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