down and replaced, kind of at lightning speed right
now. And so PMC kind of sees this as an opportunity for intersectional preservation, right? So this
old building, we've dated it, I think somewhere between 1860 and 1880, based on some maps that
have um and of birth right which before 100 years ago took place in homes just like this one i'm
sure this house has actually seen babies born inside of it um so it's really an adaptive reuse
project right um so the building was also clearly institutionally used previously um it's been
vacant for at least three or four years um but based on what we found inside um it was being
institutionally either as like a halfway house or a shelter um so our collaborative hospital
einstein philadelphia which i mentioned before it's a five minute drive from the property
in case we need to transfer in so a little bit about transfers birth centers have a less than
two percent emergent transfer rate at our volume that's maybe one transfer per year um and the
reality is most birth centers aren't transferring emergently you're you're filtering people out who
would need to be in that situation. Most people are transferring into the hospital from a birth
center for pain management, and we don't offer anesthesia at a birth center, so they transfer
into the hospital for that. The property is also near many major public transit lines. In addition
to on-site parking, we have a lot of clients who come to us who maybe don't have cars, who walk
within the neighborhood to our current office. We have a lot of people who walk to our group that
we offer weekly. So we plan to be low volume and therefore will not affect nearby traffic
or parking patterns. Like I mentioned before, all parking can be on site. So birth centers
in Pennsylvania are held to a very high standard and require yearly auditing and licensure to keep
our doors open. So this means our property will be kept in mint condition at all times. We have
to do that. We get audited twice per year in order to maintain our licensure. We also get
accreditation from the from a birth center organization that accredits birth centers
birth centers nationally that's located here in Pennsylvania. Birth centers are staffed by
nationally that's located here in Pennsylvania. Birth centers are staffed
licensed healthcare professionals. I mentioned certified nurse midwives who currently work in
the hospital setting or in birth center settings. We also would have nurses on staff, folks like
myself to do auxiliary care. And yeah, I mean, birth centers are statistically noted to be
just find safe options for people to give birth and to receive care. We can bill insurance. We
currently take all insurances, including Medicaid, state Medicaid. As far as community goes, we went
door-to-door to every near neighbor, and during our RCO meeting, we garnered a 92% support rate,
and like Julianne mentioned, we have the support from the local organization of Clifden,
which we've been developing a relationship with just to kind of learn more about the
historic nature of the property and to do our best to to preserve and maintain that
thank you very much okay thank thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no mr chairman
no mr chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair planning commission
Thank you, Chair. Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission. Board members, the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing RSA-2 single-family zoning at this location. However, this large building on a large lot has a record of prior uses, including a six-unit apartment house and an 11-room group residence. The proposed use is consistent with the building's prior legal uses and with its interior configuration, and so the City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant the variance.
Thank you. MI-2022-003-484-245 East Johnson Street, I vote yes.
Carlton Erie, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thank you. Thank you, Counsel.
Thank you.
Is there anyone in the virtual audience whose case has not been called?
I see no hands.
Thanks, everyone.
See everyone at 2 o'clock.
Great.
Good job, everyone.
Thank you.
Good afternoon.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's ZBA hearings.
With me is Carol Tenere our Vice Chair. Present Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Ishmael Shahid our Board
Secretary. Present Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Thomas Holloman our Board Member. Present Mr. Chairman.
And James Snell our Board Member. Present Mr. Chairman. Also here is our Board Attorney Hillary
Emerson and our ZVA Hearing Supervisor Lakeisha Dandy. Here's our virtual format. Proceedings
are being recorded by participating your knowledge agreement to be recorded. The video will be
available by contacting tonyasunkett at phillith.gov. For the benefit of our court stenographer,
we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying. Three, if you
are participating by phone. If 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 and the address
of the property question. And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for
comments or statements. Any comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunkett.
Let's look at our continuances for this afternoon.
Number one, MI 2022, 004-589-1825 North Taney Street.
That case is continued.
Number four, MI-2022, 004-583-1730 North Taney Street, that case is continued.
Number eight on our list, MI-2022, 004-584-5824-26 North Broad Street, that case is continued.
Finally, number 13, MI 2022-004582-0045.
MI-2022, 004582, 1712 North Taney Street, that case is continued. Are there any comments
relative to those four cases?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Any additional requests for continuance?
i see no hands at this time chair thank you so we're going to go to our add-on case
mi 2021 002 920 3245 north 27th street i vote yes with provisos interior trash storage
and temporary variance expires 12-1-25.
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
We're going to go to our regular list and we're going to start with number 12.
MI-2022-003-931-9101, Germantown Avenue.
David Guest is the attorney.
We have a letter of support from Chesson Hill Community Association,
letter of support from Chesson Hill Conservatory,
letter of support from Councilwoman Bass,
and also applicants provided letters from numerous parts of Cheston Hill and Neighbors.
David Guest is the attorney.
Good afternoon.
Yes, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Yes, David Guest, D-A-V-I-D-G-E-S-T.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Mr. Guest, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral,
photos under plans of this property five days in advance of this hearing,
and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of the above.
Okay, great.
You may proceed and begin sharing your screen.
Mr. Guest, my mistake, I should have mentioned this earlier.
could you identify your client the relationship to the property yes my client is the owner of
the property the wood mirror art museum thank you well great thank you um my colleague devin beverly
who needs to be added as a panelist will be sharing a brief presentation if you could please
find her devin beverly and we will also need to have uh william valerio teresa ball and mark
de monte as panelists why don't we start with your your assistant your your associate first
right sure absolutely can they please raise their hand to be promoted devin yeah devin if you can
i can i can start coming back in as a panelist now chair okay thank you
is she going to testify mr guest no she's just going to share
yeah um thank you okay perfect thanks so much oops um
so once again david guest i'm an attorney with ballard spar here on behalf of the woodmere art
museum the owner of 91 germantown avenue i have with me here the people i mentioned in addition
to jeff krieger from krieger and associates and darren damon from andro pogon i will provide you
with a brief overview of the project and the requested variances and then i would like to
just very briefly speak with our three witnesses to round out the presentation as you heard we
have widespread community support for the project which includes support from the coordinating rco
and from the council member if you could please go to the next slide
As many of you may know, Woodmere has successfully operated a highly regarded art museum in Chesa
Hill for over 100 years. In March of last year, Woodmere learned that the Sisters of St. Joseph
planned to... Sorry, could you just... Yep, stay on that slide. Thank you.
Thanks. That the Sisters of... Looks like we're having a few technical difficulties.
i'll just keep i know where you're we know where you're talking about yeah thank you um which is
located one block from woodmere's existing facility which you can see here and at the
prompting of neighbors who wish to save the approximately 150 year old building and grounds
woodmere did raise funds to acquire the property last year you can go to the next slide please
woodmere proposes to convert this former convent into a museum to be known as francis m mcguire
museum to be known as Francis M. Maguire Hall that will make available to the public the
hall that will make available to the public the collection strength
collection's strengths in 20th century art, which include American Impressionism and Modernism
as they evolved in Philadelphia specifically, enabling Woodmere to exhibit great masterpieces
that currently remain inaccessible and in storage.
The renovated building will include a small addition housing a cafe, restaurant, as well
as a small detached auditorium for lectures and screenings, and a children's play area,
all accessory to the main museum use and here you can just see a little bit of
imagery related to that although the existing building has been on the
property for well over a hundred years because the property is located in an
RSD 3 zoning district the proposal technically generates the need for three
variances one is for the museum use also known as libraries and cultural
exhibits two is for multiple buildings on the same lot meaning the museum use
and the small auditorium and if you could go to the next slide please the
The third variance involves the small addition at the rear of the building for the cafe restaurant,
which will disturb a small human-made area of steep slopes, which generates a variance
for steep slope disturbance.
Our exhibits filed with the board include all the required information, such as the
tech clearance certificate, deed, and photographs of the property.
There's also a lot of detailed information justifying the need for the variances, including
affidavits from the project architect and project engineer, which you can see at exhibits
six and seven most significantly i'm happy to report as you've heard that we've had this
widespread community support there's been a very robust community engagement process for over a
year which has included seven public meetings which are listed in exhibit 11 and many additional
conversations with near neighbors regarding the proposal as well as many articles about
the project in the chestnut hill local which you can see listed in exhibit 36. so in addition to
the coordinating rco and the council office you heard we have support from the concert chestnut
conservancy friends of the whistahickon and many others including many near neighbors and you can
look at exhibits 13 through 22 for that information i want to note specifically that during the
community engagement process we negotiated a list of specific parameters that limit the scope of the
accessory restaurant use which woodmere has agreed to and which are listed for the record in exhibit
12. to document our record for the appeal and the variances we'd like to have the three experts i
mentioned speak to introduce their testimony i'd like to very quickly go through a few facts about
the property the property comprises one entire block bounded by germantown avenue hampton road
green tree road and sunset avenue the property is very unique for philadelphia and distinct from
most other properties in chestnut hill due to its size location and topography and notably the
existing building on the property which will be converted to museum use since around 1850 the
property has contained this approximately 10,000 square foot mansion, eventually
occupied by a convent. The existing building was constructed well before
the Philadelphia zoning code and the establishment of the current zoning on
the property. Very significantly, the building itself is located approximately
169 feet from Germantown Avenue, 173 feet from Hampton Road, 108 feet from
Greentree Road, and 100 feet from Sunset Avenue. In other words, all of the work
is really going to be located toward the center of the property. And Woodmere
has worked diligently in consultation with the neighbors to include robust landscape buffers
around the proposed use so as i've said the property is uniquely situated and specifically
there's a wide variety of landscaping mature trees and moderate to steep slopes and due to the size
shape topography and steep slopes of the property combined with the vast size of the existing
building strict compliance with the requirements of the zoning code would cause an unnecessary
hardship so consequently the project meets all the variance criteria including but not limited to
As you will hear from the project architect, the applicant has worked hard to make the
minimum changes to the property and the minimum adjustments from the zoning code required
to allow the property to be converted to museum use.
As you'll hear from the project engineer, the applicant has worked to minimize the minor
amount of steep slope disturbance and will overall actually improve the stormwater management
system for the property and ultimately the granting of the variances will be a great
benefit to the community by creating a new publicly accessible asset in the form of a
museum and will preserve a historic building and its grounds that's the conclusion of my portion
of the presentation if you would allow me i'd like to just very briefly have the three people
i mentioned come up introduce themselves adopt my testimony and answer a couple of very brief
questions yeah that's fine thanks very much so first it would be uh bill valerio the executive
director of woodmere sir could you please state your name
i'll mute yourself first state your name and spell for the court reporter
i just want to make sure uh mark i see in um i'm not seeing mr valerian have mark there you have
mark yes please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
Mr. DeMonte, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
So we could, if you'd like, we could start with Mr. DeMonte and then we can...
Sure, sure. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Sure. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Mark DeMonte, M-A-R-K-D-I-M-O-N-T-E.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Okay. Proceed, counsel.
Great. Thank you. And I'll just say I got a phone call just now from Mr. Valerio. So, Devin, if you could please reach out to him or Ann, I think others are, he might be trying to get on. So, but I'll call.
Why don't we handle that?
Sure. I'll proceed with Mr. DeMonte. Yeah. Thanks very much. Mark, your CV is listed at Exhibit 29. I'd like to introduce you as an expert in civil engineering. If you could please very briefly describe your relationship to this project and your professional background.
Sure, absolutely.
We were brought on from Woodmere Art Museum from work we did with them a couple years ago.
Previously, our company, Maliora, we've done stormwater and civil engineering for Woodmere.
They recently installed new walkways in their property.
And a few years prior, they had originally done additional work there.
So my experience has been just that.
Thank you.
Can you please confirm that you heard my testimony?
And would you agree that it was true and correct?
And would you adopt it as your own?
Yes, yes, I have.
Thank you. Is it correct that your firm's affidavit regarding the steep slope variance for this property is located in Exhibit 6?
And that there's additional information in Exhibit 7. If you could please very briefly describe what's happening here with regard to the steep slopes.
Sure. So because of the steep slopes being so close to the existing building.
Excuse me, sir. Can you show the plan of the site plan?
you just have the elevation of the building sure we could um i think maybe go back to the image of
go back to the image where you had on that side there yep there you go thank you yep
so because of the building's uh steep slopes being so close to them uh we are assuming that
there's going to be approximately 510 square feet of steep slope right up against the building that
is going to need to be disturbed in order to build that addition you can see on the right there
and in addition we have 79 square feet that has been messed up just because of irrigation issues
and drainage issues that we're going to try to restore adjacent to the building thank you
can i answer your question what percentage of the uh steep slope are you going to regrade
mark do you know the answer to that uh percentage wise no i don't i can give an estimate based on
i want to just to make one point of clarification so the property actually it's a very large
property and it has many steep slopes kind of throughout the property and so the project team
worked very hard to limit any disturbance at all of any steep slopes so we're actually talking
about this one very very small area that's less than 500 square feet that's located near the
middle of the property and so percentage wise for the entire property it's going to be actually a
very small percentage we don't know the precise number of that percentage but it's actually in
the scope of the whole property it's a very small area mark that one particular spot there can you
estimate there well in total we have 5889 square feet from what we're looking at right here
so the property as a whole is about four acres to give you a feel so we're talking about 500
square feet relative to four acres so yeah thank you thank you so as you all probably know in the
zoning code there are three very specific criteria for the granting of a steep slope variance so i'm
just going to ask mr de monte questions about each of those criteria uh mark is it correct that the
proposed earth disturbance will not result in an increase in storm water runoff yes that's correct
that's because during construction the applicant is going to have the installation of silt fences
or compost socks to help catch anything that runs off of that hill. And as you can see from this
photo, the steep slopes are right in the middle of the site, so it's going to be very easy for
them to set them up and for them to be monitored by anyone passing by and any inspectors that will
catch any sort of runoff. Great, thank you. Next, is it correct that the proposed interventions will
not result in the shifting of soil to adjacent buildings or property? Yes, that's correct. And
that's because in addition to what they're going to be doing during construction, after this is all
done they are going to be restoring meadow grasses that are going to help with the stormwater runoff
so that in addition to the compost socks being so visible from the street we're not going to
have any soil that's going to leave the site let alone this area great thank you and is it correct
that the interventions will not increase the likelihood of loss of property yes that's correct
and that's similar to what i said just previously in that all this work is being done in the center
of the site with none of it going towards the extra uh the exterior thank you and finally is
uh the exterior thank you and finally is it uh correct that the earth moving plan shown in
to correct that the earth moving plan shown
exhibit five is fully code compliant yes that is correct great thank you um that's all i have for
mr de monte so the only two other people were teresa ball and william valerio teresa ic is in
mr valerio may still be trying to get in but we could move on to miss ball
miss ball can you please unmute yourself or wait for the chair
I'm unmuted. Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Teresa Ball, T-E-R-E-S-A-B-A-L-L. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. I note that Ms. Ball's CV is at Exhibit 24, and I will be introducing her as
an expert in architecture. Ms. Ball, if you could please briefly describe your role in this project
and summarize your professional background?
