Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chairman.
Rashid.
Thank you. Mr. Voloshin, have you been present for the entirety of my presentation before the
board this morning?
I have.
And were you able to fully hear it and see the exhibits that were offered on the screen?
Yes, sir.
Would you adopt and affirm the testimony that I've offered as your own?
yes i would thank you thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no mr no mr chairman
mr labor one one question just north there is there a train station
uh i believe that there is it's uh very transit oriented and in addition you have bus lines as
well right okay thank you mr chairman it's across the street right that's right yeah i thought so
So, questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Kiana Shedrick.
Yes, good morning.
Hi, could you state your name and spell it for the court reporter?
Yes, my name is Kiana, Q-I-A-N-A, last name Shedrick, S-H-E-D-R-I-C-K,
and I'm the president of Upper North Neighbors Association, RCO.
All right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed. Thank you for this time this morning. I am calling in to say that we did submit our own independent letter to not support the project.
Proceed.
Thank you for this time this morning.
I am flabbergasted to hear and see our name listed as a supporter of the project when we were not notified of the meeting by the coordinating RCO at all, not in writing or not verbally.
We happened to hear about the meeting from a nearby neighbor, so we did show up and attend.
However, on the day of the actual meeting, and I'm shocked to see all of this in writing, there was no vote taken at the meeting.
Tiova United RCO was not even present, so for them to be listed is absolutely farce.
And we had further questions. In fact, at the end of the meeting, we spoke to Ms. Regina Smith, who leads the Allegheny West RCO. She confirmed with us that there would be more dates, that there were community concerns yet to be addressed. There wasn't even any community in the room.
They had the meeting at New Cortland where there are elderly residents.
They were the only people present in the room, but there was no community at this meeting outside of the residents of New Cortland.
We certainly did not take a vote in support of or not to support.
There was no vote taken.
And so I just wanted all of these things to be duly noted for the record.
And if you would graciously look at the record we submitted independently or I could read it into the record,
I would like that to be done because there were several things that are not being mentioned.
And I also spoke to the owner myself at length after the meeting, and he stated that he was looking forward to the next meeting so that we could fine tune some of the things that were presented.
So I must say openly and for the record, this presentation that all RCOs were in agreement, we certainly were not.
And one RCO wasn't even present.
So that just needs to be stated for the record.
Thank you.
Thank you very much for calling in.
Are there any other comments or statements from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have a caller, calling user with the last four ending in 3552.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court reporter?
follow you're unmuted you're free to speak
adrian is that you hi could you state your name i'm sorry this is tanya chair i apologize
adrian fernandez is that you at three five five two
she's unmuted but there's no information coming through that line okay thank you
if you wish to move on chair we're going to move on is there anyone else in the virtual audience
i see no i'm sorry what i see no other hands chair thank you um mr labor i understand that
we're working with l and i and you on comments relative to the commercial and retail so we're
going to go to the planning commission and then we're going to hold our vote until that's done
So, Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Board members, the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map amendment here from I-1 limited industrial to IRMX, industrial residential mixed use.
The intent of that zoning recommendation is to facilitate this type of adaptive reuse of existing industrial buildings for residential use.
This proposed variance is therefore consistent with the comprehensive plan and represents a reasonable reuse of an existing structure for housing.
City Planning Commission recommends that the board grant this variance.
Thank you. Mr. Laver, we're going to hold our vote. Do you have a comment?
Yeah, a very, very brief comment, if I may, for the record.
Out of respect for all neighbors, I'd just like to address the last RCO comment.
It seems to be more of an issue, perhaps, between RCOs.
The developer will continue to meet with all parties who are interested after, with the
hope that this is approved, that the communications will remain ongoing at all times.
And I just wanted to say that out of respect for everyone.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
And we'll be in touch, okay?
Thank you.
Have a good day.
MI 2022-000-931-321-3201, Ryan Avenue, Mr. Sklaroff.
Mr. Sklaroff.
Mr. Sherry.
Mr. Sheridan, this is Hillary.
Just going back to the last case for a minute,
I just, Allegheny Avenue wanted to note
that the record is closed
except for the input from L&I
regarding the commercial and retail use of the property.
But also there was testimony regarding a letter
from another RCO that had been submitted.
I have not seen that letter.
Um, so I don't know if it, how, how it was submitted, but I fully if, if Mr. Labor is amenable to this, we can have the record open for that letter to make sure that it is part of the record as well.
Sure. Thank you, Mr. Labor.
Okay. So noted.
All right. Thank you.
Mr. Sklaroff.
good morning mr chairman members of the board may i share my screen could you spell your name
for the court reporter certainly s-k-l-a-r-o-f-f first name neil n-a-i-l with law firm of dilworth
Paxson, 1500 Market Street, Suite 3500E, 19102. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I certainly do. Could you identify your client
before we start? I'm pleased to represent the School District of Philadelphia this morning.
Our Vice Chair has a few questions. Carol Tenere. Good morning, Mr. Spiroff. Do you
agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? Yes, I do. Have you
emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral,
photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with
the RCO, and do you have a letter? I have submitted exhibits five days in advance.
We have communicated with the RCO a number of times.
In a phone call to me from the, I believe, the chair of the Mayfair Civic Association yesterday, they said they would send a letter of support.
There's a larger context to this, which I'd like to get into, especially if you haven't
received the letter, because I have not received it.
Okay, you may proceed and begin to share your screen.
Thank you.
