Broadcasting and recording.
Gotcha. Thank you again.
Good morning, everyone. My name is Frank DiCicco.
I'm the chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
We have a quorum. I'm officially calling this session to order.
In attendance, also in attendance, is our vice chair, Ms. Carol Tenere,
Mr. James Snell, our board member,
Mr. Thomas Holloman, our board member,
and our board secretary, Mr. Confessor Plaza.
As you know, today is actually the third day
we'll be holding virtual hearings.
While we may have, and also, excuse me, Sharon Saleta, our city solicitor, is in attendance as well.
While we may have to make some adjustments along the way, our plan is to call each case and basically proceed as we would have in a live hearing.
We ask that attorneys for applicants or other interested parties identify themselves for the record when the case you'll be participating in is call.
We will then hear the applicant's presentation, followed by any presentation by attorneys
representing other parties. Interested parties and members of the public not represented by
counsel will then be given an opportunity to testify. We will finally hear the recommendation
of the Planning Commission. At the hearing's conclusion, the board will either vote the
matter immediately or hold it for discussion in executive session. Any case held for discussion
will be voted on the record at the scheduled July 28th morning session.
A couple of changes related to the virtual format.
First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony
rather than to the room as a whole since we do not have a room.
Second, for the benefit of participating, excuse me, for the benefit of anyone participating by
phone, we ask that the attorneys and witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking or
testifying. Third, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that
by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. Also, if there is anyone at any
time who's considering or asking for a continuance, please raise your hand. That way we'll know that
you're asking for a continuance. I think I covered it all. Sharon and Tanya, did I leave anything
else? Yes. If we could inform all the callers that if you wish to testify, you would have to
press star nine on your phone in order for your hand to raise and us to notice that you
are ready to testify and you will be called according to the last three digits of your
phone number. And then anyone who is on the phone and wishes to put an appearance statement
there's a google voice phone number that you can call and do that it's 267 -270 -5548
and chair at the time we do have one hand up and it's rachel pritzker
i'm going to allow her to talk and unmute her morning rachel good morning chairman
Good morning, Tanya.
How are you?
Rachel, please identify yourself with a record.
Spell your name for the stenographer.
Rachel, R -A -C -H -A -E -L, Pritzker, P -R -I -T -Z -K -E -R, Pritzker Law Group, 1635 Market, Suite 1600, Philadelphia PA, 19103.
I'm here on 2839 West Glenwood, and we'd like to request a continuance in order to have some more time to work with the community
before we present our project in front of the board.
I should have asked you this first,
but do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
And again, that address again?
2839 West Glenwood.
Karen, I don't see that on our list.
Am I missing it?
it's number yeah it's number three eight one six four calendar number three eight one six four
i'm not certain if that was on the list that i was working from but in any case it can be
continued okay um rachel give me that address again please 2839 west glenwood avenue
calendar number 38164
calendar number three eight one six four
okay calendar number 38164
2839 west glenwood avenue is being continued
will we know the date or tanya will reach out to you i believe tanya
that is correct it will be scheduled and please look to
the ZBA calendar for the new date. Thank you. Thank you. Any other requests for
continuances? Okay I have a list that we was I have a list that was submitted to
me for continuances. Calendar number 37240 1001 North 46th Street. Calendar
number 37156, 1609 South 8th Street. Calendar number 38256, 2050 Welsh Road. Calendar number
38253, 1455 North 29th Street. Calendar number 38262, 7447 Torresdale Avenue. Calendar number
Park Avenue
and calendar number
2954 South Carlisle
Street. All those
seven cases will be continued
and they will be notified of the
date for their hearings.
Did I leave anything out, Tanya
and or Sharon?
No, I think that's it.
with that
the own
Carol you can call
the case the only case
we have is in the South 9th Street this morning
calendar number
1328 South 9th Street
the attorney is Stephanie Boggs
Ms. Boggs, are you there?
I don't see her.
Yes, good morning.
She's here.
Stephanie has been promoted to panelists.
Good morning.
Good morning, Ms. Boggs.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Will you identify yourself, spell your name for the stenographer?
Stephanie Boggs, Claire Harrison, 1835 Market Street, here on behalf of the applicant, Eli
Claire.
Carl Primavera from my office.
Ms. Boggs, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Carl Primavera from my office will be testifying on this matter.
He is participating by phone.
can i get the last three digits of his number two six five two
yeah i don't see him stephanie so once he gets on if he can do star nine
and then we can uh allow him to speak
Did you receive anything from him?
mr chairman members of the board carl primavera p -r -i -m -a -v -e -r -a claire harrison i hope you can
hear me we can good carl do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do and again please identify yourself and spell your name for the stenographer please
Carl Primavera, P -R -I -M -A -V -E -R -A, and I'm the attorney for the applicant
and co -counsel with Stephanie Boggs. So if I have a glitch, she can take over from me since
technology is not my strong point. So I'll be very brief.
so I'll be I'll be very brief uh there was mention to the uh refusal
following the original hearing uh we did submit a revised plan uh that was the plan that was
submitted uh and acted upon by the board previously when they approved the variance
with that revised plan uh there was a letter I sent January 2nd
2020 along with a copy and a separate letter to the passion square community association
so they did in fact receive my letter and the revised plan the board received correspondence
from passion square indicating opposition to the revised plan consistent with their opposition to
the original plan and the board granted uh i guess a rehearing which i understood to be for the
purpose of making sure that their opposition to the revised plan was
included in the record. So with that I don't intend to present any additional
affirmative testimony relying upon my presentation previously to the Zoning
Board and relying upon my letter of January 2nd 2020 to the board with a
copy of the revised plan and of course the decision of the board dated January
8th, favorably approving the revised plan, which was dated January 8th, 2020, the proviso was. So I do
have the owner and the architect available for questions of the board, and I'm available for
obviously questions, but given what I believe is the limited purpose of this hearing today,
and the record that we have in front of us, I don't plan to do anything further
in this presentation, but I'll reserve the right for a reply or rebuttal, if appropriate.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Stephanie?
you may wish to make any comments no i have nothing further to add
okay i think miss tavani well tanya i'll leave it up to you i think miss tavani
is on yes i am good morning suzanne uh please identify yourself with the records by your name
for the stenographer suzanne s -u -z -a -n -n -e tavani t -a -v -a -n -i chair of the passion of the
Zoning Committee for the Passion Square Civic Association, 939 Federal Street, Philadelphia,
19147.
Ms. Devon, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth?
Okay, please.
Hello?
Are you there?
Please proceed.
Mr. Chairman, I just want you to know I'm having some computer issues this morning,
so if you lose me, I will get back on, okay?
You only live two blocks from me, just knock on my door, and you can use my computer, all right?
Thank you. Thank you. This is very frustrating. We've been at this with this particular property owner since last May.
The zoning hearing was in, the committee hearing was last August.
we met with you and the zba on october 16th at which point you personally said you never would
have um changed the zoning for the original property in front and then you and every other
committee of the zoning uh the zba in addition to the planning commission said that there was
too much density at the site and you instructed us to go back and work with the property owner
We met with them, with Mr. Clare and Mr. Primavera in Mr. Primavera's office on November the 4th.
At that time, we sat down and Mr. Primavera said to Mr. Clare, so Eli, what do you have?
And Eli once again said, well, I want to sell you on the merits of the property for the umpteenth time.
And for the umpteenth time, we said, no, you've got to go back.
So Mr. Primavera, to his credit, said, okay, Eli, how about if we change the zoning of the original property back to single?
And I said, we would welcome that, but that does not mean you could build seven or eight in the back.
The subsequent conversation with Mr. Primavera, I said, that one in the front, four in the back, that's our offer.
And we heard nothing until right after, I guess it was Christmas week, when we received his plan, which was still egregious, if anything, totally ignoring every one of our recommendations, your recommendation, the Planning Commission's recommendations.
And then I will never forget the fact that we didn't know that there was a hearing on.
And then I will never forget the fact that we didn't know that there was a hearing on or a consideration by the committee ZBA on January the 8th.
And our letter of opposition did not get you until January the 9th.
So here we are again. There is nothing new to this. I mean, we might as well be back at last July, August.
There's just nothing new. Mr. Clare has repeatedly shown that he is really not willing to really listen to the density concerns of the community. So we remain in opposition. And I know some of the property owners, nearby property owners, are also on the line, too. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Hello?
Oh, one minute.
Sorry.
That's okay. Thank you.
Stephanie, Carl, anyone?
Yes, this is Carl.
Just briefly, the letter I submitted of January 2nd details the revisions to the original plan based upon input from the zoning board.
I think the chair will remember he wanted an enclosed trash area.
We discussed that at the hearing.
We went back and we enclosed the trash area.
The neighbors, I specifically recall, said that 9th Street was appropriate for single family.
So we removed one unit from the project and the unit we removed turned the 9th Street property into a single family dwelling.
The remainder of the units are designed to provide the density for this oversized site and activity on Percy Street, which we testified at the hearing was a nuisance block with drug addicts, crime.
so we believe that we did reduce the density we incorporated comments from
the board and the neighbors and in good faith the revised plan was submitted and
approved and we don't think that we were resistant to comments we just are
limited given the realities presented at the hearing which I'm not going to
represent it's in the record and given the information in our land planners
report which was submitted in the record and our architect and the owner and others and we would
ask that the board uh reaffirm its prior decision which we believe was based upon the relevant facts
which have not changed uh since we submitted the revised plan
in the revised plan the six units what are the size of the units there's seven units
though the revised plan has calls for six units if i'm correct well there's seven
excuse me if carol if you're thinking of ninth street is not ninth street would go single family
talk about the units in the back the proposal six apartments i'd like to have the architect
or uh eli address that uh so i don't there's the plan is in the record but
can we do that again have capacity or Eli Claire on the line I'm sorry could you say what the
witnesses names are Jim Cassidy or Eli Claire could they raise their hands
Jim Cassidy is participating by phone Tanya the last three digits of his number are nine three six
zero hello there's Jim Cassidy hello mr. Cassidy do you swear to tell the whole
truth and nothing but the truth. I do. Please proceed. I asked the question the size of the
units, the six apartments. Are they all the same or are they different sizes? We don't have a plan
in front of it, so that's the choice. Sure, sure. Yeah, they are different. They range, these are
the six units in the back there's uh two per floor and three stories and they range from 550 square
feet to 750 square feet so is it safe to say that the 500 square feet are basically kind of like um
studio apartments they're actually one one bedrooms one bedrooms yep 500 square feet
yeah 500 square feet mr. chairman I do have a plan in front of me if I can
Mr. Chairman, I do have...
share my screen yeah that would be helpful if you do that would be helpful
Tanya, I'm happy to do that. I just believe I need to be asked to do that by the administrator
for this year. I'm sorry, Stephanie, I didn't hear you.
We don't have, as a participant on our end, I don't think I have the option to elect to
share my screen on my own, but if invited to do so, I am prepared to do that.
Let me see, promote you to panelists, okay, I'm not sure how you got out, so you should
be able to now let's try
Jim I have the conceptual floor plans in front of the board okay
Yeah, I just suggest you go through the floor plan, Jim. Just explain the units. Not the single family, because that's self -evident, but the question from the chair is, can you just talk to us about the size and the layout of the units?
Yeah, that's fine. It's going to be a little, since I don't have that on my screen, it's because I'm calling in, but I do have my plans open, so I can do that as best I can here.
Let's just start on the first floor, and we'll start on the Percy Street side.
There is a garage with two cars, and next to that is a bi -level one -bedroom unit,
and that was provided to provide life and activity on Percy Street.
That was a change.
So you have living and kitchen on the first floor, and then walking up a flight of stairs,
you have a bedroom and bathroom and then opposite that on the first floor because there's a courtyard
in between 9th street and Percy street one unit the front unit of the rear actually opens up
onto the courtyard that's also a one -bedroom unit it's I think it's like 560 square feet
has its, you know, one bathroom, one bedroom, open kitchen and living.
On the second floor, the courtyard unit is roughly the same size.
It's a little bit bigger, but the similar layout.
It's a one bedroom.
On the Percy Street side, you have the second floor of the first floor Percy Street unit.
And then you have another one -bedroom unit in the back.
That's also right around 550 square feet.
And then on the third floor, on the Percy Street side,
you have a two -bedroom unit that's around 750 square feet.
And then on the courtyard side, you have another one -bedroom unit.
Are these typical of the apartments in the area?
Yeah, I mean, I think if you're talking about apartments in the area and that, you know, we're seeing throughout the city, if they're laid out properly, those sizes are not uncommon and normal.
Any questions from the board, Tom?
no frank okay all right um so open this up i believe it's appropriate time to open up for
the participants uh tanya will call them up
and i'll advise everyone we're going to have maximum of three minutes of testimony
Angelique DiPolito you are able to speak good afternoon mr. chairman and the
Mr. Chairman and the remaining members of the board. My name is Angelique DiPolito. I am with my husband, a property owner adjacent to this property. My address is 1326 South 9th Street.
remaining members of the board my name is Angelique DiPolito I am
Did you want to
Angelique, excuse me, spell your name for the record and do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Right. Angelique, A -N -G -E -L -I -Q -U -E. Last name is Dippolito, D -apostrophe, capital I -P -P -O -L -I -T -O. And yes, I do.
Thank you. Please proceed.
As Suzanne mentioned, we had been looking at these plans with Mr. Clare for many months.
And when we got these plans in January 2nd or thereafter, it reflected to us that it was very mildly different than the original plans that they had continued to try to push.
Essentially, my position is that they did not appropriately address the concerns of the Planning Commission as it related to density.
they essentially if you take all of the proposed units in total they essentially reduced the units
by one one bedroom and roughly 480 square feet furthermore they reduced the amount of parking
so they they increased the variance necessary for parking and or the the requirements necessary for
parking and they they moderately addressed the density um and to my point in my opinion
did not appropriately address the the level of density for the property which is the the main
concern here for this use um you know we have a lot of apartments going up down the street on the
corner of um 9th and wharton and so our density levels are already overburdened and this in my
opinion that's break the ongoing concerns and i also want to just indicate that the you know the
concerns and i testified about this back during the last hearing which is you know the the problems
on percy street are greatly overstated in my opinion that is my testimony thank you thank you
much next witness I don't see any more hands anybody wish to see a lot of on
the chat icon I see six Q &A I see three I don't have on my computer where the
icon chat has six does that include us or is that others no that's not for
raising a hand. Okay. No one else to testify. Let me just check with this person.
John, are you here for this case or another one? I'm here for 1328. I'm sorry.
I'm having a little trouble getting set up.
John, good morning.
Please spell your name.
I'm sorry.
Not for this one.
So that's all the hands I have up.
No, John.
I'm here for 13th, 28th, South 9th.
He is here.
John DiGiulio.
He's here for this.
All righty.
yeah sorry to interrupt you tony but i remember him from last week
okay i'm here john please identify yourself for the record spell your name for the stenographer
and do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
john di giulio d -i -g -i -u -l -i -o 1323 south ninth and yes i do thank you please proceed
Well, I agree with all the comments that Angel discussed.
We have the very same issues that we had from the beginning of the year, the end of the year,
the density issue, the reference to Percy Street that it's a derelict street.
It certainly needs attention, but it's not the issue that it was previous.
There is a little bit more activity there.
I'm back there often.
There's another neighbor that's back there often, and we just don't see the issue for
The issue for Percy Street is a safety and security issue as expanded by the applicant.
Percy Street as a safety and security issue.
But the overall density and the unwillingness to basically address the issue of density as an overall project is just a horrible situation.
For us as a neighborhood, for us as an area that doesn't need any more density, we do have that project at 9th and Wharton that was, you know, not accepted by us very willingly.
You know, I mean, there were so -called concessions made by the builder, but that was a non -existent situation.
But to reflect back on 1328, there's just there's just no room for another eight apartments or seven apartments within the number of bedrooms.
And I just I don't even see how we got this far again.
I mean, I really thought this issue was done.