Absolutely.
We are the design architects.
My office is Matthew Baird Architects.
We are the design architects for this project.
And we've been working with Woodmere for 10 years
on their master planning goals.
And I have been at this office for 17 years.
Great. Thanks very much.
Can you please confirm that you heard my testimony,
that it was true and correct,
and that you agreed to adopt it as your own?
Yes, I do.
Great. Thank you.
is it correct that your firm's affidavit is located in Exhibit 7? Yes, that's correct.
Thanks. I just have a few brief questions for you. Will the requested variances harm
the neighbors' use of their properties or impair any adequate supply of light and air to those
properties? No, they will not. We are not exceeding any of the existing heights of the building with
any of our modifications or new proposals. In addition, any of the modifications and the new
auditorium are all located greater than 100 feet from all frontages um additionally we designed
the auditorium which is the only proposed freestanding building to be sunken below grade
to minimize its impact on any sight line great thank you um and can you explain briefly the
reasoning behind the location of the cafe restaurant that we can see here that affects
the steep slopes? Yeah, absolutely. In the beginning, we explored several locations for
the cafe, and one of the favorite ones, which would have necessitated no modification to the
steep slope, was in this open-air porch that you see. But after meeting with the community,
it was determined that there was a strong desire to preserve that porch and restore it to its
original open air condition. And so we moved the cafe back to the least visible portion of the site.
Great. Thanks very much. And finally, is it correct that the variance for the auditorium,
which is the separate building, will represent the minimum variance required to afford relief
and the least modification possible? Yes, absolutely. That's, as I mentioned,
we sunk that into the ground so that really the only part that protrudes is necessary for access.
and it's also located towards the center of the site.
So to minimize impact from any of the surrounding roads or properties.
Great. Thanks very much.
And I think, Devin, you can go back to the site plan slide just for context
or actually maybe to the artwork slide because we do have Mr. Valerio here
and he will round out our presentation if we could just very briefly speak with him.
All right. Could you unmute yourself, sir?
i believe i did okay all right uh could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
my name is william valerio that's v-a-l-e-r-i-o first name william w-i-l-i-a-m right do you swear
for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel thanks very
much uh mr valerio's cv is at exhibit 28 i'll be introducing him as an expert in museum
Administration. Mr. Valerio, if you could please describe your position at Woodmere and briefly
summarize your professional background. My position is Director and CEO of Woodmere Art
Museum. I have a PhD in Art History, an MBA, Master's Degree in Business Association, and I've
worked in museum administration for 30 years of my professional life. Terrific, thank you. Can you
please confirm that you heard my testimony that it was true and correct and that you agree to adopt
it as your own i do thank you so very briefly um you know we've already gone into the detailed
variant standards but just to round out our presentation and give the board a feel for
uh what the project is if you could just very briefly explain why woodmere purchased the
property absolutely uh woodmere's art collection is one of the great collections of american art
80% of it is in storage and having the extraordinary gallery.
80% of it is in storage and having the extraordinary gallery space at the new building, McGuire Hall, allows us to show the art in our collection, which is the mission of the institution.
The building also allows us to expand our outdoor sculpture experience, so we will install
sculpture across the four acres, and we will expand education programs in new facilities
like auditorium, like children's art studios.
Great, thank you.
And then just really briefly, you kind of touched on it just now, but if you could just
elaborate slightly on the need for the auditorium and the need for the cafe and restaurant.
Yes, the auditorium is an education facility that is associated with being able to expand
education programs. The cafe restaurant is an amenity that visitors to museums expect
and it will be an accessory used to the museum.
Terrific, thank you. I was just going to confirm that it would be an accessory. And
just finally, if you could speak very briefly about the kind of the level of community engagement
that you and the Woodmure Art Museum
have gone into during this process?
We have had seven public meetings.
We've advertised these meetings in the local newspaper.
We have posted videos of some of these meetings
on our website, and we've worked on a one-on-one basis
with nearby neighbors and have engaged openly
with an open door policy as to the development
of our ideas and plans for the building terrific thank you very much and that concludes our
presentation thank you questions from the board yeah i just have one um it may not be significant
the francis mcguire hall is within the woodmere museum correct um the the new property is is
renamed francis mcguire hall it was previously named saint michael's hall when it was a convent
for the Sisters of St. Joseph's.
It was a lead gift from the McGuire Foundation
that led to the naming of the building
in honor of Francis McGuire.
Thank you.
Thanks.
Any other questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have someone by the name of Christopher Hull.
Mr. Hall, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Chris Hall.
C-H-R-I-S-H-A-L-L.
Right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Are you a neighbor?
Okay, proceed, sir.
and and bill and his team have been terrific as they've represented to the board they've been
absolute delights to work with they have agreed to make some restrictions and i'm i just have a
a technical question do those restrictions uh need to be part of this record
we only make restrictions that are enforceable by lni as part of the the variance record
Is that right, Hillary?
That is correct, Mr. Chair.
So, may I?
Go ahead, Mr. Guest.
Thank you.
Mr. Hall, it's good to hear you.
Yeah, I don't know if you're on, but I did state for the record that the restaurant parameters that we all discussed are in our exhibit book.
They're going to be part of the zoning board's archives, and we've stated on the record here, and it'll be on the transcript that we are agreeing to all of those parameters.
as negotiated. Thank you, Mr. Guest. That answers my question.
I appreciate it. Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no other hands at this time.
My Planning Commission. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
David Vecto, City Planning Commission. That's F-E-C-T-E-A-U.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do. Proceed, David. Thank you. Mr. Chairman and members of the board,
the comprehensive plan recommends a change in the zoning of this property from residential single
family detached three to residential single family detached one the expansion of this property would
require disturbance of a 25 slope however the plan keeps this disturbance to a minimum and proposes
to stabilize other steep slopes on the property so the city planning commission recommends that
board grant the use and steep slope variances thank you mi 2022-003-931-9101 germantown avenue
0-0-3-9-3-1-9-1-0-1, Germantown Avenue.
I vote yes.
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Shmell Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Mr. Guest.
Great. Thank you all so much. I appreciate it. Have a good day.
Right. So number two on our regular list,
MI-2022-003-867-3517 North 23rd Street.
Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
Letter of support from Allegheny West.
Letter of support from Swamp Poodle Neighbors Parcels Association with Provisos.
Also, Councilwoman Bass has taken a position of non-opposition.
Mr. Nockmson is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
Alan Nockmson, A-L-A-N, last name Nockmson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia PA, 19109.
Nockmson, you've already been sworn.
Could you identify your client in relation to this particular property?
Let me just get my notes here.
This one. The owner of the top ring is Wise, holding Group LLC, and then the virtual audience
is Brian Wise, its member. Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Nockmson. Do you agree to read the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership,
tax compliance a copy of the refusal or referral photos under plans of the property five days in
advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes in all respects
okay great you may proceed all right so i am in time again and i know it's the first one
the chair loves no you had two this morning yeah he's counting he is counting i yeah and luckily
we uh continued the number of them of mine this afternoon i noticed i noticed so um i think i'm
going for a record all right so here we're presenting 3517 north 23rd street uh we've
made some modifications based on community input and because of those requests that um that were
granted um we have overwhelmingly uh overwhelming community support so you'll see uh in our
presentation materials the notice of refusal a letter of support from the allegheny west
civic association as well as another rco in the neighborhood and correspondence from council
person cindy bass's office we received an email from charles richardson confirming that her office
in non-opposition of this zoning request.
We also have, based on the modifications we made,
revised plans.
We provided those revised plans to Ms. Emerson
before the hearing, and we asked that if this board
is so inclined to grant our variance request,
they grant it with a proviso with revised plans.
Property history as well, as we'll review.
uh maps of the area photographs of the property our plans and drawings our rco meeting notice we
actually met with the community last night um it was our second meeting with them uh our applications
for appeal or deeds of property and a certificate of tax clearance again in the virtual audience
is brian wise the owner of wise holding group llc the owner of the property so first things first
our notice of refusal. We are, you know, in the notice of refusal, we were seeking to have
an eight-unit dwelling, base of community input. We were asked to have six units, which we are
obliging. So in addition to a proviso for revised plans, we would also ask for a proviso maximum
six units, as we agreed to do with the community. So the first refusal has to do with the fact that
this is an RSA 3 property and multifamily use is not allowed. Now, there is indication on the
refusal that this is also CMX 2, just to point that out. But, you know, the zoning code requires
the examiner to use the most restrictive zoning under the circumstances, which would be RSA 3,
and, you know, multifamily use is not allowed in that zoning classification.
We have two dimensional refusals, one for occupied area, because the zoning examiner applied the RSA 3 zoning classification, 50% of open area or occupied area is required.
50% of open area or occupied area is required, while only 29.8% is proposed. I will say this,
if you look at the property to the left of us, we go as deep to the property to the left of us.
So what we're offering is not have character to the neighborhood. And as well as the minimum
rear yard depth, we're again under RSA 3 zoning, not CMX 2, but RSA 3 zoning, 20 feet of rear yard
depth is required while 12 feet is proposed. Again, not out of character because the property
until after bus, the building structure goes as deep. So we did receive a letter of support from
the Allegheny West Civic Association. We would, you know, if you read the letter,
it seems like these are the following provisos that would be requested of us.
maximum six units uh the roof deck would be for only mechanical access only uh and trash would
be stored inside with the in the units i just want to make sure that that's the case uh that
trash would be stored inside with the units that a separate trash room is not being is not expected
of us and was not asked of us so i just want to make sure that you know if we go to a building
permit stage that
the examiner doesn't
expect us to put a trash room in there.
So all trash will be stored in the units
themselves.
Pardon me, Mr.
Nockamson. I see another one that says
no commercial trash pickup.
It does. I don't know if that's an enforceable
proviso. I'll talk
to Hillary about that before.
I believe under the law
when you have more than five units.
I think you have to.
yeah exactly right so this is hillary it's more than six units the city will collect up to six
units okay they will collect up to six okay all right thank you um and then we also received a
letter of support from the swamp uh poodle neighborhood parcels association rco uh and
those are similar type of requests again maximum six units um all trash stored indoors again i
would just say trash stored inside the units themselves.
I just don't want to have a misinterpretation
that we were supposed to provide a separate trash room.
This RCO also indicated no commercial trash pickup.
All bike parking structures placed within property lines.
We're not proposing any type of bike parking there.
And then mechanical use only for the roof structure,
which we have no objection to.
And then this is the email we received from Charles Richardson, confirming that the District
Council member has no opposition to the grantee of the vacancies.
And then here's our proviso plan form.
In it, we indicated that we reduced the height of the building from 38 feet to 33 feet, originally
as a four-story structure with eight units.
We went to a three-story structure with six units, and in the proviso plan form it does
also indicate that we reduced the amount of units from eight dwelling units to six dwelling units.
And behind there is the revised site plan. And then the property history. So this history,
even though it's an RSA3 zoning classification, has a history of multi-unit use. Here,
a little antiquated, but it had one housekeeping and six non-housekeeping units. But again,
multi-unit in nature and then maps of the area we're at the corner of atlantic uh and 23rd streets
we're a lot of 2500 square feet so we're a significant lot um in in the neighborhood
uh and we're next to cmx2 uh zoning as well and then you can see where we are from a google map
perspective and then for the rest of the property we're currently a vacant lot and we have been a
vacant lot for some time. Just proof of posting of our hearing notices on both sides. And then
North 20th Street to the right of the property, North 23rd Street to the left of the property,
West Atlantic Street to the right of the property, West Atlantic Street to the left of the property.
And then our plans and drawings. This is a debut from the corner of Atlantic and 23rd Street. As
can see we try to mimic the roof lines of the neighboring properties and actually because of
the request of reducing the height of the building our property actually is lower than the other
properties we were well within the code 38 feet but at the request of the community we went to
a three-story structure and they also requested a night rendering of the property this has been
a problematic corner. So they're looking forward to activating this corner and having a lot
uh a lot of light for that for that uh corner um because there have been problems on that corner
of light for that corner because there have been problems.
but anyway that was a night view that was requested of us as well from a rendering perspective
and then this is just the property a front perspective on 23rd street again just showing
how we're mimicking the architecture of the neighboring properties with a modern twist
and then this is from the east atlantic street side and then that's where the entrance is on
East Atlantic. Another thing that was asked of us is to have a solid wooden fence which is not
zoning related but we were just trying to show you the board that we've accommodated almost every
single request of the community has asked of us for this project. Because of that we have
overwhelming support for this project. And then again North 23rd Street elevation showing again
mimicking of the architecture and then this is just a real elevation of the property as well
and then this is the site plan here again this is a revised site plan so if the boards and
clients grant our zoning variance we would ask they granted with the proviso revised plans
and then these are just our four plans no basements built on grade entrance on east
Atlantic and there's two units per floor uh there's a two bedroom one bath on this floor
one bedroom one bath on this front on the right you go up a flight of steps
and there's a two bedroom two bath on the left and on the second floor on the right there's
one bedroom one bath and then there's one more floor oops one more floor of units you go up the
flight of steps. To the right of us is a two-bedroom, two-bath. To the left of us is a one-bedroom,
one-bath. And then as you can see here, we do have a roof deck with a roof deck access structure,
but it's, and it's noted on the plans, it's for mechanical access only.
So we met with the community last night at 6 p.m.
89 addresses were notified in the meeting, here are the list of the addresses, proof
of mail-in-toes addresses, proof of email to the coordinating RCO and all RCOs, as well
as the ZBA and the Planning Commission, as well as the District Council member Zoning
Aid, our application for appeal that we filed to the ZBA, along with the notice of refusal
and project information for.
Deeds of the property showing that Wise
holding the LLC is the owner of the property.
And then our certificate of tax plan
showing no money.
That being said, I'll stop hearing my screen.
I would ask that Mr. Wise
virtually raise his hand
so he can adopt my testimony.
Mr. Wise, please unmute yourself
and wait for the chair.
Mr. Wise, could you state your name
and spell for the court reporter please yes chair bryant b-r-i-a-n wise w-i-s-e right do you swear
or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do proceed counsel
mr wise you heard everything i had to say today correct is it true and correct
yes it is and do you adopt it as your own testimony yes i do thank you questions from
the board uh mr chairman i don't have a question but i'll have a comment sure i'd like to tell
alan that this is an excellent project whereby community and developer work together and there's
no uh basement okay thank you mr holland thank you thank you thomas any of anyone else from the board
no mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
chair we have someone with the phone number ending in 3552 caller would you please
hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
caller with the phone number ending in 3552 would you please unmute yourself
hello hi could you say your name and spell for the court reporter please
Yes, Adrienne Fernandez
F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z
Swampin' and Neighborhood
Process Association, RQ
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
yes proceed okay i just wanted to make a comment about one of the five provisos
Yes. Proceed
Okay, I just
wanted to make a comment
one the proviso about um the uh any bike parking structures being within the property lines
because um we get a problem sometimes where the when the bike parking structures are near the
curb they interfere with people getting in and out of their car safely on the pavement
And it just can take away from a parking space.
