Thank you.
CHAIR, I'M JUST WAITING FOR PEOPLE TO COME ON IN.
TAKE YOUR TIME.
IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE 52 ATTENDEES.
YOU CAN PROCEED AS YOU WISH.
THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE.
MY NAME IS BILL BERGMAN, AND I WILL BE SHARING THE HEARING THIS MORNING.
WITH ME IS OUR VICE CHAIR, ISMAEL SHAHEED.
Present, Mr. Chairman
Our board member, Thomas Holliman
Present, Mr. Chairman
And our board member, James Snell, who will be joining us a little later
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our attorney
And our executive director, Tanya Sunkett
Here's our virtual format
Be advised, proceedings are being recorded
The video will be available by contacting Tanya Sunkett at phil .gov
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter a period of statement, call 267 -270 -5548.
Leave your email and the address to the property in question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony. All comments should be directed to our executive director, Tanya Sumkin. Let's look at our schedule this morning.
Number one, MI 2023, 000404, 617 South 7th Street. That case is continued.
Number six, MI 2023 -002 -366 -2251 South 23rd Street. That case is continued.
number eight mi 2022 006 737 619 north 39th street there's a request from council member
gauthier for a continuance is jeffrey young in the audience
good morning chair this is yvette benton i'll be your co -host today i see no hands at this time
Thank you. So MI -2022 -006 -737 -619 -North -39th Street. That case is continued. Mark must be tried.
Number 10, MI 2023, 000487, 2351 South Bonsall Street.
Haeyoung Bak is the attorney for the tenant.
The tenant is Haeyoung Bak in the audience.
here i see no one by that name we have a david chandler with their hand up
let's let's see if he has anything to do with this case yes he he does he would he would be the
attorney for this case okay thank you david chandler has been unmuted and allowed to speak
Good morning, Mr. Chandler. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the attorney?
Oh, sure. My name is David Chandler, C -H -A -N -D -L -E -R, and I'm the – Helen Beck and I are the attorneys for the applicant, which is on –
All right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Chandler?
Yeah. Hello? Yeah.
Yeah. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
OK, so we understand you don't do it earlier today that we did not have a signed copy of a lease.
Well, what I did, the I we did get a signed copy and I emailed it to both the Ms. Emerson and the ZBA emails around.
It was around 920 a .m. So we did.
um so so then okay we're not going to continue that we'll come back and look at that once we
have the signed lease okay so that we will be calling this case a little later okay okay
a little later okay okay and mr chair i can confirm that i i did receive the email with
and mr chair i can confirm that i i did
the signed lease that's great thank you we'll call you back in a little bit sir okay okay
thank you very much thank you sure number 14 mi 2023 000 463 38 57 poplar street
uh michelle murray enlisted owner nikya yarborough this is a request from continuance
from council member gathier we have no exhibits on this case and also the last hearing no one
appeared michelle murray or nikya yarborough
i see no hands at this time chair so mi2023 000 463 3857 popper street
um there is no exhibits this is the second listing no one appeared the first time i vote to dismiss
thomas holloman to dismiss ishmael shaheed my vote is to dismiss thank you number 16
mi 2023 000 477 6207 catherine street brandy fulton is the owner pro se this is a request
from Continuance, a request from Council Member Gauthier. This is a second listen. No exhibits
and no one appeared the first time.
I see no answer this time, Chair. Thank you. So MI 2023, 000 -477 -6207, Catherine Street.
We have no exhibits. This is the second listing. No one appeared the first time. I vote to dismiss.
Thomas Holloman, I vote to dismiss.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is to dismiss.
Thank you. Are there any other requests for continuances?
chair we have vern anastasio with his hand up he's been unmuted and allowed to speak
good morning mr chair could you state your name please vern for the record and spelled please
yes sir it's vern anastasio v -e -r -n last name a -n -a -s -t -a -s -i -o do you swear a firm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do what case 2005 south fourth street
i what um i would like to uh withdraw the case as a matter of fact
thank you let's see here that's number two mr chair on the list thank you
be right with you take your time
Okay. MI 2022, 0003972005 South 4 Street. This case has been withdrawn.
Thank you, sir. Thank you for calling in. We appreciate it. Yep. Any other requests for continuances?
Sir, we have Alan Nockamson. They have been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Good morning, Mr. Nockamson. Just for the record, could you state your name, please,
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
What case, Mr. Nockmson?
1725 Bainbridge Street.
That's your request for withdrawal?
That's right.
I just never heard on the record that the case I didn't get to the withdrawals yet but but thank
you and and I'm going to do it right now thank you sir thank you MI 2022 006 715 1725 Bayman Street
that case is with withdrawal one any other requests for continuances
here we have Kyle Levin they have been unmuted and allowed to speak
good morning could you state your name please could you spell for the court stenographer
my name is kyle levin k -y -l -e -l -e -v -i -n i am a associate of mr confirm do you swear or firm
to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes i what case do you want to talk about
Yes. What case do you want to talk about?
951 Jackson Street.
Mr. Chair, that's number 15 on the list.
Okay. Thank you.
Okay. What's your name again, sir?
Kyle Levin.
Are you the owner?
I'm associate with the office of Mr. Joseph Consul of Consul Madison.
Okay. All right.
And this case is, let's see here.
We have no exhibits. This is the second listing. Am I right?
Yes. Joseph was only retained last night and the applicant was attempting to navigate everything himself,
but has not done any of the required compliances and did not put his best foot forward at the RCO meeting.
So we're asking for a continuance to jump in and do everything right.
Thank you.
Number 15, MI 2023, 000401951 Jackson Street.
This case is continued.
Mark must be tried.
Any other requests for continuances?
I see no further hands at this time, Chair.
um number seven mi 2023 zero zero two three seven seven twenty six fifty five
south hutcherson street ming sung young is the listed owner we have no exhibits this is the first
listing chair we have a sam zoo with their hand up they have been unmuted and allowed
I could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer.
Good morning, sir.
State your name and spell for the court stenographer, please.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sao Sen Xu, S -H -A -O -X -I -A -N -X -U.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
So this case, we do not have any exhibits.
Are you the owner of the property?
No, I am the applicant.
You're the applicant of the property.
Mr. Zhu, as I explained to you in an email, I know you submitted the application, but only the property owner, because they are the ones that are really seeking the variance, they need to be requesting the continuance.
They did try, but they are computer challenged, and they asked me to request the continuance.
okay i mean we because we didn't receive exhibits and this is the first listing we can continue it
but continuances need to be requested by them and they are the ones that are going to need
to present the case to the board if they cannot do that they will need to hire an attorney
i'm sorry i could hardly hear you can you repeat that please
i'm sorry hillary this is tanya um can you just ask them to have the person just
send us the letter and that would be totally fine
say that again please sorry send a letter of the continuance okay by the owner okay okay i will
yes thank you kindly i'm sorry hillary thank you so kindly am i that is fine
MI 2023 -002 -377 -2655 South Hutchison Street. This case is continued. Mark must be tried.
And number 11.
MI 2022 -007 -453 -301 -23 Spring Garden Street. Darwin Beauvais is the attorney. No exhibit second listing.
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
So MI 2022 -007 -453 -301 -23 Spring Garden Street.
This case is continued.
Mark must be tried.
Want to go to our add -ons?
and so number one mi 2023 003 765 1625 north 18th street this case
765 -1625 -North 18th Street.
This case will be voted on at the end of the morning session.
Number two, MI 2023 -002 -113 -301 East West Moreland Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
No sit -down restaurant, no sale of hot foods.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Number three, MI 2023, 000460, 1515 Morris Street.
I vote yes with proviso.
Revised plans, one page, stamped by ZBA on November 1, 2023.
Thomas Holloman.
I'm sorry, I'm sorry, Mr. Trey.
That should be November 8, 2023 on the proviso, just to clarify.
On November 8, 2023.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with proviso.
Yeah, we're going to go to our first list of the hearing, the first case on the regular list. MI 2023 -002 -360 -742 Climber Street. Michael Peterson is the owner applicant. It's pro se. Letter of non -opposition from Bella Vista Neighbors and letter of non -opposition from Council Member Squill.
chair michael peterson is coming back in as a panelist now
mr peterson
mr chair this is uh mike peterson good could you spell your name please for the court sonographer
mike peterson p -e -t -e -r -s -o -n right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth. I do. Okay. So this application is for the erection of two roof decks
above the existing attached structure for use as a single family household living. Size and
location is shown in the plans. The minimum front setback for the proposed roof deck
from the St. Albans frontage is required to be five feet, whereas no setback as proposed.
our vice chair has just a few questions for you sir okay yes mr chair okay
good morning counsel do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy i do have you emailed in all the required documents that are needed to proceed with this
case five days in advance of this hearing yes mr vice chair thank you please proceed share your
screen mr chair able to see my screen yeah we are we're we're fine yep all right wonderful uh sir
this is what mr chair this is what i'd like to be talking about today uh and it sounds like you're
able to hear me just fine this table of contents uh we'll move forward uh as far as the refusal
goes, here is a copy of the refusal. As stated previously, the minimum front setback for the
proposed roof deck from the St. Albans frontage, the required is five feet. We propose zero in our
current plans. So as far as that goes, yeah, we're essentially requesting a five -foot set
or a waive the five -foot setback requirement for the second floor roof deck structure.
So I'd like to present my main testimony. This is the relevant portions of the plans that I'd
like to talk about today. As far as the description of the house goes, what you're looking at is the
south elevation. Currently, the way the house is constructed, it's a three -four row home. The
first and second floors have a rear setback of approximately seven foot five inches. That's to
accommodate a kitchen and a bathroom. On top of that, there is no setback, and then you have the
original, I'm sorry, there is no bump out and that's the original structure of the house. What
we propose is that we'd like a door on the third floor that leads out to an auxiliary structure on
the second floor that simply accommodates a staircase that leads to the main structure which
is on the third floor. As designed, we are unable to accommodate a five -foot setback from the St.
Albans frontage simply due to the design plan. What I'd like to note here is if you look at
At the east elevation, you can see the rear property line is six foot four inches set
four inches set back from the front edge of the house. And then this is a description of that
back from the front end.
six foot four inch patio, ground level patio, and then that's what the second floor roof deck looks
like. Again I'd like to highlight that this is simply an auxiliary structure that's built to
accommodate access to the primary structure on the third floor. This is the meat and potatoes of our
request for the variance. Essentially, in our design, there's a hardship and overcoming it
would be very, very difficult. Right now, the hardship is that our property is sandwiched
between Climber Street and St. Albans Street. I'd like to say a majority of homes in Philadelphia,
the rear of the property abuts to an adjacent home, and that setback is normally not required
for the rear of the house. In our case, it is required by a city and because we do open up to
St. Albans Street. I'd also like to indicate, again, highlighting that there's a six -foot,
four -inch ground level patio that separates the rear facade from the street, which helps to
mitigate the problems of potentially dropping debris from a roof deck onto pedestrians below.
So the structure does not affect air and light to adjacent properties.
And lastly, the design is very similar to four of the roof decks on the even side of Climber 700 Climber Street.
And then our design is very consistent with the neighborhood as well.
This is a picture of the exterior of the house.
Please notice the patio, the first and second story bump out.
And then on top of the bump out where the second floor structure would be.
And then this is a bird's eye view of the property.
farmer street to the north st alvin street to the south um although not relevant um this is
a zoning board so i indicated that rsa 5 is our current zoning requirement
um mr chair i'd like to present you the complete plans so i've indicated the relevant portions of
the plans but if there's any portion of the next two pages that you would like me to zoom in on or
scan more completely, please let me know.
Yeah. Why don't you talk about when, did you go to the Bella Vista Neighbors Association?
Yeah, absolutely.
Why don't you talk about that and how did the vote go?
Okay, yeah. So we voted, it was unanimous support from the neighborhood,
including seven neighbors and one non -relevant neighbor.
And then the board voted five non -opposition unanimously.
And you also have a letter from the council member?
This is the letter from the RCO board, Mr. Chair.
But you have another letter from council member Squill, right?
I'm not sure that I do.
So we have a copy of a letter that's, am I correct, Hillary?
There's a letter of non -opposition of the council member Squill.
Yes, Mr. Chair.
We do have a letter, Mr. Peterson, that the council member is non -opposition.
All right.
Would you like me to continue, Mr. Chair?
sure go ahead okay um this is so the rest of this is all documents that you already have in hand so
i'll go ahead and scroll through them please let me know if there's anything you're looking to stop
on this is the application for appeal presented by the applicant mr david posterneck who is my
builder he's on um the call if you would like to talk to him this is the project information form
downloaded from the city of philadelphia website this is the deed of the house the house was
purchased in 2013 from Mr. Gregory Ferrara. This is the tax clearance. It's good through December
2nd, 2023. This is the RCN notification that I made. This is the proof that I sent out that
notification and these are the relevant neighbors that I sent the notification to. Here are some
zoning notice photos. This is the front of the house. This is the rear house. Please note that
I did post it both in the front and rear of the house since we opened up to Climber Street and
St. Almond Street. Mr. Chair,
this concludes my testimony, notwithstanding
any questions from the board.
So, questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our
Attorney Hillary Ramson?
Not at this time, Mr.
Chair. Questions or comments
from the virtual audience?
I see no hands,
Chair. Planning Commission?
this is uh ron bednar city planning first name ron r -o -n last name bednar b -e -d -n -a -r
you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
please proceed uh the property is indicated for residential use on a city plan given the
physical circumstances of the site we recommend the request for a variance be granted thank you
mi 2023 002 360 742 climber street i vote yes thomas holloman my vote is yes
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Mr. Peterson, you have your votes. Thank you.
How do I do, Mr. Chair?
You have your votes. You have your votes.
All right. Thank you very much.
All right. Thank you.
All right.
Number, we're going to go to number 13.
MI -2022 -007 -248 -2241
Montrose Street. Sarah Marino and Sean Levin
are the owners.
There's a letter of support from the South of South
Neighborhood Association.
I'd love to come back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Hello.
Good morning, sir. How are you?
Hey, good. Thank you. How are you?
Can you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Shaw Levin, S -H -A -W -L -E -V -I -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
This application is for the erection of an addition above an existing two -story portion for continued use as a single -family household living.
Size and location is shown in plan.
One zoning refusal.
If abutting lots of both sides of an attached building contain only two stories of an enclosed area, the stories above the second of the attached shall be set back an additional eight feet from the minimum distance between the front facades and the front lot, whereas no setback is proposed.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
you. Can you hear me, sir? Unmute. You're muted. You're good. Proceed.
Was that a question for me? Yes, sir. Oh, I'm sorry. Yes.
Have you emailed in all the required documents that is needed to proceed with this case?