But they made no real good faith effort to address the issue.
and I'm very disappointed that it got that it got this far to begin with but that that's a
matter I guess for another day I don't know thank you thank you thank you John anyone else wish to
testify on this matter please raise your hand. I did have two other people with
me I'm sorry Mr. DiCicco I did John Gentile and Anthony was on the 1300
South 9th. They were here they had to leave okay but they're not going to
speak but they are and they were here both of them were here last week on the
call okay thank you no more hands okay thank you um questions from the board
no uh you can take down that diagram but whoever was sharing that with us
uh planning commission yes uh good morning this is ron bednar
this property is indicated right ron you're breaking up i'm sorry
try that again is it okay now
hello yes it's okay now ron yes um okay
Let me go back to my page here. Okay. This property is indicated for a single family
residential use on the city plan. We believe the applicant has not demonstrated necessary
hardship regarding the requirements of the code. The revised plan remains an overuse density
inappropriate for this location, not consistent with our adopted plan, nor enacted parking control
standards of the district we recommend the request for variance not be granted the planning commission
have any recommendation on the number of units not not not the 1328 uh 9th street piece the
rare unit where the apartments would be uh we will not make a recommendation on uh in
appropriate amount of use uh you know okay units at this point because i believe it
just needs to be redesigned okay anyone else all right hold on please I get my
calendar number up again I'm sorry but someone read it give me that calendar
number I calendar number three seven nine four eight thirteen twenty eight
South 9th Street. Okay, thank you. Calendar number 37948, 1328 South 9th Street. My vote is yes with
proviso. 1328 South 9th will be converted maximum of one unit, a single family, four apartments
on the other portion of the site. I don't know how else to explain it because we don't have an
address i don't think for percy street so the percy street uh building or buildings will have
a maximum of four units my vote is yes with proviso
my vote is yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso
good luck thank you uh before you before we have tanya
and i know i may have messed that up a little bit again i had the calendar it reads you know
for 1328 but obviously it's more than that so i'm not sure for the record i want to be clear that
1328 South Nights
will be a single family
and then the rear
portion will be a maximum
of four units.
Okay, Chair.
We'll have that documented on a proviso.
Okay. I just want to make sure
we're all clear. Thank you.
I understand that
Toursdale Street...
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you all for participating.
You can give me one minute to let these people out.
Carol?
Carol, do you have the list we had, I read off earlier for continuances.
I've been informed that Torresdale Avenue, we're going to hear that case.
It was a mistake.
It was not being continued.
So if you could, please call that up.
calendar number 382627447 Tarsdale Avenue and I'll be waiting for Mr. Jin yes good morning
good morning do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
I'll agree to a
I'm sorry we had to promote them to panelists if you can give me a second
I'm sorry I just cut out I think
Zin Jin, you're now promoted to a panelist, so if you need to share your screen, you can go ahead.
And I think that you did wave and step, and I think the chairman has to swear you in.
Good morning.
Good morning, Mr. Jin.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, and again, please identify yourself for the record and spell your name, please.
Xen Jin, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838, Philadelphia PA 19103, here on behalf of the applicant.
I believe the applicant is here on Zoom. His last four digits of his number is 3321.
This application is for an expansion of an existing use in the sense that this property is actually a beer takeout business.
However, the licensing that came with the property is actually formerly belonging to a bar.
And as a result, the Liquor License Board is requiring that the premises offer a certain amount of eating and food in order to qualify and continue to qualify for the license.
That is why this takeout food portion of the application is now before the board.
It is mostly to meet the Liquor License Board requirements.
Now, this property is actually zoned CMX1, which normally do not permit restaurant use.
We actually met with the neighbors and the community.
This business has actually been here for quite a while.
It used to be at one point a bar restaurant, which was a problem business.
But my client, who is operating it now, has been running it for quite a few years.
And generally speaking, has been fine.
the community has not had extreme feedback about anything he's doing. The one concern they have is
that they want him to make sure that if he offers to do food that he would actually do it. As the
letter from the community which we saw shows that they had a kind of a divided vote, 50 -50 vote on
this so the provisals that were indicated are three items mainly that they would like him to
join the safe camp which we agreed to and we will make arrangements to do so with the police
department but in addition the access to the second floor on the plans the original access
will require people to come through a door in the entrance and then come through two more doors to
get to the second floor we're going to restructure that to allow people to have
direct access going in from the entrance but not from outside through a
separate entrance which were was discussed but that's not the plan could
you share any of those plans because obviously we don't have them I'm sorry
I'm sorry you don't have that I can try to information it would be helpful we
you don't have that I can try to information
can see the plan absolutely
Let me see. I'm sorry. I'm trying to learn this as well. It's all new to me.
It's a learning experience for all of us.
I don't know if the board can access their email, but I did email the plans. They're attached to a letter, an RCO letter. If you scroll down, the plans are there as well.
it seems right now i don't have the option to share from my computer at this time
oh i see the option has came up okay
i do have it on my phone that that's the problem it's just
I am trying to get to the file.
mr jen there's a letter from the holmesburg civic association that says that business is currently
out of compliance with the state liquor control board due to the square footage is that still the
case well when we add the additional uh second floor as well as um that would give it the square
footage that's part of the reason this application came to be is that they would have to add seating
and space for seating in order to comply with the liquor license board requirements.
And the second concern is that it's a beer takeout establishment?
Yes, that is correct. That is the business it has been. They have always had a little bit of
packaged goods or hot dogs that you can heat up to take out, but they never really officially
added any kind of food service to the business this application would formally
add food to the business as a part of the the business operations okay I am I
I think I clicked on sharing the plans I don't know if it came up no not yet sir
Any other letters in the file, Tanya, from a council person or anyone else?
Frank, can I just send you a letter?
we did receive a letter from the councilman's office
is this now sharing
yes okay yes great what I'm gonna do is I'm gonna try to focus in on the first
floor because that's part of the discussion on the entryway so if you
look here where I'm circling this is the entry proposal one of the things
that the community did not want is they didn't want a exterior entryway directly
to the second floor because the concern there is that it would not be properly monitored because the
operator of the business would normally be in this space or towards the back in the kitchen area so
what we would they would like to see the community would like to see is an entry through the main
entrance here and then making this space more direct to allow entry into the second floor
more direct to allow entry into the second floor another concern they have is because there are
Another concern
doors here and here that it would be locked in the second floor wouldn't actually be used
so my client agreed that they would remove this and basically make this more of a direct entry to
the second floor there's already security cameras on the second floor there's security cameras on
the first floor as well so that can be monitored without a problem what in addition we'll do is
added to the police cam so if there are any incidents the police would have
access to the videos that would hopefully reduce any chance of
activities that would cause problems. Another thing that was discussed and
agreed to by my client is that if someone would stay on the second floor
obviously to monitor any customers if they're up there so that we don't allow
customers to just freely roam the second floor sitting area. The kitchen is going to be a small,
very small operation of the kitchen. A few fryers, they're not looking to do actual restaurant style
cooking. It's mostly going to be snack style cooking that would be served along with any
beer that is purchased in the premises. So everything here in as far as the
counter and the refrigerators and the area for the proprietor, these are all
existing. So most of the first floor is existing in the way it's set up and it's
mostly adding the second floor space and then rearranging primarily the entryway
to make sure that it is one to cold and two provides a direct entry to the second floor
that can be easily monitored but not locked away so that essentially the second floor doesn't get
used. That's another concern that they wouldn't actually use the second floor once they get the
operation going. All this was discussed at the community meeting. My client has agreed to all
these requests and the provisals that are being requested on the community letter we're also in
agreement with. Those will make arrangements to make sure those items are met per their request.
So the again the license is because this property when he bought it years ago was
originally licensed as a bar restaurant so the liquor license is an art style license
and not purely a takeout beer license that is something that never came up before he's been
doing business for years but recently the liquor board came and raised the issue so it requires
changing in the properties used in order to conform to the license requirements
you conclude your testimony uh yes uh my client is actually here if uh the board would like him
to affirm the testimony please do ask him to identify himself spell his name for the record
uh yes um hello are you uh available to identify yourself sir i'm actually uh not able to see the
screen so I'm trying to let me see if I can get that but I know he is online his
Last four digits is phone number 3321.
uh i guess this is a general question mr jen or sharon or someone i'm having a difficult time
finding the letter from the rco uh and being able to read what their provisos are
if someone could share that with me carol yeah i just sent it to you
Zinn, what's your witness name?
Lang -Ung, L -A -N -G -U -N -G.
Frank, the provisors they want for the business to enroll in the Philadelphia Police Department's
safe cam program. Also, that food is continuously offered at the store.
Also, that food is continuously offered at the store pursuant to the conditions of their liquor license.
And lastly, interior improvements be made and inspected so that the building conforms to the floor plan to allow access from the main customer area to the second floor without having to go outside.
jaron uh correct me if i'm wrong is it the last one the only one that we could
yes i agree that's the only one yes right so carol when we get when we get to the vote i'm
going to ask you to read that in the last uh proviso okay all right we're not ready yet though
LANG UNG is available to speak now, Zen. Thank you. Yes. Are you there? Yeah. Hi. You heard my
testimony to the board about this application. Do you verify that they're true and correct and
adopted as your own? Yes. Please identify yourself with the record. Spell your name for the stenographer.
LANG UNG is L -A -N -G -U -N -G.
Mr. Young, Mrs. Young, I'm sorry.
Ms. Young, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Mr. Jin?
So, again, could you confirm that my testimony to the board is true and correct
and affirm that you would adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Any questions from the board?
So we do have someone here, I believe, who wishes to testify.
Sorry, Tonya, I got ahead of myself.
David, are you here for this case to testify?
Yes. Can you hear me?
Yes, David, please spell your name for the stenographer and spell it.
David DeLugo's last name is spelled D -L -U -G -O -S -Z.
I'm representing the Homesburg Civic Association.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
Yes, hi. What was said by Mr. Jinn and part of the letter that we had sent more or less represents our position.
When we initially met with them, a lot of this was not yet worked out, and the liquor license issue was not brought to our attention, which it later was.
if you go, I guess the plan is not there anymore, but there wasn't a door. One of the doors was
only recently built that was in that plan. The one that would, if you had to go to the second
floor, the one that leads to the behind the counter area, that was recently built. And I'm
also glad to hear that they were going to continue to change around the floor plan so that people
wouldn't have to go outside the building to access the second floor because it used to be that if you
went through that first door you were in the behind the glass area so to speak which is you
know a secondary issue with this is that they were they're able to keep their safety glass by having
the restaurant license and you know for further clarification the uh the takeout bar license is
the square footage that's necessary is would not be possible at like this is basically like an end
row unit, a three -story end row, where, like, you know, there's dentist's office and pizza
joints usually in the first floor.
And so, you know, they're just doing this to conform, as Mr. Jin said, to the liquor
license requirement for square footage.
The only other thing I was going to say is for the safe cam, you know, I did notice there
are cameras inside.
I did not actually notice if there were cameras outside because one of the issues that was
brought to our attention was stuff that goes on outside the business on the sidewalk or
in the immediate vicinity and that there's been incidents there outside the business in the past.
So, yeah, I, you know, maybe Lang or Mr. Jin can speak to that a little bit more.
Other than that, as long as, you know, the second floor is integrated into the building and not
just, not just used as a, as a end around to the state liquor law, then we, you know,
then we weren't opposed as also says in the letter that we voted four to four, you know,
So we're not not opposed, I guess you could say.
And as the letter said, if you grant the variance
that we ask for those provisos to be entered in as part of it.
Now, I did notice, I did overhear part of what you said
about not all of them could be formally put in there.
And I didn't catch which one was able to be put in there
if you could do that.
the only proviso that is enforceable we can put in as a proviso is the last one
which is, Carol, could you read that off, please?
which is carol could you read that off please
Actually, could I suggest a summary of that?
If those changes, the access to the second floor,
is that reflected in the plans that you submitted in the exhibit packet, Mr. Jim?
Yes, they're actually, the only thing is that the community doesn't want the customers
to access directly from outside or be forced to go outside.
But, yes, those change plans allows people to go from inside without intruding into the payment area space of the proprietor.
So, yes, the plans do reflect the changes.
So, if the board was to add a proviso stating interior to conform to plans submitted to the board on 7 -21 -2020, would that achieve what the Civic Association is requesting?
Yes. I mean, the only thing I will add for Mr. Chin is that you had mentioned that one
of those doors was planned to be removed in your testimony, but that was not reflected
in the plans as you had mentioned. I mean, right now, the first door is a safety door,
and then the second door is a locked door, and then the third door is just a regular
interior door. So the question was was that first safety door going to be removed per your testimony?
Yes the first safety door can be removed because it wouldn't be necessary
a new safety door. Right but that does not reflect on the site plan. No that's on the floor plan.
Copy the plan. So is there an alternative way to add that as a second proviso stating safety board
at, can you describe the location to be removed? Can you suggest any language
that would? At the front counter, but adjacent to the entry. Yes.
Jen, I missed the first part of your response. I'm sorry, it's the
safety door front counter is into the main entry. So safety door located at the
front counter adjacent to the main entry to the premises to be removed. Okay.
okay thank you thank you anyone else uh wish to testify
no one else has the hand up chair any letters from uh the district council person but in the
file i thought i had a letter but i do not zen did you submit a letter see the letter
from the council office the community letter came in just recently as well so
I don't know if the council office had a chance to submit a letter okay all
right Sharon do you have the language for the proviso yes something to do with
the safety door located in the at the front counter adjacent to the main
entrance something yes it would be two provisos one interior to conform to floor plans submitted
and approved 7 -21 -2020 um second proviso um safety door located at front counter adjacent
to main entry to be removed you know what i'm going to do let's let me do this first
any questions from the Board? No. Planning Commission. This property is indicated for
neighborhood commercial use on the city plan based on revised plans. We have no objection
over granting the variance. Thank you. So, Sharon, is it appropriate for you to read off the
proviso sure i think that would be fine all right so read the proviso and then i'll ask for the vote
there are two provisos the first the interior to conform to floor plan submitted 721 -2020
second proviso the safety door located at the front counter adjacent to main entry to be removed
thank you so my vote on calendar number three eight two six two seven four four seven
torsdale avenue is yes with the provisos yes with provisos yes with provisos yes with provisos
thank you
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Have a good day.
Thank you. Do we have any other
cases? Yes, Tanya. I believe that was it. For purposes of attorneys who came a little late,
could we request a reading of continued cases again?
sure um we gotta find it
frank you want me to start yeah why don't yeah carol why don't you read them off i don't i can't
find them okay calendar number three seven two four zero one thousand one
north 46th Street calendar number three seven one five six sixteen oh nine south
8th Street calendar number three eight two five six two zero five zero Welsh
Road calendar number three eight two five three fourteen fifty five north
29th Street calendar number three eight two four eight fifty six oh nine Park
Avenue and calendar number three eight two one zero no I think that was you
now strike that if I could interject vice chair for 2050 Welsh Road the
attorney is requesting to continue and he be as the moving party who's Matthew Monroe okay shall
I reread that Tanya yes yes please calendar number three eight two five six two zero five zero Welsh
Road attorney moving party thank you kindly chair that's all the business I had thank you Tanya
Thank you everyone. For the board, we have not yet had an executive session. My question is to
Sharon and Tanya, is there any business that the executive board needs to take up?
I will send you a link. I will send out a link to an executive session right now after we close
this meeting. Then the board will decide when, correct? We will have a
discussion at the link that I'm about to send. Thank you.
so we're done for this session chair if you want wish to close out yeah i'm just curious if we
we have enough time to we can do an executive session this afternoon correct
well i would suggest we discuss it offline okay all right all right so this concludes this
morning session and two o 'clock right we'll be back at two yes okay thank you everyone be safe
My name is Frank DiCicco. I'm the chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
We have a quorum calling this session to order. Attending this zoning hearing also
is our vice chair, Ms. Carol Tenere, Mr. James Snell, our board member, Mr. Thomas Holloman,
our board member, Mr. Confessor Plaza, our board member and secretary. As you probably are aware,
today is actually our third day of having virtual hearings. Excuse me, also our city solicitor,
Sharon Saleta is on
and our
staff member, Ms. Tanya
Sunkit, they were also in attendance.
And while we may have some difficulties, adjustments along the way, our plan is to call each case and basically proceed as we would have in a live hearing.
While we may have some
difficulties, adjustments
along the way, our
We ask that attorneys for applicants or other interested parties identify themselves for the record when their case, when the case they'll be participating in is called.
We will then hear the applicant's presentation, followed by a presentation by attorneys representing other parties.
Interested parties and members of the public, not represented by council, will then be given an opportunity to testify.
We would ask that your testimony be within three minutes.