So even though there may be no bike parking now, that could change in the future.
So we would like a proviso to protect the curb lines from that, from take away parking spaces.
Hillary, can we do that?
I believe so, Mr. Chair.
Okay, fine.
Alan, I'm going to probably use that wording that was in and about the property line, okay?
Thank you.
Thank you very much. Anyone else from the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no other hands at this time.
Hi, Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair Bergman and members of the board.
David Vecto, City Planning Commission.
So in regards to 3517 North 23rd Street, the comprehensive plan recommends a change in the zoning for this property to residential two-family.
on this block there is documented history of two duplexes two triplexes one four unit building and
one rooming house as well as several single-family homes since other duplexes exist on the block and
since the proposed zoning would allow two dwelling units the city planning commission recommends the
board grant permission for multi-family dwelling with a maximum of two dwelling units thank you
uh mi 2022 003 867 357 north 23rd street i vote yes with proviso maximum six unit
trash and recycling stored indoors no commercial trash pickup all bicycle parking structures
located with indebted property lines roof deck and roof deck access structure limited to mechanical
use only, and revised plan, one-paged, stamped by ZBA on November 16, 2022.
Harold Tenere, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Snell, my vote is yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with provisos.
Okay, Alan, just for the record, state your name for the record, please, for number three,
MI 2022-003-938-6217, West Dorot Avenue.
Yes, Alan, A-L-A-N, last name Nockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
Could you identify your client and relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is D&F Properties and in the virtual audience, Dennis Friel.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Nockamson. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed all of the required pieces of information, starting with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos, plans, five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, in all respects.
Okay, you may proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Thank you.
So I'm here to present 6217 West Gerard Avenue.
In our presentation materials for this RSA crime property, you'll see our notice of refusal where we're asking for four units in this existing structure.
You'll see in our presentation materials that there's much basis for this allowance.
There's a history of multifamily use in this property, and actually the last use of this property was an 11 office commercial building.
So there's not much of a history of single-family use for this RSA 5 property, and you'll see nearby there's much multifamily of similarly situated properties.
Because of that, in the merits of the case, and this is a corner property, and there's multiple forms of egress for these units, the HMC Squared Community Association issued the letter of support, which you'll see in Exhibit 2.
In Exhibit 3, you'll see the 6200 block of West Girard Avenue, nearby multifamily structures of a similar use that we're requesting.
exhibit forest maps of the area,
then you'll see photographs of the property.
Example, interior photographs of this developer, which same type of quality would be inspected
Example, interior photographs of this developer,
which Sam.
if this project progresses. Plans and drawings from their architect or RCO meeting notice or
application for appeal that we filed with the CBA or deed to their property showing that DNF
properties is the owner of the property. Our certificate of tax clearance and again in the
virtual audience is Dennis Friel, the owner's representative. First things first, this is an
RSA by property, but it's of a significant size. The lot is almost 2,000 square feet. Again,
significant history of non-single-family use, and all we're proposing is four units in this dwelling.
You'll see from the letter of support, there was overwhelming support. There are some provisos here.
I would think that the enforceable proviso are trash stored outside and garbage compactors within the units.
So if this board is inclined to grant this variance request, those are the two provisos that we would request that would be included because that's what the neighborhood asked us.
And then the 6200 block of West Girard.
So you can see we're the corner property at 6217 West Girard.
We're proposing four units.
62.15, which is right next door to us, four units.
62.13, WestJord, next to us, four units.
So it's not enough character of what we're asking for.
And unlike these landlocked properties, our property is a corner property where there's multiple forms of e-press.
And then you can see here's the backup of, like, you know, proof that these are, you know, quadplexes, just like what we're requesting.
and then maps of the area again this is a significantly sized uh uh lot uh it's almost
2 000 square feet so and we're at the corner of drort and uh in felton and then photographs of
the property so this is our property from the west drort avenue side this is our property from
north felton street side as you can see this speaks nothing as being a single family structure
and you can see there's multiple forms of egress here on the side which we you'll see from our
drawings uh that we've accommodated our units appropriately here's our hearing notice postings
again proof posting on both sides of the property and this is west gerard avenue to the right of the
property, West Girard Avenue to the left of the property, North Felton Street to the right of the
property, North Felton Street to the left of the property. As you can see from the pictures, this
is not really a single-family portion of the neighborhood. There is a mix between industrial
and multifamily use in close proximity. An example interior photos, I always like to try to show
photos of what the property hopefully will look like if the variance is requested. So here's an
example of just an open floor plan kitchen bathroom living room walk-in closets bathroom
and then our plans are drawing it's pretty straightforward we're repurposing this property
we're not trying to build on top of it create more square footage there's enough square footage in
this building structure uh we just want to like obviously enliven this you know corner property
as well. So again, there is really no basement use in this property as well. So for unit number
one, you get in from the Girard Avenue side, and then that's a one bedroom, one bath. And they're
all one bedroom, one baths. You can also get in from the Felton Street side, and then that's how
get into unit number two so unit one and unit two are on the first floor you go up a flight of steps
and you know once you reach the landing uh to the right is unit three and to the left is unit four
we are not proposing any roof decks here we're using the existing building structure
And we had a well attended meeting for this on September 1st at 6 p.m. 87 addresses were
notified of this meeting. Here are the list of the addresses, proof of mailing to those
addresses, our deeds of property showing that DNF properties is the owner of the property,
our applications for appeal that we filed with the ZBA along with the notice of refusal
and the project information form.
And our certificate of tax planning
And our Certificate of Tax Planner is showing that the owner is in good standing with respect to real estate taxes.
showing that the owner is in good standing
with respect to.
I have in the virtual audience Dennis Friel, so if Mr. Friel can virtually raise his hand, so he can adopt my testimony as his own.
Mr. Friel, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Chair, I see no one by that name in the virtual audience.
Okay. Mr. Nogamson, you're an officer of the court. We'll accept your testimony.
just one question what was the property last used for it was an 11 unit office building
okay and before that it was a multi-family structure all right questions from the board
no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or
comments from the virtual audience
okay i see no hands at this time by planning commission
thank you mr chairman and good afternoon uh david fecto city planning commission
mr chairman and members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends no change the
residential single-family zoning at this location this property has a documented history of use as
dwelling units and offices dating from at least the year 2000 the proposed dwelling units are in
keeping with the previous use of this property for multifamily use. The City Planning Commission
recommends that the Board grant the use variance. Thank you. MI-2022-003-938-6217 West
Gerard Avenue. I vote yes with provisos. Trash stored inside yard with receptacle for each unit.
Garbage disposal each unit. Carol Tenere, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Snell, my vote is yes with provisos.
Yes, my vote is yes with provisos.
Thank you.
Mr. Nockermson, MI2022-003-936-2325 Germantown Avenue,
please state your name and identify your client and their relationship to the property.
Yes, Alan Nockmson, A-L-A-N, last name Nockmson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
And the owner of this property is A to Z Real Estate Transaction LLC.
And in the virtual audience is Ghazi Ida7, its member.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Nockmson. Do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Okay, you may proceed and begin with sharing your screen.
Thank you.
so this is a rather straightforward project uh 2325 germantown avenue uh you'll see from the
notice of refusal this is a cmx3 property where we're proposing uh to have a triplex there so
essentially we're we're asking the board to allow us to eliminate the commercial component and to
simply swap out the commercial unit with the residential units which is not out of character
uh to this to this block uh commercial is actually out of character for this block
uh and uh we presented similar type of variance requests to this board which this board has
granted uh you'll see that there's correspondence from the 37th board executive democratic committee
the coordinating rco for this project at the well-attended meeting there was unanimous support
for this project uh and simply because uh this is a property that has not has seen has not seen
development in some time, and having a triplex would add the necessary density to help support
any commercial nearby portal. Next, you'll see the CMX multifamily variances. This board has
granted in the past, which have a similar nature. Maps in the area, photographs of the property,
our plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notice, our application for appeal that we filed with
the CBA, our D to the property showing an A to Z real estate transaction LLC as the owner of the
property, and our Certificate of Tax Clearance. Again, in the virtual audience, it's Gaziata 7,
it's a member. First things first, this refusal is on a CMX 2 property. We are seeking to have
three family, three dwelling units in there. We have several refusals as a result. The first of
which is indicating that we're only allowed
two dwelling units, but a commercial unit.
And simply we're trying to swap out that commercial unit
with the residential unit,
which leads to our second refusal.
Because we're not providing that commercial unit,
Because we're not providing that commercial unit, we're getting a refusal as to that.
we're getting a refus-
And then the third refusal is a de minimis maximum area refusal, where we're allowed to have a maximum occupied area of 75%, where 82.19% is proposed.
Again, this is in a regular-shaped lot, as you'll see, and that's why we have that dimension.
refusal so in order to have a functional floor plan we need a little bit extra building coverage
for this project so as you can see 14 people attending this meeting all 14 voted and supported
this project and then again not out of character to have a similar type of variance request
you'll see 2240-44 north franklin street which is nearby this board granted a similar request
22-47 North 8th Street, again, a similar request.
23-12 Germantown Avenue, this board granted a similar request.
23-34 Germantown Avenue, this board granted a similar request,
merely swapping out the commercial component with the residential.
23-16 North 6th Street, again, a similar request.
And here's just a zoning map of the area.
You can see we're mixed between CMX2 and RM1.
But if you look nearby,
at least on this part of the neighborhood,
there really is no commercial corridor.
And the neighborhood's looking to increase the density
to the point which will allow for commercial use
to actually thrive and survive.
And you can see that from a Google Maps perspective,
that there's really not much commercial use there either.
And then for the rest of the property,
this is a front of our property at 2325 Germantown.
This property has been vacant for some time.
You can see Google Earth only goes as far back as July of 2007.
You can see this was a vacant lot.
I would also point the board's direction
to the corresponding properties, building structures,
which no longer exist.
But as you can see, this was never a commercial corridor.
These building structures speak of full residential.
And then this is Germantown Avenue to the right of the property, Germantown Avenue to the left of the property.
Our plans and drawings, again, we're trying to do a solid brick facade, no bay windows.
and then this you can see from here this is where we're having issues because of how the building
that the lot is is you know not straight like this is angular which is causing issues uh for
our uh maximum occupied uh area if this was squared off we wouldn't have those issues but
because of the angular nature of the lot, that's why we're asking for that, the minimus dimensional
variance. And then this is our project in a nutshell. The first unit is a bi-level unit,
which is two bedrooms, two baths. The second unit is on the second floor, which is a two-bedroom,
two-bath. And then the third unit is on the third floor, which is a two-bedroom, two-bath.
or our rco meeting notice we met on september 19th with the community it was an in-person meeting
100 addresses were notified of that meeting list of the addresses proof of mailing to those
addresses our application for appeal that we filed with the cba our notice of refusal our
project information form our deed to the property showing to a to z real estate transaction llc is
owner of the property or certificate of tax clearance showing that no money is owed
to the city of philadelphia for real estate taxes so with that being said i believe that
mr addis evans in the virtual audience i would ask that he virtually raise his hands
mr addis seven please unmute yourself and wait for the chair
sir could you state your name and spell it please for the court reporter
My name is Gazi, G-A-Z-I.
The last name is Ataseven, A-T-A-S-E-V-E-N.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth?
The whole truth is nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do, sir.
Proceed, Mr. Knopson.
Yes, Mr. Ataseven, you heard everything I had to say today.
Yes, I heard.
Is it true and correct?
Yes, absolutely.
And do you adopt my testimony as your own?
Thank you.
Alan, is there almost the whole block vacant?
i would i would say so but mr seven you probably would know better than me since you own the
I would say so, but Mr. Assevin, you probably would know better than me since you own the property.
property what can you ask can you answer the chairman uh yeah i i was can you hear me yes
okay yes sir yes almost half of the block is uh empty uh and i sold one one vacant land two six
months ago they are starting construction but to answer your question yes half of them almost
vacant yeah thank you and the one question no i was going to say i believe the one that started
construction is one of those variants requests that we yes yes for the three units all right
thank you questions from the board no mr chairman and mr chairman no mr chairman
questions or comments from the virtual audience
here i see no hands at this time thank you planning commission thank you sir good afternoon
david facto city planning commission mr chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends
no change to the commercial mixed use zoning at this location there is no unique physical condition
of this 1315 15 square foot lot that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning
code granting relief from the required ground floor commercial use would conflict with the
comprehensive plan and would conflict with the spirit and intent of the zoning code and so so
the city planning commission recommends the board deny the use of dimensional variances
um alan you want to respond uh well so this is a mint block property uh and you know if this was
a corner property i would think that would be a better argument uh but this board has recently
granted similar zoning variance requests mid-block, on this block, including across the
streets. So in order to help support the commercial border, and Mr. Otis Evans, also a realtor,
there's no way to support a commercial border with no density. So this density will help
support a commercial border. All right. All right. Thank you. MI 2022-003-936-2325
germantown avenue i vote yes carol tenary my vote is yes thomas holloman my vote is yes
james snell my vote is yes yes my vote is yes number six is mi2022-003-863-1128 mount
vernon street mr noklinson for the record could you state your name and also identify your client
and the relationship to the property.
Yes, Alan Nocklinson, A-L-A-N, last name Nocklinson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
And my client is Lee Tereshok, the owner of the property.
All right, so there's also a letter of support for this
for the 14th Ward Democratic Executive Committee.
An applicant has provided petition and support
signed by approximately 18 neighbors.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Nockmson. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed proof of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral,
photos under plans of the property, five days in advance of this hearing,
and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, in all respects.
Okay, you may proceed and begin with sharing your screen.
Thank you.
so this is a very straightforward project 1128 Mount Vernon Street so even though this is an
RSA5 property there's a rental license for two units my client occupies the lower level unit
with her mother and they rent out the upper level units but it's you know given the change in the
law, it's now being deemed as visitor accommodation, which now requires a variance.
So you'll see in the notice of refusal, that's why we're here today, is that we're seeking
visitor accommodation use.
I would object, actually, I said I was okay with the refusal.
I'm not in this way.
I would ask for a proviso because the refusal only references the visitor accommodation
use on the second floor.
The unit is a bi-level unit, which occupies both the second and third floors.
So if this board is inclined to grant our variance request, I would ask for the following proviso.
Visitor accommodation use limited to bi-level upper units.
We have a letter of support from the 14th Democratic Executive Committee.
We have the rental license as the next exhibit showing two units is allowed.
Again, my client lives at the property, has a great relationship with the nearby neighbors, and they gladly signed the petition in support of this project.
You also see it's not out of character to have Airbnb properties nearby, and we have a map showing that.
Uh, and we have a map showing that we'll also show you maps of the area, photographs of the property, uh, photographs of the interior of the property that's on Airbnb, uh, and, you know, their listing as well as reviews, which are extraordinary, uh, their, uh, floor plans you'll see from, you know, that, you know, so you'll understand the layout of the property, the interior of the property, our RCO meeting notice, the DTIP property showing that, uh, Miss TerraShop, uh, is the owner.