Yes. Thank you. Please proceed.
okay i can present now yes okay all right great thank you uh let me just share
okay and you see the document that i'm presenting yep we do okay great um so as was mentioned uh
we have a refusal because of the uh design that we have proposed doesn't account for the eight
foot variance setback. So we would like a variance to not have the setback. The reason is if I go over
to one of these other docks, let me make sure I find the right one. Yeah, so we want to add a third
floor right here. But the way that the house is designed right now, the third, the second floor
doesn't go all the way to the back of the house. So, if we were to have a setback in addition to
the shortened length of the second floor, there wouldn't actually be enough space to add on
the extra floor. So, we're hoping to get that variance approved. We presented over at the
Sassana board meeting, got a couple questions from residents, but had a lot of our neighbors
show up and show support uh so thank you to them and then uh they approved it um and
we have our architect on the phone with us as well but i think that's that's most of the
information that i thought would be relevant but i'm happy to answer any questions or bring
up any other documents um i also have the the ownership and the tax records um and the agreement
of sale uh available if anyone wants to see any of that um over some of these photos where you're
you're trying to show that other places have third floor without a setback right why don't you just
oh yes yeah thank you thank you there's a number of other uh houses on our block not exactly our
near neighbors but you can see uh two houses down on the the right and then three uh houses
to the left are a series of third floor buildings, and they all have the third floor
without the setbacks. And then farther down... The white one that's like one down from your
look like one down from your house does the second floor only go partially back with that one too
house, does the second floor only go partially back?
uh you're talking about this picture the white house with the black top yeah yeah that one goes
the full length so they they completely tore down and redid that house okay thank you
all right questions from the board no mr chairman no chair questions or comments from our attorney
hillary emerson not at this time mr chair why should your comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time share my planning commission
so run bednar city planning the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the residential
single -family zoning at this location uh we believe that the lot uh size 750 feet and the
The required front setback of the proposed third floor would render the third floor unusable.
This presents a clear hardship for the applicant to continue to derive value from the property.
And so the Planning Commission has no objection to the granting of the dimensional variance.
MI 2022 -007 -248 -2441 Montrose Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman my vote is yes Ishmael Shahi my vote is yes thank you sir you have your votes
oh thank you all very much appreciate it thank you we're going to go to number 18
MI 2023 002 156 2120 pine street elena laskins and jane
Walt Coxon are the owners pro se. There is a letter of non -opposition from the Center City
Residents Association. This application is for a four -floor addition to an existing single -family
structure. Size and location is shown in plans. The maximum allowable building height in the
The RM1 zoning district is 38 feet, whereas a building height of 48 feet, two inches is proposed.
Do we see the honors?
Hello, Mr. Chairman. Can you hear me?
Hi. Good morning. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court's sonographer?
Elena Laskin, E -L -E -N -A -L -A -S -K -I -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you put your video on, please?
Yes, I see that I do not have my video on.
That's okay.
That's all right.
Thank you.
There we go.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, okay?
Good morning, ma 'am.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, sir.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
and before you start i should also mention that center city resident association and non -opposition
out you also have four emails of support from your neighbors and the project has received
approval from the historical commission that's right you can start now please thank you thank
you sir um so i'm here to talk about 2120 pine street which is my primary residence
I have here my notice of refusal. We're zoned RM1 with a maximum height of 38 feet. We are
seeking to add a four -story to our existing three -story property of a post -building height
of 48 feet, two inches, and we received a refusal based on height. So just for some context,
we have some pictures here. We are this three -story building between these two four -story properties.
and for further context it's kind of hard to see because of the trees I have some aerial photos
that make it a little bit clearer we're this three -story property with the red arrow in this
row of four -story properties we also have a picture of directly across the street from us
these properties are also all four stories and the reason we are pursuing this addition
is because our house has a lack of natural light, which creates a hardship.
As you can see from the ZBA map here in the corner,
our building is connected on three sides to three other buildings,
which means that we do not have sufficient natural light in our property.
And you can see it from this picture in the left -hand corner.
We are fully connected to this property on the right.
Other than this small side yard, we are connected to this property right here on the left.
Other than this small side yard, we are connected to this property right here on the left.
And we have no backyard.
We are connected to this property here to the south.
And so what we're seeking to do is to build a four -story addition to come up to the level
of the properties around us and to be able to capture natural light both by raising our
property to meet the other properties, as well as to utilize the existing setbacks for
windows.
And while I have this picture, just so you have a visualization of what we're looking to do,
right here, this uncovered area of the deck, we are seeking to preserve a deck,
and then replace the pilot house and the existing pergola with a fourth story.
Here are some pictures of our zoning posters and our drawings. So everything in this drawing
that's shaded is existing deck. And like I said, we're looking to work in the existing footprint
of the deck, maintaining the deck in the front and adding an addition to the back where there's
currently a pergola and a pilot house, while maintaining all of the existing setbacks from
the other properties. Another drawing, here's our existing third story wall. We would just extend
to four stories. We've taken efforts to reduce our massing, such as including this pitched roof here,
and it's such that you can see from this little guy here that someone walking down the Pine
Street would experience the same thing as they have today. It would appear as a three -story
building, so we've just made efforts to make ourselves as discreet as possible.
As you can see from this drawing we're planning on using, over here on the right, you can see
we're planning on using this addition as living space, and we've added as many windows and light
areas as possible to remedy our issue of not having sufficient natural light in this home.
So as you can see over here, we're trying to get as many windows as possible. Just the rest of the
drawings. As you indicated, we did go in front of the CCRA at the end of August. Here's our
non -opposition letter. We've not received any opposition from any neighbors, and anyone who
spoke spoke in favor of our proposal. As you further mentioned, we also have approval from
the Historic Commission. We met with them in mid -May, and they reviewed and signed off on the
plans that we've presented to you. Letters of support. Application for appeal in the project
information form. Evidence of mailing to 104 neighbors. Our tax clearance certificate. Copy
of our deed. And a bonus picture from the inside of the pilot house showing where we would open up
to a four -story. And with that, I thank you and I'll take any questions. Questions from the board.
no mr chairman no chair why should your comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair why should your comments from the virtual audience
i see the heads chair planning commission uh ron bednar city planning the property
is indicated for residential use on the city plan given the physical circumstances of the
site. We recommend their question. Thank you. MI 2023, 002156, 2120 Pine Street. I vote yes with
proviso. Revised plans, two pages, stamped by ZBA, November 8, 2023. Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes
with proviso. Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso. You have your votes. Thank you.
thank you all right so now we're going to go to let's see here one two three
number four mi 2022 006 742 725 bybury road david orphanetes is the attorney
letter of support from the Somerton Civic Association.
Chair, David Orphanides is coming back in as a panelist now.
Good morning, Mr. Orphanides.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Certainly. My name is David Orphanides, O -R -P -H -A -N -I -D.
Certainly. My name is David Orphanides, O -R -P -H -A -N -I -D -E -S.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, a relationship to this property?
Certainly. My client is the Lubavitch Center for Russian Jewry, and they are the owner of the subject property.
Our vice chair has just a few questions for you, sir.
good morning counselor do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy i do have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required
to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing it did thank you please proceed
and share your screen i certainly will thank you uh can you see my screen yet not not yet uh mr
Mr. Chair, I just want to note that board member Snell has joined us.
Good morning, Jim.
Good morning.
I was just waiting for my time to chime in there.
Yes, I'm here.
Welcome, Snells.
Welcome.
All right.
Can you see my screen now?
We can, yes.
Great.
Fantastic.
Again, my name is David Orphanides.
I'm with the law firm of Orphanides & Toner here in Philadelphia.
And once again, I'm representing the owner of the property, 725 Byberry Road, and that's the Lubavitch Center for Russian Jewelry.
What you see up here on the screen right now is a photograph that I took from Byberry Road that shows the existing structure at the subject property, which is to the right where the arrow is.
the structure that exists there is composed of two buildings, an older building that has been
very nicely maintained through the years, definitely since my clients purchased the
property, acquired the property in 2013. And then in the area where the arrow is, there's a newer
addition that wraps around the back or the north side of the existing structure. The Byberry Road
runs to the south of the property. In this photograph, you can see a banner that's up on
the wall, and that is the area of the sign that we're looking to have a variance granted for in
this case. It's only a sign application. There's no proposed change to the height or area of the
existing building, no change to the parking that exists. As you can see, there's an existing parking
lot um to the west to the left or to the west of the property with access from bybury road
so it's a simple sign application um the sign that we're proposing and i will uh go right here
to the rendering is uh very uh understated it's a non -illuminated wall sign um it is just a series
of letters uh words uh name um and a symbol that are directly mounted to the wall with one inch
thick pvc it is going to be a non -illuminated sign um the this wall uh this portion of the
of the building at the property the the newer edition as you can see here in the site plan
that was submitted with the application uh it is it is located 78 feet seven inches away from the
front property line on Byberry Road. So here you can see the property fronts on one side on Byberry
and on the other side on Proctor Road. Here you can see the existing building, the older building,
and then the newer addition. By right in RSD3, a building can be located as close as 25 feet
from the front property line. So, you know, we've mounted, this sign is going to be mounted
over 50 feet further than realistically it could be if a building, if it was mounted where it could
be closer to Byberry Road on a structure that was right at the front setback. And right here,
you can see the front setback line is shown on the plan. So we're substantially further away.
Byberry Road is an extremely wide road. I think as most of us know, it's 70 feet wide,
Wide sidewalks, wide cartway.
It's a fairly busy road.
And our position is that this sign, because of the distance that it is from the street, from the front property line, even though it is slightly larger than what is permitted in the zoning district, as you can see here from the notice of refusal, 15 square feet is permitted in the underlying RSD 3 zoning, RSD 1 zoning district.
and 49 square feet is what's proposed.
The sign is 49 inches overall.
Again, there's a lot of open space in the middle
and throughout the letters and the symbols,
but you can see right here when you measure for a sign,
but you can see right here when you measure for a sign it's to the outer edges of whatever it is
it's to the outer edges of whatever it is.
and we're at 49 inches by 144 inches and so putting us slightly over what is permitted in
the zoning district again as you mentioned at the beginning there is a letter of support from
the somerton civic association we did my clients met with the civic association themselves in a
smaller breakout meeting with their zoning committee and then we met with the full community
you can see here the notice of the meeting from september 12th
and the certificate of the mailing that went out along with the listed addresses at tab 17.
the letter from somerton civic is extremely detailed i think as you can see it highlights
A lot of the points that you would see if you review the photos that we have of the property, again, mentioning that, you know, it's a Byberry Road, busy street.
There are other properties that are fairly densely used, including businesses down to the west, an apartment building across the street.
All of these have signage either up at the front property line or near to the front property line, residential properties across the street from us on Proctor.
There is a school located further to the north of us on the opposite side of Proctor that actually has something fairly similar to what we are proposing in this case.
Here you can see the view of the St. Christopher School from Proctor Road, and then as you get nearer, you can see similar type of lettering, similar type of size as what we're proposing in this case, and in a similar way, it's going to be, you know, it's not going to be highly noticeable from the street.
uh there were plans approved for this project um i'm showing you now tab 11 construction drawings
that were approved by lni on august 4th 2016 and you can see here that there was actually
a larger sign that was approved at that time by lni and here you can see it on the left
where i'm circling with my cursor and so you it's i think it's pretty clear that the sign that and
there are reasons why that sign wasn't built, some constructability concerns based upon my
conversations with the rabbi. But you can see the difference between that sign and then the sign
that we're proposing. Much smaller, much more understated. So for these reasons, we feel that
the variance here is the minimum variance required given the existing location of the
structure, the size of the property. It's a 35 ,537 square foot property. The fact that my clients
have maintained this property in terrific condition throughout the years. I've included
street view photos that go back through the years that show how the property has been maintained.
There's no other signage at the property.
You can see going back through the years and also in the exterior photographs that I have provided at tab six.
So it's not as if there's a ton of signage here already.
Obviously, my clients would be limited in adding any additional wall signs at the property because we're already over the limit.
So if any additional wall signs were proposed, they'd have to come back both to the community and to the zoning board for further relief.
In my exhibit book, I've included at tab 12 the appeal and project information form that was originally submitted. I was not the original attorney. One of the members was an attorney and submitted it. I took over the case over the summer. Copy of the deed at tab 13 showing my client owns the property. Copy of our tax compliance is at tab 13.
There you go. Or 14. I'm sorry. Showing no balance due. We had a little bit of issue running the tax clearance certificate, but we've provided this to Hillary, and she said it was acceptable.
Copy of the hearing notice for today's hearing. Posting photographs at tab 16 on both frontages that you can see here in accordance with the requirements of the zoning code.
And again, a copy of the 14 -303 notices at tab 17 for the community group meeting with
Somerton Civic Association and then also providing notice of today's zoning board hearing.
of today's zoning board hearing um with that i would ask uh to have my client um promoted to
With that, I would ask to have my
panelists and um rabbi goldschmidt and and have him adopt my statements okay
whereby goldsmith if you're in the virtual audience please raise your virtual hand
Rabbi Goldsmith has been unmuted
and allowed to speak, Chair.
Good morning, Rabbi.
Could you please state your name
and spell for the course stenographer?
Shalom Goldschmidt.
Shalom, it's S -H -A -L -O -M.
Goldschmidt, last name G -O -L -D -S -H -M -I -D.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Rabbi Goldschmidt, did you hear the statements that I made to the zoning board this morning?
Yes, everything is clear. Thank you.
And they're true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
And would you adopt them as your own?
And just to be clear, you are authorized, obviously, on behalf of the Lubavitch Center for Russian Jewry.
Yes, I'm the rabbi and the president of the Lubavitch Center for Russian Jewelry, correct.
Okay, thank you very much, rabbi.
Mr. Chairman, I was in touch with Alice Udovich from Councilman O 'Neill's office.
Yesterday, obviously, was an election and a successful one for the councilman.
I believe she may be on this morning's call to state the councilman's position as well.
Thank you.
So let's start with questions from the board.
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Good morning, Chairman, members of the board.
Alice Udovich on behalf of Councilman Brian O 'Neill.
Alice, everybody probably knows, but just for the record, could you spell your name?
Alice, A -L -I -C -E, Udovich.
u -d -o -v -i -c -h right do you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth i do please proceed uh chairman the councilman supports the granting of the
variance at this location thank you for taking the time to call us house we appreciate it is
there anyone is there anyone else in the virtual audience i see no hands at this time commission
Yeah, this is Ron Bednar. The property is indicated for residential use on the city plan. The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the signage dimensional requirements of the code.
Therefore, we recommend the request to finish the opportunity.
MI 2022 -006 -742 -725, Bybury Road, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Number five, MI -2022 -006 -736 -2129 Pine Street.