We will finally hear the recommendation from the Planning Commission.
At the end of the hearing's conclusion, the board will either vote the matter immediately or hold it for discussion in the next executive session.
Any case held for discussion will be voted on the record at the scheduled July 28th morning session.
A couple of changes related to the virtual format.
First, we will be administering oaths individually to participants prior to their testimony rather than to the room as a whole since we have no room.
Second, for the benefit of everyone participating by phone,
we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking or testify.
Third, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded
and that participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded.
And we would also ask, if you wish to testify, that you please raise your hand.
That way, our Zoning Board Administrator, Ms. Tanya Sunkett, could identify you and pat you in.
Tanya, do you want to, at this time, give them the call -in number if they don't already have it?
Yes. If you wish to testify and you have called into the Zoning Board meeting, in order to raise your hand to be noticed for testimony,
you have to press star nine and then your hand will be raised and you'll be recognized at that
time. If you called, if for some reason you wish to put in an appearance statement, we have a number
that you can call. And the idea is that you will call a Google voice line at 267 -270 -5548 and you
will record on that line the information requested in order to be considered of
putting in an apparent statement and then we will be able to attach you to
the case that you wish. Thanks Frank.
Thank you Tanya. Any questions from the board before we begin? Any
Okay, Carol, please call the first case, Ms. Tenuri.
Okay, calendar number 39058 -318 -East -Durham.
The attorney is Jared Klein.
Can I just say that before we start, can we read the list of continued cases?
I've got ahead of myself, yep.
Can we do that, Carol?
Mr. Klein, would you hold off one second, please?
Carol, would I read the continuances?
Calendar number 38265 -4154 North 7th Street.
Calendar number 39300 -4951 North 5th Street.
Calendar number 39298 -1216 West Lycoming.
There's an additional continuance, 39129 -6906,
caster avenue and there are two withdrawals calendar number 38634 2825 parish street
and calendar number 39292 1421 hope street those are all the two o 'clock continuances
thank you and if there's any interested parties listening in please contact our board administrator
Miss Tanya Sunkit for a date. She will have dates for you on the
continuation. Thank you. And I'm just waiting for Jared to be entered in by
Tanya. Can everybody hear me? Jared do you agree to waive the reading of the
refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes I do. Jared you're kind of low.
can you hear me now yes thank you sure um good afternoon everybody uh mr chair members of the
Good afternoon, everybody. Mr. Chair, members of the board, it's nice to be seeing you again.
board it's it's nice to
A little louder if you could, please.
I will. I will speak up as loudly as I hold the microphone right up to my mouth here.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Okay, cool.
All right. Good afternoon again, everybody. It's nice to see you again.
uh jared klein from from blank rome 130 north 18th street philadelphia 19103
on behalf of the property owners for 318 east dorham street and the property behind it 351
east mount pleasant um i do have some exhibits i don't know if i can share my screen or if the
members of the board have had everything sent to them already if you could share it that would be
helpful? Okay. Okay. So this application is for 318 East Durham Street. And just to orient the
board, the lot that we're talking about is this lot on the aerial photo that you can hopefully
see on the screen that I've shared. The subject property is 318 East Durham Street. It's an RSA
3 zone property. The property around it, as you can see on this aerial photo,
it's surrounded by the Sedgwick Apartments, which is an existing apartment complex,
which is located at sort of it's surrounded by Sprague Street, Durham Street, Ardley Street,
and Mount Pleasant Avenue. This application is essentially to combine the 318 East Durham Street
parcel with the remainder of the Sedgwick apartments that entirely surround the subject
parcel. The way that this property has developed over time, the Sedgwick apartments are all zoned
RN2, and there is a total within there of 93 units and 57 parking spaces that are existing.
The 318 East Dorham Street lot is zoned RSA 3.
And so it has created sort of a peninsula of odd zoning.
And I've moved my screen to the zoning map.
You can see 318 East Dorham is this little RSA 3 piece that's entirely surrounded by the RM 2 parcel that it backs up to.
So what the application is for is to demolish this existing structure that's on 318 East
Dorham Street that you can see on my screen, and to build in its place a new structure
that would be folded into the Sedgwick Apartments.
So we would be replacing this single -family house with another building that would become
part of the Sedgwick Apartment complex.
The number of units to be in the new created structure is eight.
And so the refusal, the only refusal we receive is for the multifamily use on this RSA 3 parcel.
We're proposing eight units and seven is allowed by right.
One of the initial challenges that we had from a development standpoint is it is very difficult to have this property exist independently as an RSA 3 lot.
For a family to buy this as a single -family house, you would be living in a situation where you are completely surrounded on three sides by a parking lot and other residents of the apartment complex.
And it just really makes common sense to include this front parcel with the rest of the complex that entirely surrounds it.
We did have a prior version of this project that went through.
And I have to briefly mention it just for context.
So back in 2019, a similar application was put in, and we had a meeting with the East
Valley Area Neighbors Association about that.
And we revised this application in response to those comments from the initial meeting
with the community.
And just to mention some of the things we've done that are in this application that are
different from the initial version. We've increased the setback. The initial proposal was to have the
Durham Street parcel be constructed with an eight -foot setback. We've increased that to 14 feet
three inches. We also reconfigured the building because some of the neighbors had concerns
about having ingress and egress to the building fronting on Durham Street when the remainder of
the complex doesn't really have entrances and exits that are on Durham Street. So we rotated
the design of the building so that the ingress and egress for the for the tenants happens on the
side of the building and we and we move the parking spaces to the side of the building as well
to better reflect that one of the other things we did was we
We have, as part of our packet, a unity of use agreement.
have as part of our packet a unity of use agreement
Some of the neighbors at our initial presentation had a concern about the fact that the parcels were owned by different entities and, you know, what could happen between those two as situations changed.
So we have the unity of use agreement.
It's part of our application.
And as the zoning board knows, that will ensure that these parcels will be treated together for zoning purposes.
And if anybody wants to remove that unity of use, the project will have to come back through the zoning purposes for whatever outcomes removing the unity of use has.
The last thing that we did that was different, and that is something that we're advising the board of today, is we've removed the proposed office use from our application.
The initial application contemplated having a leasing office for the complex within the new structure that we're building here at the front of the parcel.
The neighbors had some concern about whether it was an accessory office or whether an office was appropriate.
And so we've removed that from our application.
So if the board is inclined to grant the variances, we're asking for a proviso that says no office use, which is consistent with the understanding we reached with the neighbors.
In terms of how this will relate to the community that surrounds it, you know, the apartment complex has been an ongoing use for decades.
It has not, to our knowledge, been a burden on any of the surrounding neighbors. In fact, in terms of parking, which is always a hot button issue, if we're following the RM2 code, which is what we're trying to achieve with the unity of use, that would require 31 spaces for the 101 total proposed units.
the site is offering 61 spaces. So we have double the amount of off street parking to reduce any
burden that these additional eight units may have on the surrounding community. And I would also
point out that this is a very transit friendly development. If I go back to the aerial photo
where we started the presentation, you can see right here is the Sedgwick train station for
Receptors Regional Rail. It is literally across the street from the Sedgwick Apartments. And so
even though we have an abundance of parking, there's still a very easy and viable mass transit
option for people who are living at this complex. And I know also I'm aware, obviously, that the
neighbors still have some concerns in the letter that they submitted. The last thing I'll mention
is we did go through the Philadelphia Water Department conceptual approval process.
We are under 15 ,000 feet of earth disturbance,
so we are not required to have a full stormwater management plan,
but we did receive conceptual approval from the Water Department for what we're doing.
And the amount of new impervious coverage that we're creating is approximately 1 ,800 square feet.
So it's a very small area of new impervious coverage.
And we do not believe that any impact to the watershed will come from our very minimal change to this line.
With that, I would like Brian Paul to adopt my testimony if he is online and able to do so.
Brian, are you on?
Brian Paul, I don't see a name on the hand up.
Is he on the phone or Zoom?
He was on by Zoom.
If Brian is not on, maybe
is Jerry Slipikoff on?
Could you ask them to raise
their hand?
If they could raise their hand
just to be recognized.
Are either of you gentlemen on?
Yeah, I'm on. Jerry Slipikoff.
Okay, Jerry, do us a favor,
please. Spell your name.
Identify yourself. Name and address.
Okay, it's Gerald, J -E -R -A -L -D, Slipikoff, S -L -I -P -A -K -O -F -F, as in Frank.
And I'm a principal in the ownership of both properties.
Are you swearing a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Jerry, did you hear my testimony, and do you adopt it as true, correct, and your own?
Every word of it, and yes, I do.
Thank you very much.
Members of the board, I have with me, hopefully on the Zoom, members of the engineering and architecture team, if you have any specific questions for them about the application.
But at this point, I will turn the floor back over to the chair.
Thank you.
I noticed as far as the complex is concerned, there are a number of buildings.
Are they, are those buildings, all right.
You're proposing eight units in this building, correct?
units in this building, correct? Yes. What is the occupancy in terms of number of units in the
What is the occupant?
other buildings? Do they range from different ranges or what? Are they all the same? The buildings
are of slightly different sizes, but there is a total of 93 existing units across the eight
buildings. So you have roughly 10 or so in each building, roughly. Yes. This is pretty consistent
in terms of the number of units to the surrounding buildings. Yes. And the idea here is to have it be
as consistent with what's there as possible. We're really trying to blend it in. And one of the
things the neighbors did ask us about back in the 2019 version of this was changing the aesthetic.
We had initially proposed a glass front, and in some of the renderings, we now have it returned to be a brick, which you can see on my screen now.
That is more consistent with the coloring of what's already in the complex.
All right, could you do me a favor?
Did you put up the letter from the neighbors?
So it's a little bit easier for me to read on here than on my phone.
It should be up on your screen now, Mr. Chair.
I have it now.
All right.
Is there anyone else who wishes to testify in this matter?
If so, please state your name and address for the record
and spell your name for the stenographer.
So, Chair, we have Kelly O'Day up first.
We have quite a few.
Kelly, I have allowed you to talk.
You can unmute yourself.
And I would ask the witnesses to limit their comments
to between two and three minutes, please.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and board members.
I am Kelly O'Day, that's K -E -L -L -Y -O apostrophe D -A -Y,
and I live at 301 East Dorham Street
for the past 13 years.
I oppose the proposed zoning use variance request.
Please refer to my written testimony
and my nine exhibits to fully understand
what I am going to briefly highlight
in my three minute time period.
Do you have a copy of my written testimony?
I don't see it. I'm sure it's somewhere. Unfortunately, since we're doing this virtually,
we don't have the physical documents in our hands or files.
Okay, I request that that be included in the record.
318 Eastern Street has been continuously used as a single -family house since 1901,
a period of 119 years. Gallman purchased the apartment complex in 1986. The house had already
been standing for 85 years. In 2010, Gallman purchased the 318 property and has had it for
the past 10 years. So I take strong exception to the peninsula. Now I have four particular reasons
to object to it. The first is that the application simply does not meet the unnecessary hardship
criteria. In order for the board to deem this, to approve of this variance request, this use
variance request, you need to find four items for a use variance. That there are unique physical
circumstances that create an unnecessary hardship. They have not met that burden. It has been a
single -family house, I will show you in the attachments that I included in my
testimony, they could easily build a new single -family house or they could build
two semi -detached houses. The applicant has not demonstrated that there's a
physical condition that prevents them from complying with strict
conformity to the SA3 provisions. The proposed variance would alter the
essential character of the neighborhood. The applicants claim that the project is a minor
expansion to a long -standing existing use is simply not valid. The proposed building would
cover the equivalent of 90 percent of the 4 ,400 square foot lot. It would dramatically increase
the density of the entire complex. It would tower over nearby houses and would reduce open space
on their entire apartment complex.
It would be equivalent to building
five semi -detached houses
in this 4 ,400 square foot parcel.
The applicant could build, by right,
single -family house
or request a dimensional variance
for two semi -detached houses.
They have not met the cure
by dimensional variance criteria.
In summary, on this point,
the applicant has failed to meet
the four -use variance criteria
They have not established unnecessary hardship that justifies the issuance of multi -family
use variants for a RSA 3 single -family parcel.
The second item, no business or professional office. That is a mute point. At this point, since the applicant has indicated they are withdrawing that, I would ask that that proviso be included if the board sued move in that direction.
The second item, no business or professional office, that is
Traffic congestion. The applicant's variance appeal will increase East Durham Street traffic congestion on the narrow two -way traffic, two -sided parking, 30 -foot -wide street.
I think that the board needs to recognize that Sprague Street is a one -way street.
East Durham Street is a narrow two -way, two -sided parking street.
So we definitely have a traffic congestion when commuters are leaving in the afternoon from their Sedgwick Station apartments.
As a side, I would note that even though the Sedgwick apartments and the station are on Mount Pleasant,
They are called Sedgwick Station because of the historic nature of our neighborhood.
The last point I will raise is the flash flood risk.
The applicant has minimized the risk.
However, I would point out that they currently have 57 ,000 square feet of impervious cover in a flood -prone watershed.
This is the largest impervious cover upstream of the flood -prone Sedgwick train station.
It has a designated flood -prone intersection designation by the water department and there
are road made flood signs on all sides of the intersection. I would ask the board to
carefully review my exhibits and I ask the board to reject this RSA 3 use
variance request. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. I'm going to hold off on my comments
until all the other witnesses speak. Tanya, do you have anyone else? Mr. Chairman, is it is it
appropriate for for me to respond or would you rather hold on my comments? Please respond.
Okay, I just wanted to follow up on two points that Mr. O'Day made. The first one
as Mr. O'Day said that in his opinion, we were dramatically increasing the density on the site.
I just point out that there's already 93 units there. So an increase in eight units is less
than 10%. On the issue of the hardship, I just wanted to point out that the unique condition
relevant to this property is the fact that it is surrounded on all sides by our active use RM1
zoning and i would just remind the board that the uh valley view case which i'm sure you're
familiar with says that the context of the surrounding area is unquestionably relevant
to a hardship determination and i think that context of this particular lot located as it is
surrounded by the apartment complex uh is an indication of a hardship unique to this line
thank you no i can't think you raised the point i said i was going to wait to the end but
sometimes I can't help myself. Mr. Chair, could I respond? No, just a second, sir.
Excuse me. Pardon me. I keep in the letter and the last witnesses testimony keep talking about
it was these were it was a single family house since 1901. I suspect that maybe on that site or
where the apartments are, they may have all been single family at one time. That that that's not
the case. So I don't know when were the apartments, the original apartments built. I would assume
sometime after 1901. Excuse me. Yes. Could I provide that information? No, just let us finish
please. So anyway, I'm looking at that as an issue for me. Single family in 1901. Okay.
It seems like that has changed significantly since 1901.
All right.
Tanya, do you have anyone else?
Yes, Chair, we have about seven.
We do have someone with the number ending in 486 over the phone if you wish to speak.
someone over the phone with the number ending at 486 do you wish to give
testimony no it was Brian Paul trying to chime in before but Jerry's of a call
my business partner anyone else please raise your hand we have IB Reyes if you
wish to speak, you can unmute yourself and speak.
Please identify yourself with the record.
Spell your name for the stenographer.
E .B. Reyes.
E .B. Reyes.
E .B. Reyes.
You got a lot of feedback.
You got a lot of feedback.
E .B. Reyes.
E .B. Reyes, I'm here for the 2275 East Cambria Street.
Please spell your name for the stenographer, please.
Oh, I -B -I Reyes, R -E -Y -E -S.
Cambria Street, I think she's on the wrong...
I don't believe she's here to testify about 318 East Doran,
Mr. Chair. Ma 'am are you here for the Durham Street property? I'll take that as
a no. Anyone else? No, I'm sorry. No, I was muted. No. Okay, thank you. Anyone else?