We will also show you maps of the area, photographs.
on the property, our application for appeal, our certificate of tax clearance trying to make
clients good standing with the city with respect to her real estate taxes. And again, Ms. Tereshuk
should be in the virtual audience, don't doubt my testimony as her own. So this is an RSA
buying property. Again, we already have a use permit for two units. So given the change in the
law with with airbnb and short-term accommodations we're here to legalize the visitor accommodation
use and we have a letter of support from the 14th ward democratic executive rco committee
and then you'll see here that there's you know a rental license for two units she's always done
things above board but given the change of the law you know it necessitated uh this only variance
and again my client's retired she lives in the property on the unit number one with her mother
this helps her responsibly retire and pay the expenses associated with the property
so she met with her neighbors to ask for support and there are 16 properties where individuals
signed our petition and they're listed and you can see from the map they're all nearby
And then here's a copy of the petition.
And then there's nearby Airbnb.
So you can see where my client is in the neighborhood.
All these, there's a ton of properties near close by.
There are also Airbnb.
They're either going to have to legalize
like Ms. Tereshoff is doing,
or they're going to no longer be in Airbnb.
But I'm sure the board has seen many cases
in the recent listings of similar requests.
And then just maps of the area.
showing where we are in the neighborhood we're on mount vernon street and where we are from the
google maps perspective then for the rest of the property we're a three-story uh building
in the middle of the block there's a proof of our uh posting of our notice for the hearing
so we go street to street we go from from mount vernon to clay street and there you can see that
And Mount Vernon Street to the right of the property, Mount Vernon Street to the left of the property, Clay Street to the right of the property, Clay Street to the left of the property.
And just interior photos just so you can get a feel of what this looks like.
This is straight from the Airbnb website.
and then you can see um that she has excellent reviews and this you just want to give a sampling
of these reviews out of a possible five she has 4.96 172 reviews and then just map uh you know
floor plans very simple you know first floor is first and then you go on the second and third
floors and that's you know the visitor accommodation request and we met on october 19th at 6 30 pm
in a well-attended community meeting 159 addresses were notified in that meeting
list of the addresses proof of mailing to those addresses proof that we emailed the notice
to the coordinating rcos or rco and any related entities
our deed showing that Ms. Tereshuk is the owner of the property
for application for appeal to the ZBA
and a certificate of tax claims.
That being said, I'm going to stop sharing my screen.
I'm going to ask Ms. Tereshuk for the raise her hand
so she can adopt my testimony as her own.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Ms. Tereshoff, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter, please?
My name is Lee Tereshoff, L-E-E-T-E-R-E-S-C-H-U-K.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Proceed, counsel.
Yeah, Lee, you heard everything I had to say today.
And it's a term, correct?
yes do you adopt as your own testimony yes thank you questions from the board
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
no mr chairman no mr chairman no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
jr i see no hands at this time high planning commission thank you mr chairman and members
of the board david vecto city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to
the residential single family zoning at this location. Visitor accommodation is a short-term
rental use, short-term being fewer than 30 days. As such, it is not strictly necessary for the
applicant to continue deriving value from this property. The applicant could simply rent their
property to a longer-term tenant. City Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the
use variances. Thank you. So MI-2022-003-863-1128 Mount Vernon Street, I vote yes to a temporary
variance that expires 12-1-25 and also visitor accommodation use limited to bi-level upper unit.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes with the temporary variance and promosso.
Thomas Solomon, my vote is yes, with provisos.
James Snell, my vote is yes, with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with provisos.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right.
MI 2022-003-866-5926 Market Street.
Mr. Knacklebson, could you state your name for the record
and also identify your client and relationship to this property?
Yes, my name is Alan Ockamson, A-L-A-N, the last name is Ockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N, and the owner for 5926 is also A to Z Real Estate Transaction LLC, and its member is Dazi I7.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Ockamson. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos under plans of the property, five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Can you please proceed?
Thank you.
And share your screen.
I know this is unbelievable, but it's good. Good stuff.
What's the most consecutive zoning matters have you heard matters?
I'm from Brooklyn, so that's my accent coming out.
Oh, my gosh.
So that you've ever had one attorney do?
I've been here, I think, 16 years, never.
Okay, there you go.
Actually, I think you may have number two, that one when you came in and did all North Philadelphia, changing from the duplexes to the multi-units.
i think you're at number two too if you're interested yeah but that was all related
projects this is okay these are all different these are all right yeah but yes it's uh it's
a little much um but at least we get off next week uh all right so 5926 market street um this
is a very straightforward project this is a cmx great property we're proposing to have
one commercial unit on the ground floor and four residential. And the only refusal we're getting
is the fact that we're not providing parking. History of the property, last known use,
four residential, one commercial, no parking. So we are mimicking what the last known use of
this property is. Because of CMX3, we could have built something a lot bigger, a lot more dense.
we chose not to we're on the l it would make no sense to have a parking spot uh on on the l line
uh block um also because the width of the property is only 16 feet wide if we put a parking spot
on the ground floor we would have to eliminate a commercial component on a commercial quarter
which would make no sense so you'll see that from the notice of refusal you'll see the neighborhood
has supported our zoning request, and that's through the West Philadelphia Economic Development
Council. Our use permit showing the last known uses, four residential, one commercial, no parking.
Maps of the area, photographs of the property, our plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notice,
our application for appeal, our deeds of property, our certificate of tax clearance.
And Mr. Ades-Seven, as you know, is the member of A to Z Real Estate Transaction LLC, the owner
of the property. And at the conclusion of my presentation, I'll ask that he virtually
raise his hand and adopt my testimony as his own.
um and adopt uh my testimony uh as his own okay so notice refusal again this is cmx3 property
and the only refusal we have is that we're required technically to provide one parking space
for the four units of residential and we couldn't accommodate that without eliminating the
commercial component and it would make no sense to eliminate the commercial component to provide
that parking space and we'll be out of character again because we're under the L.
The West Philadelphia Economic Development Council issued a letter of support for this project.
Use permit again for family dwelling with a commercial component. That was the last known
use in 1967. I don't know how long that use lasted because we have a vacant lot.
maps of the area as you can see we're on market street we're a cmx3 property but really
very narrow uh from a width perspective which makes it impossible for us to comply
with that request and then photographs of the property we're a vacant lot we've been a vacant
lot you know as far back as 2009 proof of uh posting of that property um for today's purposes
Marcus Street to the right of the property, Marcus Street to the left of the property,
as you can see, we're on, you know, the L. Plants and drawings,
you know, brick facade, four-story structure, you know, very nice project.
And you can also see that there is no basement use at all for this property. So again,
you have a commercial space in the front you have unit number one which is behind it a hallway uh
unit number two is the second floor unit number three is the third floor and unit four is the
fourth floor and then we met with the community on october 25th 106 addresses were notified of
that meeting, list the addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses, proof that we
emailed that notice to the coordinating RCOs and related entities, application for appeal
that we filed with the ZBA was showing the A to Z real estate transaction LLC as the
owner of the property. Our deed to property showing A to Z real estate LLC is the owner
of the property. Our certificate of tax credit showing that A to Z does not owe any real estate
taxes with respect to this property. That being said, I'm going to share my screen. I'm going to
Nessa and Mr. Adasev, and again virtually raise his hand.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Do we see it in the audience?
Just state your name and spell for the court reporter.
You've already been sworn.
My name is Gazi, G-A-Z-I.
the last name is atasev and atas7. Proceed, counsel. Mr. Atasev, you heard everything I had
to say today. Yes, I heard. And is it true and correct? Yes. And the adopted as your testimony.
Yes, I will. Thank you. Okay, questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
chair i see no hands at this time hi thank you planning commission thank you sir david vecto
city planning commission mr chairman and board members the comprehensive plan recommends no
change to the commercial mixed use three zoning at this location this proposal is substantially
in keeping with the intent of this zoning district the lack of one required parking space will not
impair the use of adjacent properties and so the city planning commission recommends that the board
grant the variance. Thank you. MI 2022-003-866-5926 Market Street, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes. Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Okay, so number nine, MI 2022-003-862-1110 South 54th Street,
Mr. Nockmson, state your name for the record and identify your client in relationship to the building.
Yes. Alan Ockamson, A-L-A-N. Lastly, Ockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N. My client is Paroli, LLC. Oh, I'm sorry. Wrong one. Sorry. My client is Ivy House Realty, LLC. And in the virtual audience is its member, Chanel Small.
Yes, Alan Nockmson, A-L-A-N, Leslie Nockmson, N-O-C-O-N.
Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions.
After your name, Mr. Mockamson, do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral,
photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met
with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, I do.
You may proceed and begin with sharing your screen.
Thank you.
Thank you.
all right so i'm here to present 1110 south 54th street uh you'll see for the presentation but
you also see from the rendering there is no below ground use for this property uh we're proposing
to have a two-family dwelling and each unit will have its own entrance for the lower level unit
You can see it's on the ground floor, and then the upper level gate, it has a set of exterior stairs to its own front door.
It's also a corner property as well, where it's a responsible trash management plan of outdoor trash storage.
So you'll see from the notice of refusal, this is a CMX 2 property.
So all we're trying to do is eliminate the commercial component completely.
It would be out of character to have commercial right here. We're nowhere near a commercial corridor. And the neighborhood actually prefers to have it this way. This has been a problematic property for some time, a nuisance to the neighborhood. And they want to activate this corner, not with any commercial use, but to just merely two residential dwelling units.
We do have a letter of support from the Southwest Philadelphia District Services, as well as letters of support from nearby neighbors.
You'll see maps of the area, photographs of the property, our plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notice, our application for appeal that we filed in the CBA, our deeds of the property showing that Ivy House Realty LLC is the owner of the property.
The Certificate of Tax Clearance will show that that entity owes no real estate taxes on the property.
And again, in the virtual audience is Chanel Small, the member of Ivy House Realty LLC, the owner of the property.
Notice refusal. Again, we're a CMX2 property.
We are allowed two residential units as a matter of fright.
We're being refused because we're trying to eliminate the commercial component, which would be out of character for this corner property.
Letter support, as you can see, we received unanimous support, both from the members of the community that attended the meeting, as well as the executive committee of the coordinating RCO, and there you can see it there as well.
And then we also did outreach to members of the community outside of the community meeting. So you'll see letters to support there sprinkled through our presentation.
And then maps of the area, again, we're a corner property, because there's an alleyway
We're on 54th Street between Willows and Pentridge, and you can see here, this is not a commercial
area, and having a commercial property here would be a nuisance, honestly, to the neighborhood,
and to rather have two well-sized residential units was a preference for the community.
And you can see this is an eyesore to the community.
We bought it recently, so we didn't create this issue.
But you can see through this orange poster, which is not a ZBA orange hearing notice poster,
that's a poster saying that there are issues with this property.
Ms. Small wants to hopefully get the variance approved and make significant improvements to
this property. Here's our proof of posting, though, of the zoning area notice. And then
South 54th Street to the right of the property, South 54th Street to the left of the property.
Our plans and drawings, again, this is just a rendering of what we hope it's going to look like,
which is much better than what it looks like now.
And then you can see that we're hoping to store it to trash it over there.
And then just our plans and drawings. Again, there's no basement use. Only the first floor unit. I mean, the lower level units on the first floor. And it's pretty straightforward to walk in through the front door. There's a living room, kitchen, and a bedroom.
And then just our plans and drawings again, there's no basement.
You go up the exterior staircase. You come into this enclosed course area where there's a kitchen,
living room, bath, bedroom, and it's a bi-level unit which has several bedrooms on the third floor.
RCO meeting notice. We met with the community earlier this summer. They were actually accommodating
to have a community meeting rather quickly, but we had to wait for the hearing. 172 addresses
We're notified of the community meeting, list of the addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses, application for appeal that we filed with the ZVA,
deed to the property showing Ivy House Realty LLC as the owner,
and our Certificate of Tax Clendery showing that they're in good standing with the city.
I'm going to stop sharing with the screen.
I believe Ms. Small is in the virtual audience.
I would ask that she virtually raise her hand.
could you raise your hand and unmute yourself please i believe i'm unmuted can you hear me
okay yes could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
yes my name is chanel small first name chanel c h a n e l l e last name small s m a l l do you
swear firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes proceed uh miss small
you heard everything I had to say today. Yes. Is it true and correct? Yes, it is. And do you adopt
it as your own testimony? Yes, I do. Thank you. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman. No, Mr. Chairman. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no hands at this time. All right, Planning Commission, please.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members of the board, David Fecto, City Planning Commission,
The Comprehensive Plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed-use zoning at this location.
Requested relief from the ground floor commercial requirement in the zoning code appears to be warranted by the configuration of the property.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the use variants.
Thank you. MI 2022-003-862-1110-South 54th Street, I vote yes.
Carlton Aery, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
So number 10, MI2022-003-864-2411, North 33rd Street.
Mr. Nockleson, could you state your name for the record
and identify your client in relationship to this property?
Yes, Alan Nockleson.
A-L-A-N, the last name Nockleson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
And the owner of the property is SJC Real Estate LLC.
And in the virtual audience is Shati Cooks, its member.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Hi, Alan.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, refusal referral,
photos and or plans of this property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the
RCO and do you have a letter? I do. Okay, great. You may proceed and begin with sharing your screen.
Okay, we're here to present 2411 North 33rd Street. You'll see that this is a property
that is an RSA is an RSA 5 property in name only. It has a significant non-single family
use history. And you'll see also that there are other similarly situated properties,
which are also multifamily in nature. This notice of refusal, through this notice of
refusal. We're asking for a two-family dwelling. We do have revised plans, so the board's inclined
to grant our zoning requests. We ask that it granted with the revised plans. We do have
correspondence from the Strawberry Mansion community concern, and our revised plans are
based on the request of the community. The use permit that you'll see in the presentation packet
and the rental license will show that this is not this property does not have a single family or
will show that this is not this property does not have a single family or recent single family
history uh you also see that on the 2400 block of north 33rd street there's nearby multifamily
even those are even though those properties are also rfc in five afterwards we'll show you maps
of the area photographs of property our plans and drawings our rco meeting notice our application
for appeal that we filed with the cba our deed to the property showing that sjc real estate llc
the owner of the property, as well as a certificate of tax clearance showing that there's no real
estate taxes due on account of this property. And again in the virtual audience is Shati Cooks,
its member. Notice refusal. We are an RSA 5 property and we're just merely asking to have
a two-family household dwelling and that's the only refusal we have. We do ask that if the board
grants this variance request that they're granted with revised plans. Those revisions were based on
the request of the coordinating RCO, which we provided by. And then the correspondence from the
coordinating RCO strawberry management community concern. So in addition to a proviso for the
revised plans. I believe, uh, that the other, uh, requests that are enforceable would be, uh,
no, uh, let me just see, no roof deck, no roof deck access structure, which I don't even think
it's on our plans, but, you know, we have no objection to that. And then for trash, for unit
number one trash would be stored in the rear and for unit number two the trash would be stored in
a ventilated uh trash closet so those would be i i would believe the enforceable provisors oh and
one more thing um no bedrooms um in the basement would be the last thing i think i think alan the
words we use use a basement for storage trashing mechanicals only well the only thing i would say
as to that is if we want to have the basement used for like a secondary living room or an office
um we we just don't want to have a situation where we can't use the property that way hillary
hillary
she's there somewhere she always said why why do you want to proceed with that yeah all right so
you can see here there's a use permit showing that this property excuse me sorry this is hillary i
had to step away for just a second that's fine um it mr chair it's your call whether you want
to do a proviso for um no bedrooms in the basement or um limit it in the other way that that you
described um i think i'd prefer the use of the basement for storage trash and mechanicals okay
Yeah. So as you can see from the use permit, this property was previously used as a real
estate office in one apartment. But more importantly, as you can see from this rental
license, most recently, it had a rental license for two units, meaning this was a duplex previously.