Alan Notkinson is the attorney.
There's a letter of opposition from the Center City Residence Association.
The applicant did supply a petition in support signed by eight neighbors along with four form letters.
Alan Nockamson is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Mr. Nockamson, you've already been sworn. Just state your name for the record, please.
Yes, Mr. Chair, members of the board, Alan Nockamson, A -L -A -N, last name Nockamson, N -O -C -H -U -M -S -O -N.
Mr. Nockamson, could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
Oh, yes. My client is 2129 Pine LLC. And then the virtual audience is Kay Keeley. I do. This is a first for me. My notes actually had me asking for a continuance of this matter. We wanted to do a little more community outreach before we presented this matter to the board.
That's fine. So MI 2022 -006 -736 -2129 Pine Street, this case will be continued. Thank you, Mr.
Nockamson. We appreciate it. Thank you. And Mr. Nockamson, I just had a quick question. This is Hillary.
And, Mr. Nockmson, I just had a quick question. This is Hillary. The refusal didn't specify. Was the change of use to visitor accommodations for all six units in the entire structure?
The refusal didn't...
Is that what the proposal is?
Yeah, I did not file the original application. So, if, you know, if the board's so inclined to grant this zoning matter, I was going to ask for a proviso visitor accommodations for six units.
okay all right i just wanted to clarify thank you thank you let's see here number 10
mi 2023 000 487 2351 south bonsall street
Counsel?
Who's the counselor you're looking for, Chair?
Well, it was Helen Bach is listed as the lead attorney, but it was one of her male associates was on the air, on the before.
Okay, we have a Charles Goodwin with his hand up?
Yep, yep, yep.
Actually, it's David Chandler.
Charles Goodwin I think is here
for the case that was just continued
he'll be coming back
in as a panelist now
Thank you.
Good morning. Good morning, Mr. Chandler. How are you? Could you state your name one more time?
You've already been sworn. Yes. David Chandler, attorney for the applicant, C -H -A -N -D -L -E -R.
And could you please turn your video on, please? Sure.
Oh, here we go. Okay. Good morning. Good morning. Could you identify your client
and the relationship to this property?
Okay, my client is Mr. Mustafa Horain.
I'll spell his name.
M -O -U -S -T -A -F -A is his first name.
His last name is Horain, H -O -R -A -I -N -E.
And he is an owner of the proposed food store,
which is located at 2531 South Bonzel Street.
The zip code is 19145.
He is leasing the property, and we submitted a copy of the signed lease this morning.
Ms. Emerson said she did receive it, and we also emailed it to ZBA and the other sites as well.
All right, so our vice chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Good morning, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we did.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay. Well, we'll share the screen with the exhibits.
Okay. We have Exhibits 1 through 11, which we had previously submitted.
The first one is a E1, Exhibit 1 is the deed, showing that the DL and YS LLC is the owner of the property.
And then we have.
And this is the lease.
This is between Mr. Horain and the landlord.
And this one was not signed, but as I said, we did email the signed lease to Ms. Emerson and the ZBA website's emails today. So we do have the signed lease.
Exhibit three is notice of refusal. Basically, it was refused because previously the site was occupied by Western Union, Western Union check cashing, and they went out of business.
And then Mr. Horain leased the property for the food store for selling groceries, beverages, candy, various food items. And obviously, he needed a variance to.
And obviously, he needed a variance to open the store because there was a change of ownership.
So that's why we appealed.
He applied for the variance.
It was denied.
So that's why we appealed.
So basically, it's just a new business there, basically.
Reasons for appeal.
Exhibit 4 was Application for the Appeal.
This shows the zoning, RSA -5.
It allows a residential single family, but it allows the business to be at the corner.
now exhibit seven these are the photographs of the exterior and interior as you can see
uh it currently has the check caching sign western union but obviously that that'll be taken down
that is the 7 -eleven is next door uh but we've got no opposition from the 7 -eleven
again that's the uh front of the uh uh store looking from pass yonk avenue that's the south
side it's this uh that's it's facing south the building itself is facing south and uh it itself
it's on the north side of pass yonk avenue um again
there are a couple other businesses to the side now this is the interior where the the food will
be stored and that's uh where we'll have the um the cash register
interior shots
and actually we had a letter of support uh from mr gitto james gitto and he was the president of
the zoning committee from the west passing neighbors association we had a zoom meeting
held on april 20th in which we presented our case and he um he submitted a letter of support
and basically we've got no letters of opposition or anything
and we submitted the letter of support
and the only thing he asked is that the applicant
have and maintain a trash can outside
which obviously our client will do
and we've been in touch with the councilman's office
and no opposition there
and exhibit 10 are the
resumes from the
from the
Mr. Hrain, Mr. Salem, who's his
partner
and they're immigrants from
Yemen and
basically that is that is our case
so you want to bring one of your clients
and adopt your testimony
yes yes he will
OK, please proceed. Basically, that.
Mr. Horrain. Oh, yeah, he Mr. Horrain isn't here, but we have his partner who is here.
OK, and he will he will adopt Mr.
Will adopt my testimony. OK.
Mr. Chandler, is the partner's last name M .O .H.?
uh yes it's um m -o -u -s -t -a -f -a harain h -o -r -a -i -n -e we have ali mo here is that his partner
Oh, yes. He is a partner.
He's been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Mustafa Hurey. Can you hear me?
Yeah. My name is Mustafa Hurey.
could you spell your name please
M -O -U -S -T -A -F -A
H -O -R -A -I -N -E
oh I'm sorry
that is Mr. Horain
I understand
you swear we're firm to tell the truth
the whole truth, nothing but the truth
yes sir I do
Yes, sir, I do.
please proceed counsel
Please proceed, counsel.
Mr. Horain, you are the tenant of this property?
And you filed an application to open a food store at the property?
I wish.
And if approved, you will open it in the near future?
Yes, sir.
And did you hear my testimony regarding this case?
And everything I said, was that true and correct?
Yes, sir.
Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions for my client.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar City Planning.
The property is indicated for residential on the city plan or adopted district plan recommends no change to existing zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or condition of the property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the use and dimensional requirements of the code.
Therefore, we recommend your question variance not be granted.
MI 2023, 000487 -2351 South Bonsall Street, I vote yes.
Proviso, use limited to first floor.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Game Snell, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you.
Number 12, MI 2022 -006 -740 -538 North 10th Street.
Justin Crick is the attorney.
This was a request for six dwelling units.
It has been reduced to four units.
There is a letter of opposition from the 14th Ward Democratic Executive Committee.
However, the RCO is willing to support a three -unit proposal.
Justin Crick is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Good morning, members of the Board.
Good morning, Mr. Crick.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court's stenographer?
Yes, Justin Crick, J -U -S -T -I -N, last name Crick, K -R -I -K.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
Yes. My client is Mei Zhao, LLC. Michael Zhao is on the line. He is the principal of the entity, owner of the property.
Okay. And our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Counsel, do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and relate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required
to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing? Yes. Thank you. Please proceed
and share your screen. Thank you. Members of the Board, I will share my screen real quickly.
Okay. We are here today on an application to turn the property located at 50, I'm sorry,
538 north 10th street from a single family dwelling into a multi -unit dwelling the applicant
did and as i will indicate and show you based upon plans and the sizable nature of this property did
initially request for a six unit property in a configuration that had what is considered three
front units and three rear units and after meeting with the rco on several occasions had reduced that
unit count a few times. And while the RCO is amenable to a three -unit plan, which we leave
that up to the board's discretion, the applicant and testimony from the architect would show that
that the four -unit configuration is somewhat more feasible in general and not necessarily
for the cost -effective reasons, but just because of the existing structure and the way it is
situated. Again, however, we respect the RCO's input throughout that. So just to get right to
it, again, this does say a refusal for six units. We are now seeking four on the proviso plans that
have been attached. And again, RCO amenable to three. The property is situated on North 10th
The property is situated on North 10th Street between Brandywine and Green Street, and while it is not entirely visible here, I'm going to zoom in a little bit, there is a rear alleyway, and that rear alleyway is kind of critical because of egress for fire purposes and so forth.
between Brandywine and Green Street and
And any unit count that is approved would obviously meet building code and the rehab of this property would be sprinklered.
The rear yard is sizable. We have over 20 feet in depth.
And as you'll see, we've indicated or included a trash receptacle area, an enclosure to accommodate any of the units that are allowable here.
We believe that that is a sufficient way to store trash.
With the four -unit option, the applicant was willing to accept a proviso of commercial trash pickup.
I don't know if that's necessary.
Should it be any fewer units, I think that the city volume would be acceptable for a lesser count or density.
But again, as you can see here, this is a very sizable rear yard space that all parties have access to through this side alley.
And what you'll see on the layout in the plans is that right in the center of the building with access to this rear yard is a central spiral staircase that divides front from rear of the building, which provided some of the complications in the design and layout of the property other than it being used as a single family dwelling.
From the exterior front, the property just looks like a customary row home three stories in this area.
what you're what you're not necessarily getting that you see from let me jump to
it the side plans or the the essentially from Brandywine Street you
would see the property actually this is from Green Street but the property is
situated with a very long rear to which the applicant is extending the second
third floors of the of the rear shed house originally so the original I'm
sorry this plan calls for as you can see again the trash enclosure and rear yard
we have over 20 feet of rear yard space and overall we're talking about large
floor areas for for this entire structure but what gets tricky and I'll
have the architect testify momentarily, is this center staircase and configuring anything in this
property that doesn't separate or that includes front and back. There is also a significant
height difference between the front of the property and the rear property, which also
mess with configurations of units. So what the architect has attempted to do was to combine a
second third story rear unit internally with a staircase to provide a larger
two -bedroom unit and then the similar thing in the front the second and third
floor with two bedrooms on the third floor and the kitchen living room area
on the second the first floor however we're really stuck with in a sense this
front unit that has basically a smaller square footage footprint and is more of a
one -bedroom efficiency but it has extremely high ceilings at about 12 to
15 feet that that can be discussed more with the architect but so while we are
bringing this into four unit as opposed to the three configuration it's just a
matter of difficulty given the contours it's prohibitive that we have seen for
that for that use we do have a copy of the deed showing the purchase of the
property back in 2019 the property has not been used since that time this is
not a legalization the applicant has not stuck any units in there it is currently
in the process of being rehabilitated there is a tax clearance zero balance
for real estate taxes and pictures of postings in the windows the prior plans
just to show you again they they did include separate units in terms of front back and
as well as basically three in the front three in the back we did cut that down to five at one point
and then came down to four this was notified to the rco
and to all the addresses required several addresses listed i'd like to bring on ray brogdon the
architect just to explain a little bit more about the the push for the fourth unit versus the three
again understanding that it's a recommendation by the rco and we we do respect that recommendation
uh so if mr brogdon could explain a little bit more about this design and the difficulty with
with uh three and the the the similarity or not much difference in density by doing so
if mr yes hi uh my name is ray brogdon spell your name please sure uh r -a -y -m -o -n -d
if mr yes hi uh my name is ray
for raymond brogdon b -r -o -g -d -e -n for brogdon do you swear or affirm to tell the truth told
truth nothing but the truth yes please proceed counsel yes mr brogdon um i assume you've heard
my statements today to the board yes all right can you explain to the board in your design process
given the existing structure uh a shell of a structure and layout of this um where you fall
with respect to the number of units uh and the feasibility of three versus four yes um
um what i what we were trying to do was um to keep the center stair um in place without uh
disrupting the the structure or the core of the structure because basically the existing stairs
is the spine of the building um dealing with that the house that was built in the 1800s
the front half is actually higher than the the rear portion of of the building at the second and
third floor. So while trying to, you know, meet the program of the owner, the center stairs is
really the challenge of meeting the front higher portion and meeting the lower portion. So
with keeping the stairs intact and not disrupting the structure of the building by removing that
stair this um this design was the result of of not um you know um affecting the the main core of the
building thank you um that is all i'd like to bring my client on to adopt the testimony if
Mr. Zhao, Mike, if you are available, can you raise your hand?
Mike Zhao has been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Thank you.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for this phonographer?
M -E -I -N -U -G -H -A -O.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes. Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Mr. Hsiao, have you had an opportunity to hear my statements to the board today?
Yes. As well as Mr. Brogdon's?
Yes. Do you understand the statements and the testimony that I made to the board today?
And would you agree that it's true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
yes would you adopt do you adopt my testimony as if it was your own here today
yes thank you uh members of the board so again just reiterating we we respect that um that uh
the property is single family zoned uh that the rco is opposed to the multi -unit in the form of
the original six and the current proposed application for four that they have uh expressed
a willingness to agree to three and we leave that to the board's discretion and hope that the reasons
stated by the architect indicate the the impracticality or the the ability to kind of work
the three versus the four and that is uh we'd like to put it before the questions questions
from the board no mr chairman no chair questions comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
chair we have diane monroe they have been unmuted and allowed to speak
good morning miss monroe could you state your name please and spell for the course
stenographer good morning diane d i a n e monroe m o n r o e right do you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes please proceed okay thank you um the
The opposition is because we do feel as though with the three, the three apartments would be more in line with what is currently on that block.
there's a three -story apartment on that block currently has been there for I think it was built
for I think it was built maybe back well redone those houses been there for over 100 years
maybe back well
has been redone by the Philadelphia Housing Authority back there in the 70s and there's
three apartments there currently doors away from this current house that we're talking about
and it can be done and it has been done and um are they looking at to me is cost because that's
what they were saying at our meeting about the cost effectiveness for the applicant
the community when we had the meeting felt as though that should not be a community concern
about a cost to the applicant it can be done to with the stairs it can be done and it has been done
with that house two doors from there the philadelphia housing authority who owns it and
still have tenants occupied in it.
So we do wish
that the community is not resisting
but they want to be in a compromising position.
Three, we do not have
four, five, or six units
in any existing
house on that block or surrounding
that block. So please take in our
consideration. We were looking for provisos
but the applicant
didn't appear to want to hear that
as far as establishing storage
closet. So those tenants, if they do
three the tenants will be able to store their trash can as well as the recycle can in it has
been done our community developers but it's a resistance there somewhere and um it has been
We don't have four apartments in a single -family house in our community.
We want to keep the continuity within our community.
Thank you.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call.
We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Here we have Mary Jones.
They have been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Good morning, Ms. Jones.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, good morning. My name is Mary Jones, M -A -R -Y -J -O -N -E -S, from Council President Daryl Clark's office.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Yes, the Council President supports the community's position of a limitation of three units based on the existing neighborhood context.
and also um wants to amplify their concerns about trash storage thank you thank you very
much for calling in we appreciate it is there anyone else in the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission this uh ron bednar city planning
the property is currently indicated for residential use on the city plan our adopted
The district plan recommends no change to the existing residential zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship for expansion of non -conforming use is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or condition of the property.