We have a Jeffrey Selling and you can unmute yourself and speak.
hello and thank you for taking my testimony
identify yourself name and address my name is jeffrey selling g -e -o -f -f -r -e -y
selling s -e -l -l -i -n -g and i live at 514 east durham street about a block and a half from the
proposed apartment site. I strongly oppose... Do you fire a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Please proceed. I strongly oppose this project for many
reasons, but I'm going to mention three. One, the proposed new three -story large apartment,
3 ,900, 60 square feet, building, shoehorned into a 4 ,400 foot square foot site, will change the
quiet and residential look and feel of our neighborhood the rsa3 zoning district calls
for a single family house of 2200 square feet with 50 open area the sheer size of the proposed
building will overwhelm the neighborhood two i'm also concerned about the increase in traffic and
problems with parking in a quiet residential neighborhood. I regularly walk and ride my bike
in this neighborhood and have noticed that the homeowners usually drive slowly, carefully, and
are mindful of pedestrians, children, bike riders, etc. Many others cut through Durham as a shortcut
and they drive too fast, ignore stop signs, and are dangerous to pedestrians. The last thing we need
is more congestion, more cars, and more challenges with parking, which is already an issue down there,
especially during the day when so many people park near the SEPTA station. The neighborhood
is zoned for single -family homes, and not only is that its character, but that is what keeps it safe.
Adding more apartments would add congestion, make parking more difficult for the SEPTA commuters.
Three, my third concern has to do with the increase in impervious surfaces, which would
increase stormwater runoff, which is a problem all over the city. The Water Department is working
to mitigate this with many programs, including a rain garden at the intersection of Durham and
Sprague Streets, right near this. That has been a problem area in terms of flooding, destructive
erosion and sending more water into our overtaxed sewers. This proposal would increase impervious
surfaces, not by only 1 ,800 square feet, but by 1 ,800 square feet quite a bit, which in turn
would cause additional runoff problems, issues with flooding, and add to the volume of our
already strained combined sewer system. Let me finish by repeating that I unequivocally oppose
this project thank you here we have thank you for your testimony can't hear
you I don't have anything further at this time any questions from the board
for that way okay please Tanya bring it up thank you I'm sorry we have a Natalia
I believe you're allowed to speak you can unmute yourself afternoon my name is
Natalia Sereko. It's N -A -T -A -L -I -A. Last name is S -E -R -E -J -K -O, and I'm the Executive Director
of East Mount Airy Neighbors, and I am here to express the opinion of the neighbors. First,
I wanted to clarify the vote for this particular variance. There was one person in attendance
that supported this variance request 46 opposed with 25 being near neighbors as
mentioned in the letter that we sent out the neighbors did not think that this
think that this variance demonstrate unnecessary hardship. It was not the least
variance demonstrate unnecessary
possible modification possible for that lot. It would increase congestion for
both the local residents and SEPTA, Chestnut Hill East Regional Rail
commuters exiting the Sedgwick Station onto a one -way street. The applicant
site is within the Winnihawken sewer shed and could contribute towards the flooding that is
present there and that the applicant proposes to build a business office on the first floor which
would not be an accessory office but would be the regional leasing center for the apartment
So as a result of the votes of the neighbors and the concerns of the neighbors,
East Mount Airy neighbors opposes the variance.
Thank you.
Jared?
I would just respond to the neighborhood's comments just by pointing out to the board
again that while I understand the community's perspective, if this was a brand new apartment
building and if we were proposing to take this site and turn it into something new but really
we're adding in a very small way less than 10 percent of the total units adding to an existing
rm2 zoned parcel in this neighborhood so we're not taking single family homes away
we're supplementing in essence what's already there at this lot
thank you
okay mr chairman yes thomas holloman i like to make a comment according to the plan
they're going to demolish a building a single family building therefore the designer can build
back anything he wants he can conform to the RSA 3 code requirements so my
suggestion would be that he goes back to the existing code here RSA 3 the the
challenge that we have with a by right development mr. Holliman is that if the
parcel is as kept as an RSA 3 the setback side yard and rear yards
requirements that we'd have to meet would create, I guess, what I can only describe as an odd
building. It would be a new structure that would be surrounded by the parking lot in the apartment
buildings and would have to be smaller than the existing lot because we'd have to meet the 10
foot rear yard and the side yards that are required in RSA3. And that was one of the challenges we
looked at. And that's why we went for the unity of use to try and make this blend into what's
there rather than creating a new, much less user -friendly lot.
Well, couldn't you not appeal for those changes to make it conform to the RSA3?
Because the owners already owned the apartment complex that surrounded it, and because of
where this lot sits at the front of the remainder of the of the complex um we thought that the the
highest and best use here was to have it be part of the apartment complex that already surrounds it
um i have a general i'm sorry tom are you finished i have a question yes okay
can i can i go frank or yeah yeah um yeah i think 46 is a lot of people to be opposed to this
with 25 of them being near neighbors that means 25 are in the area and councilwoman bass
is also opposed to this so i just wanted to put that on the record i i didn't receive
correspondence from her from her office but if if you have it i believe it's there
If I could, Chair, we have Charles Richardson available to speak, if you wish.
Okay, yeah, Mr. Richardson.
Good afternoon, everyone.
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Bass.
Last name is Richardson, R -I -C -H -A -R -D -S.
Councilwoman has not made a decision on it at this point.
She actually would like you guys, the board, to make the decision on whether or not you would like to see this go forward.
this variance. She notes that the number of people that are opposed are very high and
she also notes that the developer has done something to try to mitigate some of the concerns.
some of the concerns so she's leaving it in your hands and we tell her thank you for on behalf of
So she's leaving it in your hands.
all of us we do appreciate that uh i have a question and uh i'll pose a question to you
jared but obviously it's for the other folks that are here uh during your meeting with the rco was
there ever any discussion or did anyone raise the possibility of reducing the number of units
or is it or or is the community just stuck on single family does the issue that it's becoming
a single family becomes multi have more to do with the number of units i guess is what i'm asking
than it does with the actual use um so i i was my phone i was not in attendance at the original
RCO meeting, so I can't speak to that directly. My impression is that the community concern has
more to do with the loss of a single family at this site than it does to opposition to the
existence of the apartments generally, but I'm not going to speak for those folks.
It could be, but that could be the driving force. That's why I'm trying to find out.
I was not at that meeting. Tom Chapman attended on behalf of the applicant, but he's
since retired. So I don't have firsthand knowledge of the meeting.
I don't remember the lady's name who spoke on behalf of the, I think it was Natalie.
Are you still on, Natalie?
Yes, I'm still on. The community is opposed to additional apartments coming into the neighborhood
because the side of the street that that single family home is on is facing a residential area
and they're concerned with additional traffic and all of the things that they had mentioned,
you know, the flooding issues and all of that.
So the downsizing of the apartments down, you know, to maybe six still would be an issue
because that would add a lot more congestion to that area,
and it would also put that leasing office on the residential block.
Did I hear earlier that the leasing office was off the table?
What we're asking the board to approve will not include any office.
No commercial, no retail, it's all residential.
That's correct.
All right.
So my next point is, if you built two single family homes there, and we just average it out that four people to a home, you got eight people living in two single families.
So that's why I go back to if there's any consideration room, is there any appetite for going back and discussing a lesser number of units?
and I don't know if that would even work for the developer but I'm trying to figure out I don't
know if I would I don't know how you would be able to sell a single family on that site maybe 1901
you could I don't know how you do it in 2020 that's my point I just don't don't see how you
get there I don't know who would buy a house surrounded by all those apartments so it's an
open question if somebody wants to uh natalie if you want to weigh in if you think there's an
opportunity uh to have further conversation with the applicant and his attorney uh let us know
um i would defer that to kelly o'day who's on this call who has been in touch with the neighbors
okay uh chair too we do have 10 other hands just well the 10 other hands uh unless they have
something new and different uh we'll certainly entertain we can take their names and addresses
for the record but again folks you know this this is things are a little bit different now
we're doing this virtually it's um takes a lot more time for us to get through these processes
but if you have something new and different raise your hand if not um maybe natalie or someone can
give us the names and addresses of the folks that are there or they can get on the record themselves
so so why don't we do that let's let's get the name let the other witnesses their names and
addresses i i lowered all hands and then they came back so do you wish them all to be allowed
to put on record their name and address yes and i will only entertain comments if it's new and
different. Jane, you have been unmuted and you're allowed to speak. Hi, my name is Jane Von Bergen.
That's Jane, J -A -N -E, V -O -N -B -E -R -G -E -N. I live at 314 East Mountain.
V -O -N -B -E -R -G -E -N.
I live at 314 East Mount Airy Avenue.
I can look out my back window and see the house.
It's next to the house.
It's, it's, uh, is another single family dwelling.
Um, you know, there's a driveway that separates it.
The street is basically charming and residential.
And I, excuse me, I'm sorry to interrupt, but could the witness be sworn in?
Well, go ahead.
Sorry.
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you so anyway jane von bergen
capital b -o -n capital b -e -r -g -e -n live at 314 east mount area avenue i can look through my back
window and see the house it's actually quite a charming house when it's kept up and um it's next
to another uh single family home on that same street i object to it because it will change the
nature of the street. It's not so much the number of the units, it's the problem, it's the nature
of the street, and nothing that has been proposed will, you know, by the developer will make that
okay. Thank you. Next we have Richard Gallagher. You can unmute yourself and give your testimony.
Thank you very much. My name is Richard Gallagher, R -I -C -H -A -R -D G -A -L -L -A -G -H -E -R. I live at 417 East Durham Street in Philadelphia. That's one block east of the subject property. I did submit a written testimony last week, but I'd just like to point out a couple of
uh let me interrupt you sir if you could do you swear in the firm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth yes i do thank you please proceed uh just a couple of quick points
to to uh make um regarding the context of the site um we believe that the uh proposed development um
especially the size and mass of the building would permanently alter and dominate the block
on which it sits. We feel that the essential character of the surrounding neighborhood
is that of tree -lined streets with semi -detached single -family homes. And so the proposed development
would greatly alter that feel on the street. Regarding the traffic, I'd like to ask whether
a traffic study has been done to ascertain what the impact would be on Durham Street
with regard to congestion. Of the four streets that bound the apartment complex, Durham Street
is the smallest and I feel the least equipped to handle an increase in traffic. Regarding the
impervious coverage the it's been stated that 1800 square feet of impervious
coverage would be added to the site which may not seem like a lot but that
would about triple the amount of impervious coverage I don't mean to be
rude and interrupt but I think we've heard some testimony once or twice
regarding that again we're not trying to dismiss your your testimony as not
being relevant but we're trying to get people on as possible we have other
cases under understood sir I just wanted to point out that that's triple the
existing amount we should thank you thank you that's all we have Joanne on
and Joanne you have been unmuted and you can give your testimony this is her
husband, Carl Papendik. Carl, would you state your name and address for the record? Yes, my name is
Carl, C -A -R -L, last name Papendik, P -A -P -E -N -D -I -C -K. You swear to the firm to tell the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you, sir. Please proceed. I have the property. I'm at
7131 Sprague, which is actually 300 East Durham. I'm the only property that abuts the apartments,
and I think part of the sophistry of selling this on the low percentage of change by adding this
one apartment building is not what you see if you stand on Durham Street and look back
across the street toward the apartments.
Right now, two -thirds of that space is taken up by residences,
one -third by an apartment house.
The large white house on the corner is mine.
I've lived here for 65 years.
I've lived here for 65 years.
From my understanding, the apartment...
From my understanding, the apartments were built
five years before I moved in.
The apartments have been doing all the things
one would expect apartments to do
to make themselves stay attractive for renters.
But in the last couple of years,
the shift has been on to be more commercial,
where they've cut down trees,
By the way, there are two very large trees that are on that lot with that house.
When we moved in, our neighbor Miss Taylor, who owned the house, loved the house and
had no difficulty selling it to others after she moved. So the idea that it wouldn't be attractive,
maybe the apartment house could make it less attractive so it wouldn't sell well,
which they will do for our homes that are surrounded by them or adjacent to them.
So that's more than just a house. It's two large trees, it's hedge, it's a wall, it's a feeling of
a house, and it's a feeling of a residential area if you're across the street looking back at it.
When you look back at it, you don't see all the 90 units.
You see one apartment house.
That's it.
Now you will see two, which is doubling and halving, if you will, or reducing significantly
the look when you look at the house from Durham Street on the northwest side.
You see those two houses right now and this cute little house in the middle.
And the apartments have been able to rent it.
We talked to the woman who rents it.
She loves the place.
She was just told that her lease would not be extended.
So in effect, they gave up a rental.
Mr. Chair, I'm sorry.
I have to object to hearsay on that.
Okay, my wife called to her.
Joanne?
Yeah, but your wife's not, sorry, your wife's not testified.
Well, can she testify now?
Oh, I think we're going to hear the same thing.
Am I not correct?
She's going to, she actually talked to the woman.
So it's not.
Jared, did you want to?
I'm not looking to, I don't want to repeat anybody's testimony.
I'm just making my hearsay objection and it can just be noted.
Thank you.
So would you allow my wife, Joanne, to talk about what she was told by the woman herself?
This is Joanne Papendick, J -O -A -N -N -E -P -A -P -E -N -D -I -C -K, 300 East Durham Street.
I live next door to the little house, 318.
is anyone there yes chair can you swear her in can you swear for him to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you i i was talking to tanya and she said that
her lease was up at the end of may and that she was had she had to leave but then with the
pandemic, they allowed her to stay until the end of August, but she still had to
get out of the house at the end. What is the relevance of this testimony? Well, the
house is going to sit empty. That is not relevant. I mean, the house
could be empty, could be occupied. I'm just, what relevance does that have as
It's the desirability of the house.
And you can see at the pictures now on your screen,
I hope you're seeing what we do,
the two large trees and the hedge surrounding the house.
Yeah, but somebody can decide to buy that house.
If they bought it, they can tear that stuff down.
There's no guarantee that the shrubbery
and the trees are going to remain.
But there's a guarantee they won't.
if their zoning is approved.
I hear you, but there's no guarantees
moving forward.
I just lost everybody here.
How did I do that?
Hello?
It also establishes a residential look
at this time.
Understood.
Tanya?
Okay, Chair.
If you wish for these people only
to put their name and address on record,
we have Minow Reval.
you have been allowed to speak. Please unmute yourself and go forward with testimony.
You have been allowed to speak.
Please unmute yourself and go forward with testimony.
Thank you.
My name is Meenal Ravel, M -E -E -N -A -L.
Last name is R -A -V -A -L.
Address?
7153 Sprague Street, around the corner from this site.
We swear to firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Thank you.
Something new and different please
Right two points. Mr. Klein said we're just adding in a small way by turning this house and
Lawn into a asphalt. I will say that's classic
Way that all environmental issues are being taken these days. The situation is already bad. We already have too much impervious
land here
Ma 'am, I need to interrupt you, and I'm sorry. You're repeating a lot of what we've already
heard. Okay, I'm not repeating. I'm saying I'm questioning. I'm questioning. I'm questioning
adding in a small way. It's not a small way. No, no, no. You have to wait, ma 'am. Ma 'am,
you're talking about impervious surface. We've heard that two or three times already.
Something really different, please. She's been muted. Would you like to move on?
The second point is single family. You said that this, this property would be undesirable
as a small family, like one or two person. It is extremely desirable to live, to buy it. I
myself would buy this property if it was available as a house. So it is very desirable. It's a lovely
little block. That's my two points. Thank you very much for letting me speak.
Thank you.
Alicia, you've been allowed to speak.
Please state your name and address.
Oh, hi.
This is James Aleniak.
I think I'm on my wife's plan for the phone system.
Anyway, it's James Aleniak, James, Z -E -L -E -N -I -A -K.
I live at 7151 Sprague Street.
I think that what we're missing here, and the important thing to note,
is that the house is not out of character.
It doesn't matter that it's built in 1901.
My house was built in the 1860s
and my house is very much in character with the neighborhood.
The neighborhood is made up of single family and twin houses.
The apartment complex, though it's been there
for quite a while, is at incongruous with the neighborhood.
This has links up our neighborhood and makes it cohesive.
To take down, to say that the house is out of character
is erroneous. The apartment complex is out of context with the neighborhood. It's there. We
accept it, but we certainly don't want more of it. And we certainly don't believe that zoning
should be changed for it. So that's my thought. The house is super lovely, super cute. And if
we spun around and if everybody who's making this decision came to the block, you would see that
the house is in character with the neighborhood, not the other way around. But the rest of the
block is all all single in in twins two family houses yep thank you okay chair we have william
ewing he's been allowed to speak unmute yourself and speak my name is william ewing e -w -i -n -g
i live at 510 east mount pleasant avenue which is about a block and a half from this site i
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Two points that haven't really been made before.