Again, so that means what we're asking for is not out of character to the history of this
property. And then nearby multifamily structures. 2426 North 33rd Street is a triplex. 2445 North
33rd Street is a duplex. 2446 North 33rd Street is a duplex. 2451 North 33rd Street
is a duplex. So there is a significant history with this property, but also on this block
of multifamily use, even though these are RSA 5 properties. And then it just maps of the area.
And then photographs of the property. This is a two-story structure, which is in desperate need
of some TLC. There is an addition to this property, which I don't believe I referenced
originally with the notice of refusal so and that kind of goes to what the community requested of us
here's proof of the orange notice posters being posted on the property north 33rd street to the
right of the property north 33rd street to the left of the property or plans and drawings
so what was requested of us which is not zoning related but this addition originally we had a
different type of material on the third floor. So at the behest of the community, they asked us to
follow the brick facade to the third floor, which we gladly did with a new cornice line as well. So
if you look, if you walk by the property built as proposed now, it's not going to stand out.
uh built as proposed now um it's not going to stand out as something that's newer construction
uh it will look like the the true philadelphia fulbright facade and corners line that you would
expect and then just plans you know of the property i would ask i just don't want my client to get in
trouble but if someone uses the property as a flex space down there that's why we would ask for no
bedrooms in the basement rather than you know what the you know chairman has as you know proposes
language but we defer obviously to the board in that respect and then just the elevations you can
see of what the property is going on and then our meeting notice um we met on halloween uh 162
addresses were notified of that meeting these are the addresses proof of the mailing of those
addresses. Proof that we emailed the notice to the coordinating RCO and as well as related
entities or applications for appeal that we filed to the ZBA. Our deed to the property showing that
SJC real estate LLC is the owner of the property. And finally showing that there are no taxes owed
on the property. I'm going to unshare my screen. I would ask that Mr. Cooks virtually raise his hand.
Hi, Mr. Cook, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Mr. Cook, please unmute yourself or wait for the chair.
Yes, my name is Shati Cooks, spelled S-H-A-T-E-E, last name Cooks, C-O-O-K-S.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Yes, Mr. Cooks, you heard everything I had to say today.
Correct.
Is it true and correct?
Correct.
and do you adopt as your own testimony yes sir all right thank you all right questions from the
board no mr chair no mr chairman no mr chairman all right questions or comments from the virtual
audience chair we have strawberry mansion community with their hand up okay please
unmute yourself and wait for the chair hi could you state your name please and spell it for the
court reporter. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and the board. My name is Bonita Cummings. I am the
director of Strawberry Mansion Community Concern. My name is B as in boy, O-N-I-T-A, Cummings,
C-U-M-M-I-N-G-S. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth? I do. Proceed, please. I just wanted to indicate our presence as the coordinating RCO
And that I did want to know about the no drug rehab recovery houses was one of the provisos, which was not mentioned.
Hillary, you want to respond?
The reason that proviso was not added is because that was not given, was not on the list the
chair gave, because that's something that would require a separate zoning use permit
application, and because this property is zoned, RSA 5 would require a separate zoning variance.
Thank you for calling in.
Is there anyone else in a virtual audience?
chair i see no other hands at this time planning commission thank you mr chairman members of the
board david fecto city planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the
residential single family zoning at this location there is no unique physical condition of this
property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code the city
Planning Commission recommends the Board deny the use variants. Thank you. MI 2022-003-864-2411
North 33rd Street. I vote yes with following provisos. No rooftop deck or roof deck access
structure. Trash for first floor units stored in real yard. Trash for second and third floor units
stored internally. Use of basements for storage, trash, and mechanics only. Revised plans, one page
stamped by ZBA on November 16, 2022.
And there's a note here from our council,
stamp plans with architecture, architect seal.
Yes, Mr. Chair, that's a note for myself.
Okay, all right.
Thank you.
Yes, I, yes.
Thank you very much.
So, so is this with a proviso?
With proviso, that's all.
Okay, Carroll Tenere, yes, with proviso.
Thomas Holloman, yes, with provisos. James Snell, yes, with provisos. Ishmael Shahid,
Ishmael Shaheed, that's with provisals.
yes, with provisos. Mr. Nocklinson, we thought about
Mr. Nockamson, we thought about giving you a quick break, but we've changed our mind.
You're going to move to number 14, please.
I feel bad.
Actually, I thought there was one more person behind me.
I was going to say, you should have just had that one person.
Whoever that person is, I'm sorry.
All right.
But they will be fine.
MI-2022-004-585-1943-South Hemberger Street.
Letter of support from West Pashyunk Neighbors Association.
Just for the record, state your name, identify your client, and the relationship to the property.
Yes, my name is Alan Ockamson, A-L-A-N, last name Ockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N.
and you're i've already i'm sorry i'm you know what maybe you needed that break but go ahead
all i'm thinking about this is the 10th one so hopefully i didn't mess it up all right uh parole
llc is the um is the owner of the property and gabe uh polishok is the uh its member okay
our vice chair has a few questions
do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
i did uh actually no i don't um okay we'll just go ahead okay so i think and and i didn't bring
this up to miss emerson's attention i probably should have i looked at the refusal and there's
a refusal for the minimum front setback. So we're, there's a two-story structure to the left and
right of us. And we're trying to go up three stories. Now there is a front part on the first
story that is, I guess, an enclosed porch area. So we go, our front facade on the third story
addition goes straight up from the second floor to the third floor. The refusal is stating,
obviously we have to be set back eight feet in the front i thought it was eight feet from the
front of the second floor it's saying that we're five feet one inches we're set back five feet one
inches from the front but we're not from the second to third floor we're set back zero because
we're going straight up so that's why i object to the refusal just as an out of an abundance of
caution um i just don't want anyone to think that we're we're setting back on the third floor
and our site plan shows that so okay do you have anything else no have you emailed the exhibit
packet with proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the refusal or referral photos under
plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and
do you have a letter yes no more sex you may proceed and begin to share your screen
great god i'm gonna miss you when you're gone i know this is like i should have got the
disciples today too right um all right so this is actually a very straightforward project 1943
south hamburger street this is an rm1 property these are all dimensional variances um you know
based on just the you know the small lot size and what we're replacing is not out of character on
that lot and i actually did an analysis from atlas on that block where it shows so many of these
other properties run afoul of the dimensional requirements of the zoning code so we'll go
through the notice of refusal the letter of support from the west passing on neighbors association
Properties with the rear yard depth under nine feet, but there's also related matters as well, which apply to our zoning requests.
Maps of the areas, photographs of the property, our plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notice, our application for appeal, our deed to the property, showing that Paroli LLC is the owner of the property, our certificate of tax clearance showing they're in good standing with respect to real estate taxes.
And finally, Mr. Polershuk is in the virtual audience and is the member of the corporate entity owner.
So notice the refusal. Again, this is an RM1 property.
We're just trying to make it a two-family, trying to freshen up this property, use this as a two-family dwelling.
There is no use refusal here. These are all de minimis, dimensional variances.
Again, things that are not out of character to this block, to the other properties nearby.
So these are the refusals.
Maximum occupied area, 75% is allowed.
We're at 87.04%.
Again, we want a functional floor plan.
Given the size of the property, it's rather difficult to conform to the code.
Same thing with the rear yard depth, 9 feet required, 7 feet proposed.
same thing with the required yard area 144 feet is required 99.169 is proposed and then finally again
99.169 is proposed. And then finally, again, we, I don't believe based on the interpretation
of the code that we're providing any setback, but we're getting refused to leave the way. It's
just how much of a variance we're requesting. So a letter of support from the coordinating RCO,
the community itself unanimously supported this project five of the seven members of the of the
executive committee of the coordinating RCO also supported this project and then as you can see
here we did an analysis of 14 15 properties one of them is ours and we're number one but all these
properties there are numbers here we're on afoul of those dimensional requirements that I indicated
on a refusal in some way. And most of them completely. So what we're asking for is not
out of character to what other properties nearby are facing. And then maps to the area. This is
as orange as orange gets. So having a duplex here makes sense. We just want to, we're asking for
these dimensional variances to have a functional floor plan. And if we go out to the property,
My client didn't do this, my client, one of my clients, the neighborhood wants this property developed appropriately.
But as you can see here, here's the enclosed porch, you know, and here's the, you know, obviously the second floor.
We're going straight up, and you'll see that from our presentation, further presentation materials.
You know, proof of posting after notice for today's hearing.
again south hamburger street to the right the left architectural plans and drawings
as you can see we're going straight up so i think we're providing zero setback on from the second
and third floors the examiner saying that we provided five feet uh one inch and i think it's
based on what they were thinking was the porch as this has the starting point for the setback
But as you can see here, a much improved building facade compared to what's there.
And then, you know, the floor plans, we have a first floor unit or unit number one, which is a bi-level unit.
Unit number two is also a bi-level unit on the second and third floors.
Our RCO meeting notice, we had our meeting recently on October 27th.
184 addresses were notified.
List of the addresses, proof of mailing, proof that we mailed the notice or emailed the notice to the Coromini RCO and related entities, our application for appeal, our deed to the property showing the parolee LLCs, the owner of the property, and our Certificate of Tax Guides.
with that being said i will unshare my screen i would ask that uh mr polishuk virtually raise
his hand so he can dot my testimony that's his own all right sir could you state your name and
spell for the court reporter please yes gabriel polishuk g-a-b-r-i-e-l last name p-o-l-i-s-h-u-k
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Proceed, counsel.
Mr. Polashok, you heard everything I had to say today.
Correct.
Is it true and correct?
And you adopted as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no hands.
planning commission good afternoon mr chairman and members of the board david effecto city
planning commission the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning change for this property
from residential multi-family to residential single family however we have to evaluate this
on the current zoning the addition of a roof deck and roof deck access structure which generates
dimensional variances is not strictly necessary to enable the applicant to continue deriving value
from the property so the city planning commission recommends the board deny the dimensional variances
for the roof deck and roof deck access structures um mr knockamson i don't usually do this but
the photos of that existing property boy i tell you the neighbors are going to welcome
welcome this so so mi 2022 004 585 1943 south term murder street i vote yes
carol tennari my vote is yes thomas holloman my vote is yes james snell
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Mr. Nakazun, thank you, and take some time to relax a little bit.
And I'll invite you to the ceremony where I...
Your Honor, it's all time. Okay.
One day, 10 in one day.
All right, good. Thank you. So number 11, MI 2022-003-934-1422-30, North A Street. Rachel Pritzker is the attorney. Letter of support from APN.
Chair, Ms. Pritzker is coming back in as a panelist now.
Good afternoon, Chairman, members of the board.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Rachel, R-A-C-H-A-E-L, Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R, 1521 Locust Street, Suite 605, Philadelphia, PA, 19102.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, the relationship to the property?
Yes, my client is 1422 North 8th Street, LLC, and they are the owner of the property.
And our vice chair has a few questions.
I do agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral,
photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing,
and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Okay, you may proceed and begin with sharing your screen.
Thank you.
I just also want to thank Alan for letting some of the rest of us talk today.
Really nice of him.
Thank you.
He was the only one that does this work in the entire city.
What a marathon.
This is 1422 North 8th Street.
This is an aerial view of it.
As you can see, it's a large existing building.
sort of weirdly situated under the L on or the train on 9th Street as well. And it's situated
next to a large vacant property that's owned by the city. I'm just going to go through our hearing
packet. This is the refusal. The property is owned ICMX, Industrial Commercial Mixed Use.
And what we are proposing is an adaptive reuse of this property to include 62 dwelling units
on the first through fifth floors, as well as vacant commercial space on a portion of the first
floor, 10 indoor accessory parking spaces, and 20 Class A bicycle spaces. The two refusals that
we received is for the use for multifamily, which is not permitted in ICMX, and then the parking
ratio, which relates to the ICMX zoning classification. It requires 31 parking spaces
proposed for 62 units. We are providing 10 parking spaces. I'm just going to go through
our argument a little bit to set out the hardship on the record.
And I think it's helpful to see the aerial of the site as well as sort of the visuals. Again,
we're proposing 62 dwelling units with 10 parking spaces and doing an adaptive reuse.
the two refusals I went through. First is obviously for the multifamily use. The granting
of this variance would be in harmony with the purpose and spirit of the code and the city's
2035 comprehensive plan, which I have here. The Lower North District plan, basically the Lower
North District plan states that, you know, it's a bit challenging in the Lower North District
related to purely commercial or industrial sites, as that most of the area is a bit limited with
those uses and any new uses. As you can see, based on the zoning map, almost the majority of the
properties are zoned multifamily residential or single-family residential with a smattering of
some industrial, but like this property, a lot of them have either been converted or I'm sure are
sitting vacant. Basically, the code opines that land use changes have accelerated in the last 10
years where land is transitioning away from industry to residential, and the current zoning
does not reflect this change. That's on page 18. The goal of this city should be to allow
vacant industrial zone parcels off American Street to transition to other uses. That's on page 50.
And also those that are not a part of the American Street corridor, which this one is not.
They, in fact, propose some land use changes to high-density residential. And so for this property
in particular, not only are we doing an adaptive reuse, but if you look at the size and shape and
location of it, it's really mostly near all residential properties. There's almost no
there's almost no major industrial uses over here, especially with a building that is this size and
major industrial uses over here, especially with
shape. Additionally, from like a parking and loading perspective, you'd have to somehow figure
out a very small vans or trucks to try to get in on these, you know, get in under the train tracks
here, which would be quite challenging. The building has also fallen into quite some disrepair,
So we'll probably actually have to be torn down instead of preserved, which is what we're looking to do.
Rachel, before it's in a train, I can't see the top. How many floors?
It's hard to see. The best way to do it is on this.
Is it three floors?
No, it's got a mix of, if you can see from the elevation, it's got some areas of the building that have one, two, three, four, five.
in some areas of the building that are taller.
It's not as straight across.
It's sort of like a hodgepodge of a few buildings.
Okay, all right, all right, thank you.