That would prevent it from being used in conformity with the code.
It clearly represents overuse.
Therefore, we recommend the request of a stop and plan.
and by 2022 006740 538 north 10th street i vote yes revised plans one page
stamp by zba november 8th 2023 maximum three dwelling units
thomas holliman my vote is yes with proviso
James Snell, my vote is yes
with proviso
my vote is yes with proviso
thank you counsel
thank you very much
Number 17, MI -2022 -003 -171 -3421 -35 Richmond Street.
number 17
MI 2022
David Orphanides is the attorney.
No RCO letter, but meeting was held on 1023 by ProPAC, Port Richmond, on patrol and civic.
David Orphanides, please raise your virtual hand.
he's coming back in as a panelist now chair
morning mr chairman good morning counsel you've already been sworn could you just state your name
for the record certainly my name is david orphanetes o -r -p -h -a -n -i -d -e -s and could you
identify your client a relationship to this property yes my client is viera property management
p -a -n -y -3 -l -l -c and viera spelled v -i -e -r -a and our vice chair has a few questions
good morning counsel do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? Good morning, sir. Yes, I do. To both. Have you emailed all your documents and exhibits
in five days advance of this hearing? Yes, I did. Thank you. Please proceed. Thank you, sir.
All right. Can you see? Again, my name is David Orfanides from the law firm of Orfanides and
Turner here in Philadelphia. Up on your screen, you have a picture of the subject property,
3421 to 35 Richmond Street. This is a picture that's taken from the corner of Richmond,
which extends to the right, and Shiller Street, which extends to the left on the north side of
the property. Richmond's on the west side. The property also fronts on the east side with Melville
Street, which you'll see in a couple minutes. This property is an adaptive reuse of an existing,
pre -existing industrial property. The property used to be zoned I -2. It was remapped to ICMX.
It's a fairly large parcel. It's 19 ,546 square feet in size.
um i will show you some aerial images here you can see the property that i've clouded in red
you can see that we're very close to i -95 um you know a block or half a block away you can see
richmond street to the right uh shiller street down below here to the north and then melvale
street to the east that's left of the property uh when you look at photos you'll see that this block
of Richmond Street, kind of across the street and to the south of us is residential. We have
residential properties abutting and running to the south of us on the same east side of Richmond
Street. But then you have commercial properties and light industrial properties opposite to us
on Shiller Street, Melville opposite to us on the east side of Melville. You have light industrial
commercial properties, and then abutting us down at the end of the block in Ontario,
you have residential, Melville and Ontario at the northeast corner, and then the northwest
corner of Ontario, Melville, and then coming back up to the south side of our property
on the west side of Melville, you also have residential.
So it's a real mix, both the blocks that we're on, as well as the blocks that we are across from.
And that'll have some importance as we talk about the variance that we're applying for here.
Here you can see a little closer view.
We have a parking lot on our property that serves the uses, the present uses at the property.
There's a vacant lot here on the southwest corner of Melville and Shiller that my client also owns.
That's just vacant right now.
Here you can see the residential properties to the south of us on both Richmond Street and on Melvale Street.
Here is a view from the northeast.
You see the parking.
It's a two -story structure.
There is a walkway or balcony deck at the second floor level to the rear here.
A view from the northwest.
view from the southwest, and a view from the southeast.
And a view from the southeast. You can see that there is the an alley that's between our property and the abutting property to south of us on the west, same side on the same west side of Melville Street.
You can see that there is an alley.
What we're applying, well, back in 2015, variances were granted for this property to utilize the second floor for 15 dwelling units, along with various commercial uses at the ground floor.
The variances was for the residential use, and then there was a parking at that time that hadn't been provided but is now provided.
So our application is there. Well, let me go to the plans for a second.
So there are three units. Well, let me go to here.
There was a plan that was approved back in 2015.
And then since then, as the different tenants have come through the commercial space that show the layout of the of the ground floor here.
To the left, the residential units are on the second floor on here on the right.
But you can see that there are a number of units that front on Richmond Street.
When we look at the photos, you'll see they have storefront glass.
They're visible from the street.
And then there are a number of commercial units that extend to the rear on Melville Street.
Those units have proven to be somewhat difficult to lease because they don't have street front ends.
You'll see in the photos that Melvale is pretty quiet with the residential uses to the south of us and then basically a blank wall for the light commercial or the commercial light industrial building, one story building across the street from us.
And so the proposal is to convert three of the commercial units or non -residential units at the back of the of the ground floor for two residential purposes.
We feel that the same factors that warranted the granting of the variance for the second floor exist for the granting of the variances for these three units at the rear of the first floor, and maybe even more so, because, again, the rear of the building doesn't have any real good street presence or visibility, which limits, again, the ability to rent those spaces.
So those are the plans that were submitted with the application.
I'm just going to go back to, there we go.
There we go.
And again, so here's Richmond Street, Shiller Street, Melville.
These are all plans at tab 8.
And again, you can see there's three units, units 112, 113, and 114 that we're proposing to convert to residential.
So our refusal in this case, again, like in 2015, is using this property, which I think I mentioned is now zoning classified ICMX for residential purposes.
Tab three has a copy of zoning provisions of the zoning code that, again, show that the residential uses are not permitted in ICMX.
Zoning map is a tab five that confirms the ICMX zoning classification of our property.
But you can see, which is blurred out by the uses, the properties to the south of us are RSA3 residential, particularly those properties on the west side of Melville Street, which is essentially a but or are next to the three units that we want to convert to residential use.
Again, the properties that are RSA3 are right here to the left of this plan, and then the residential units are right across the way.
There's an open space or alley, which is our property, between our property and the residential unit to the south of us on Melville Street, 3420.
There was some concern by them early on in this process.
I took this case over from another attorney regarding windows in this existing windows in the south facing wall of our building and their view upon the rear yard of that property owner.
My client took it upon himself to address that.
And as a result, we we met I met again with the community group.
When I say again, there was a meeting with the prior attorney, and having demonstrated to them and them feeling confident and comfortable that we addressed the concerns of the abutting property owner to the south, they actually issued us a letter.
It is dated February 6, 2023, but I just got it this week.
I think I got it on Monday and it was based upon there was a meeting back, I guess, in February before I took on the case, one of support.
But they hadn't released the letter until we met with them again this past fall at the end of the summer and and demonstrated to them that we had appeased the neighbor to the.
at the end of the summer and and demonstrated to them that we had peace the neighbor to the south
so this letter even though it's dated february 6 2023 comes subsequent to the meeting that we
had with them on october 2nd 2023 because they were holding a letter pending the outcome of our
discussions with that neighbor this this 14 303 notice is at tab 16. we have the list of addresses
is at 16B, along with the area map for those addresses that were mailed, the copy of the
notice of the meeting that I conducted, and the certificate of first -class mailing is at tab 16D.
The deed for the property that by showing that my client owns a property is at tab 12. Here you
You can see Vierre Property Management, PA, NY, Roman numeral III, LLC.
The tax compliance certificate is at tab 13.
The notice for the hearing, today's hearing, completed with the owner information is at tab 14.
And then tab 15 has the, we had three frontages, as I mentioned, Richmond Street, Shiller Street, and Melville Street.
and each frontage of the property was posted in conformance with the requirements of the zoning code.
I did reach out to Councilman Driscoll's office regarding their position in the case.
I'm not sure if Stan is on the meeting or not, I guess we'll find out regarding their position in this matter.
But again, we believe that the conditions that warranted, in summary, that warranted the granting of the variance for the second floor for residential use exist here, if not even as much, maybe more so, because the units are at the rear.
Here you can see the frontages on Richmond and Schiller, those units at the ground floor that are remaining commercial, which is in keeping with the ICMX classification of the subject property.
um and uh here you can see in this photograph that i have a tab six uh where the roll down gates for
some of the units have been rolled up um this picture was taken or somewhat mid -morning um
during the week and you can see these all units all have storefront glass um have good visibility
from the street um one of one or two of the units are presently vacant as you know commercial real
estate is down right now post -pandemic. Finding tenants for them is a challenge. My clients are
also experiencing that, even with the units that have the frontage and have the visibility on
Richmond Street. But again, that's a condition that warrants the granting of the variance to
use the rear units that don't have the visibility. And I'm just scrolling through
till i get to melville street and here you can see the building that's across from us on melville
to the south of us on melville and then again the back of the property i mean no there's nobody
walking walking down and we just don't have any visibility or frontage at our property here and
that you can see in the photographs here so with that uh i rest um i'd like to have my client and
the architect adopt my statements if at all possible and then uh then but once they do that
i would uh ask that my exhibits and my statements be uh accepted into the record
quick question how many uh commercial units will be left if the three became residential
so there are a total of 11 so let me um let me just go to that plan again one of the plans
so there's a total of 11 so what we have left is we have eight left we have unit 101 102 103
104 to 106 107 108 109 to 110 that have been combined in 111 so eight at the present time
two of those are two units that have been consolidated you can see 9 10 and 4 to 6 right
here, this is a beer distributor. 910 was a hair salon, which is presently vacant. The architect
for the project is in one of the units. And then there's various other commercial units.
Thank you. Please bring your comment on.
Yeah. So all the ones that are on Richmond Street are remaining.
Okay. Thank you.
Enrique Vieira, can you please raise your hand?
your virtual hand enrique vieira can you please raise your virtual hand
chair i see the name but the person has not raised their hand
okay you see the architect mr orfinanis no he's with uh vieira property management three
Is he the architect, Mr. Orfinetes?
No, he's with Vieira Property Management 3 LLC.
He's the owner.
Try one more time calling his name.
Let me see.
Enrique Vieira, can you please raise your virtual hand?
It's down at the bottom of the screen.
I'm not sure if he's...
I see the name, but no one is putting their hand up.
So, Mr. Orfanides, you're an officer of the court.
We'll take your testimony.
And I can quickly have the architect adopt him as well.
What's the architect's name, Mr. Orfanides?
Is it Giovanni Ramos?
Yeah, I'm sorry.
Space for a second.
Giovanni, yes.
Giovanni Ramos has been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Good morning, sir.
could you state your name, please, and spell for the court sonographer? Good morning. Giovanni
Ramos, R -A -M -O -S. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but
the truth? I do. Proceed, counsel. Giovanni, sorry about that on your name right there for a minute.
It's all good. It's all good. We haven't talked in a little bit. Giovanni, you are with Supreme
Architects, correct? You are Supreme Architects, correct? Yes, yes. And you prepared the plans for
this project that I've shown to the zoning board, the plans at Tab 8? That is correct. Okay. And
you were actually one of the tenants in one of the commercial spaces at Front on Richmond Street,
correct? Yep, unit 101. There you go. So that's that unit right there by the entrance to the
rear units and the residential units. And Giovanni, did you hear the statements that I made to the
zoning board today yes i did and are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge yes and
would you adopt them as your own yes thank you giovanni and with that i uh again i um introduce
all the evidence that we submitted to the zoning board into the record along with our statements
thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no chair questions or comments
from our attorney hillary emerson um just one request mr chair um mr orphanetes we didn't
receive the propac letter so if you could please forward that to us certainly great yeah there's
some confusion he said he had done it before but then they never got it so yeah i'll be happy to
forward i'll send you an updated exhibit package okay thank you you got a question or comments from
the virtual audience i see no hands chair planning commission the run bednar city planning the
comprehensive plan currently recommends industrial commercial mixed use on the city plan given the
location currently represents a transition area between residential and industrial we have no
objection to the granting of Chris Reyes.
That's right.
So MI 2022
003 171
3421 to
35 Richmond Street, I vote yes.
James Snell.
Go ahead, Tom.
I'm sorry, go ahead.
James Snell, my vote
is yes.
ishmael my vote is yes
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes thank you counsel thank you have a nice day i want to go back to
earlier case that
in the add -on list that we had a bypass.
So the case is MI
2023 -003 -765 -1625
North 18th Street. Mr. Holloman
has recused themselves from this vote.
Mr. Snell will be voting.
And Jim, could you certify that relative to the video?
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Yeah, Jim Snell, I do certify that I watched the video and I'm ready to vote on the case.
Okay, so MI 2023 -003 -765 -1625 North 18th Street, I vote no.
James Snell, I vote no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you.
Is there anyone from the 9 .30 a .m. list whose case has not been called?
I see the age, Chair.
Thanks, everyone. See everyone at 2 p .m. Thank you very much.
Thanks, everyone.
See everyone at 2 p .m.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Katina, we're ready to go.
Chair, yes, we have 43 attendees. You can proceed as you wish.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this afternoon ZBA hearing.
With me is our vice chair, Ismail Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, Thomas Holloman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, James Snell.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and our executive director, Tanya Sunket.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised, the proceedings are being recorded.
Video will be available by contacting tanyasunket at phil .gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, if you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267 -270 -5548.
Leave your email and the address of the property in question.
And lastly, the question and answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony. All comments should be directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken. Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
Number one, MI 2023 -003 -956 -1818 Franklin Mills.
That case is continued.
Number seven.
mi 2023 003 939 1519 to 27 north 33rd street that case is continued number 12
M .I. 2023 -003 -757 -2347 North Phillip Street. That case is continued. Attorney moving party.
And number 14, MI -2023 -003 -775 -3148 West Burke Street, that case is continued.
Are there anyone who has comments relative to those four cases?
Good afternoon, Chair.
This is Yvette Benton.
and I'll be your co -host this afternoon.
I see no hands at this time.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
I see no hands, Chair.
Okay, thank you.
We have a few cases without exhibits.
Number seven.
Wait a minute here.
number six, MI -2023 -002 -787 -90 Red Lion Road.
Sean Ward is the attorney.
There are no exhibits.
This is the third listing.
I don't believe Mr. Ward is available.
This case will be continued.
Mark must be tried.
Number eight, MI -2022 -004 -684 -9800 -Busselton Avenue.
This is the fourth listing.
Jared Klein is the attorney.
Mr. Klein, is Mr. Klein present?
Chair, he's been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Klein, just for the record, could you state your name as spelled for the court sonographer?
Certainly. It's Jared, J -A -R -E -D. Last name is Klein, K -L -E -I -N.
Right. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Klein, you have information relative to this case on Busselton Avenue?
Yes. This is going to be a withdrawal at the applicant's request.
All right. Thank you so much for getting online. We appreciate it.
You're very welcome. Thank you.
MI -2022 -004 -684 -9800 -Bustland Avenue, that case has been withdrawn.
We're going to go to our add -on list.