And why can't I find, there we go.
well let's see why we can't get it full size there you go um this uh project is a minor portion
of the redevelopment of the abraham lincoln high school property at 3201 bryant street
As you will see from this cover page, the project was originally very large, including the high school, K-8 elementary school, new ball fields, and renovation of existing ball fields.
This came to the Zoning Board for approval in 2019 and resulted in a community benefits agreement.
A little of that is the subject for today.
We have a list of exhibits and I'll quickly go through some of these because I want to isolate for you what the subject of this application is.
Exhibit one is our tax clearance.
We've also submitted to your solicitor a subsequent tax clearance, which was not available when we had this.
This is a subject of a continuance, and this was valid on the day the Zoning Board heard our request for continuance.
And your solicitor suggested that we supplement this with a new one.
Exhibit 2 is a deed of subdivision.
This was originally a larger parcel, and we'll quickly go through that.
That was the larger parcel that you're seeing there.
The school district received a zoning permit to be able to lawfully subdivide the project.
lawfully subdivide the project. Our Exhibit 3 is our posting of the initial zoning notice,
Our Exhibit 3.
which was posted at the property along with the notice of refusal. We have photographs of the
posting as well as photographs of a key plan and photographs of the surrounding neighborhood.
When this was continued until today, we made a subsequent posting. There is a copy of the poster showing today's date and the method of joining this.
Again, we have photographs of that second posting with the notice of refusal.
This is Exhibit 5, and I think the most important, and we'll synthesize what our argument is today.
This is the track toward Roland Avenue, I believe, and you'll notice there is depicted here a small building.
This was a utility building, which the district has decided to remove.
And in place of that, they need to put up a new fence. The fence is 10 feet in height, runs about 100 feet. In the community benefits agreement that was the result of the overall application, the fence must be clad in vinyl, in black vinyl.
And so you see in this photograph, and in this photograph, the vinyl fencing. However, the fencing is six feet, 10 feet in height. And the notice of refusal points out that we can only have four feet in height, in accordance with the zoning district.
However, that's not practical for making it safe.
While this project was going on, we discovered that situation and we haggled with the L&I
and we got a temporary zoning permit to allow us to put the 10-foot fence in.
It was temporary.
we were to have gotten a regular zoning permit
by the end of 2021, we didn't do that.
And so we made an application for appeal
in order to rectify that situation.
You granted us a non-protunk application.
When the temporary permit was issued,
we did get a letter of non-opposition
from the Mayfair Civic Association.
When we made this application,
we sent our letter to the Mayfair Civic Association
asking for information so that we could notify the public.
What we have here is a number of our communications
with Mayfair, which covered a period of time from when we sent that letter out
until now. We communicated with Stan Wyszynski, a staff member in the former councilman's
office, and asked him to intercede. And I did receive a phone call yesterday from Mr.
Stevenson, I believe, who is the chair of, if not the zoning committee of the Mayfair Civic
Association, confirming to me that they were in support and that they had not understood
the nature of the application. As you can see, the application is very minor. It's in the interior of
the facility of the campus and is there to protect the property and the children from intruders.
And so we asked for a variance, approval of the variance, to allow us to legalize the 10-foot fence, which has been put in the place of the utility building that was removed.
And all of this I'm scrolling through is all the email exchanges.
We don't fault Mayfair, as Stan has told us.
These are an organization made up of volunteers, and we understand their efforts, but the community has been well informed.
and we understand their efforts, but the community has been well-informed when this was originally,
when the whole project, which originally was presented to the community, presented to the
board in 2019, and had the support of the community at that time, and resulted in a CBA,
which requires us to put up the kind of fence that we have, although it did not specify 10 feet.
I'd be pleased to answer any questions and are relying on Section 14304-14F of the zoning code, allowing my comments to be used as to be accepted for the purposes of creating findings of fact if there's no objection from any party.
Thank you, Mr. Sklaroff. Are there questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
no mr chairman questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission thank you chair bergman ian hegarty for the philadelphia
city planning commission members of the board the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa
one single family zoning at this location however this proposed fence uh serves an important support
function related to the long-established educational use on this property and it's
consistent with the purpose and spirit of the zoning code. City Planning Commission recommends
that the board grant the variance. Thank you. MI 2022-00931-3201 Ryan Avenue, I vote yes.
Carol Tenere, my vote is yes. Thomas Tallman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
my vote is yes thank you Mr. Sklaroff thank you Mr. Chairman members of the board
thank you the next case will be seven and eight together MI 2021 004654 4445 Chestnut Street
and MI 2021 004653 4443 Chestnut Street Alan Ocklinson letter of non-opposition from Spruce
Health Community Association. Good morning again, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Alan
Nockamson, A-L-A-N, last name Nockamson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N, 123 South Broad Street,
Suite 1600, Philadelphia PA, 19109. Mr. Nockamson, you've already been sworn. Could you identify
your client and the relationship to the property? Yes. My client is KMR-1 LLC. And I have the
corporate representative here, Sudhakar Goverdaman. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Yes. I can't believe I just muted myself. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and
stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax
compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in
advance of this hearing? And have you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter? Yes, in all
respects, and we have a letter of support for both zoning matters. Okay, great. You may proceed
and please share your screen.
Good morning again.
Alan Nockmson of Nockmson PC.
I'm here to present 443 and 445 Chestnut Street.
Both properties are currently five residential units
on the second to fourth floors
and commercial unit each on the ground floor,
as you can see from this picture.
The purpose of these appeals is to merely convert the commercial space into residential, a residential unit, which will be a one-bedroom, one-bath.
In our presentation materials, we go over the notices of refusal.