Yeah, but the train, as mentioned,
does make it quite challenging.
However, again, providing for an adaptive reuse.
Additionally, it's got a location close to a lot of transit,
which is beneficial from a residential perspective.
And again, most of this area, as you can see,
even is struggling with just single-family home, multifamily uses, but that's mostly what the area
is zoned for. We met with, let's see, we met with APM. This goes into more detail about, you know,
the city's plan, both Riverward's plan and the Lower North District plan, both kind of stating
that there should be allowances in consideration for industrial conversions. I also did see an
article the other day that Philadelphia is outpaced almost every other city for preserving
industrial buildings with an adaptive reuse. So I thought that was a nice note given some of the
other stuff Philadelphia gets slammed for. Additionally, like I said, it's surrounded
by all residential and a large vacant city-owned lot. And more photos of the building and the
zoning posters that we have. See, as you can see, Chairman, part of the building is different in
size. Yep. And as you can see, it's fallen into quite disrepair over the years of not having a
use in it. The refusal we got for parking, we'd have to demo part of the structure to be able to
provide additional parking. We are utilizing the space that we have in the building for 10
parking spaces, so we are providing parking, but we would have to demolish portions of the structure
to be able to fit 30-some-odd parking spaces. We met with APM back on the 16th. Oh, no,
that's today's date. We met with APM back on the 3rd of November. We submitted the letters and
certification of the letters to the near neighbors. There were 79 letters sent out, and we have a
letter of support from APM. They were really happy about us
rehabilitating the structure. They also liked that we were doing
multifamily, providing, you know, some screening related to
security and lighting for the property, as they had mentioned
that there was some concerns in the neighborhood about vacant
buildings and vacant land and not having lighting and people on
the street and eyes on the street. They also liked the idea
of the commercial space, but requested that we set aside some
space for community gatherings which we have incorporated into the revised plans um and you
know again we're really happy because this has been an eyesore um and we're supportive of the
project especially because it does provide workforce housing units that's just what this
developer does um but and is not obtaining any bonuses or anything to do that's just part of
their plan i'm going to um send it over to ray rola who's our architect just so he can go through
the plans as I'm not an architect. And I just want to make note that we did submit a proviso
plan form where we added south-facing elevation. We reduced the commercial space on the ground
level to add some room for the community space. We deleted the floor plans of the upper floor,
enlarged the floor plans, ground level, and additional detail that was requested of us
for parking loading in a trash room, and deleted some other things on the prior plans that were
not relevant. So we do have four pages of stamp plans submitted to the board with this proviso.
What's your architect's name? Ray Rolla.
Mr. Rolla, please unmute yourself and wait. He's coming back in as a panelist here.
Fine, that's fine. Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
Ray, are you able to unmute yourself?
Ray, are you able to unmute?
Yes, now I did.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Raymond Rola, R-O-L-A.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
ray are you able to share your screen or would you like me to do so just to go through the plans
um uh yeah why don't you you share your screen and i'll go through it okay
make sure okay the board see that
yes okay i also want to point out for uh member holloman board member holloman that there is
no basement that we're using as well thank you council that should be a benefit absolutely
so ray uh can you see my screen i have the elevations up and the site plan um yes i can
see uh z1 which you have on your screen and z1 is the site plan that basically identifies the
different parts of the building uh there are basically two main parts uh it was actually
probably added to at some point but there there's a four-story portion that is only it's four
stories because we deleted part of a floor to make bi-levels it was five stories and then there's the
the true high ceiling five-story portion that wraps around it um and then there's a two-story
portion over here and you can see there's three uh overhead doors in the back underneath the
L. And one of them is for trash storage. Trash storage is inside and you'll see that on the
next sheet. And yeah, you can go to the next sheet then. So we have a loading zone that's
also used for trash pickup and a trash room that is accessible from every floor. We'll
have a trash room that will bring the trash down to the lower level and then taking out
commercial trash pickup. We have parking. There's two overhead doors kind of on each end and we
split it up with four parking spaces on one side and five on the other with the ADA accessible
parking as required by the code. We also have a bicycle storage that you can see here. There's an
elevator located here basically the main entrance is off of eighth street there is a ada ramp as
well as stairs that kind of brings you into a porch which was a loading dock at one point
off of eighth street so it makes a nice entrance we'll be redoing the canopy there there's a large
lobby space with a with mail room and a wide corridor that leads to a community room
and also a commercial space that's sort of in the middle of the plan.
And the rest is really just notes we had to make to comply with the streets department
turning radiuses. And that's basically it. I also just want to briefly mention for the board and for
the planning commission that we are including commercial space. So we're not trying to get
way from trying to request the minimum variances necessary. We are trying to incorporate some of
the uses required by the base zoning by providing a commercial space as best we can. Do you want
to have your testimony adopted, counsel? Yes. Is there a Judah Angster on the call?
If not, chairman. You're an officer of the court. We will take your testimony.
Yeah, he has his hand raised.
Hello.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
My name is Judah Engster, spelled Y-E-H-U-D-A, last name Engster, A-N-G-S-T-E-R.
Right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
You see, counsel?
Thank you.
Judah, have you heard my testimony today?
Do you believe it to be true and accurate, and do you adopt it as your own?
thank you happy to answer any questions chairman well one quick one rachel what's the history of
the place i believe it was used i have it's written down i believe it was used for um
industrial and so it was a last permitted for warehouse and storage but the last
permit we had on it was from 2004 okay in bacon since at least 2004. okay all right all right
questions from the board no mr chairman all right questions or comments from the virtual audience
can't remember I see no hands hi planning commission please
Okay, I see no hands.
Hi, Planning Commission, please.
Thank you, Mr. Bergman and members of the Board, David Fechto, City Planning Commission.
The Comprehensive Plan recommends a change in the zoning of this property from industrial commercial mixed use to commercial mixed use 3.
Under that zoning, the residential and commercial units would be allowed by right.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the use and parking variances.
Thank you.
MI-2022-003-934-1422-30 North A Street.
I vote yes.
Chairman with Proviso for a stamp.
I'm sorry.
My mistake.
Carol Tenere.
Report Proviso, revised plan, four pages,
stamped by CBA on November 16, 2022.
to. Harold Tenere, my vote is yes with Proviso. 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. Hey everybody, let's take a five-minute break, give our court reporter a
chance to regroup, and then we'll be back and we only have a few left, okay?
Mr. Chair, can we just, I think that was the end of the two o'clock list, can we just make
sure there's no outstanding. Is there anyone still in the audience whose case has not been called
for the 2 p.m. list? I see no hands. Hold on. Thank you. Diane Monroe has her hand up. Okay.
Ms. Monroe, you can unmute yourself or wait for the chair.
Hi, Ms. Monroe. Could you state your name and spell for the court report, please?
diane monroe right uh d-i-a-n-e monroe m-o-n-r-o-e i could have fallen asleep
on this since two o'clock it's 11 28 well listen wait a minute do you swear for him to tell the
truth the whole truth is nothing but the truth hello you can unmute yourself miss monroe
okay yes i did in what case were you interested in 1128 mount vernon street i must have went to
sleep i'm i'm sorry about that we uh we uh that case is over oh god lord was it approved uh it
was approved with a temporary variance oh wow i fell asleep i've been there i'm sorry
I'm very sorry
about that, Ms. Munro.
All right.
See everybody in five minutes.
Oh, my God.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We can show you how we doing.
Court Repelter, are you back?
Yes, ma'am.
I'm back.
Thank you for the break.
LaKeisha, are we ready?
Yes, Chair.
Start recording, please.
And we're recording.
Yes, sir.
We're all ready to go.
Good afternoon.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon's 3.30 ZBA hearings.
With me is Carol Tenere, our Vice Chair. She's here. Ismael Shahid, our Board Secretary.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thomas Holliman, our Board Member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And James Snell, our Board Member.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Also here is our Board Attorney, Hillary Emerson, and our ZBA Hearing Supervisor, Lakeisha Gandy.
Before we begin, be advised the proceedings are being recorded.
By participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
A video will be available by contacting TonyaSunkett at phil.gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you are participating by phone, if 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 comments are not to be made to the question answer screen on the on the
on the to the box on the screen all comments should be directed to our executive director
Tanya Sunkett. Let's take a look at our continuances for this afternoon. Number one,
MI 2022-003-546-30 Quinn Street. That case is continued. Number eight, MI 2021-003-593-4829
Longshore Avenue. That case is also continued. Is there anyone who has a question about those
two particular cases? I see no hands, Chair. Are there any other requests for continuances?
Chair, we have Joseph Consul with his hand up. Okay. Mr. Consul, please unmute yourself or wait
for the chair. Mr. Consul, could you just state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Yes, I'm Joe Consul.
That's J-O-S-E-P-H-C-O-N-S-O-L-E.
Right.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Mr. Consul, are you talking about 504 North Pleasant Place?
I am, sir.
You're requesting a continuance?
yeah i believe it's necessary um we do not have our tax certification yet we i believe we have
Yeah, I believe it's necessary.
We do not have...
everything else um i am not 100 certain whether a continuance is required i guess maybe hillary
could could weigh in um but i hillary we only have i think two cases you want to hear this
and we'll just hold it for the tax?
Yeah, so Mr. Consul, we're missing two things in this case.
One, we don't have an RCO letter.
And two, we don't have the tax clearance,
which I understand is something that you're working on.
We can, because you received all of the other documents,
the meeting has been held and the property has been posted.
We can hear the case today
and then hold it for those remaining items.
The RCO letter was sent out last night.
it was a letter of support i believe rco notification was copied and i believe my
assistant sent an updated uh packet okay i i will double check for that mr console but yes we can
hold for the tax clearance all right i i will i will get back to you shortly as i go through the
continuance is okay all right cool thank you any other requests for continuance here we have
strawberry mansion community with their hand up okay strawberry mansion please unmute yourself
or wait for the chair hi mr chairman i i was just trying to get clarity on whether this was
continued 22 23 there's 29 north 31st street we haven't i'm gonna i'm gonna get to that in a
minute oh okay thank you all right thank you all right i have any other question request for
continuance chair i see no hands at this time okay so i have a few cases that have we have no
exhibits number two mi 2022 003 509 601 rector street douglas manger is the owner applicant
pro se there's no exhibits this is the first listing share i see no hands at this time that
case is keep mi 2022 003 509 601 rector street that case is continued
Number five, MI-2022-001-056-2223-29-North 31st Street, no exhibits, first listing.
Jarrett Klein is the attorney.
Here, I see no hands.
Okay, so MI-2022-001-056-2223-29-North 31st Street, that case is continued.
And number six, MI-2020-003-265-1224 Herbert Street, Michael Lambert is the listed attorney, no exhibit, fifth listing.
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
Okay, so MI2020-003-265-1224 Herbert Street, I vote to dismiss.
Carl Tenere, I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, dismiss.
James Snell, dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, dismiss.
Thank you.
So we're going to go to our list.
Number three, MI-2022-003-536-2412 North 19th Street.
MS Ristling is the owner.
We do not have an RCO letter.
And we may need an attorney in this case.
Chair, we have someone by the name of Mark Roche with his hand up.
Mr. Chair, that is one of the principles for the owning entity.
I do not have the name of the attorney.
Okay, fine.
Mr. Roche is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Thank you.
Hi, Mr. Roche, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Mr. Roche, please unmute yourself.
Good afternoon.
Hi, Mr. Roche.
Could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
My name is Mark Roche.
That's M-A-R-K, last name R-O-E-S-C-H.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth?
Yes, I swear.
So there's several things that we don't have for this case.
And we also were under the impression you may need an attorney.
And we also were under the impression you may need an attorney.
Yes, I have my attorney.
He called me at 3.30, requested the code again, and promised me to be here.
I texted him.
What is your attorney's name, Mr. Roche?
Glenn J. Romano.
Okay, he has his handrails.
Do you want me to make him a panelist?
Please, please.
And Mr. Chair, I just want to note for the record,
The only thing that we haven't received in this case is the RCO letter.
We've received all other documents.
All right, good.
Thank you.
Mr. Romano is coming back in as a pen list now, Chair.
Hi, Mr. Romano, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter?
Mr. Romano, please unmute yourself.
mr romano yes i'm sorry sure now sure could you state your name is spelled for the court reporter
glenn romano g-l-e-n-n-r-o-m-a-n-o right do you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i do i think we um could you identify well we know who your client is now
um our vice chair has a few questions good afternoon do you agree to waive the reading
of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy yes have you emailed the exhibit packet with
proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the refusal or referral photos under plans of the
property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter
um i've just been brought into this case uh in the last 24 hours mr roach can better answer those
questions oh mr roach has been sworn mr roach could you answer those questions
yes uh mr chair uh the letters have been sent out and uh with the rco on november 3rd
It was a good meeting in the afternoon, late afternoon, yeah.
Okay, so I believe we have everything, Council, we have everything but the RCO letter.
And Mr. Roach, do you know how the RCO letter, did they?
I don't know.
I invited some other people who were on the meeting.
We had a good meeting.
I reached out to the RCO that was coordinating.
So, Mr. Romano, what we're going to do is we're going to go on with this,
and we'll hold the vote
until we get an RCO letter.
Okay, that's fine.
We're requesting a variance
that will allow conversion
of the premises
to a multifamily dwelling.
It's currently
a single-family dwelling.
The history of the premises...
Romano, could you take
the screen for us?
Share your screen.
so there's a green button at the bottom yeah
that's it do you see a slideshow there we do okay great uh
mr rose prepared the slideshow and i would like to allow him to uh give the presentation i think
we just lost your side show. Oh. See it now? There it is. It's there. Yep. Yes. Okay. All right.
I would like to allow Mr. Roach to give the presentation with the slideshow if that's okay.
Sure. Yep. This is Hillary. Mr. Romano, you do need to give the presentation. You can introduce
your client as a witness to explain certain things, but according to the code, because the
property is owned by an entity, the presentation needs to be given by an attorney. Okay, that's
fine. And I want to direct you to page three, which is up on the screen. The premises was
previously a triplex, and we'll show further that it currently has three kitchens and three baths
in each of the units. It was later converted by the previous owner to a single-family dwelling
for tax purposes. At least that's the information we were given. On the screen are the latest
permits that were given to the previous owners. Then we have our zoning application and refusal
and our appeal.
On the screen now is a picture of the interior of the premises.
It's a three-story premise with a basement, and I'll have further details on that.
and I'll have further details on that.
Next screen shows the three
kitchens, one on each floor, and the next video shows three bathrooms, one on each floor.
In the basement, the premises was previously wired for three separate units. Two were taken
out when the last owner converted to a single family dwelling. You are now looking at the
premises from the outside, which also includes the zoning notice that was posted.
We have some additional photos of the interior. It's a very nice premises, very clean.
Now, what happened was that we tried to market this for a single-family rental, and it just
didn't work, even at a much reduced rental rate.
And I think the only use that makes sense for this premises is to go back to a multifamily
dwelling. We also have the ability to convert this to Section 8 housing. Mark Roche received
a certificate of completion of a course for that. We've had the community involved. Mr.