Okay, so number
Voting on this will be myself, Thomas Holloman, and Ishmael
MI 2022 001 -058 -332 Delancey
I vote yes with proviso
Revised plans, two pages, stamped by ZBA on November 8th, 2023.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Number two, Mr. Holloman and also Mr. Shaheed will be voting on this.
M -I -2023 -003 -558 -2334 -North 30th Street, I vote no.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
Ismail Shaheed, my vote is no.
Thank you.
number three mi 2023 002 107 2100 robin street the same group will vote again i vote no
thomas holloman my vote is no it's no shaheed my vote is no number four mi 2023 003 744 1807
Walnut Street. The vote in this matter has been rescheduled to Wednesday, November 15th at 2 p .m.
Number five, MI 2023 -003 -678 -605 Glenview Street. The vote in this matter has been
rescheduled to Wednesday, November 15th at 2 p .m. Mr. Chair, this is Hillary. I just want to
interject briefly on um numbers 4 1807 walnut street and number 5 605 glenview street the
reason these votes are being postponed um for one more week is because l and i is reviewing
the information on the refusals and may need to issue corrected refusals prior to the board
voting on these matters. Thank you. Number six, MI 2023 -004 -265 -164 North 54th Street. Myself,
Mr. Holloman and Mr. Snell will be voting on this. I vote yes. Hours of operation,
business to close at 9 p .m. on Monday through Thursday and at 11 p .m. on Friday through
Saturday. Approve use in assembly and entertainment on the first floor with single -family living
household above. Temporary variance for assembly and entertainment use expires 12 -1 -26.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes, with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes, with proviso.
So number seven, MI 2021 -004 -819 -2900 Distance Street, this is a resumptive hearing.
Would Mr. Consul please come on?
Joseph Consol, if you're in the audience, please raise your virtual hand.
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
Is there anyone from the RCO present for this case, 2900 Distance Street?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Voting on this will be myself, Mr. Holloman, and Ishmael.
I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
And number eight, 5129 North 5th Street.
This is a non -pro -tunk hearing.
i vote request to file no no mr chair mr chair uh we need to have we need to have mr perry come
on and give this presentation first okay and then we can vote thank you mr perry
Okay. And then we can vote. Thank you. Mr. Perry? He's being promoted to panelist now, Chair.
Hi, Mr. Perry. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes. Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Roger Perry, R -O -G -E -R -P -E -R -R -Y. I'm the attorney for the
owners of the property.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, Mr. Burton. Why don't you proceed and give us
your presentation. Okay, can I share
my screen if you... Yeah, you can.
okay that should be up you're you're fine yep okay thank you very much uh we uh were asked
yesterday uh to uh note that we were making a letter request a note pro tonk uh on this property
um at 5129 north 5th street uh by way of very brief background this property was granted a
variants on January 24th of 2018. However, they did not complete the building permit process
and then went in late and were noted that after three years, they had to reapply.
The owner's architect reapplied for zoning. However, they did not associate me with the
Eclipse account. And I was unaware at the time that they issued a refusal in September. So when
I heard from my client, it was five days late. And we contacted the board and they said to submit
the request by letter, which we did. And the administration and the board has kindly allowed
me to make this presentation with regard to this property. 5129 was granted this, and this is the
refusal that issued September the 18th of 2023. And because of our miscommunication with the
architect, the client is not English speaking, but by the time I heard through the client and
the architect, we missed it by five days, and we think it's sort of a de minimis. We did prepare
the paperwork for the appeal. The appeal is exactly the same as it was in 2017 and 18.
This is to legalize a neighborhood restaurant, which is next door to a church and in an area
here. This is the property commercial here, commercial down here, and was supported back in
2018. And granted, as the board can see here, other than the fact that I can throw myself on
the mercy of the board, noting that I was not associated with the application, and therefore
it went by me by approximately a week before I knew that an appeal. We're requesting the board
to allow us to file this Nook Pro Tung Peel,
which will be the same issue for this property,
which is to put a Vietnamese restaurant on the ground
and to put one apartment above it,
which was granted in 2018.
If there's any questions, I'd be glad to answer them.
My client is not here just because of the short notice
from yesterday.
Any questions from the board?
no mr chairman no chair our attorney miss emerson have any questions
um no questions mr chair just a comment um if the board um grants this request um the application
and any um associated fees should be filed with um the zba staff by friday november 17th
that would be fine thank you uh request to file non -proton granted
everybody have to vote that
yes mr chair
thomas holliman no proton hearing granted
james now no proton hearing granted
no proton hearing granted thank you gentlemen and i will follow mr perry thank you thank you
very much we're going to go to our regular list number two mi 2023 zero zero three seven seven
MI 2023, 003 -777 -3662 North 21st Street. Michael Matione is the attorney.
We have letter of support from Upper North Neighbors Association, letter of support from Swamp Poodle, which was then revised, and letter of 13th Ward RCO Committee, partial support.
good afternoon mr chairman good afternoon mr mattione could you state your name please and
spell for the record sure michael mattione m -a -t -t -i -o -n -i right do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do could you identify your client in
relationship to this property?
Certainly. It's Louis Vargas, and he's the owner of the property.
And our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed on this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Again, Mr. Chairman, I represent Louis Vargas, he's the owner of the property and we submitted
in advance materials including the tax payment confirmation, revised refusal, a letter of
support from the Upper North Neighbors Association.
We submitted an email from Swampoodle neighbors, and they sent another email at 1 .27 p .m., which still supports, but asks that there be hours of limitation on the office use.
And I just got that at 1 .27 p .m., so I didn't have a chance to add it to my exhibits.
And then the partial letter of support from the 13th Democratic Board coordinating RCO.
We submitted the site plan. We have an updated plan that's just easier to read. Elevation plan, support petition, permit from 1960, neighboring uses chart, zoning map, and photographs.
I'd like to turn to the refusal of this matter. It's Zone RSA 5 and we have four refusals.
One is because we're proposing two residential uses in the RSA 5 district. One is for proposing
a professional office in the RSA 5 district. One is because we have 82 % lot coverage where
80 % is permitted. And the other is our rear yard doesn't meet the nine -foot requirement.
There's our cycling. It's easier to see on this plan. Here's the building.
This is 21st Street. This is Erie Avenue. We're a corner property on the building.
I'm sorry. A corner property on the corner of 21st and Erie. And here is an elevation plan.
you can see the side of the building there's an addition and the first floor is used for business
second floor is an apartment and the third floor is an apartment Mr Vargas purchased this property
in 2017 and it was shown to be two residential units and an office it had not been used for many
years so any use permits had expired it had been vacant and in need of repair Mr Vargas renovated
the structure. He added an addition, modernized the structure, and made it habitable for both
residential and professional office. He retained an architect. The architect told him that he was
getting all of the necessary permits for all the work. Mr. Vargas had the work done. After it was
completed, he was cited by the city for doing construction without permits. Mr. Vargas then
contacted the architect and couldn't figure out why he didn't have the permits he had paid for them
but then as a result of that Mr. Vargas then filed for zoning approval and that's why we're here today
since at least 1960 this property in 1960 is a use permit for three family
use there. So this has been a multifamily structure since at least 1960 and at some
point in time the first floor was converted to the business use. Nobody
knows when and it was probably done without permits as we couldn't find any
in the records. But the building presently has a first floor office and two
but the building presently has a first -floor office and two apartments
requirements.
above each apartment has two bedrooms they're about a thousand square feet
they rent for eight hundred dollars a month so look at the photos this is the
building itself again that's the corner 21st and Erie here's the business door
entrance and as you can see they do tax returns and help out with some other
business licensing issues.
And it provides services that are not found anywhere else in this community.
There's nowhere else within a mile radius where anybody can go to have their tax returns
So this provides a service that you can't find anywhere else in the community, and it
is on a corner property.
The business has two employees.
It generally operates 10 a .m. to 4 p .m. anyway, except in the first quarter of January to
April when it would be open until 5 p .m. And again, it provides these services that
are not available anywhere else in the neighborhood. The professional office doesn't take up any
spaces, parking spaces at night. It's not open. And you might have parking spaces taken
off if you were a residential unit. And just some additional site photos. And then interior
of photos. This is the office. Again, just showing the interior of the office. And then
this is going upstairs to the residential units. As you can see, they're well done,
well maintained, well appointed units. And this was not much more than a shell when Mr.
Vargas acquired the property. And then the surrounding community, again, going south
on 21st Street, as you can see, there are several vacant properties and vacant land.
in the other side of 21st Street. Erie Avenue, there's no problem with parking on Erie Avenue.
In the middle of the day, there's plenty of open parking spaces again showing and there's
an industrial site as you can see across the street as well as additional residential uses.
It's important to note that there are also many multifamily structures on the street.
If you look down, you see almost every property on 3600 block of 21st Street is three -family,
four -family, two -family. There are very few single -family and some of the ones where they
say they're single family, they're actually vacant property. So these units are well -appointed
units. They have modern conveniences. They have washer and dryer in the units as shown
by the photos. Again, this is also a corner property and has a long history of office
and residential use. We went around and had petitions signed by 10 neighbors on the 3600
block of North 21st Street and 10 neighbors came in and supported the property, supported
the project and the variances requested.
Again, when we get back to support letters from the RCOs, the Upper North Neighbors Association
fully supported the variances requested.
Swampoodle supported the variances requested and in their last email, they said that they
would like a fourth proviso, and that is that the business not be open at 5 p .m.
They ask for another proviso, a limit of two multifamily units, no basement living, and
the trash be stored inside.
The 13th Democratic Ward supported the multifamily variance, but objected to the business variance
despite the fact that the business provides a necessary service in the community
and noted opposition, although I was at the RCO meeting
and there were a couple people asked questions,
but it did not seem as though, and I was not there when they took the vote,
but it did not seem as though there was strong opposition to the business use.
And, you know, again, we have a petition signed by 10 nearby neighbors
all supporting the business use.
So, again, if you look down Erie Avenue,
there's no parking or congestion. We believe that the granting of the variances won't increase
congestion. There's plenty of parking on Erie Avenue. Health and safety will benefit by having
this professional office use because you can't get the services provided anywhere else in the
community. And they'll also benefit from the active residential use on this property on a
block where there's several vacancies. Public facilities will not be overburdened by the
granting of the variances. This is an existing building. It's just being reactivated, and it
and they won't have any negative impact on environmental status. In fact, it would reduce
won't have any negative impact on environmental status. In fact, it would reduce the likelihood.
the likelihood of illegal dumping, and the property will be used in a different manner.
The configuration of the property, it's clearly been for a long time, since at least 1960,
divided into three units, and that creates a hardship to the land as well.
And again, when you look on the west side of 21st Street, even though it's Zone RSA 5,
There's at least six other multifamily uses in that area.
And it's only this block we're talking about, it's RC5.
Across the block is RM1, across the street is RM1, and then you have industrial as well.
And this is a corner property similar to another CMX2 zone corner property.
You can see most of the corner properties in the area are permitted for commercial uses
and that's again what we're seeking here as well. So if the variances are granted it would allow
the business to continue to provide necessary services and again it would allow for the
renting of these apartments at the very modest rent of $800 a month and there are two bedroom
apartments that have things such as washers and dryers in the units.
With that Mr. Chairman I would like to call Louis Vargas.
Louis Vargas, please raise your virtual hand.
Louis Vargas has been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Good afternoon, Mr. Vargas.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Good afternoon, Chairman.
My name is Louis Vargas.
My name is spelled L -E -W -I -S, and my last name is Vargas V, as in Victor, A -R -G -A -S.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, Chairman.
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And, Lewis, are you the owner of the property at 3662 North 21st Street?
Correct.
I have been owner since 2017.
And when you purchased it, was it divided into three units, one commercial space, and two apartments?
Correct.
The layout was already there.
And did you change any of the uses?
No, just a rebuild.
And what did you do to improve the property?
Basically, I converted the show into a usable property where it wasn't just vacant and deserted land.
And why do you believe you had proper permits to work on the property?
I believe when I hired the draftsman and architect, when I first purchased the property to help me build this lot here,
I believe that I was getting all the right permits and information going by what they were telling me.
And when you received the notice violation, what did you do?
I notified the draftsman again, who then applied for certain permits, which I was showing that as well, and which is the reason why I'm here today as well.
And is the use of the property as a professional office on the first floor in two apartments of Oakland system with the prior use?
I believe it is, sir.
And are there other multifamily unit properties on the block?
Correct.
Correct. And what type of business operates at the site?
We have at the moment basically a multi -service for the community where they can pay bills, prepare taxes, returns, et cetera.
And then also we are connected with a construction company where they also help out the community if they need anything redone for their property to make it look better in the community.
And are the services provided by the business available anywhere else in this community?
No, they're not.
And how many employees will the business have?
Yes, two.
And will operate at night?
No, sir.
Is the property a cleaner property?
Correct, it is.
Does the use of the property as proposed, to your opinion, have any negative impact on the community?
No, it just helps the community by providing needed services.
And also with moderate price housing going against the market that it is at the moment as well.
And what do you charge per rent a month?
Just 800 bucks.
And could this property be converted back into a single family residence as required under RSA 5?
It will be extremely difficult to the point where it will create hardship not only for myself, but also the people that are also residents.
And did you hear my statements at the beginning of the hearing?
Correct, I did.
And are they true and correct?
And do you adopt them as your testimony as well?
I do, sir.
I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.
I have no further witnesses.
Before I give it to the board, Mr. Matione, the issues that came, the interior, trash storage, household living, maximum two units, hours of operation.
household living, maximum two units, hours of operation. Are you comfortable with all that?
Yes, we are.
Okay. Thank you. Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Charles Richardson. Charles Richardson has been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Good afternoon, Mr. Richardson. Just for the record, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenography?
Yes, sir. Good afternoon. Charles Richardson, R -I -C -H -A -R -D -S -O -N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass from 508 City Hall.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
We're going to allow you to make the decision on this one because of the fact that we don't believe in rewarding bad behavior.
Mr. Vargas bought the property back in 2017, and we've had multiple complaints over the time, and we actually had let Mr. Vargas know that he did not have permits over these past six years.
And he's continued to do more and more and more with the property, and now he's asking permission, asking forgiveness after he's already done what he wanted to do.
So we're going to let the board, as some of the RCOs have mixed opinions on this, we're going to let the board make the decision on this and let you be the ones that make that call.
Thank you, sir. We appreciate it. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, we have a caller with the phone number ending at 3552. Caller, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
And could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Yes, Adrian Fernandez.
My last name is spelled F -E -R -N -A -N -D -E -Z, Swamp Legal Neighborhood Process Association, RCO.
Do you swear or affirm and tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Thank you for receiving my corrected written testimony.
The correction was based on the fact that there was a letter of support from Carmela Vasso, and she seemed to indicate that she was at the meeting, so the information that was there we thought was reflecting what happened at the meeting.