One, the traffic on this block of Durham Street is affected by the fact that it dead ends at the railroad tracks on Sprague Street,
which has one -way traffic so that you have to enter Sprague Street from Mount
Pleasant you can exit up to Mount Airy but it actually you can't exit on that
area because it goes because that's a different grade and it's a very
difficult block, and so cars end up turning around there. It's difficult traffic. The second
point I wanted to make is that this is really the back of the apartment house, not the front,
as the applicant stated. There's only one apartment building from that apartment house
that's on Durham Street, and really Durham Street, except for that one building, is all single
family houses for blocks from the railroad tracks all the way up. So this is, it's not filling in
apartment in what is existing. It is
apartment in what is existing. It is creating more apartments where it's mostly single -family,
including the Papendix House, which is next door to this one.
Thank you.
Okay, we have Adam Bernstein. You have been allowed to speak. Please unmute yourself and give your name and address.
Adam state your name and then I'll swear you in okay chair we can go forward
there's a Anita sharp you can unmute yourself and speak give your name and
address? My name is Anita, A -N -I -T -A, Sharp, S -H -A -R -P -E. I live at 6 -1.
Ms. Sharp, you went off. You said you live at 6 -1.
6 -1 -6 East Durham Street.
Okay. Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. Thank you. Please proceed. I want to just go on record that I am opposed to this variance
for all the reasons that were stated earlier and adding one last thing is that unfortunately I
am steadfast in the opposition no matter what you want to put on there if it's an apartment building.
thank you okay chair we have another person nina you can unmute yourself and state your name and
address hi my name is nina curlett n -i -n -a c -u -r -l -e -t -t i live at 236 east springer
and I oppose this variance request
for all the reasons spoken about.
I need to swear your way
and it's part of what we do here.
You swear a firm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
I am in opposition to this variance request.
First and foremost,
because the parcel does not meet the requirements
for a variance as defined
and specifically the parcel itself being suggested by Gallman Group as not being able to be used as
a single family home is false. The Gallman Group is misleading by stating the home at 318 East
Durham has not been in use as a single family home. Up until the date that House Sedgwick LP
he bought the property, who I believe is Gallman, when they purchased this in 2010, the property
was indeed used as a single -family home. I know this for a fact because 318 was owned and sold
in 2010 by a close personal friend and his wife who resided there, began their family there,
and raised their children there. The home was indeed, it did indeed serve as a single -family
home, just as Mr. Kelly O'Day testified. It's a wonderful home, charming inside and out, and I
can personally attest to having spent time in that home. It absolutely does not need to be or oppose
any kind of reason that it should not exist on that street as is and has continuously been used
as zoned up until the property was sold to Gallman.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And by the way, I just want everyone to understand,
I was not trying to dismiss your concern about the property
and being demolished and changing the character of the neighborhood.
I just, without standing there, but looking at the pictures,
I just thought it might not be as desirable to buy a home that is surrounded pretty much, at least on three sides, by apartment complexes.
That's the only point I was trying to make.
Chair, we have Ann Bullock.
You can go ahead and unmute yourself and give your name and address.
Afternoon.
This is Ann Bullock, A -N -N -E -B -U -L -L -O -C -K.
My husband, Thurman, and I live directly across the street at 319 East Durham Street.
Mr. Bullock, Mrs. Bullock, do you swear to affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
thank you please proceed we've had great neighbors who owned that home the home is an interesting
Thank you. Please proceed.
We've had great neighbors who owned that home.
little home that provided family relationships with many of us on the other side of the street
even as renters have been in that property we've had great relations we've had activities on the
small street and we all oppose the change that's going to bring in everything you've already heard
So we will relinquish our time.
We have Carolyn Campbell.
Hi, my name is Carolyn Campbell.
I live at 7144 Crittenden Street.
Is there any way for me to share my opinion?
You're getting a lot of, as an echo, feedback.
someone needs to mute or do you have two devices on? Is this better? I would like to share my
screen. Do you have a phone on? Do you have a computer on? Is there some other device near you that's on?
No it shouldn't be a problem. That's better. Okay. Name and address. You swear to
firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? I do. I have
an image to share. Thank you. She's not a panelist. So she would have to send it
to me. Okay, would you please send that to Ms. Sunkit? Okay, sure.
while you're sharing that could you please provide us with your testimony yes
or does the visual do you need to have the visual up as you speak
oh it's nice to have the visual because it's design research in the area and
is it a visual of the of the house that's in question here
so I will just talk through it I don't have Tanya's email in front of me so the question
was raised earlier what was the use of the area prior to the apartment buildings the use to the
area prior to the apartment buildings was a park. The apartment buildings were built and currently
I don't understand the stormwater strategy on site. Our neighborhood floods. We live up
up up the watershed from this apartment complex and during three different rain events this
spring, we have seen water flowing into the gutters, flooding the streets, and preventing
access across Upsil Street, which is a major thoroughfare in Mount Airy.
Upsil is not a neighborhood street, and that's what the imagery was showing. And my
objects into this project is that it's not in the spirit of the current planning process
that the city has gone through to reconstruct Philadelphia. And if we do not hold our developers
accountable for stormwater management in the redevelopment of Philadelphia, we are only going
to create larger stormwater problems. And we must hold developers accountable for the spirit of the
development and this variance would not be in the spirit of new development in
Philadelphia. Thank you. Thank you. Here we have two more. Natasha Martinez,
please state your name and address and you can unmute yourself and give your
testimony
Natasha Martinez, do you wish to testify?
Hello, I'm
Do I need to state my name?
Yes, please state your name and address for the record.
Explain your name to the stenographer.
Natasha, N -A -T -A -S -H -A, Martinez, M -A -R -T -I -N -E -Z.
Then do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
I just wanted to state on record that I currently reside in 318 East Durham Street, and it is a very quite charming house.
I had no intentions on moving or relocating at least for about four or five years until my
daughter was out of high school. However, you know, this news was very new. And then with
Gallman Group not renewing my lease, and I'm assuming the lease was not renewed due to
have the property empty if zoning was approved to demolish the property. And I would love to
stay there if I had the opportunity to. And I oppose the zoning that they're putting in.
Thank you. Here we have Ethan.
Hi, my name is Ethan Menser. I live at 427 East Durham Street.
To mention, do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please spell your name for the stenographer and proceed with your testimony.
I'm sorry?
Please spell your name for the stenographer.
P -T -H -A -N -M -E -N -T -Z -E -R.
Okay, please proceed with your testimony.
I would first echo all of the collective concerns about the variants,
but to add something that hasn't been heard, a lot of personal concern,
I am a professional composer and music producer,
and my recording and mixing studio is in my house at 427 east durham street and
my objection to the variance is that the noise from a major construction project along with
ongoing noise from an increase in traffic will do we have it so i i need to interrupt you
that is something that this board will not be able to take into consideration.
Construction will go on in that neighborhood, potentially, you don't know, it could be that
property, it could be any other property. That really is not something that we would certainly
do. We wouldn't take that under consideration. What about the increase in traffic? Well,
we've already heard about that several times. Right. I'm not being dismissive. I'm just saying
We've heard about that several times. We've heard about flooding. We've heard about stormwater runoff. And so if you have something new and different, that would be helpful.
Okay. Well, I would just add that the negative impact on my business and my ability to pursue my career would be, I can't overstate that.
So, thank you.
Chair, we have one more.
Alethea, you've been, can I meet yourself and speak?
Thank you.
My name is Alethea Colbert, A -L -E -T -H -I -A -C -A -L -B -E -C -K.
I live at 323 East Durham Street, directly across the street from the apartment building.
Could everyone hear her?
Could anyone not hear her?
You need me to repeat?
Is this better?
A little bit better.
Try it again.
All right.
Alethea, call back.
A -L -E -T -H -I -A -C -A -L -B -E -C -K.
Thank you.
Do you swear and affirm that it's all the truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Thank you. I live at 323 East Durham Street, directly across the street from the apartment
building. And I would just like to go on record as saying that my family and I wholeheartedly
do not support the rezoning of this property. And one other element I would like to add,
in addition to all of the other concerns raised by my neighbors, is that my husband and I are often,
And we are very friendly with many of the people
We are very friendly with many of the people who live in the apartment buildings.
who live in the apartment buildings.
However, the -
However, the increase in traffic to our street would be detrimental.
We already have significant problems parking in front of our own home.
And a lot of that is due to the residents who live in the apartment building who either
do not have space in the apartment's existing parking or are parking on our street because
the entrance to their building is on East Durham Street.
This is a significant problem for all of us, for all of our neighbors who live on this street.
And then second, the other problem that we constantly face is an incredible amount of trash and garbage that ends up on our street.
For those of us who are residents here, who live here, who take care of our homes, we are constantly working to keep our street clean.
And a lot of this trash and debris is either coming from people coming to visit people from the apartment and or from from people not caring about the neighborhood in which they reside.
so I would I would just ask that the Commission and the zoning board please
consider the impact that this kind of additional residents on this street
commercial resident or apartment apartment buildings would have on the
life and the quality of life that many of us who have chosen to make homes here
have thank you thank you appreciate your testimony thank you that's all chair okay
jared do you have any uh comments closing remarks i would like to speak if i could
uh i i i unmuted things now i i signed up to testify who are you i'm adam ornstein i was on
the list of of people to give testimony and had trouble before with my microphone but it's working
name and address for the record spell your name for the stenographer and hopefully it's new and
different yes uh my name is adam ornstein it's spelled a -d -a -m -o -r -n -s -t -e -i -n
you swear to firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do
yes hi uh i'm a homeowner at 431 east durham street where i've lived for over 12 years
the applicant's apartment complex is located at the end of my block at the corner of East Durham
Street and Arley Street. The applicant's requesting a use variance and zoning code section 14 -303 -8E1
enumerates four findings, all four of which they must satisfy before a variance can be considered.
However, the applicant fails to satisfy even a single one of them, which are having a hardship
arising from a unique physical circumstance is peculiar to the property.
I apologize for interrupting. I believe we heard that testimony earlier.
Okay. Then I'll jump ahead to testimony that you haven't heard, which is that Mr. Klein,
as well as the applicant in their application for a variance, is misrepresenting the surrounding
context of the 318 East Durham Street. They're making an audacious claim that the RSA3 zoning
of 318 East Durham is, quote, inappropriate, unquote, because they say it is, quote,
surrounded by this apartment complex. I really wish that the board could see what the 300 block
of East Durham Street looks like, because 11 of the 12 blocks' parcels are single -family
homes. At the corner of Ardley Street is one apartment building, and all the remaining
homes on that block are single -family homes. So the notion that the apartment complex is
surrounding 318 is the opposite of what the situation is. In fact, Sedgwick Farm era single
family homes surround the applicant's one apartment building at the end of the block,
not the other way around. And in fact, it's one apartment building that is out of context with
the rest of the 300 blocks, single family residential homes. And what the intention
of the applicant is trying to do here is very clear. It's to buy up and pick off the single
family residential homes on the even side of the 300 block so that they can change facts on the
ground, add more apartment buildings, and commercialize and destroy a quiet residential
block for their convenience and profit. What's more, there's no hardship here. And even if
for the sake of argument, they could show hardship, it would be self -created. And the
zoning code clearly states that a variance cannot be granted if the hardship is created by the
applicant. They didn't have to buy this property in the first place in 2010. And frankly, they
probably shouldn't have. I urge the board to reject the applicant's variance
request. Thank you very much. Thank you for your testimony.
thank you for your testimony
anyone else tanya no chair you can move forward
okay mr klein thank you mr chair i'll be
extremely brief as i know this has gone on a long time
i just want to touch on a couple points that we heard a lot about
um during the last few minutes the first is this
concept of parking and traffic i just think it's important for the board to
keep in mind that there are already 57 cars and a already configured driveway parking situation
so what we're doing with this application is adding four cars to the parking total it's going
from 57 spaces to 61 spaces we're not reconfiguring the existing ingress and egress we're not creating
any new traffic patterns so to suggest that this application is going to increase the traffic
burden beyond which that already exists, I think is a bit of a red herring.
The other comment I will make, just I know I mentioned this earlier, but in terms of
the stormwater management, you know, we did what the city asks us to do.
We submitted our conceptual plans to the water department.
They gave us the conceptual approval.
They didn't ask us for an earth movement or a stormwater management plan to be developed.
And, you know, while I certainly understand some of the comments, you know, we did what the city of Philadelphia asks us to do in terms of providing for stormwater management on the site.
And I want to thank all of you for your time this afternoon. It was nice to see you all again.
Thank you.
Questions from the board.
Tom you had raised something earlier you okay with the response I assume yeah I'm okay with
the response thank you planning commission good afternoon chair member and members of the board
this property is indicated for residential use on the comprehensive plan this property is in an
island surrounded by an existing garden style apartment and rm2 zoning which makes developing
as a single -family home a bit out of place we would recommend that the applicant work with
the district council member to update the zoning of the property to be more in line with the abutting
properties accordingly we have no objection to the granting of the variance
i'm just going to take one more shot at this uh i know everybody wants to save that little
white house and all that that that is there today there's no guarantee that someone may buy that
house and decide to tear it down and put up a new structure a single family so the uh uh you know
The concern about the aesthetics remaining the same, there's no guarantees that that will occur.
Somebody can decide to buy it, tear it down.
I appreciate your concern for that.
I live in a row house neighborhood in South Philadelphia, which is a lot different than your neighborhood.
But I also want to just remind everybody before I make a decision on my vote, without knowing what the rest of the board is doing,
if there's any consideration based on what i just said that there's no guarantee that that house
will continue to remain there in the unforeseeable future is there any appetite to go back to the
table and see if there's an opportunity to provide for maybe lesser units assuming that the developer
would even consider that so uh having said that and listening to what the planning commission
uh what they just said about going back to the district council person and
making some adjustments to the current zoning uh i i would suggest that we take this under
we the board uh that we take this under advisement and vote on it uh for next uh
next tuesday i'd like to have some further discussion about it
is there any objection to that or you want to vote it now
i don't have any objection to your taking under advisement mr chair well i know i'm missing the
board i didn't i wasn't sure if you're asking me but i i figured i would sign on here i was
i folded that into my suggestion that maybe you and your client go back to the community and talk
to them maybe it's something about the design of the building that could be changed and not be as
offensive to them in terms of the aesthetics that they're used to having i don't know i don't have
I operate I tried to give everybody an opportunity to try to work things out
especially when a case like this because again I'll repeat myself there's no
guarantees that that single -family home is going to remain there and look the
way it does a year from now five years from now or whatever it could but
there's no guarantees the board is it anyone on the board opposed to continuing
the board is anyone on the board opposed to continuing this for further discussion
i'd rather have further discussion i'm okay with it i'm on board with it frank
okay so we will uh as we said earlier um i'm looking for the case we will discuss this and
we will vote on this next tuesday morning and in the between time mr klein if you can reach out to
the RCO. If you think there's any merit in what I've just said, you guys can talk about it and
notify us if there's any change. If not, you know, we'll just take that as what today's testimony is
and we'll stand. Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will reach out to Natalie from the RCO after we
conclude today's meeting. Thank you for your time, everyone. Thank you. Hey there. Excuse me. My name
is Maeve Zeleniak. I am
17 years old. I grew up here.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry. You can't just jump in.
Hello? Go ahead, Chair.
We're done with this.
Okay. Thank you.
All right.
This case is going to be held for further discussion.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Thank you, everyone.
Are we ready to move on?
Yes, we're ready, Cara.
Okay, calendar number 39299, 337 South 18th Street.
The attorney is Zen Jen.
are you here okay i'm going to promote you to a panelist and then unmute you and then you'll be
able to speak and present your screen as necessary thank you mr jen do you agree to wave the reading
refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Thank you.
Xen Jin, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Suite 1838 Philadelphia PA 19103.
Here on behalf of 337, I believe it's Enterprise. Let me pull up the
presentation pack. I will share that with the board.
video hello good afternoon
and everyone
we can't hear you okay good afternoon
good afternoon mr jen please uh identify yourself with the record
yes i'm sorry um it was sound was not coming over clearly earlier i think uh my system has
reloaded um good afternoon uh do i need to be sworn in at this point yes you swear a firm to
tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you carol did you ask about
stipulation? Yes, I did. Okay, thank you. Please proceed. Thank you. Again, I'm here on behalf of
my client, which is 337. I believe it's Enterprise. I'm pulling up the DD information right now. I'll
also share the information with the board regarding the plans as well as the documentation.