Roche can testify his involvement with the community. I have a letter that was sent
to the local community organizations. That's up on the screen now, if you can see that.
Uh, and we also have a certificate of mailing that went out to all the neighbors, uh, affected
neighbors.
So they're all aware of this.
We have the updated tax compliance, issue date November 16th.
We have, I haven't showed you the deed, I will bring that up.
current deed of the property
on the screen now
Now, just to go back to the slideshow.
Again, Mr. Roach will testify as to his involvement with the community organization
and what was said at that meeting.
uh uh mr roach do you want to give testimony at this time about that
mark you have to unmute yourself
yeah thank you uh glenn thank you chair i'm happy to testify that we spoke to all those people that
we made a community meeting we sent out the letters we talked to multiple neighbors on the
street and people who are affected. Special shout out to Danita Bates from the one of the
local RCOs who supported us a lot and asked for changes in this presentation. I honestly cannot
explain why the coordinating RCO didn't send anything. We reached out multiple times and I
learned then from the city that I should just go to the meeting anyways. And I reached out via phone
and emailed multiple times in the past couple of days,
but did not get a response.
So I hope Lady Odessa, her name is fine.
But that's all I can say.
I tried that we talked to them.
The meeting was good.
Other people who were on the meeting are also on this call,
if that is helpful.
Mark, do you?
Mark, do you?
Sorry.
Sorry, I just want to interject.
Sorry, I just want to interject.
This is Hillary briefly.
This is Hillary briefly.
I just received from Mary Jones and Council President Clark's office a meeting summary form that was submitted yesterday.
It does not appear that the RCO, all in the family, CDC, took a position.
There was some sort of unrelated zoning issue that came up after the meeting, and there's no report of the meeting on here except that it occurred.
Oh, okay.
Thank you.
That's a new information for me.
Mark, did you have anything more to say about that?
Well, I think it's interesting.
This house really is in a neighborhood where nobody wants what it is now.
we have proof for that and we would like to show what we want to do out of it and across the street.
That was also a statement from the RCO. We did a really good job with the house across the street
and that's why we came in with three options and we think it makes the most sense for the community
to do a similar development to that single-family house and those are the three
options we prepared and I'm happy to show the plans and details if needed.
if it's okay i would like to proceed with the different options for this property
uh up on the screen we have presentation first we have option one which is to keep it as a
single family home well can i cancel wait a minute i'm a little i'm a little confused because
you're you're applying for free dwellings right right um you know we we just wanted to run through
of different options here. Actually, I wanted to ask Mark, what was the problem with trying to
market this as a single family dwelling? Well, the main problem, to answer the question of the
chair first, two slides down, we have the three family dwelling and the reasoning why we think
that is the best option to go. But we said we start out where we are now, and then the three
family. So the reason why it's not a good single family home, it's just too large for that
neighborhood we rented it at a very low price and couldn't get anybody to to take it even though
it's not in a bad shape it was the family who lived in there previously always used it as three
family was like multi-generational living there and we think a triplex is the best because we did
that across the street then we can offer three times houses at a price point below a thousand
dollars also offered to section eight and that's a bigger upgrade obviously also more expensive
for us yeah and that would make the most sense and uh i was advised by l and i uh mr ward there
said also bring in an option to just make it a duplex because then it's basically a very common
layout for the neighborhood that's why we made those three options to reason and give also
basically the board and an opportunity to discuss that right now a single family home it's not
wanted in that neighborhood nobody wants to rent something like that we would have to sell it again
and then one quote from another owner and also a lady who is head of one of the rcos if that is
sold again like that then it's just going to be a house where uh that goes down pulls the
neighborhood down and if we do the same that we did across the street from 2439 north 19th street
that really increased the look of the house and is exactly what the community wants there that
is what we were told and i got the witnesses for that thank you thank you um council do you want
to have your part of testimony you did you want to have that um approved by mark yes mark uh mark
Mark, do you approve the testimony that I gave on behalf of the applicant?
Yes, I certainly do.
Thank you, Glenn.
Adopted as your own.
And if needed, I would also like to explain why I brought Glenn Romano in last night that has a story to it.
I can explain that, obviously.
I'm not sure if it's relevant.
We don't need a story from why you adopted the council.
I just want to confirm.
We appreciate him being on the line.
I just want to confirm, Mark, you adopted the testimony that I gave as your own testimony.
Questions from the board?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
I can't see the basement.
The basement, Glenn, can you go up the basement?
We would leave unchanged as a utility room.
That's the same basement as we have a picture.
Stop one down.
You just had it.
The bird's few.
Now you went too far, Glenn.
There we go.
yeah so the basement access it could only be from the first floor down that's basically
would be a utility room no living down there no also the ceiling height is not enough it will just
no living down there no also the ceiling height is not enough it will just be a storage room and
utility it's it's basically like all those houses in that neighborhood the basement won't be anything
for uh living there is no plan to develop the basement and attach it to a apartment one more
one more question are your is your proposal three units we would prefer a three unit but if the
board says a duplex is better then we would live with that as well but we applied and wanted a
three unit that's what we wanted and that's what we went through the process it's the first time
for us doing that we are small basically it's my own family doing this i never did this before
and if we didn't do it properly i apologize for that but we we suggest a three unit but we were
told a duplex may be a good compromise if the board doesn't want a multifamily as a triplex
so so how many meters do you have there existing it was before basically there were four meter
spaces when we bought it there was one meter because the lady who who sold it to us she was
89 years old told us her husband used to use it as a two apartments rented and then they lived at
the top floor and but then the fact the daughter moved in and then they wanted to get rid of all
those pico bills and they told us that it costs less uh tax if it's just a single family home so
you see on that picture there's four meter spaces for three units and one common that's what it's
wired now and that's how we bought it okay other questions from the board yeah mr chairman i have
a question. Can you scroll back up? I see someone there for PHA. I just want to make sure I don't
have any conflicts before I vote. I think he took a class at PHA and he certified to understand
Section 8. Yeah. So one of the community groups basically asked if he would also do Section 8
because that's really needed in that area and said, yes, we did. And we have long before we
bought this we i made this class and we also tried to rent it as section eight but even in
also not in the section eight market or any kind of social or supported housing
nobody needs that big of that huge size of a house basically or as glenn romano told me this morning
people who basically can do that they would move somewhere else that's what was my understanding
but we tried and it's not we are basically from europe and want to think long term like uh and
nobody wanted it for that price point okay i'm good mr chair uh thank you mr chairman i would
recommend maximum two units thank you okay well let's go let's go see where planning is first
uh tom and if i i hear what you're saying tom okay questions from the virtual audience
Chair, we have Odessa Tate with her hand up.
Ms. Tate, please don't.
Okay, Chair.
It's telling me she's not available to talk because she's using an older version of Zoom.
Okay, all right.
So I would have to promote her to a panelist.
Yes, please promote her.
Let's see what she has to say, please.
She should be coming back into the panelist now, Chair.
hello chair hi how are you could you could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
please sure it's odessa tate o as in oliver d as in dave e as in ethel s as in sam s as in sam
a as in apple t as in tom a as in apple t as in tom e as in ethel all right do you swear for him
to tell the truth the whole truth is nothing but the truth yes i do proceed miss tate so according
to the city of philadelphia and rco is responsible for organizing and conducting public meetings
where community members can comment or plan developments in their neighborhood
we take votes based on neighborhood residents it is a violation and a disservice to rcos when
real estate owners or developers invite other developers real estate professionals and family
members outside of the community to represent a portion of the vote all in the family did not
take a vote because it was clear that Mr. Roche had his other property tenants and developers
on the call to participate in the vote. Participant at 2225 North Verpelt Street is under Ms. Riesling,
LLC, which is a partner of Mr. Roche. Participant at 2439 North 19th Street, International Brothers,
LLC is also on the lease with Fuller House for the 2412 North 19th Street. One participant claimed
One participant claimed to live at 2324 North 19th Street and the house is owned by Alma Parker and Ruth Wilson and there is no record that indicated a sale or rent of property. One participant admitted to be an attendant at one of Ms. Erosha's properties at Sharswood Street under Ms. Riesling, LLC.
to live at 2324 north 19th street and the house is
Last participant at 2412 Grant Street reported that he was a resident and renting out a room in his home for $450.
This point was used to drive the example home for more that people want smaller spaces.
Furthermore, this is a two-story property and the participant has a rental license for two units, license number 826300.
The morning after the meeting with Mr. Roche, he struck me with allegations that the people on the call contacted him
and thought that he was a victim of racial bias and discrimination
and sent a document attached with complaints from his tenant on Sharswood.
Listen, Ms. Tate, do me a favor.
Could you just lower your voice a little bit or lower the volume on the computer?
Okay, my apologies.
No, no, no, don't apologize.
Just, we can hear you better.
So his tenant on Sharswood and his partner at 2439 North 19th Street,
This is completely inadmissible with those allegations.
Then a couple of days later, he sent an email saying we had the feeling things changed a lot when Odessa saw us for the first time.
He also included in the email that he tried to look up the ownership and representatives of my organization and for me to send him the information.
With these offensive and preposterous allegations, I chose not to further speak with Mark.
But I have one question. How is an RCO protected when things such as this occur?
Mr. Roche made mention in his presentation that 2412 North 19th Street was a triplex since 1960 after being a five-family home,
then stated that the home was converted to, say, taxes or multiple PICO bills, they don't know, in 1991.
Now, in 1997, the property was recorded as being used as a single-family home since 1991.
Legally on record since 1997, there is no indication that the property has legally been used for multi-family.
Mr. Roche stated that he purchased the home on March 30, 2022 and tried keeping it a single-family home
and that the property is tough to rent at $1,370.
He also stated that he marketed the property for two months with no response
and stated there was barely a response with the property.
He has written a statement saying we think families don't want houses that large in their neighborhood.
If renting it for $1,290 plus $80 for water does not go well, renting it for $2,000 will work even less.
Furthermore, he is currently renting the property as a single-family home to a tenant effective June 2022.
Her lease term is over in June 2023.
Also on the lease is Statesville House at International Brothers LLC, who are owners of the property 2439 North 19th Street.
Mr. Rowe showed that he has a PHA landlord certificate so he knows that he can partner
with PHA for this home to get a more desired income for a tenant for a single family rental
in fair market rent.
So Mrs. Tate, Mrs. Tate, listen, I think I know where you are, so all in the family
has decided not to take a position, you're saying, because of the people that were at
the meeting, am I right?
Yes, because of the people that were at the meeting, and we do not support the variance
for one it has been used as a single family by the previous owner since 1991 even in disrepair
because i have photos of the current property mr roach is currently renting the property as a
single family home for his price of 1370 and he used inadequate architectural drawers from another
property to represent as the proposed architectural development for this mistake mistake mistake
slow down i think i know where you are and i think i understand what your position is okay
thank you okay thank you very much is there anyone else in the virtual audience
chair i see no hands at this time okay planning commission
it's uh ron bednar city planning first name ron r-o-n last name bednar b-e-d-n-a-r all right
do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do proceed ryan uh this property is indicated for residential use on the city plan given the
surrounding use context and its documented use history recommended the requested variance be
granted provided maximum two uh units only so mi 2022 003 536 24 24 12 north 19th street
I vote yes. Maximum two units.
Harold Tineri, my vote is yes. Maximum two units.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
thank you so so you understand thank you council so you have two units all right number four
MI-2022-003-544-504
North Pleasant Place. Joseph Consul is the attorney.
We have
waiting for the RCO letter by Eastmount
Airy Neighbors.
Mr. Consul is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Mr. Consul is coming back in as a panelist now.
Go ahead, Hillary.
No, I was going to say, I checked my email.
I do not have a revised exhibit packet for this case with an RCO letter.
So if Mr. Consul could show that on his screen and then send a copy of that as soon as the hearing is over, that would be greatly appreciated.
We'll do that.
Oh, certainly.
You want me to start with that?
Well, let's start with – I've already sworn you in, I think, Mr. Consul.
Could you identify your client and their relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is Mr. Gregory Finch, and he is co-owner of the property with Diane Finch.
Okay, and our vice chair has just a few questions.
Hi, Mr. Consul. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance,
a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans
of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO
and do you have a letter? As discussed, the RCO letter was sent out
last night, which I'll share and then email over immediately. Okay, great.
Tax clearance, Hillary and I already spoke about that earlier
this meeting. Okay, you may proceed and begin. You already did
sharing your screen. Is my appeal packet up?
It is.
All right.
So this is 504 North Pleasant Place.
This property was built as a three unit.
And as you can see, it held a rental license for eight years as a three unit.
It was owned at that time by Teresa Ashton.
She passed away around the time that this license went inactive.
my client is uh kin of miss theresa ashton i believe it's his great aunt through um through
just the family inheritance he now is the owner of the property and has come in to um fix it up
and get it legalized so to that end we are here uh seeking to um re-establish the previously
approved three-unit use. The property has never been anything but, as I discussed.
We have the refusal. This property is zoned now as RSA 5, and multifamily living is prohibited
in the district. We have the RCO letter. I'll leave this up for a second. They gave us two
bits, both a cover letter saying that they vote to support the variance. We met with them in
October 25th. And then subsequent to that, they also sent us a vote. Five attendees, two near
neighbors, all in support. These are certificates of mailing. Photos of the property. Here's the
outside. That door is the entrance to units C and B. This is the entrance from a
So further out view, here's a side of the building showing the entrance to unit A, meters, gas
boilers, water meters, kitchen for apartment A, there's apartment B, kitchen, apartment
c entrance apartment c bathroom bedroom and apartment c kitchen
and as i mentioned uh the tax clearance is coming here's deed and proof of ownership
and i don't believe there's anything else of relevance to to that to that packet so takeaway
uh always been a three unit seeking to re-legalize the use that because of a of a death of an owner
and just my client inheriting it recently
and stepping in to make it legal.
We're hoping that we can reestablish that use
so we can get three renter licenses
and upkeep the property.
Okay, do you want to adopt your testimony?
That's it.
Okay, do you want to adopt your testimony?
I do. Gregory, are you available? Can you raise your virtual hand?
Gregory, are you available?
Can you raise your...
Mr. Finch, please unmute yourself or wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
First name Gregory Finch, G-R-E-G-O-R-Y, last name Finch, F-I-N-C-H.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Proceed, counsel.
Good evening, Gregory.
Did you hear my testimony just now about 504 North Pleasant Place?
Do you adopt it as your own?
Nothing further.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
here we have charles richardson with his hand up okay mr richardson please unmute yourself and
wait for the chair good afternoon mr chair how are you council could you uh please uh identify
yourself charles richardson from the office of councilwoman cindy bass room 508 city hall
right okay do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
I do. Proceed. Councilwoman has no opposition to granting this variance. We are aware that
most of the properties in that vicinity are zoned incorrectly, so we'll be addressing that in the
short term, but there's no opposition to granting this variance. Thank you very much. We appreciate
your call. Anyone else in the virtual audience? Chair, I see no hands. Planning Commission.
sir ron bednar city planning this property is indicated for residential use on a city
city plan given the surrounding use context and documented uh history our district plan
recommended corrected uh zoning to rm1 at this location therefore we recommend the
Requests of variance be granted.
on the line, and he has to go. So please, the board, I'd like to start with Mr. Nardi.