We learned later from Charles Karn that she was not at the meeting and that some of the information was incorrect.
So we adjusted our letter of support, the provisos, adding the four proviso, asking if the variance is granted, asking for professional office only for the hours stated daily between 8 and 5 p .m.
And we also are still asking for the other three provisos that are listed in the written testimony.
Thank you for calling. We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the room?
Thank you.
Here we have Carmela Johnson.
They've been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Carmela Vassor Johnson, that's spelled C -A -R -M -E -L -L -A, last name V as in Victor, A -S -S -O -R hyphen J -O -H -N -S -O -N.
We're referring to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
Okay, I just wanted to say a couple things. First of all, I understand that the permitting and zoning process did not go smoothly, or as they should have in the beginning of Mr. Vargas' process, but I ask that we not throw the baby out with the bathwater.
They are doing what they can to remedy that situation now.
The community have benefited from them putting this building back into service and actually
helps take away a lot of blight from that corner, which had been very distressed for
many years.
The professional office is also very welcomed in the neighborhood as we're looking to rebuild
our community and not just with corner stores which is basically what we have in the neighborhood
we need other professional services and opportunities available to the neighbors
also the immediate neighbors on the block have supported this
the multi -family and business service of this building and so we want to stand
next to them in supporting this project thank you thank you so much for calling in we appreciate
Thank you. Thank you so much for calling in. We appreciate it. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Mr. Chairman, Ms. Johnson is from the Upper North Neighbors Association. She had written the letter of support. I just wanted to make that clear.
Thank you. I appreciate that. Anyone else?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair and members of the Board. This is Greg Walton from Planning Commission staff.
My name is spelled Gregory, G -R -E -G -O -R -Y, last name Waldman, W -A -L -D -M -A -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Chair.
Please proceed.
The comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change to residential multifamily at this location.
The applicant's claim hardship for business and professional use is self -created as a
seek to legalize work that was done without permits. Proposed two dwelling units would be
permitted under the proposed residential multifamily zoning. In itself, the proposed
dimensional variance for occupied area is minimal, does not conflict with the purpose and spirit of
zoning code, but is related to the variance for rear yard depth, just not the minimus. However,
these conditions existed prior to the construction done by the applicant. The City Planning Commission
recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variances for two dwelling units and conventional
variances, but deny the variance for business and professional use. MI 2023 -003 -777 -362,
North 21st Street. I vote yes with provisos. Interior storage of trash and recycling,
no household living in basement, maximum two dwelling units,
hours of operation for business and professional office, 8A to 5P.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Snell, my vote is yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with provisos.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number three, MI 2023 -003 -764 -3800 Palton Avenue, Alfred Fiscaldo is the attorney. Letter of support from HOPE PHL.
Alfred Fiscaldo has been promoted to panelists, Chair.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Counsel, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Alfred Fiscaldo, F as in Frank, U, S as in Sam, C, A, L, D as in David, O.
Right.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
I represent the Presbyterian Medical Center for the University of Pennsylvania Health System.
They are the owner of the property at 3 ,800 Paliton Avenue.
Thank you.
Our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel.
do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy i do have you
emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that are needed and required to proceed with this
case five days in advance of this hearing i have thank you let's proceed and share the screen thank
you can the board see my screen yes yes we can sir thank you um so i i provided the following
exhibits to the uh to the board last week uh the notice of refusal dated june 21st 2023
3, the application for appeal at tab 2. There was an amended refusal from the board related
to the number of signs we were seeking relief for today. There was an error in the original
application that was remedied. The project information form at tab 4, pictures of the
posting on the property at tab 5, renderings of the signs, which I'll provide to the board
in a moment. The letter of support from People's Emergency Center of Community Development
corporation which is now hope phl they were the uh the governing uh rco we've met with the rcos
twice the tax certificate clearance and the uh witness list and the and the deed
here's a copy of the original refusal uh which notes that uh we need relief dimensional relief
to have four signs above the second floor uh sill this property is the pen presbyterian medical
Center. It's located at 3800 Palatin Avenue, founded by North 38th Street to the east,
founded by North 38th Street to the east, Filbert Street to the south, Sloan Street to the west,
Filbert Street to the south, Sloan Street.
Paliton Avenue to the north. It's owned CMX4. It's about 550 ,000 square feet in size and has
the medical center and related parking. Penn has constructed and almost completed a 10 -story
parking garage on the property. This application was submitted to allow for signage above the
second floor sill to identify and enable pedestrians and vehicles to find or easily locate and
travel to and from the hospital parking garage. The original refusal was for four signs. There's
actually five signs above the second floor will window sill. That amended refusal was issued
on the 30th of October and provided to the RCOs
and to the councilperson's office.
When we spoke to the RCOs, we advised them of the error
and the original submission, and they approved
or supported the request for the variance for the five signs,
and the support letter is attached to Tab 7.
There are no provisos or conditions in that letter of support.
here's a rendering of the parking garage which you'll notice which is here bounded by palton
to the north sloan to the west filbert to the uh the south north 38th street is to the right of
the screen uh primary entrance to the parking garage ingress and egress from filbert street
there's an exit on st sloan and an entrance uh from palton avenue
the signs we're speaking of are located to this location facing paleton avenue
there's an identification sign just above the second floor sill identifying the medical center
and then a pen medicine sign uh higher up on that side identical signage on the filbert street side
identifying the parking garage entrance and exit and the uh and the medical center then the fifth
sign is located on the stair tower on the east southeast side of the building uh which is the
pen the pen logo uh here you'll see the the signage on the um on the palatin street side
the pen medicine sign at the top of the building with the logo uh that sign it's about five feet
by 28 feet it's internally illuminated uh the second sign is down at the corner of the building
in the lower right -hand side of the screen. Penn Presbyterian Medical Center identifying
the building that's about two feet by 35 and a half feet internally illuminated.
Mirroring signage on the Filbert Street side, the Penn Medicine sign and the logo at the top left
corner of the building. And then in the center at the bottom, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center
parking garage to identify the main entrance and exit from the to and from
the garage this is a blow -up of the Penn Medicine sign and logo which is at the
Palatin and the Gilbert Street sides of the building at the top and this is a
blow -up of the the logo on the stair tower the fifth sign facing North 38th
with a typical Penn logo.
And this rendering shows
the Penn Presbyterian Medical Center sign,
which is on the Peloton Avenue side of the building.
And then the Penn Presbyterian Medical Center
parking garage sign,
which is located on the Silver Street side.
Again, these signs are necessary to enable pedestrians
and people coming to the hospital
to identify the sign and locate it easily and safely.
And with me today, I have, at tab seven,
this is the letter from the OPHL, the letter of support.
I have with me today Hong Nguyen.
He is the Assistant Vice President of Facilities
at Penn Presbyterian Medical Center.
And if I can have him sworn, I'd have him adopt my testimony.
Kong, could you raise your hand so that you can be identified?
Kong Nguyen has been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Hi, sir.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, Kong Nguyen, K -H -U -O -N -G, and my last name is H -U -Y -N -H.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr.
Thank you.
Mr. Nguyen, could you state for the record your title and position at Penn?
Yes, sorry.
Yes, Kong Nguyen.
I'm the Assistant Vice President of Facility at PPMC, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center.
And did you oversee the construction of the garage and the signage that's a part of this application?
Yes, I do.
Were you present for my recitation of the, in summary of this application?
Yes, I was.
And was that recitation true and correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
I don't have any other questions for Mr. Wynn.
I have other witnesses available.
The board has questions regarding the signage.
But if not, I'm happy to move my exhibits into evidence.
Move your exhibits into evidence.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
no chair questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson i'm just briefly mr chair um
mr uh fiscaldo um it looks like there are actually seven signs being proposed but only
five of them are on this application is that correct no that that that that exhibit was uh
shows all the signers there's there are some signs that were uh below the second story uh
window sill and those were already permitted and they've been installed
okay all right thank you for the clarification yes thank you if your comments from the virtual
audience chair we have a claire sable they have been unmuted and allowed to speak
hi could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
hello yes my name is claire sable c -l -a -i -r -e last name s -a -b -e -l do you swear or affirm to
tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do are you a neighbor yes i am okay
please proceed thank you mr chairman um i live at three three two sloan street which is uh the
block of sloan street immediately north of the of the parking garage just north of powleton
um i attended the um the first meeting with rco leaders on september 19th but was not notified
of the second meeting the pec meeting held in october nor were any of the neighbors um on my
block and all of us were opposed to um the signage specifically i don't i have no objection to to pen
putting signs on the structure, but it is a large parking garage, which takes up the better part of
a block. And I specifically object to sign number one and sign number four, the two large internally
illuminated signs, the five by 28 feet ones, which I really feel would significantly negatively
impact the neighborhood by projecting these large institutional branding on where there's
essentially um two pedestrian corridors especially on the the filbert facing side the illuminated
sign would look directly into a large um uh community low -income community of seniors which
is in the university square complex whereas uh on the back of the garage again y pen needs a large
um five by 28 foot illuminated sign high up on the back of a parking garage on what is essentially a
residential area of powleton avenue um it's going to be illuminated at night looking into
and projecting onto a you know a residential area um and it just it just seems uh totally
superfluous to be perfectly honest i understand needing signs for for you know pedestrian and
driver navigation but these buildings on top of you know a multi -story parking structure are not
visible from cars and so it really does only serve the purpose of reinforcing um penn's very large
presence already in the area with large illuminated branding that um really negatively impacts the
community feel it's a very pleasant neighborhood and again for a garage it just seems um totally
superfluous and and um i really i'd walk of intrusion thank you for your input is there
anyone else in the virtual alliance i see no hands chair council before i take this to planet do you
want to respond i'd be happy to call um if the board would like uh phil dorley he's the president
of Compass Sign Company, they're fabricating and sawing the signs, which frankly are similar
to other signs located on the campus. He can speak to the level of illumination, which is less
than a street light, and the impact and the necessity to help people locate the building.
i think you just covered it i mean um okay uh planning commission
planning commission good afternoon chair members of the board this is greg baldman
planning commission staff in 2019 the zoning map was amended to commercial mixed use at this location
in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan the proposed signs are
for the existing hospital use the city planning commission recommends that the zoning board grant
the variance. Thank you. MI 2023. I'm sorry to interrupt, Mr. Chair, but just for the record,
I just wanted to know with respect to Ms. Sable's testimony that that second meeting was hosted by
the coordinating RCO, and we offered subsequently to meet with Ms. Sable twice after that meeting
to discuss the signage, and she declined those meetings. So just for the record, I just wanted
to make sure that the board was aware. Thank you. MI 2023 -003 -764 -3800 Palton Avenue,
I vote yes with proviso per amended refusal dated 10 -30 -23.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes with provisos. James Snell, my vote is yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed. My vote is yes with provisors.
Counsel, you have your votes.
Thank you so much.
Number four, MI 2023, 003 -833 -5200 -UNRU.
Ronald Patterson is the attorney.
There's a letter of non -opposition from the Taconi Civic Association.
Ronald Patterson is coming back and is a panelist now, Chair.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Patterson.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Ronald Patterson, R -O -N -A -L -D, P -A -T -T -E -R -S -O -N, Claire Harrison Law Firm, 1835 Market Street, Philadelphia PA, 19103.
Do you swear a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
My client is the owner of the property.
It's a Philadelphia QOZ Self Storage LLC.
Operating here is Devin Self Storage.
okay and our vice chair has just a few questions sir good afternoon counselor do you agree to
waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy i do have you emailed in all
the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case
five days in advance of this hearing yes i have thank you council please share your screen thank you
So, as you mentioned, this application regards 5200 Unruh Avenue.
It's a large warehouse building, four stories here depicting here, right near and along the Delaware River.
And it's about a quarter mile from I -95 and State Road.
For the most part, it was predominantly unoccupied for the last memory, except for an adult cabaret strip club called Daydreams that occupied the building and which had a draped vinyl sign here, if you could see it here on the front of the building facing, I guess, parallel with State Road.
Um, pictures of the current condition, the view from I -95, you can see the upper two
floors traveling down on Route Avenue.
It's the street.
I think you get the flavor of what's going on here.
So Devin took over in like 2022, embarked on a complete renovation rehabilitation of the building and signed it out for the by -right use of a self -storage facility in the I -1 industrial zoning district.
This application is for an accessory signed package.
You can see my screen showing the area of the self -storage.
You can see my screen showing the aerial of the self -storage.
Can you see that? I'm just asking.
Yes, it's visible, Mr. Patterson.
Okay, we're still here. Okay.
So the original application, sorry, was for four accessory signs, three on the building and one freestanding at the corner here of State Road.
We revised the application to reduce this sign, which is sign A, and I'll show you what it was reduced to, which basically spanned the upper floors of three and four.
as well as a freestanding sign.
We're going to remove this freestanding sign
and reduce the size of this sign,
and I'll show you what the new plan looks like.
The screen.
This is the current condition of the building.
You see how it's been renovated.
You see here the free staining signs were removed.
This new sign A, as I mentioned, is half the height.
We've reduced the size of it, and now it's on the fourth floor.
The signs, other than this one, were permitted as a matter of right.
This one, because it's above the bottom of the second for a windowsill, are required a variance.
The size of the sign you see here is now 82 feet in width.
It was 104.
It was 26 feet tall.
Now it's 17.
Cuts in by half.
So freestanding sign, not really visible from I -95, obviously, but we believe that the sign A variance is justified in this case because it's hard to exist based upon the property's location, its use, its surrounding use, and basically its visibility from any nearby street.
The building needs to be and has the right to be identified for what the use is.
As I mentioned, it's set back at least a quarter mile from the nearest street.
It's located in a highly industrial area, nowhere near any residential uses, buffered by the I -95 elevated highway.
Okay. Visible from I -95. When you see the visibility from I -95, you really only see these upper floors, which really necessitates the need for this type of sign at this location.
Go back to the highway shot here.
so apropos anything lower than that would not be effective
and it also replaces of course the long time
similarly located a daydream sign yes
yet we believe that there's no it creates no adverse impacts in fact it will be
beneficial because it will identify the building and will also
help with traffic safety trying to locate
the building due to its
distance from I -95. We did meet with the
Decony Civic Association. That was earlier
mentioned.
Showed your refusal. It was for
sign above the bottom of the second floor windowsill, although it's not clear
from reading that. And our letter from the Decony
Civic Association not opposing our application. With that
THAT SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO PROMOTE ALLEN UCCI TO HELP TESTIFY IN THIS MATTER.
Here, there's no hands at this time.
Hmm. Okay. Patterson, your, your officer of the court will gladly take your testimony. Yes, he would have. I'm sorry, his hand did go up. Oh, sorry. Okay. No, you're fine. It just went up. Do you, would you like for him to testify, Chair? Please. Yes.