I have a exhibit package here. So this is actually an RM1 property. I'm going to go ahead and put the information up onto the screen. It's a 337 Holdings LLC. My client, Brian Bellis, is actually here with us as well.
so I'm going to go ahead and put the plans up first for the board's view we
also submitted photographs letter of non -opposition from the RCO as well as
deed and tax clearance
So what I have here is the plans for this property. This application is to use this
property as a six dwelling unit. There's a reason why my client is asking for this.
This is actually an existing structure. It is in an RM1 district and the only
variance is the dimensional one based on the lot size because the size of the
lot only allows up to four units. What is shown here is essentially the existing structure on
the interior. And one key thing to note is that the stairwell, which leads up to the highest level
from the ground floor, runs through the middle of the building. This is an existing stairwell that
runs straight up the middle. Because of this stairwell and because the front floor level of
the floors and the rear are actually offset. So there's actually a drop in height between the
front floor and the rear half of the building floor. It just makes more logical sense without
having substantial structural changes to simply split this front and back unit on each level,
which actually came up with the six units. This building originally was multifamily
and the community was aware of that it's also surrounded by multifamily and it's in a densely
multifamily area of the city so when we met with the RCO we had no opposition partly because of
the neighborhood as well as the expected use is consistent with what they were expecting
and the number of units itself it was not an issue so as we provided trash storage that is
going to be inside and the pickup will be a commercial pickup. One of the advantages of
this building in a sense is that it does have the ability for all units to access this trash storage
as well. The building itself is one of the largest on the block. It runs from the street in the front
all the way to the street in the back. If you look at the view from here, you can see that
it's one of the deeper buildings on the block that runs
between 18th Street and Bouvier or Bouvier
Street. So it is one of the larger buildings.
Each of these units will ultimately end up over 500 square
feet as well. And there'll be a front and a back and there'll be six total
units based on the stairwell location and the
split of the design. These are not meant to become
a heavily dense use. My client anticipates most of these will be inhabited by maybe one individual
at most two. So that is why we are asking the board to permit a dimensional variance for lot
size in this case for the use of six total units whereas four is normally permitted.
There would be a financial hardship if my client would have to convert
to a full unit here, this stairwell would have to be removed in some way and relocated.
The depth of the property probably would cause us to have to do two stairwells in its place,
one in the front, one in the back, to allow egress and actually complicate matters when
it comes to design. Thank you. Do we have anyone, Tanya, to testify?
I believe my client is available to affirm my testimony.
Please, sir.
Yes, the client is able to speak.
Hi, Mr. Bells, you're with us?
Yes, I'm here.
Great.
You heard my testimony to the board.
Would you affirm that everything is true and correct and adopt it as your own testimony?
Before you answer, Mr. Bells, would you please spell your name and name and address?
My name is Brian Bellis, B -R -I -A -N, last name Bellis, B -E -L -L -E -S.
My address is 711 Paper Mill Road, Erdenheim, PA, 19038.
We swear to firm to tell the truth, all truth and nothing but the truth.
Thank you.
Again, you heard my testimony, Mr. Bellis.
would you um uh confirm that is true and correct and
adopt it as your own i do thank you
thank you do we have any other witnesses tanya
yes we have a wade albert you have been allowed to speak
hello can you hear me identify yourself for the records by your name please
sure uh my name is wade albert w -a -d -e last name is a -l -b -e -r -t
and i am counsel for the civic association the center city residents
and i am counsel for the civic association the center city residents association
Association.
okay thank you and do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth i do thank you so i would and and i would just echo um that the rco considered this case
and uh voted to not oppose the application um provided uh requesting for a proviso that all
trash from the building be stored inside the premises and collected by a commercial trash
holder. And our understanding is that the applicant has agreed to that proviso. And we
would request that proviso be listed in the license.
That will be made part of the record. Thank you, Mr. Albert.
Thank you.
Anyone else wishes to speak on this case?
I have no more hands. You can proceed, Chair.
Thank you. Questions from the board?
Planning Commissioner.
Chairman and members of the board, this property is indicated for residential use on the comprehensive plan.
With the removal of the commercial on the first floor, we feel that it will not increase any potential impacts of the surrounding neighborhood.
Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the variance.
Thank you.
Calendar number 39299, 337 South 18th Street.
my vote is yes with the following proviso trash to be stored inside and to have commercial pickup
my vote is yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso
thank you thank you have a good afternoon sounds like you're singing
um it does yes with proviso sounds like there's wine involved calendar number 39293 1500 dickinson
the attorney is vince tofino
is this continued case
no I know that Mr. Dufino was trying to sign on earlier and this case Dickinson Street wasn't
listed as an option so he signed in under another case that was withdrawn Hope Street
I don't know that that makes a difference as far as his ability to get in now Mr. Dufino you've
been promoted to a panelist and you can now speak ah there we go there you go hi do you agree to
waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy yes i do and you also swear to
affirm to tell the truth and nothing but the truth sorry frank always do always do okay
All righty. So 1500 Dickinson, I represent the LLC. Anthony D 'Alessandro is hopefully on board
somewhere. He is the principal, one of the principals for the LLC, and he's a lifelong
residents resident of South Philadelphia this is a CMX one zone property on the
southwest corner of 15th and Dickinson I could I could pull some pictures up I
think if you you sure enough that would be helpful okay my daughter helped me
with this so without her I'm useless on the computer but do you see the
pictures hello not yet help me Nicole why don't you do this why don't you go
through with your testimony while you're trying to get the pictures oh okay one
second all right oh I gotta share my screen now I go okay so this is a view
of Dickinson Street this is the building there it's the southwest corner 15th and
Dickinson it's the the old deliverance church which was also a boarding house
up until a few years ago and basically the refusal is because we want three
residential units there and in doing so what first of all it's a 16 by 6 times
times 75 corner lot so it's a it's a very vast building it sits on a very big envelope and
75 corner lot, so it's a
basically my clients my client who's from five blocks from the neighborhood went to the neighborhood
and said what would you like here would you rather have commercial and two residential or would you
and three of the adjoining neighbors said that they would rather have residential there
because there's several reasons.
Basically, parking, there's two businesses on the other corners,
and they believe that they wanted to enclose the whole property
because there was giant decks off the side, as you can see, on 15th Street.
One of the decks runs the other property.
The first floor goes all the way to the other property.
That's an existing condition.
um so what i wanted to do is basically go to letters from the the closest
residents to the property and i'm trying to get to them now um hold on a second
that's the letter from the zone now call can you get in here again
that's why you're going at it you have any floor plans yeah we do have floor plans all right you
want to see them first before the letters yes all right the floor plans now we they submitted an
original plan that I'm giving you the initial plan later on it was agreed by everybody that
we could build all three floors out to the end of the property line. But the original plan doesn't do that. So we're just going to submit the original plan. And at a later point, if we have to go back, we will
I'm not clear the original plan calls for extending the original plan is right here. It doesn't call for extending the all three floors to the end of the property line.
You had decks on the original plane?
Yeah, you can see the original plane here, the decks.
Second floor and third floor would each have a deck, correct?
That's on the original.
They originally do have decks, if you look at the pictures.
They're existing.
They're existing decks.
And the bottom deck goes all the way to the back wall.
uh and the neighbors were concerned with that so they wanted to enclose they wanted us to enclose
the whole property to the property line so they wouldn't have these giant decks uh but when we
went to go amend it of course covid hit and we couldn't submit the plans anywhere so that's
basically where we're at we're in a situation where uh we we have neighbors that want the
whole property enclosed and we can't get to that you know so we so what I did
is I said I submitted the original plans to you because we would have to amend
them but from a practical standpoint what in the decks serve a purpose at
least to put for the people on the second floor and third floor to have a
place to put out trash well because where's trash want to be stored in the
there's a basement area which would which would be for all the residents all
they would all have access to the basement yeah I believe they would have
access to the basement area so but anyway we said what we did is we
submitted the original plan because I can't amend it so we submitted the
original plan which calls for for for deck area in the back and stairs and a
staircase well the staircase will be on the side but we may be able to change
that at a later point, pursuant to to the code. Let's go to let me go to the letters real quick.
All right. So now, basically, we, this is the letter from, I'll give you the letter from the
RCO first. The board, none of the members live in the area. The issue with the board is not
property coverage or anything like that. They're agreeing to three units. They just want the first
floor unit to be commercial. So there's their letter. And it just basically says the community
was opposed to the elimination of the first floor commercial space. No objection to the second
residential unit there was four people there for the board and they wanted to
people there for the board, and they wanted to hear it. We did a lot of studies. We showed them
hear it we did a lot of stuff
that there's absolutely no demand right now for commercial space, the COVID atmosphere,
the riot atmosphere. There's going to be a surplus of commercial space on the market.
So we made all those arguments, but they didn't want to hear it. They basically said,
this too shall pass, and we want the commercial space. But we said the adjoining members,
The adjoining members, Nicole, we need to get that letter up.
I can't get past that.
The adjoining neighbors agree with us that basically they want residential.
So I can give you the letters from the adjoining neighbors.
This one here is from James Wright, and I'm trying to find his property address.
Oh, okay. Yeah, his property address is up here.
I'm having issues, technical difficulties.
We understand that.
I've been having them myself.
I just want to go back.
Did your neighbors give you any reason why they wanted the building to take up the entire footprint and eliminate the patios?
Yeah, and I do have a plan.
The reason being because of noise in the back area.
Parties.
It's actually about 50 feet long.
The abutting property, as it goes back, are there windows on that abutting property that face the back of this property?
So it's a blank wall, right?
It's a blank wall.
All right.
It's a blank wall.
I have a concern, I would think that my, at least as far as I'm concerned, that the patios would serve a purpose, at least for the place for trash.
Because I don't see people storing trash for a week in a basement.
I just don't see how that's going to work out.
But I understand the neighbors are always worried about people sitting out on a deck and talking, but can't have it both ways.
All right.
So there's three letters from 1502 Dickinson, one's from 1510 Dickinson, and here's a petition that was put together.
Only one neighbor attended the meeting with the board, despite us paper in the whole neighborhood.
They talked to, we got three letters from the adjoining neighbors.
all the neighbors are for residential use basically even the neighbor that was in the
meeting she was a block and a half away she was for it then we left and then there's a board vote
and all of a sudden she was in opposition but we have her outvoted by the by the very near neighbors
all right before you hold on a minute is there anyone else to testify on this tanya
Yes, we have the property owner who wishes to speak. You are unmuted. You can go forward and speak.
This is Paul Markowich. Can you hear me?
Yeah, please spell your name and address for the record.
I mean, give us your address. I'm sorry.
Yep. Paul, P -A -U -L. Last name is Markowich, M -A -R -K -O -W -I -C -H.
I hope you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do.
Can I interrupt you, your address, please? I'm sorry.
Address is 708 Mount Pleasant Road, Bryn Mawr, PA, 19010.
And you are one of the principal owners?
Correct. There's three owners in 1500 Dickinson, LLC.
It's myself, Anthony D 'Alsandro, which is mentioned, and Rich Lilletto.
Okay. Do you have something you wanted to add to Mr. DeFino's testimony?
I just wanted to add to questions that Vince said, what Vince had mentioned.
So the first floor property is full property line, already existing, already built.
The patios start on the second floor and the third floor, which that is the current open
air space.
We are planning to have trash all housed in the units so that people would have access
to the basement, but the trash would be housed in the units.
to the near neighbors um as vince had alluded to the the the preference was to have the staircases
enclosed have it all 100 lot coverage so that there is no open space on the second and third
floor and having it 100 residential and actually just wanted to add in it in um in going around
the neighborhood in the area we feel in looking at the corners there's about 50 of the corners
in a really, I call it three block north and south and two block west radius.
I call it three block north and south and two block west radius. So 15 corners in that area,
about 50 % of all those properties are currently residential. So this project was a boarding house
for a church prior to this that provided housing for homeless people, really not in great condition
as it was. We're not making any changes to parking. And there's really not a vibrant commercial scene
in the area with mostly residential corners, vacant corners, bodega markets, and we think
Broad Street really is the commercial corridor, which we're next to. So then the three neighbors
who signed it is our neighbor south on 15th Street, where we have that adjoining party wall
with no windows, and then the two neighbors to the west on Dickinson. And those three neighbors
are the most affected by us building on the space that Vince has shown there on the screen,
and all three of them signed to have that space filled, have no open air on our property,
and also have it residential. So just wanted to add that as really the main reason why we're
coming to you today with a vacant, blighted building that we think could really add value
to the neighborhood in what the neighborhood's already asked for. Let me ask you, Mr. Markowitz,
in the current configuration of the building, the second floor and third floor, how many bedrooms are
in there? What would you have if you did not extend the building out to the adjoining property?
So right now, they're, they had, the current configuration was not great because, again,
it was more of a boarding house that there's, all the rooms were turned into bedrooms.
The biggest challenge we would have is the staircase location. Because of the width of the
building to make the most optimal use of the units, we have that extra space on the second
and third floor. We can, the staircases really need to be east to west and south on the building
or they would just take up too much space inside of it. And it would then be very hard to have
bedrooms and hallways that we think would be suitable for a condo that could sell for maybe
$300 ,000 in the neighborhood. Well, let me stop you there because you broke up a little bit.
a center staircase is something you would not consider or no so we think a center that we would
consider we'd like to put it in the space that you're seeing right there so in the in the with
that with that center staircase would you have two bi -level units on the second and third is
that what you're proposing no we're proposing one unit on each floor so one two -bedroom unit on the
first floor one two -bedroom unit on the second and one two -bedroom unit on the third floor
with the staircase being on the south side of the building, which you're looking at right here
next to the neighbor's building. And then we'd have each unit would be full from north to south
on Dickinson heading south. So you'd have the Dickinson Street, the window 15th, and not having
the staircase in the middle of the building, which would chop up the units and not make them as
desirable. Well, the reason I asked was I've seen where, actually I did a building once many years
ago we did a staircase similar building corner property we did a center staircase but when you
got up to the second level it broke off to the right was a bi -level apartment to the left was
a bi -level apartment so they were able to get two full apartments that were bi -level i'm not
suggesting you have to do that i'm just looking at it was a position i'm more concerned about
providing an area for trash that's one of my biggest concerns and and if we're and if we can
gain the approval for three residential units that's something we can consider of just do we
make the staircase in the building still using full lot coverage and and maybe keep the trash
in the basements if it's desirable but we can't see how it can work with the open space as it is
because the unit is so small currently okay all right anyone else to testify on this um can you
Yes, Chair, we have Lauren.
You can unmute yourself and give your testimony.
Yes, hi. Good afternoon
to the chairman and the board. My name is Lauren Tavis. I am
co -chair of the East Point Breeze Neighbors
RCO zoning committee. I'm also
a resident that lives within two blocks of this applicant
location. I need to spell your name please for the record. Lauren, L -A -U -R -E -N, Tavis, T as in Tom,
A as in Apple, B as in boy, A as in Apple, S as in Sam. And do you swear and affirm to tell the
truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Yes, I do. Thank you. I just need to, a couple of
points I wanted to make. First of all, I've been co -chair of the zoning committee for the past
three and a half years this is the first time an applicant has come to the board
and accused us of falsifying the votes and the outcome of not
the votes and the outcome of not considering people's votes or bullying other people to find
considering people's votes or bullying other people to
in our favor. I wanted to make clear that everybody who was in attendance that day
was opposed. We were not presented with anybody who was in favor, including the other near neighbor
that showed up. The letters presented to us, those aren't votes. You have to be at the meeting in
order to vote. Those letters appear to be letters drafted by the applicant and handed out to
neighbors to see if they would sign. The one letter is just people's first names. It's not even
anybody's full names. The board took the position, as we have, with a number of commercial applicants
that have come before us in at least the past five years, that there are a limited number of
commercially viable corners in our neighborhood in our sliver of point breeze that runs between
broad street and 18th street and this particular corner is 1200 square feet is the complete first
floor and that is a viable commercial space that just doesn't exist throughout the rest of the
of our sliver of our community it is one block from broad street it is two blocks from um the
The Broad Street Tasker Mars subway line or subway stop, it is a perfect spot for a good
commercial business.
In the past 18 months, we have seen, within two blocks of this location, we have seen
a bakery, batter and crumbs.
We've seen another cafe, a market, and a medical supply shop opening up at 15th and Mars.