Mr. Nardi.
Hi, could you state your name and spell for the court reporter, please?
Mr. Nardi, please unmute yourself.
hi mr nardi could you state your name please and spell for the court reporter
michael nardi n as in nicholas a r d as in donald i right do you swear for him to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do proceed counsel thank you mr nardi i have up on
screen can everyone see this we can the plans for 1935 reed street could you please go through and
explain to the members of the board the dimensions of this project okay so we're the area in question
is the rear yard to be used as a as a parking space the total dimension of the rear yard is
20 feet by 16 feet, eight and a half inches. The required width of a space is eight foot six
inches. That would leave 11 feet six inches for a rear yard, which is more than is required.
now in terms of the size of the space itself is there enough turn ratio based upon the plans
in order for Ms. Lutz to be able to safely enter the area where the proposed parking space
would be yes and do you understand her car to be a jeep compass
yes and do you have the dimensions of that vehicle
The dimensions, as verified, are 14 feet by 6 feet.
And can you describe for the members of the board the other additional curb cuts that
you're familiar with that are on this street?
Well, there are multiple curb cuts on that street, mostly on the opposite side of the property.
And there's one not directly across the street from her, but within 15, 20 feet of her rear yard, going towards Reed Street.
Do you understand that Opal Street does not allow for legal parking?
um i wasn't aware of that in the entire street but um i know there are signs posted where there's
parking is is not legal and the side of the street where the curb cut
for reed street would happen is that on a side where does that affect parking on that side
no parking is on the opposite side of the street okay and with regard to this property are there
any unique features that you can explain to the board about why this parking space is able to
be accommodated at this property? Well, the property is actually situated on a corner. So
at the front of the property faces Reed Street, and the side of the property faces Opal Street.
and so it's unique in the sense that the rear yard is facing opal street that has parking on
one side of the street it's not on the side of this street of this property and the rear the
rear yard length of 20 feet also contributes to the uniqueness of this property excuse me council
Council, are you going to use the rear yard setback for parking?
Mr. Nardi, that's correct. The rear yard setback is...
Right. The rear yard setback right now is 20 feet.
Are you using it for parking?
We'd be using a portion of that for parking.
Well, that's one of your zoning refusals, that you can't use the rear yard for parking.
Right, I understand that, and that's where we're looking for a variance for that condition.
I mean, the other unique situation here is the fact that with parking in her rear yard,
she takes a car that would normally be parked in the street, off the street,
and by doing the curb cut at her rear yard, she's not taking a parking space away.
Has the curb cut been reviewed by the streets department?
curb cut been reviewed by streets department yes and what was their opinion well they approved
they approved uh we do have an approval from the streets department
okay but you're still not supposed to have uh parking in the uh rear yard setback
right well it does it does provide for enough room for a rear yard and parking which is one
of the issues in the zoning code that if if there is any parking in rear setback it has to
retain at least a minimum of a rear yard setback which would be nine feet
you have that yes we have 11 feet six with the allowance of eight foot six
where my arrow is Mr. Nardi is that does that show where right what I'm showing right now is
that 12 foot that 12 foot is is part of the rear yard setback and uh and then the eight feet uh
is uh what was what I showed is allowable for uh the car to make the turn in but it's actually
eight foot six but it still leaves enough for an allowable rear yard of nine feet.
So therefore you have eight feet five which is eight feet six plus nine feet. Well it's actually
eight foot six plus eleven foot six because there's 20 feet in the rear yard. Okay thank you.
And Mr. Nardi while I have you still this is the side view of or the rear view of 1935
Reed Street as you're facing from Opal? Correct. And across from Opal, on Opal, across from the
side of 1935, is this the rear of 1339 South 20th, which shows a similar curb cut with a parking
space? I haven't seen that. That was built since I've been there. So I would have to say if that's
been documented as being the address, then yes. Okay. Are there any other questions for Mr. Nardi
while I have him before I go through some more of the presentation? We're fine. Okay. All right. And
thank you, Mr. Nardi. Okay. For the members of the board, our packet contained the
zoning permit, the application for appeal, which we are seeking a variance because of the hardship
here in this area due to the lack of parking. This variances the lease modification of the
code to provide relief. It will not increase congestion in the public streets. In fact,
as Mr. Nardi stated, it will take away a parking space that would ordinarily be in this difficult
area where we find parking is substantially hard to find in South Philadelphia, as the board is
aware. It will not permanently harm any of the neighbors, nor will it increase congestion in
the public streets or undue burden on the water sewer or other public facilities. It will not
create any environmental damage. The pictures that, oh, here are the deed for the property
showing that she purchased it in 2016. We notify the near neighbors. Here's our proof of mailing.
The zoning notice is posted. The refusal, and this is the front of the property of 1935 Reed
Street. As you can see here on the side, this is Opal Street, which is a one-way street where the
cars are parked on the sidewalk. That's how difficult parking is around here. They're taking
a risk like playing checkers in order to find a spot that's not legal for the most part. This is
the side which I showed during Mr. Nardi's testimony of the area where she would have this
curb cut happened here and this side yard would be open. This is a view looking to the right of
1935 Reed. This is a view looking to the left of 1935 Reed Street, a view looking across from 1935
Reed Street. This is the rear of 1339 South 20th Street which as Mr. Nardi stated he had originally
been out to the property. This has since been a curb cut with a parking space that was here
which is directly across. If you were to see the opposite side, Ms. Lutz's property is right here
at the bottom of the photograph where my arrow is. This is a photo of two curve cuts on 1935,
down the street from 1935 Reed Street on the same side as Ms. Lutz with two garages here. You can
see that the cars are able to enter here. On Saturday, we went out and took photos. This is
On Saturday, we went out and took photos. This is how, again, difficult parking. This car here
how again difficult parking
this car
has a ticket for parking illegally on the sidewalk, and these other cars are doing the same
along this street. Down the street from 1935 Reed, this is townhouses where they've given up
their rear yard in order to have parking in this area. We also found in the area at 1848 South
reed reed street this is a property that has a side yard with a curb cut for parking
and again we found something at 1900 south 19th street this is a side yard with parking
and we already went through the plans at this time i would like to call my client kelly lutz
Kelly, could you state your name and spell it please for the court reporter?
Kelly Lutz, L-U-T-Z, Ms. Lutz, can you please put your virtual hand up?
Ms. Lutz, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it, please, for the court reporter?
Yep. My name is Kelly Lutz, K-E-L-L-Y. Last name is Lutz, L-U-T-Z.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Thank you. Ms. Lutz, have you heard my testimony here today?
Yes. Do you agree with and adopt the testimony that I gave today with regard to your property
at 1935 Reed Street? Yes. Ms. Lutz, what do you do for a living? I'm a registered nurse. And
you are currently, where do you work currently? I work at Jefferson Methodist right on Broad
the street. Okay. And what are your hours? I work at seven in the morning until eight o'clock at
night. And I work in an operating room. So if the surgeries aren't finished by eight o'clock at
night, I may get home even later than that, nine, 10 o'clock at night. And what is parking like
in that area when you are coming home? It's very difficult, especially at night, I would say after,
you know five o'clock it starts to get a lot more um difficult to park there thank you i have
nothing further does the members of the board have any questions questions from the board yes
mr uh chairman go ahead one of the um use refusal says lack of required rear yard death
required is nine feet proposes zero can you explain that um i'm sorry so the plans show
and that's what i don't know why it says zero because you can see here on the plans that it
proposes and mr nardi just testified that it would be at least 11 feet i don't remember his
exact numbers, but you have 12 feet here that would be available. That's not going to be taken
up by the parking space. This is 20 feet across and parking space is going over 8 feet, which
leaves 12 feet. But council, that's 20 feet across, but we're talking about death.
I could be wrong, but I think when you put the car there, they're starting like the car takes
away that nine foot that's what i think the car goes forward 16 so you this part here is 16 feet
i believe eight and a half inches it has here um which is only going forward but you're i'm trying
to i'm misunderstanding your question because it from what i understood from mr i think when i
think when you park a car like that they're saying that car is taking the whole distant thing you
You no longer have a yard when you do that.
So it says rear yard depth, right?
Rear yard depth.
And when you put your car there, they're saying you don't have a yard.
That's why it's here.
That's not the way it's going to.
It's going to look just like the other picture that I showed you across the street.
It's not taking up the whole yard.
It's just this one area, which would be 16 and a half, 16, eight and a half feet by eight feet.
and it leaves the other 12 feet by 16 1⁄2 by 8 feet.
It's not taking up the entire yard.
the entire yard all right lynn thank you uh any other questions from the board
All right, Lynn.
Thank you.
Any other questions?
no mr chairman and mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
chair we have a betty buford miss buford please unmute yourself or wait for the chair
hello hi miss buford could you state your name and spell please for the court reporter
Betty Buford, B-Y, Buford, B-E-A-U-F-O-R-T.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I affirm.
Are you a neighbor?
Yes, I am.
Proceed.
Well, when this was presented to us at our RCO meeting, it was presented by Dennis Lee.
I don't know who this lady is.
And Dennis Lee said she was asking for this for rentals.
and I want to state the facts on that first
and then
Old Pal Street is a small street
and she's trying
to put a parking space
in her backyard
plus that's a no-no
plus you see there's no alley
there's no
her street is N Street, there's no alley
for the people that live on Reese Street
that's a blockage right there
you see where she had those two
there was no alley
if you need an alley for the people
how are the people going to get out
to the street to protect themselves
that's one thing
my concern
so here's
Ms. Buford here's the issue
are you for or against this project
excuse me
are you for the project
or against it
no I'm not for the project
that's all I'm asking
okay thank you very much
we appreciate your call
Mr. Chair can I respond to her
comments
I just want to make sure there's no one else in the audience
and then I'll give you the last response
Chair we have a call-in user
call-in user
can you please unmute yourself or wait for the chair
Hi could you state your name and spell for the court reporter
Call-in user
please unmute yourself
Hi, Tiffany Green, Concerned Scissor Point Breed, RCO.
Tiffany, could you spell your name for the court reporter?
T-I-S-S-A-N-Y, G-R-E-E-N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed.
Initially, back in 2012, we had this ordinance passed with no garages.
I know this is saying a driveway, but we didn't want her to run into the same situation that they have over in the graduate hospital area where a lot of parking spaces were taken up.
Although she's in the backyard driveway at this particular point, we've had others come through.
And it's just a situation at this point that we feel that there's no real reason for a variant or a unique or compelling situation at this point.
just to make, not to be inconsiderate, but she did at 1935 Reed Street.
The 17 bus runs 24 hours at night, and it drops you off right at 19th and Reed, and she lives 1935.
So the other thing is that the dimensions on this don't sound correct,
or either the refusal needs to be corrected in terms of the dimensions.
But I just wanted to say also that when she's back, it's very, like Ms. Buffett says,
It's very narrowing with the parking.
If she's backing up, it would be detrimental to other neighbors who do park on that block as well.
And we just – and like she said, also in the meeting, it was posed was the owner using it because she was elderly or she had a problem with walking,
and it was stated that it was only using for aesthetically or to rental profits or increase.
And at that particular point, most of the people in the meeting did not agree with that.
Thank you, Tiffany, for coming in.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Bye-bye.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no other hands at this time.
May I respond here?
You most certainly can.
I'd like to call my client back, Ms. Lutz.
And I'd like to share my screen again.
Ms. Lutz, please unmute yourself.
Okay, I'm here.
You've already been sworn.
Proceed.
Ms. Lutz, you were in the meeting with regard to this project, correct?
Correct.
Now, did you represent that you needed this parking space for rental?
So I currently have, my situation is that I bought that property in 2016.
I moved in with my fiance who lives on 20th and Ellsworth.
I moved in with my fiancee who lives on 20th and Ellsworth.
We have a two-year-old now and I'm pregnant and that home is much bigger.
So our plan is to move back into that property and having a young child or two young children
at that point, having that parking space would be very beneficial to us.
So that's where the confusion is coming in.
It's not for my tenant, it's for myself moving back in there.
working as a nurse and having two small children, that parking space, especially because I go into
the hospital 6.30 in the morning and get home very late at night. So parking, it would be really nice
to have that. I understand. So with regard to the dimensions of the space, would your space look
similar to this parking that is here across from you on Opal Street? Yes. All right. Now the
dimensions of what your space would be, according to the drawings, is that it would take up eight
feet going this way, and that would leave the additional space on this side. Is that correct?
Correct. And with regard to the other cars that are on the street that you, that, you know, in
your experience, when you've seen them going into their curb cuts, are they able to safely navigate
that? Yes. Thank you. I have nothing further with regard to Ms. Lutz. I would just like to
state, Mr. Chair and members of the board, Ms. Lutz has requested this variance, as she stated,
not because of the reasons that the members who came on the call were stating. They are
clearly, you know, concerned about things that
Our project would not create. First of all, we're taking a space off of the street. And not only that, there's a safe distance for Ms. Lutz to be able to drive into the space. They would leave a rear yard of more than nine feet based upon the plans.
I'm not sure why the refusal says zero because it's not taking up the entire yard. It's only
taking up eight feet across and 16 feet in length. So it would be sufficient to leave a rear yard
depth of nine feet. As we stated, there's a difficulty with parking in this area. It's like
checkers at times, I'm sure for many of the people who have to park in that area. And we're just
asking for a variance that would not create an undue burden on the community, nor create any
additional congestion. And for those reasons, we would ask that you grant the variance.
Thank you. Thank you very much. Ron Bednar, please. Planning.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning. This property is indicated for residential use on the city plan,
given the site's physical circumstances. We have no objection to the granting of the
request adherence okay um we're waiting for tax clearance am i right yes mr chair also waiting
for the rco letter well i believe members from the rco came on already if i'm not mistaken
uh mr chair this is hillary i i checked the taxes there's there's no balance i know sometimes
there are issues with getting a clearance in the system but there are no balance um we are fine
there um i wasn't clear from ms buford's testimony if she was speaking on behalf of the rco
or just herself she referenced she had been to the meeting but did not indicate
she was from the rco and tiffany green was from um was is is from an rco um we can we can take
her testimony that i don't believe concerned citizens of point breeze was the coordinating
rco in this case um but they did participate okay so we can vote uh it is your call mr
chair the meeting was held over a month ago or sorry i'm sorry the meeting was held on 1024.
okay mi2022-003-519-1935 reed street i vote yes
my vote is yes
Thomas Holloman
my vote is no
my vote is yes
Ms. Nichols you have your three votes
thank you Mr. Chair
good evening
is there anyone in the virtual audience
whose case has not been called
chair i see no hand
okay we're thank you everybody thank you appreciate all your work thank you
good night everyone
Good night.