Patterson, you're an officer of the court.
Mr. Yucci, you're free to speak. Please unmute yourself.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Alan Yucci. It's spelled A -L -L -A -N, last name Y -C -C -I.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Hi, Alan. How are you?
Pretty good. How are you?
I'm fine, thanks.
You've heard my presentation.
Would you agree that it's true and accurate?
Yes, I do.
And would you adopt it as if it were your own?
Yes, I would.
And with respect to the sign, this sign A, the self -storage sign,
would you agree that the need for the sign is to appropriately
and effectively identify the building?
Anything else you'd like to add?
Yes, I agree that that is the appropriate way to identify this building.
I, much like you've noted, with it being so far away from I -95, it would be virtually impossible to point out this building in any other way.
Okay, thank you. That's all I have, Mr. Chair.
Hillary, before I open it to the board, have the plans changed on this? Is that what we're saying?
Yeah, I was just looking at that. I think I did not see that the first time.
so there are six pages of revised plans and i i did want to ask because i was a little bit
confused the initial refusal was only for sign a excepting the square footage there wasn't any
mention about its height and the height is still i mean the location on the building
but its location on the building is still roughly the same just a little higher
uh it's yeah the sign is smaller it's um it's no higher it's just not as low anymore in terms
of height i couldn't tell i assumed the refusal was for the above the bottom of the second floor
windowsill the way the refusal was written um so it wasn't clear to me other than um
does not comply with area requirements i thought that's what it meant in this case but
Yeah, so the size of the sign has decreased. If I may, it's gone from 2 ,723 square feet to 1 ,394 square feet. Seems large, but it doesn't look that large from State Road and I -95.
Okay. So if it's possible, can you just pull up the refusal for a second? Because I think it may be that.
here we go okay yeah it doesn't seem that it mentions the the um being above the second
story but i mean that certainly would make sense because that is um standard on a wall sign and
perhaps um perhaps the planning commission can weigh in on that if that should have been there
because if we should we should just clarify if the board grants what is what is being granted
because the one refusal that's listed on here um i don't think it uh applies anymore um when i
looked at the wall area um so but we can we can check with planning on it it's very generous in
in that zone so what where where where are we going to be with this sorry is it amended refusal
no no i don't i don't think we need to amend the refusal i think just the so there are six pages
of revised plans and it may be that it will get it may be that there was a refusal missed on here
because the way that that i read this is that the sign was too big um and now the sign i believe is
you know in compliance with the area requirements but there is notes on the plans that the location
of the sign still requires a variance being above the second story so we just need to clarify that
that's where if you're granting it that that's what the variance is for but i also would like
to hear from plannings they may have additional insights on what the sign as well let me go to
board first questions from the board no mr chairman no chair
no chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair my planning commission
good afternoon chair members of the board um putting me on the spot a little bit with the uh
good afternoon chair members of the board
the right the area uh of the sign um but the height uh refusal would still stand um
i'll may i proceed with my testimony please in 2017 the zoning map was amended to light
industrial at this location in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan.
The appellant's claim hardship is self -created, proposing a law sign that exceeds the height,
and I'll leave out size for now, that is allowed by code. The appellant has not shown that the
property cannot possibly be used in strict conformity with the zoning code, and that the
variance is therefore necessary to enable the viable economic use of the property. The City
planning commission recommends that the zoning board denied the variance
so hillary this would be six pages revised plans yes mr chair and uh mr chair i did get the um
the actual measurements that are permitted uh for a ball projecting sign a maximum area is 100
square feet per lot I have that I have that one which thing here um which I it looks like this
exceeds but um so this would be six page revised plan dated today yes Mr. Chair okay
All right, so MI 2023 -003 -833 -5200 Unruh Avenue, I vote yes. Proviso, revised plan, revised plan, six pages, dated 11 -8 -23.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is no.
James Snell, my vote is yes, with provisos.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes, with provisos.
You have your votes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And Hillary, thanks for that advice there.
Thank you.
Number five, MI 2023 -003 -963 -1533 Cecil B. Moore Avenue.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from the United Neighbors Alliance Civic Association.
Mr. Anastasio, can you please raise your hand?
He's coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
I think I swore you in this morning, didn't I, right?
Yes, you did.
Just state your name for the record, please.
Vern Anastasio, representing Nate Webb, who is the principal of Phoenix Webb, the owner
of the property in question.
All right.
And our vice chair has just a few questions.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do. Have you emailed in all the required documents that is needed to proceed with this
case five days in advance of this hearing? I have. Thank you, Vern. Please proceed and share your
screen. Thank you. Mr. Chair, this is just a referral at 1533 Cecil B. Moore Avenue and it
is for a takeout restaurant. It's already an eating and drinking establishment and way back in 1980
It actually, the zoning board did grant a certificate for a takeout restaurant, but Nate Webb and Phoenix Webb have operated this restaurant and a music venue next door and an open air garden as well.
All food -related, as you can see, one, two, three, four different properties.
It's sort of their entire situation on Cecil B.
More just a block off of Broad Street on the Temple University campus.
Here's 1533, 31, 29, and then 27.
This is the property in question.
We're here, 1533.
Nate and his brothers have been very active members of the community for a very long time, well over 10, 15 years.
They've been clients of mine for about the same amount of time where they've continued to open and operate businesses that benefit the immediate neighbors as well as the students.
benefit the immediate neighbors as well as the students.
They recently did.
They recently did an ice cream shop down the block.
They have a restaurant.
They have a live music venue.
Now they would like to provide takeout service
simply because in a post -COVID situation,
takeout is a lot more popular than ever before.
We did meet with the community.
RCO William Harris did send a letter of support
and ask that this board grant the special exception
because it would do nothing but improve the quality of life
of those who work and live on Cecil B. Moore.
We did meet with the community.
As I said, 79 individual households were mailed.
And we've also submitted into evidence our tax certs and our deed
and all relevant documents in support of this
proposal. With that, I'd like to call Mr. Nate Webb
to raise his hand and be recognized.
Mr. Webb, could you state your name, please, and spell
for the court stenographer.
Nate Webb, N -A -T -E -W -E -B -B.
Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do. Please proceed, counsel. Thank you. Mr. Webb, did you hear my presentation to the board
this afternoon? I did. Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge? Yes, it is.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony? I do. Thank you. I have nothing further,
Mr. Chair. Questions from the board? No, Mr. Chair. No, Chair. Questions from our attorney
hillary emerson not at this time mr chair questions from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair planning commission good afternoon chair members of the
board this is greg walden for planning commission staff in 2014 the zoning map was amended to
commercial excuse 2 .5 at this location in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan
The proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what normally might be expected.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the special exception.
MI 2023 -003 -963 -1533 Cecil B. Moore Avenue, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you. Thank you, counsel. Thank you.
All right. Number nine, MI 2023 -003 -839, 810 South 23rd Street. Brandon Saverin is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from the South of South Neighborhood Association.
Brandon Saverin is coming back in as a panelist now, chair.
Good afternoon, everyone.
Mr. Saverin, could you state your name and spell it for the courts and honor for police?
Yes. My name is Brandon Saverin. That's spelled B -R -A -N -D -O -N.
Then S is in Sam, A, V as in Victor, R -A -N as in Nancy.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yes, my clients are Tamara Murphy and Thomas Murphy, who are the property owners.
Okay, and our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do, Mr. Vice Chair.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I did.
Thank you, Mr. Saverin. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, members of the board.
I am here seeking a use variance on behalf of the owners of 810 South 23rd Street.
Since the issue came up in a prior case you heard today, I'll just say at the outset that the property is currently vacant
And my clients have not started the use, the business use that they are seeking today and will not do so until obtaining the proper zoning permitting.
So before you is the refusal that we obtained from L &I.
obtained from L &I, and you'll see that the application is for a change of use
And you'll see that the application is.
to personal services, which is not allowed because the property is zoned RSA 5.
There's only one refusal, which is a use refusal. We're not proposing an addition or anything like
that to enlarge the building, so there's no dimensional refusals. Just thought I'd show you
the section of the zoning code. I think this is in 14203. I'm sorry, it's actually 14601
where the code defines use categories. What is personal services? So it includes a variety of
pretty different things, but the one that we're here for today is the maintenance of fitness and
health. So this is about a proposed Pilates studio. And Tammy, who is my client, is a trained
Pilates instructor who happens to live right around the corner from this property. So this
on your screen is Exhibit 2A among the exhibits that I submitted to the board. And I would ask
that these be moved into the record at the conclusion of the hearing. Exhibit 5 is a zoning
map from atlas .phila .gov that shows the location of the property. So up here in the zoomed out map,
we're in the Graduate Hospital neighborhood, just a half block north of Christian Street on 23rd.
We've got Grace Ferry Avenue, about two blocks to the west. And I'll keep going here on to exhibit six. This is a parcel map and then an aerial photo from Atlas. So actually, this is a pretty neat property. It's a little unusual.
There's a beautiful street that is a car -free street that you may be familiar with if you know the area called Madison Square, which is right here.
And most of the properties that face Madison Square are homes.
But at the end of the block was a church called the New Temple Baptist Church.
And that church was subdivided in half in 2015 by a prior owner. So if you can kind of imagine this, here's the church and I'll show you some street level photos in a second.
But the owner at the time dropped a firewall down the middle of the interior of the church and then ran a parcel line through that firewall.
So they both legally and physically cut the building in half in like a safe, you know, permitted way under the building code.
And our clients are purchasing one of those two pieces. I'm sorry, have purchased and are looking to use that that space as a Pilates studio.
Now, you know, I mentioned that for you to keep in mind that until very recently, the history of this property was not residential.
And further, although we are next to the other half of the church, which is now a residence, the owner of that half supports our application and came out to the RCO meeting to say so.
And unlike, you know, the other half of the church and unlike the other properties on Madison Square, our front door is on 23rd Street.
So that makes our building and our space quite a bit different and suited for commercial use.
So in exhibit seven, I'll show you our orange posters for this hearing and you'll see what the what the space looks like.
So I'm just going to scroll through some of these. This is along Madison Square, I believe. So this is the side of our building. Here's a view of the front. So this is 23rd Street. That's the front door onto 23rd, as I mentioned.
Um, so although we're along Madison square, that's, that's not where the, um, folks visiting
the Pilates studio would, would enter onto. They'd be coming right off of 23rd street.
Uh, and here's just a closeup of the front door. Um, I have also in exhibit one, the permit from
2015 that talks about when the building was cleaved in half, just so you have proof that
that occurred and that it occurred with all proper permits. At Exhibit 10, I have floor plans that
were prepared by our registered architect. And essentially, I will, although her name's Judy,
and she is on the line, if you have any questions, I'll attempt to very quickly walk you through
very quickly walk you through these plans.
these plans so there's
So there's not actually that much construction
not actually that
that would be necessary to convert
what is sort of like currently a loft style residence
in this space into the studio.
So you'd walk in off of 23rd Street.
We're proposing two rooms on the entry, the ground floor.
One would be an office for Tammy.
The other would be sort of like a guest lobby where folks can maybe sit before or after classes and a public bathroom.
The second floor of the building would be sort of the centerpiece.
That was the main church chapel space or half of it.
And that's where the studio itself would be where classes are taught.
And there's also a basement that already exists.
It's half of what was the church's basement.
That would be converted to a space for some smaller, perhaps one -on -one instruction because
Tammy instructs folks in what's called postural therapy, which is sort of like individualized
instruction for folks, you know, dealing with injuries or chronic conditions.
And there would also be a second bathroom and utilities in the basement.
Mr. Chairman, you mentioned our letter of support from SASNA, which I just put up on the screen.
This was not in my exhibits because we received it just before the hearing, although the meeting was held several weeks ago.
I attended the meeting with Tammy and Tom.
It was, as far as RCO meetings go, pretty much a smash hit.
Folks were pretty excited to see this business come in.
They were actually kind of surprised that we needed a variance, but I tried to, you know, educate them as to why that, you know, in 2015, in the subdivision process, it had been sort of temporarily declared to be a residence.
Anyway, here's our vote, which was unanimous, no one in opposition. And I think the last thing I'll talk about, since I know, you know, we'll call the Planning Commission in a moment, is some of the things the Planning Commission has written about the neighborhood in the past, and why I believe we have a legal hardship that entitles us to a variance.
So most of Exhibit 1 is a memo that I authored to the board, which talks about how we satisfy the requirements for a variance under the code.
One of the things that I think establishes our hardship in this case is that in graduate hospital, there are so few spaces where somebody can have, you know, either a small gym or a fitness studio like ours by right.
Washington Avenue, which I know you're all familiar with, is largely zoned industrially in this area, I2, so that does not allow our use. And a lot of South Street is zoned RM1, that does not allow our use.
bits of South Street or Zone CMX, which would Broad Street would allow our use. So sort of
the end result of that, which I wrote about is that if you're someone like Tammy, and you're
trying to, you know, either buy or rent a space to open a small studio for Pilates, yoga, etc.
You're probably looking at renting a space on Broad Street, which is problematic, because if
you want to serve this market, our market is like the western side of graduate hospital all the way
up in the 20s, you're almost a mile away from Broad Street. So that is all just to say, again,
there's not a lot of spaces available in which we wouldn't need a variance. And the Planning
Commission wrote about this in its central district plan, I think, maybe about eight to
10 years ago. This is a map that is copied out of that central district plan, and it talks about
a couple things. One, it talks about in this ring that says nine, that the Planning Commission
would like to see more corner businesses in the interior of the neighborhood, which is exactly
what we're proposing today. It also talks about how Washington Avenue really does not allow a lot
of viable uses because of its industrial zoning, which is also a problem. So I'm not sure what
Greg is going to have to say in a moment, but I would say that the central district plan seems to
me at least to sort of promote putting our type of business within this neighborhood, despite the
residential zoning of our property. So with that, I will ask if I can bring on Tammy to adopt my
testimony.
Tammy Murphy has been unmuted and allowed to speak, Chair.
Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Tammy Murphy, and it's spelled T -A -M -M -Y -M -U -R -P -H -Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, Counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Hi, Tammy. Were you able to hear my testimony over the last few minutes in your zoning case today?
Was my testimony true and accurate to the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
And would you therefore adopt it as if it were your own testimony?
Okay. Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair planning commission
greg i noticed that they're sending questions your way before even at your turn here i'm
that was in the day uh yeah um yes i uh i i don't know if there was a preliminary preliminary
zoning uh meeting but i was not part of that but i'll just speak to the um the recommendation that
i have um good afternoon chair members of the board the conference plan recommends no change
to the existing residential single -family zoning proposed personal services use exists in the
redacted reuse of the historic church structure the city planning commission recommends the zoning
board for at the variance. Thank you. MI 2023 -003 -839 -810 -South 23rd Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
Number 10, MI 2023 -002 -937 -5610 Lancaster Avenue.