We have exchanged emails with the applicant and the owner since January, which if I could
just point out that at the time of the meeting, we weren't as concerned with coronavirus and its
economic impact on the city. We took this position then, and in the six months since then, we've had
numerous exchanges with the applicant and the owner and have encouraged them to market the
commercial space, to speak with commercial landlords, to actually make an attempt to find
a commercial resident. We believe that this coronavirus is temporary in nature, even though
you know it could be another six eight months or a year before things feel normal again but
permanently converting that first base to residential is a permanent decision and we
really don't want to lose a commercially viable spot of 1200 square feet for a temporary for
a seemingly temporary in the grand scheme of things situation additionally we previously
approved or a sit -down restaurant a block away. We've had applicants who have presented us with
the same kind of hardship that these applicants have had, and they're just not hardships.
You bought this property that was a commercial, zoned commercial, and now you don't, now you want
out of it, but there's no actual hardship. They haven't tried to actually market the spot
in a reasonable way and we just wanted them to do that um there's again there's no hardship
and we as a community really want a viable commercial spot and believe that this is a
prime corner for that um i'm just heartened to hear that they have come to this board to you know
say that we've somehow carried on a nefarious business and lied about our position um and we
have not been we have been clear from the start and consistent um if there are any questions you
know i live within two blocks and i would love and i would patronize you know commercial business
if it were there and i really hope that this board will direct them to pursue those avenues
and actually try to fill that spot we're otherwise not opposed to two residential units above it
thank you three just my
i'm in a good response to that just just a minute please
um miss davis you said you were part of the
point breeze i am co -chair i've been co -chair of the east point breeze
um zoning committee uh planning and zoning committee for the past three and
a half year and three years i've lived in the
neighborhood for five and a half years so where does newbold
and your uh borders where do you um newbold is
Broad Street is roughly Broad Street to
Pashyunk and or sorry
Broad Street to 18th Street the
north end of it. Correct and then
Washington to
Pashyunk thereabouts. We changed
our name a couple of years ago to East Point Breeze
Neighbors. Oh okay all right that's what confused
me all right. No that's okay.
All right I
don't remember over here
I don't remember that change
happening that's why I asked.
yeah Vince
yeah yeah I just have
I didn't say you bullied anybody or did anything
wrong I said when we
went to go we asked her if
she if she the one
person that was there we asked
we asked do you have any concerns or do you have a judgment on what you would want there she said
do you have any concerns
or do you have a judgment on what you would
i don't so i didn't say you bullied anybody i just said that she had no opinion beforehand
isn't that the truth i mean is that what i heard i'm going to go back and forth please yes yeah i
mean i i didn't want to call you a bully i just said she had no opinion while we were there
Mr. DeFino, I think you made your point.
Ms. Davis?
Chairman, the only thing I would add is the reason that we require, I don't put any weight
in those letters that Mr. DeFino provided because none of those people showed up at
the meeting.
We require neighbors to appear at the meeting and express their opinion and to listen to
everybody.
So if that near neighbor showed up and didn't have an opinion in the beginning, she had
an opinion at the end and she voted to oppose it which is why you know that's why we have rco
meetings and that's why they're required to attend those letters of the near neighbors um you know
i don't they just knock on the door and say sign my petition i don't know i mean they didn't appear
and hear out what other neighbors say there's it's frequent that i change my mind of mind as well um
but there was nothing i appreciate that um mr chairman thank you can i just have a response
that mr chairman we don't want this to go back and forth it's not at all just it's for the board
um so just wanted to add just so for the board can vote if i was with you together i'd show you the
i took photos of all 15 intersections which is 60 properties on the major corners 15 16th and 17th
street from dickinson three blocks north three blocks south of those 60 corners 25 are residential
16 are bodega markets that could be beer could be lottery all different food mostly bulletproof glass
nine are vacant three are churches two are salons two are laundromats one's a park one's a school
one's a community center so 83 of all the major corners in that area are residential bodega
markets are vacant as ms tavis mentioned we started emailing ms tavis and the board in
January after our meeting, every month from there to ask if they have any commercial opportunities
that we could talk to since they mentioned that there's demand in the area. Never received an
answer until we got into April and May. One of my partners, Rich Luletta, started a company called
the Philadelphia Apartment Company, which has now recently sold to Keller Williams, largest rental
agency in the city, has a very extensive experience as a licensed realtor. We talked to two different
major commercial agencies from the beginning. So we're not asking for a bailout on what we bought.
We're asking for what we think is the most optimal use of this property in spending time with the
neighborhoods and canvassing the corners. In regards to the three neighbors, we spoke to the
three neighbors. The fact that they did not show up to the meeting does not mean that their voice
does not matter. So those three neighbors, they supported this project and we spoke to them for
that. So the fact that they did not come to the RCO, I don't think that means that their voice
is illegitimate or that their voice should be questioned that's an opinion um that we could
we could debate and it's not worth it so just want to mention those those facts of what the
actual community looks like that's closest to where we are and that uh that led to our decision
i appreciate that i'm somewhat familiar with that neighborhood i know further south you go
uh for whatever reason most of the corners uh over the last 10 years or so have been converted
it into very active commercial storefronts what happens when you go
north of say Morris Tasker I'm not sure why that still hasn't occurred it's a
flip of the coin for me to be honest with you I understand both sides anyway
before I go any further is there anyone else is there anyone else on this call
time no chair you can proceed all right thank you uh closing remarks mr tofino if not we'll move on
no i have no closing remarks i think everything was said okay uh questions from the board yes
mr chairman i'd like to see the uh first floor plan if possible to see how that common space
in the basement is reached Paul are you there yeah do you want me to show the
do you did from the the architect David Whipple's email he sent us recently I
don't know if I'm gonna be able to to get that one will you be able to share
it in Paul is not a panelist no only you can
Paul is not a panelist. No, only you can share Mr. Dufino.
If you could pull up your email from uh from when he sent it to us.
You had it on your ZBA hearings packet.
Well I had it in my packet. I had the one plan I did have was the initial
plan and my help has left the building so I'm in Bay shape area. You sent these
emails on July 8th in the ZBA to the ZBA to Tanya
Vince if I were to email that packet to you right now would that help you know
why the exhibit I did have from the packet was the first rolling I don't
know if it was in it my home it's an important question that Tom raised I mean if we can't
resolve it we're gonna have to hold this for another week does that work for everyone on the
board. I'm trying to get to it, but Dave Whipple just sent it to you, Vince. He just texted me.
I might be able to put it onto my screen. Let me see. New mail. See, I have my other computer
here, so I might be able to go to that screen and just put my... If I might suggest we can hold the
vote and be able to have the document submitted to all chairs yeah the board
members yep that's that's exactly right 411 and I think that will be fine it
wouldn't be a hearing hold because you already have the documents included in
the exhibit packet okay we'll leave that for discussion and vote on it next
Tuesday yes we're saying yes okay and you'll provide the you have it in your
package yes you don't need me to do anything i don't no i have it uh carol i don't have this
carol would you read off the calendar and number and the address let me see if i could put my
computer off to it no it's not working okay carol do you want me to go to the next case no no just
read off that give me the calendar read off the calendar calendar i'm sorry i'm sorry i'm sorry
did we have payment planning commission oh sorry thank you tanya planning commission
sorry remember and members of the board this property is indicated for commercial use on
the comprehensive plan while we have no objection to two units we do feel that the corner commercial
is viable in this neighborhood that has had an influx of new commercial in the past two years
Accordingly, we recommend that the first floor unit not be approved.
Thank you.
And again, I apologize for not acknowledging you.
Calendar number 39293 -1500 Dickinson.
All right.
So calendar number 39293 -1500 Dickinson will be held for discussion.
We will have a vote on this next Tuesday morning, provided we get the information that our board member, Tom Holloman, requested.
I think I actually have it now.
I think we already have it.
We have the floor plans.
For the first floor.
For each floor, I believe.
Vince, wasn't that included in the exhibit packet that you submitted?
Yeah, I think it was.
I'm pulling it up now, but I can't.
I don't know what I'm doing.
We'll hold it until next week.
I don't know if you're saying it, if you're not saying it.
I only see you.
Yeah, I don't know how to get this on here.
All righty.
If there's an issue, you can just contact me, and I'll shoot it over.
I can shoot it over by e -mail now.
do we have that we have other cases don't we carol all right thank you yes we do all right
We have other cases, don't we?
so we'll hold this for discussion uh and we'll vote on it next tuesday executive session
all right thank you thank you miss davis
okay calendar number 3914 ag 2406 west thompson street the attorney is alan knockamson
are you with us
yes do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy
see. Yes, I do. Name and address. Alan
Nockamson of Nockamson, PC 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA 19101.
You swear in front of me to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
I do. Thank you. I also have Mayor Miltz, who is a representative of the owner's group on the
line as well.
we're going to hold off until we get the you want to swear him in now or you want to yeah i thought
we were going to swear and we can wait at the end yeah wait till he whenever he testifies we'll
swear him in okay so i hinted you a packet of uh eight exhibits the first is the detail property
second is the tax clearance certificates uh uh third one is a notice of refusal this is an rm1
property. The only refusal we have here, we're seeking to put three units when two units are
allowed as of right. This lot size, the size of a lot is 1 ,072. So under the code, we're required
to have 1 ,080. So we're actually only eight square feet short with regards to this property.
The board may remember this, or maybe not, but in January of 2017, I did the zoning variance project for 2408 West Thompson Street. Exactly the same scenario. Same lot size, same refusal. We were eight square feet short. We were 1 ,072 lot size, and we were seeking three units to be 1 ,080.
The board granted it under calendar number 29 -250.
So similarly, we met with the community group,
the Brewery Townshardswood Community Civic Association,
which is Exhibit 8.
They open -whelmingly voted in support of it.
Their zoning committee was actually unanimously
in support of this project.
Thank you.
Do you want to call your witness?
Mr. Miltz, can you state your name and address
for the record sure um oh can everyone hear me yes um okay uh mayor milf that's m -a -y -e -r
last name m -i -l -t -z address uh my home or okay home 417 cherry hill boulevard
Cherry Hill, New Jersey
Mr. Mills, do you swear
it's firm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing
but the truth? I do
Thank you. Yeah, Mr. Mills
you heard everything I stated today
And is it true and correct?
Yes. And would you adopt it as your own
testimony? I would
Okay. Thank you
Tanya, do we have any other
witnesses? No one
is available with their hands up. Okay. Questions from the board?
Planning commission?
Chairman and members of the board, this property is indicated for residential use on the
comprehensive plan. We believe that this request for a third unit is a de minimis variance because
they are only eight square feet short. Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the
variance. Thank you. What's that address again, Carol? It's calendar number 39148 -2406 West
Thompson Street. West Thompson Street. Okay. All right. Calendar number 39148 -2406 West
Thompson Street. My vote is yes. My vote is yes.
my vote is yes okay jam he's still there
Jane still Tom are you there Tom voted already Tom and confessor voted all
All right. Well, it's for Tom, myself, Thomas Holloman, myself, Carol Tenere, and Professor Plaza all voted yes.
right was for Tom myself Thomas
Good luck.
Thank you. Thank you for your time.
Thank you, everybody. Thank you for your time.
Have a great day.
Sure. Calendar number 39285, 2275 East Cambria.
this. This is an application for a two -family dwelling in an existing structure. This proposed
use is refused for the following. A two -family dwelling is prohibited in this zoning district.
And the individual who filed it did so by power of attorney.
Hello? Can you hear me? Yes. My name is Evie Reyes. I'm the goddaughter of the owner.
He's there also. He will have to present the case.
Yes, I know. Thank you. Ms. Reyes, can you spell your name for the stenographer, please?
Evie, I -B -I, last name is Reyes, R -E -Y -E -S.
Were you owner of the property?
Sorry.
Were you owner of the property where he's at?
Yeah, we have to wait a second.
Who's the owner who's presenting?
Ruben, my godfather.
He's the owner.
He's supposed to, I think.
Yes, but what's the name so I can pull him up?
Oh, Ruben, R -U -B -E -N.
Ortega?
Mr. Ortega, you've been promoted to a panelist. You can now present your case,
but first, state your name and address.
Mr. Ortega, are you available to present?
um he's there but he's he's muted he has to unmute himself
hi can you hear me now yes hi how's doing everybody uh good afternoon chair and board
members my name is ruben bilcara mr ortega would you please uh identify yourself with
the record name and address and spell your name okay my name is ruben bilcara i'm the owner property
located in 2275 East, Canberra Street, Philadelphia, 19134.
And Ruben is spelled R -U -B -E -N, last name O -R -T -E -G -A. Thank you.
Please proceed. Thank you for your time, sir.
and and the reason I'm here for to legalize my property to the SUNY code for two unit family
and the property when I was purchased it was in November 19 2004 and it was already
bought I mean when I bought it was already existing and built into family's unit
Did you meet with the community group?
Yes, I did, yes, I did, sir.
I have a approval of 27 people.
Yes, I submitted all those copies to the lady Tanya who was sent by email.
we have any letters in her in the file Tanya
there is a letter in the file it's from Southport Richmond Civic and they support project okay okay
Okay, anyone else to testify on this on this matter.
No one, you can proceed.
Thank you, Tanya.
Questions from the board.
Planning Commission.
Chair member and members of the committee.
We believe that this property is indicated for residential use on the
comprehensive plan.
We feel that this property was built as a single family and feel that it is
overuse of the property according to even recommend the requested variance not be granted
all right what carol what's that calendar number please calendar number 39285 2275 east cambria
all right calendar number 39285 2275 east cambria
my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you
my vote is yes
my vote is yes
my vote is yes
good luck calendar number 39297 2625 jefferson street the attorney is adam laver
Adam do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? Yes, Mrs. Tenere, I do. Good afternoon. You got my memo, dress casual today. I did.
Thank you for that very much. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Adam Laver of
Blank Rome, One Logan Square, behalf of 2625 Jefferson, LLC, and its principal, Kevin Sekel,
owner of the subject property at 2625 -33 Jefferson Street and 1506 North Valley Street.
I am about to share my screen. Here we are. Kevin has appeared before this board before.
He's with us virtually this afternoon. He and his family live in the neighborhood on
master's exhibit package which has been electronically shared with council to
the board as well as the Philadelphia City Planning Commission includes
numerous individual letters of support from near neighbors at tab five in
addition to the full support of the coordinating RCO which is the brewery
town Charleswood Community Civic Association at tab 5a upset of this
hearing I'd like to bring to the board's attention that when we began like two and
a half hours ago approximately 21 near neighbors were with us virtually prepared
to testify in support of the project I understand that several of those
neighbors unfortunately had to move to work obligation some are here some are
no longer with us in addition I'd like to know due to the challenges of the
online platform, several of the neighbors who do not have ready access to
computers are participating collectively around shared computers, meaning that
their individual appearances may not be registered for the formal record. You're
looking here at the screen at the subject property which is a corner lot
currently vacant. I'm showing three images here. The property front on both Jefferson
and Valley Streets. The aerial photographs, which I've brought up to the screen right now,
are also provided at top seven for those of you who have the electronic existence.
The property sits, very interestingly, across from the historic Jefferson State grounds, affectionately known as Athletic Park.
I learned that this park was home to baseballs, the Philadelphia Athletics, from 1871 to 1876, followed by other historic baseball clubs and several African -American historic baseball leagues, which is quite significant.
Today, the development site itself looks out on this park and recreation center and inspired
by the history, Kevin hopes to name the development the diamond, hearkening back to the baseball
diamonds of yesteryear and cementing that history for the future.
The development site itself is approximately 9 ,000 square feet in size.
It's zoned residential multi -family RM1, a high -density zoning classification for residential, with a sliver of RSA5.
You can see here with the cursor I'm showing you this site, and you can see the IRMX and RM1 surrounding.
The green is the park that I mentioned.
The property is located on a block largely dominated by this presence of high -density
and the changing development across the street is the industrial residential mixed use that is in
purple the proposal before you is new construction of a five -story multi
The proposal before you is new construction of a five -story multi -family apartment building
with 25 predominantly two -bedroom apartments, all with private balconies.
And I'd like to point out, which is very important to the case before you and the development
proposal, underground parking.
No parking is required here and the developer is proposing underground parking off of North
Valley away from the historic baseball fields. Why is he doing that? He's doing that because
it's good quality. He's doing that even though it's not required and exposing himself to this
zoning board variance process due to the needs of the community, the interests of the community,
which we'll get into in a moment. In addition to that underground parking for 14 automobiles,
bicycle parking within the site, a residential rooftop deck amenity. So the development proposal
features a single curb cut off of North Valley Street, a beautiful frontage along Jefferson
in with patios, landscaping, and setbacks. And we're proud that the project supports the city's
mixed -income housing fund by putting money into the fund for off -site affordable housing.
With a project of this type, of course, commercial trash pickup from within the property lines
is an important feature. The zoning refusal is shown on your screen. It's in tab nine in your
packages. There is only one zoning refusal, and that zoning refusal is for the proposed height,
eight feet beyond what is permitted. Again, this is supported by the community. The developer has
exposed himself and allowed, in a legal sense, allowed this one variance so as to accommodate
the underground parking to use for that purpose. This is supported by the community due to the
developers investment in ample on -site underground parking. The one refusal we would submit is de
minimis within the scope of the development and receptive to the particular needs of the community.
You will note that the proposed height is below the IRMX height limitation, which takes up much of the block, as previously demonstrated, shown in this photograph.
I will share with the board that much of the block is in the process of development.
PHA workforce development is underway. Low -income housing is underway.
The proposed and existing diversification of unit types is, I would submit, a model for the neighborhood and the city.
This site, as I've mentioned, is market rate, which is next to new PHA workforce, new affordable housing, plus the benefit of the money going into the fund for housing in other sections.
Despite the challenges of the pandemic, Kevin, who lives in the neighborhood, has carefully and respectfully walked door -to -door reviewing the proposal with his neighbors. The results show at Tab 5B in numerous immediate near -neighbor letters of support.
This is a chance to revitalize the property with active development that respects the community, is appropriate for the district, mixes nicely into the shared plan of these various types of housing for the block, which is pockmarked with, at the moment, these open parcels.
The authorization of this single variance in this instance will not alter the character of the neighborhood or district or be detrimental to the public welfare.
I would suggest that the one refusal that we have before you due to the underground parking really meets the scope and spirit of the code as supported by Brewery Town Sharswood, by Senator Street's letter that is in the package and mentions the different types of units,
the affordable and the workforce, along with market rate in the community, the addressing
of underground parking, which you really don't see, unfortunately, yet in this community,
and we hope that others follow. The Grana variants will not substantially increase congestion in the
public streets, danger of fire, otherwise endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare,
et cetera. And I would reserve time if needed.
et cetera. And I would reserve time if needed. Kevin Steckle is here at the
appropriate time to speak. And as I mentioned, I believe that there are still
several supporters only if needed, but they are here. Thank you. Before I open
it up for questions, any questions from the board? No. All right. Why don't we do
this I understand there were a lot more many more folks that are there remain
on the phone now so if you could just give us your name address why don't we
do this first excuse me is there anyone who is waiting to be heard who is a
protesting if there are any protestants raise your hand now and we'll recognize
you first.
Any hands to go up, Tanya?
No, no hands. I just have
promoter Kevin Steckle, so if
he wishes to speak, but other than that,
there's no hands. Okay, so then we'll
go to whoever wishes to be
put their name on the record as
having been here, listening
to this case and being
supportive. We'll ask you to come up
your name and address, and I'll swear
you with. If there are any near neighbors who are still in the virtual room and have not had to
leave to return to work, we'd be grateful if you would make your presence known at this time.
If you're no longer there, we will rest on your many letters that are here in the record.
We have a Eugene. He can unmute himself and speak. Hello, can you hear me? Yes. Yeah, hi. I live in
the 1500 block of North Bailey Street, almost almost right
across the street from the proposed site. Your name?
What is it? Your name and address?
Eugene Nidovich 1501 North Bailey Street. Please spell your
name. Eugene E U G E N E. Last name is Nidovich. That's N as
in Nancy. A Y D as in David. O B as in Victor. I C H.
Thank you.
You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
Please proceed.
So I'm almost right across the street at 1501 North Bailey Street.
I'm for the project.
I think it's a great idea.
I don't think the height is a problem, especially given the fact that it's a corner property.
This developer is one of the only developers in Brewery Town that's adding any parking whatsoever.
So, I mean, I'm for the project. I think it's a good idea. From what I understand, I don't know a single person that's against it. So thank you. Thank you. Appreciate you taking the time to be with us today. Thank you.
we have a Robin Rice you can unmute yourself and speak yes hi my name is
Robin Reese my last name is spelled R I E Miss Reese could you speak up a little
bit hello spell your name for the stenographer my name is Robin Reese R O B
D -I -N, last name Reese, R -I -E -S -S.
I live in the neighborhood.
I live on 27th Street.
Could you give us your address?
1305 North 27th Street.
Thank you.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you.
I support the project.
I think it's a great project for the neighborhood.
Thank you very much.
And we thank you for taking the time to be with us.
Anyone else?
Yes, we have a Michael Connolly. You can unmute yourself and give your testimony.
Hello, my name is Michael Connolly.
And your address, Mr. Connolly?
I own 1523 and 1525 North Bailey Street. I am for the project.
Thank you.
Thank you, sir.
we have a Francis
you can unmute yourself
and give your testimony
can you guys hear me
my name is Francis Megawai
and I live on 1444 North Myrtlewood Street
and I own a part of
1514 North 24th Street
Mr. Megawai
I'm mispronouncing your name
I'm sure please spell your name
M -A -N
G -U -B -A -T
Thank you
Swear and affirm to tell the truth
The whole truth and nothing but the truth
Yes, I swear to tell the truth
I support this project
Over by 30th and Jefferson, where I live, there's definitely a lot of congestion with a lot of like the multifamily that's out there.
Over by 30th and Jefferson
Where I live
There's definitely
So it's nice to see a project that has parking.
And yeah, Mr. Steckel's project on 27th and Thompson, he did a really great job with there and just used just like higher end materials, which make the neighborhood look nicer.
So it'll be nice to see a developer that actually puts in quality product into the neighborhood, unlike a lot of these other developers that kind of just like slap product together.
So definitely in support.
Thank you.
Thank you for spending time with us.
Anyone else?
Evelyn Thomas.
It says it's not allowing her to speak because of her Zoom.
miss thomas lives at 1512 north valley street which is uh yards away from the property
i'm sorry that she's not able to speak okay no problem anyone else
that's all i'll cheer thank you mr steckel would you please state your name and address for the
record kevin steckel would you please state your name and address for the record
kevin you have to unmute yourself okay there we go kevin steckel k -e -b -i -n -s -t -e -c -k -e -l
i live at 1305 north 27th street unit four thank you mr steckel and excuse me just when
mr steckel is swearing firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I do. Thank you. Please proceed. My apologies. Mr. Steckel, have you been with us for the
duration of this virtual hearing? Yes, I have. Have you been able to clearly hear
the testimony that I've offered today? Yes, I have. And would you adopt and affirm it as your
own? Yes, I do. Thank you, Mr. Steckel. Thank you. Does that conclude your testimony? Yes,
Mr. Chairman. All right. Thank you. Anyone else, Tanya? No, Chair, you can proceed. Thank you.
Questions from the board? No. Planning Commission. Chairman and members of the board, this property
is indicated for residential use on the comprehensive plan. While the applicant is
applying a mixed income bonus, we would have liked to have seen on -site mixed income housing,
which is reflective of the community. The applicant has selected to pay into the trust.
part of the problem with the code is that you can do units or pay in so the
applicant was not able to combine options to create what we would have
considered a more ideal project but accordingly we have no objection to the
granting of the variance well thank you very much calendar number 39297 2625
that's two six three three Jefferson Street my vote is yes my vote is yes my
vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
thank you chairman members of the board have a good afternoon thank you you
likewise stay safe
That concludes the 2 o 'clock hearings.
We have one more.
Rachel.
He's on 3 .30.
3 .30?
It was left off the list by mistake, so we'll go to 3 .30.
We'll take a 10 -minute break, stenographer.
All right, 10 minutes.
All right.
Thank you.
Is everyone back?
Is the stenographer back?
Cherise?
Can anyone hear me?
Yes, we hear you.
Maybe give her another minute here.
Yeah, yeah, I'm not in a rush.
I just want to, I don't see her.
hold on I don't see her up
she's still on me all right
hi Rachel how are you
good good
Carol it looks like you're
freezing
I'm sitting under
something will the air condition
out there with confessor look where he is
I know where is
is that a painting in the back of you or he's like in riviera maya or something
i'm in dominican republic even better even better are you it was last year when i went up to that
even better are you it was last year when i went up to that was a screenshot oh my god
that's gorgeous oh so you're really here yeah
yeah because that water hasn't been moving at all
it also hasn't gotten any darker out in hours
Check in
Cherise, court reporter
are you there?
I don't see her
Yes I'm here
I had to unmute myself
Yes I'm here
it looks like that's everyone's here
all right Tom Tom around
is she Jim
confessor to Carol
ready to go
our cameraman ready
we're all ready
all right
Okay. I think she's coming on.
I'm sorry, Chair. If I could just mention,
Charisse, this is, if you could listen for the chair
speak in it, it's a case that we did not have on our list,
so you won't have it, and he'll call it out, so you can record it,
please. Okay. Okay. And then I'll send you,
afterward, I'll send you the other list. Okay. And are we on the 430 list now,
or what are we, what list are we on now?
3 .30.
3 .30.
Okay, 3 .30.
All right, we all ready?
Mm -hmm.
Okay, good afternoon again, everyone.
My name is Frank DiCicco.
I'm the chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
We have a quorum.
I'm officially calling this session to order.
In attendance is our vice chair, Ms. Carol Tenere,
our secretary, Mr. Confessor Plaza,
our board members, Mr. James Snell,
and Mr. Thomas Holloman.
And also our city solicitor, Sharon Saleta, and our board administrator, Ms. Tanya Sumpkin.
Excuse me. While we may have to make a few adjustments along the way, our plan is to call
each case and basically proceed as we would have in a live hearing. We ask that attorneys for
applicants or other interested parties identify themselves for the record when the case you'll
be participating in is called. We will then hear the appellant's presentation, followed
by any presentation by attorneys representing other parties. Interested parties and members
of the public, not represented by counsel, will then be given an opportunity to testify.
We will finally hear the recommendation of the Planning Commission. At the hearing's
conclusion, the board will either vote the matter out immediately or hold it for discussion
in the executive session. Any case held for discussion will be voted on the record at
the scheduled July 28th morning session. A couple of changes related to the virtual
format. First, we will be administering oaths to individuals prior to their testimony rather
than to the room as a whole since we do not have a room. Second, with the benefit of anyone
or participating by phone, we ask that attorneys and witnesses identify themselves prior to speaking
or testify. Third, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that
by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded. We would also ask if you wish to
have a case continued, please raise your hand so that we will identify you and proceed with a
continuance. I think at this point we're ready to go. Ms. Tenere, please call the first case.
Calendar number 381642839 West Blenwood. The attorney is Rachel Pritzker.
If you could also announce the continued case and the withdrawn case, please.
You want those first. Calendar number 39679 -1307 East Moya -Mensing is continued. Calendar number 39303 -3734 North 8th Street is continued. And calendar number 39718 -613 -23 North Front Street is withdrawn.
And those cases will be continued. Ms. Sunkit will provide the date for those continued healings.
I'm going to start again Kyle
Want to start again, Kyle? I'll call the first case up.
I'll call the first case up
Okay calendar number 38164
West Glenwood
The attorney is Rachel Prisker
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy
This is the wrong case
I continued that this morning
This should be 1534 West Tioga
Sorry about that
Yeah it wasn't on the list
by accident
And it's in the chat.
You got a calendar number, is calendar number 39714 -1534, Tioga Street?
And if you're able to access your email, I've sent each board member the exhibit package.
Yeah, and I can share my screen as well.
That's helpful.
Yeah, that would be helpful.
Thank you.
Okay, I will. Once I get my testimony out, and then I'll go through the plans as best I can.
Do I need to be sworn in?
Yes, you do.
Mr. Chairman?
Your name and address again?
Rachel Pritzker, R -A -C -H -A -E -L. Pritzker, P as in Paul, R -I -T -Z -K -E -R. Pritzker Law Group, 1635 Market, Suite 1600, Philadelphia PA, 19103.
and I'm the attorney for the applicant, the owner of 1534 West Tioga, who I have with me here today.
Both Rahat Kamal and Justin John are here as well and will speak at some point, I'm sure.
Thank you. Are you swearing in front of me to tell the truth, all truth and nothing but the truth?
Thank you. Please proceed.
Okay, so before you today is an application for a rehab of an existing structure that was previously a three -family dwelling.
We're just here to extend the variance permitting the same use.
This will involve, in addition to the rear of the third floor, a roof deck, roof deck
access structure.
There's no dimensional variances, as everything from a dimensional perspective is in conformity
with the code.
And as you can see from your packet, if you were able to get that, it sits alongside many
other RSA 5 properties that have gotten variances or were previously zoned RM1.
1532 West Tioga, 1520, 1540, 1518, 1504, 1501, and 3446 North 16th are all multifamily and single
family lots. This project went in front of the Tioga United. So I'm going to share my screen.
um okay
share you can see
use all application down tax balance deed
so here's the property on west tioga it's this fourth lot
aerial view of it. It's this existing structure right here across from apartments.
Again, it's this property here. This is the front of the property. So again,
it's an existing structure and you'll be able to see from the plans and the renderings that
we're keeping most of the existing structure. We're going to be rehabilitating the front
to make it a little bit more in conformity with the neighboring properties. And then again,
the rear addition, and there's a vacant lot next door. This just shows the zoning posters that
were posted on the property. This is applicable zoning sections. Again, the refusals just pertain
to use, I believe, just for single family to multifamily. We met with a nice town
Teoga improvement team. We had a unanimous consent in support of the project. They were
excited for the more affordable housing price point of this project with the multifamily and
understood that it's similar in character with the existing structures on that block.
There was 100 mailers that went out. We had a pretty good showing. We also have a significant
number of letters of support from near neighbors as well that we submitted.
I'm going too fast, I can slow down, but I think you get the gist.
And I'll just go through the plans really quick.
so this is the site plan just shows the existing lot with the elevations again 38 feet in height
a rear addition and three units. And I believe we had a rendering done as well as the community
wanted us to show where the trash area was going to be. So as you can see, we're just going to be
um refinishing the outside just a little bit more brick facade more updated look um and sort of a
open porch area so that we can have room for enclosed trash which was important
for the neighbors um i'm just going to go back through
this is like really slow okay just going to go back through the refusal to make sure i didn't
miss anything yet just uh it was previously approved three dwelling units um and so we're
just asking that the board um reaffirm a variance granted in 1963 for three family unit as
obviously there's been some vacancy in the meantime um and just to improve this existing
structure to provide more affordable housing for this neighborhood i'm happy to answer any
questions that you may have or go back to any of the exhibits if i went too fast
i want to ask your clients if they adopt your testimony yeah justin and rahat um do you adopt
my adopt my testimony as your own and is it accurate let's get their names and addresses
on the record please yes sir this is justin uh first name's justin j -u -s -t -i -n last name's john
j -o -h -n um i live at 1330 north 31st street uh philadelphia pa 19121 you swear in the
firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Next person.
This is Rahat Kamal, R -A -H -A -T -K -A -M -A -L.
I reside at 2039 North College Avenue, Philadelphia, PA.
And do you swear and firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you.
And Rahat and Justin, have you heard my testimony and do you accept it as your own?
Thank you.
yes thank you tanya do we have any uh whitney any participants
um at this time no one has their hand up chair
okay thank you any questions from the board
planning commission
how many members of the board this property is indicated for residential
use on the comprehensive plan we have no objection
Thank you. Calendar number 39714, 1534 West Tioga Street. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
My vote is yes.
Thank you.
Good luck.
Thank you.
Good luck.
That's all we have, Chair.
that's it yes that's it right sure now no other hearings right sherry that's right until tomorrow
all right nine o 'clock tomorrow is it nine o 'clock tanya oh no we're gonna have our meeting at nine
and then we'll log in here at 9 30 but we'll have our meeting at nine that's what i meant to say
yes i'll send you all the link thank you all thank you good night all thank you see you tomorrow
Good night.
Good night.
Good night.
Good night.