Carrie Nass Poust is the attorney.
Let her support from the Overbook West Neighbors Incorporated.
Carrie Nass Poust is coming back and is a panelist now, Chair.
good afternoon could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
good afternoon my name is carrie nace paust i'm an attorney with law firm of fox rothschild
last name n -a -s -e hyphen p -o -u -s -t you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes i do could you identify your client a relationship to the property
yes my client is family dollar stores of pennsylvania llc and they are the tenant at this
property our vice chair has a few questions good afternoon council do you agree to wave
the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy yes i will note that it is a referral
thank you uh have you emailed in all the required documents that is needed and
required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
Can you see my screen? Great. Thank you.
This property is located at 5610 Lancaster Avenue.
we did submit our exhibits five days in advance of the hearing we included a copy of the notice
of referral application of appeal the project information form a redacted copy of the lease
confirming standing for this property as well as confirmation that the taxes have been paid for
this property we also did submit copies of the notice that was sent out to the neighbors as well
the certificate of bulk mailing confirming such mailings. The property in question as I indicated
is 5610 Lancaster Avenue. It's highlighted here on your screen on the aerial. It runs along North
56th Street on Lancaster Avenue which runs along the bottom. This property is zoned CMX3 and is
also subject to the fourth district overlay commercial review area. As you
As you can see, this property is improved with an existing shopping center and is leased to several other commercial tenants.
can see this property is improved with an existing shopping center and
It is also surrounded by other commercial uses as well as residential uses on the other side of North 56th Street as well as 57th Street.
family dollar currently leases the end cap of the shopping center this is a copy of the leasing plan
you can see here the two existing buildings family dollar is currently here on the plan west end cap
of the building. Shown here in front of you are photographs of the existing conditions
of the property. You can see here is Family Dollar. To the right of the screen is the
remaining of the shopping center. This photo just shows a view looking down towards Lancaster
Avenue away from the store. This photograph shows across the street looking at 56th Street.
This photograph looks up 56th Street away from Lancaster Avenue.
And then this photograph shows the other side of the existing Family Dollar store.
A Family Dollar has been leasing this space since 2004. We've submitted in our exhibit packet a copy
of the Certificate of Occupancy that was received when they initially started occupying the space.
Since that time, the space adjacent, you can see here in your photograph,
previously occupied by a child care facility, has become vacant. Family Dollar is looking to
amend their lease or has amended their lease to expand the existing store into the space adjacent.
Family Dollar is proposing to open one of their combo stores, as they call it, in this
location, which would be a Family Dollar as well as a Dollar Tree store.
This would allow them to expand the merchandise that they offer.
They would additionally include seasonal items, some party supplies, stationery, houseware,
kitchen items and as well as some arts and crafts submitted in the exhibit
packet and shown before you here is a copy of the floor plan this area here is
the existing space and then this area here would be the space that they would
be expanding into the expansion will allow for the existing store to be
refurbished let me just pull up here for you see this down here in the lower right again is the
existing conditions this above that is the elevation of what the store will look like
when it's combined they will be refurbishing it they will be painting the exterior cleaning it up
as well as doing a new interior fit up and upgrading it as well as coming up with a new
layout. Their hours of operation are 8 a .m. to 9 p .m. And although the existing store does have
a certificate of occupancy and is permitted under the zoning, the expansion into the new space
is requiring a separate permit for that additional space to allow the retail sale of consumer goods.
Under the underlying CMX -3 zoning district, this use is permitted by right.
However, the fourth district overlay does require special exception approval to allow the retail sale of consumer products.
The overlay district prohibits uses from operating between the hours of 11 p .m. to 5 a .m.
As indicated, the hours are 8 a .m. to 9 p .m.
And as such, the applicant would agree to a proviso that would limit the hours pursuant to the overlay district.
We don't believe that the proposed use would have a detrimental impact to the neighborhood.
In fact, to the contrary, we believe that it would be a benefit as it will provide a wider range of merchandise for sale to the community,
as well as cleaning up an existing underutilized space within the shopping center.
Furthermore, the proposed use will also be located within an existing commercial space
and will be an expansion of an existing use.
And as such, we do not believe that it would create any overcrowding of the land
It would create any overcrowding of the land or cause undue traffic congestion or impair the supply and light of the air.
or cause undue traffic congestion.
We did meet with the RCO, which is the Overbrook West Neighbors Community Association.
They did have certain concerns regarding the current operations.
We met with them on two occasions to address those concerns.
and as a result of those meetings, we did receive a letter of support, which was submitted again to
the zoning board and in our exhibit packet. Based on the foregoing, we are respectfully requesting
that this board grant a special exception to allow the additional space to be used for retail sale
of consumer goods. And with that, I do have my client on the line. And I would like to have him
be admitted, Sergio Sangelapur. Chair, Sergio Sangelapur has been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
yes uh sergio chanelport s -e -r -g -i -o the last name is s -c -i -a -n -c -a -l -e p as in peter o -r -e
we're referring to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Yes. Please proceed, Council.
Thank you. Mr. Shailenpour, were you here this afternoon during the statements that I've just made with regard to the property and the proposed use?
I was.
And do you agree with the statements that I made and were they true and accurate?
They were and I did.
And had you provided testimony yourself, would you agree to adopt those statements as your own testimony?
I have no further questions at this time
and we request that the exhibits be moved into record.
They were moved in.
Questions from the board?
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
there we have a gregory allen with their hand up they have been muted and allowed to speak
sir could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
yes sir chair my name is gregory allen g -r -e -g -o -r -y last name is a -l -l -e -n
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth sir
I do. Are you a neighbor? I am the president of the RCO. Okay, please proceed. And a neighbor,
but not a near neighbor. Okay, that's okay. Okay, so first I want to compliment Carrie and Sergio
on the time that they took to hear our neighbor's concerns about the quality and other issues that
were related to store operations. They did that on two occasions, on the second meeting coming
with another group who were actually the team that would work in the stores. So I want to give
that compliment. And I agree with everything else that has been said. Our neighbors had
no questions about the store related to zoning. The only concern I think that hasn't been addressed
was the trash. There was concern about it being outdoors, and there was a comment that the trash
might be able to be moved indoors, or that there would be a compactor. Because what happens in
that area is that people will see a dumpster, they'll bring their trash to the dumpster,
And then vermin are attracted to that trash and the residential parts of the store are, the residential is really close to the store.
So a lot of neighbors were concerned about vermin entering their homes from the commercial property.
thank you very much
let me see if there's anyone else
in the virtual audience
and I'll let counsel respond
yes sir
thank you and thank you for taking the time
to call us is there anyone else
in the virtual audience
we have David
David Friedler
they have been unmuted and allowed
to speak
sir could you state your name
sir could you state your name and spell it please for the court stenographer
and spell it please for the court stenographer.
my name is david friedler thank you chair for allowing me to speak
could you spell your name please for the court stenographer david d -a -v -i -d friedler f -r -i -e -d
l -e -r you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do are you a neighbor i'm not a neighbor i'm one of the owners at the property
um i just wanted to do your client
i'm sorry this is your account client counselor i know this is the landlord my client family
dollar the tenant all right all right thank you proceed sir okay i just wanted to address um what
the what the gregory was saying regarding the trash i spent um thousands of dollars to have
the trash it's it's in a special department in the shopping center there has not been any trash
problems in the past um i would say eight to eight months to a year since i've done that it's
gated off it's locked every day we make sure that the trash is clean and i don't foresee any issues
with the trash going forward um everybody has a separate garbage bin we have cameras on the
location we watch it on a constant basis and there should be no issues with the trash and if
there ever is we are more than willing and able to to handle it and take care that there should
be no trash going forward and no trash problems going forward that's that's just what i you know
that's all i wanted to say thank you thank you so much for taking the time to call so we appreciate
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands at this time, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair and members of the board.
This is Greg Walton for Planning Commission staff.
We comprehensive plan recommends no change to the commercial mixed use zoning at its location.
The appellant has shown that the proposed retail sales of consumer goods will have no detrimental impacts beyond what might be expected.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the proposed special exception for retail sales of consumer goods.
MI 2023 -002 -937 -5610 Lancaster Avenue, I vote yes.
The 4th District Overlay requires proviso limiting the hours of operation from 5A to 11P.
Thomas Hollis, my vote is yes with proviso.
James Snell, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shahi, my vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you. Have a nice afternoon.
Number 11, MI -2023, 003 -954 -3753 North 18th Street.
Alan Nockmson is the attorney.
There is a letter of opposition from the 13th Board RCO Committee.
Mr. Nockmson.
He's coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board, Alan Ockamson, A -L -A -N, last name Ockamson, N -O -C -H -U -M -S -O -N.
Thank you. Mr. Ockamson, you already have been sworn. Could you identify your client and relationship to this property?
Yes, my client is 3753N, 18th Street Holdings, LLC. And in the virtual audience is its member, Brian Wise.
Our vice chair has just a few questions, sir.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you. Please proceed to share your screen. Thank you very much.
Hi, I'm here to present 3753 North 18th Street.
Just from the outset, we are looking to hold this vote, have further community input on these modifications we made to the project at their request.
We will meet with the community. They will provide my understanding.
We will meet with the community. They will provide, my understanding, a letter or update, they may or may not provide an updated letter. And then, you know, we would ask for an opportunity to respond to any additional commentary that the community has. So for all intents and purposes, this will present. And then we would have, I guess, a resumption hearing afterwards. Is that correct, Mr. Chair?
Yeah, I think, Hillary, we could close it except for a letter from the RCO and counsel's response. Is that right?
That is correct. We don't even necessarily need to do a resumption. We can just hold the vote with the record closed except for those documents.
The only thing I would say is if there's additional changes based on that commentary, can I be given the opportunity to make additional revisions to our plans?
Well, in that case, we would want to do a resumption. So we'd have all of that on the record. So we can we can just schedule this for resumption. And Mr. Nockimson, do you already have a meeting scheduled with the community group, another meeting?
I talked to the community leader, Charles Karn. I don't know if he's on the phone, but I believe I talked to him either yesterday or the day before. So we're still in the process of scheduling one. We're hoping to schedule one before the end of the year.
So if Mr. Curran's on, maybe at the conclusion of my presentation, maybe we can schedule something.
So then we can know when we can schedule the hearing.
If not, then you can just reach out to us and let us know once this is ready to be resumed.
All right.
Thank you so much.
All right.
So we're here to present 3753 North 18th Street.
We'll first review the notice of refusal.
Correspondents from the 13th Democratic Ward.
They provided this correspondence, not knowing that we were in agreement to revise our drawings.
But I think there was some confusion in that respect.
So, you know, I don't know if they're going to change their position, but we did make changes at their request, which hopefully will gain community support.
We also have a petition from several addresses on the 3700 block of 18th Street in support of this project.
So it's signed by, I would think, I think a half a dozen individuals.
We have our revised proviso plan form that we completed.
Two things that we did is we set back the third floor in the rear, 10 feet, eight inches at their request.
And we also reduced the building depth by an additional six inches to further be in conformance with the Philadelphia zoning code.
What we're offering for this RSA 5 property is a triplex, which is not out of character in the neighborhood. And you'll see a matter that the board heard in 2022, where under similar circumstances, they granted use as a triplex in addition, and we'll go over those additional addresses.
There are like four or five other instances of multifamily use on that block.
Then we'll review maps of the area and then photographs of the property and then our plans and drawings.
We had a meeting recently and we'll have a review of that notice that we sent out along with proof of mail on that notice.
But in addition, we'll be meeting with the community after this meeting.
our application for appeal our application for appeal our deed to the property and our
certificate of tax clearance again at the conclusion of my presentation I would ask that
Mr. Wise virtually raise his hand be sworn in and I'll have a few questions for him all right so
first our notice of refusal so again this is an RSA 5 property it is rather large in size
The lot area for this property is 1 ,392 square feet.
So this is not a small RSA 5 property.
We're seeking three dwelling units.
One of the things to note is we did not ask for a roof deck.
We responsibly are storing the trash inside with ventilated trash closets.
We have two refusals.
First is because this is an RSA -5 property and we're asking for three units, we're being refused in that respect.
Again, in 2022, under similar circumstances, this board granted a variance request on this block,
and it's not out of character either to have multifamily on this block, as you will see when I go through that exhibit.
Second, we're being refused because TechWord have a de minimis request for deviation from the Philadelphia zoning code. We are required to provide a rear yard setback of nine feet.
We are required to provide a rear yard setback of nine feet, and we're at eight feet, one inches.
We actually reduce that variance request by another six inches by way of these revised plans.
While we would like to be in conformance with the code, it would be rather difficult, given the dimensions of that building, and to make a functional floor plan.
So we're asking for that slight variation from the Philadelphia Zoning Code.
correspondence from the 13th democratic ward
um now while they voted against the project i think if you look at the letter what they're
really upset about is not the use of the property but the dimensions of the building structure so
there are the structure to the left and right of us are they're set back in the rear
on the second and third stories.
They were upset that our building structure
goes back straight up from first floor to third floor.
This is, I guess the rear yard setback
is part of that refusal,
but the fact that we're not set back originally
had nothing to do with the actual use variance request,
but I think they were so focused on that
and the fact that we did not set back at all
that, you know, again, they were very upset with that happening.
And, you know, we agreed that we would set back the third floor appropriately.
We can't set back the second floor the way they want.
If we did that, we would lose a bedroom for unit number two because, you know, the units
are first floor and lower level for unit one, second floor for unit two, third floor is
unit three.
We're willing to have a one bedroom on unit three as a compromise. We originally wanted two bedrooms for unit three. For unit two, in order to accommodate their setback in the rear, we would lose a whole bedroom. That would make this project impossible to get off the ground.
We wouldn't be able to get financing, given the rising construction costs and the interest rates, which are well over 8 % or more for a project of this sort.
It would be impossible for us to build.
And so we're asking, you know, to the community to meet us in the middle where we would, again, set back the third story, which has nothing to do with the refusal for the use.
And we'll see what the community has to say in that respect.
But again, we also met with individuals on that block. And we really focused on people on that block who'd be most detrimentally impacted. And you can see we're at 3753. It looks like we have the signature for 3751.
51. So they would be most impacted by the light and air issues that are allegedly at issue here.
But everyone, and then we also have 3749 as well. So we really did try to deal with the people who
would be most directly impacted by this project. And then our revised plans, again, we're setting
We're proposing to set back the third story, 10 feet, 2 inches, and then also reduce the building depth by an additional 6 inches as well.
And these are our revised plans in that respect.
And then in 2022, in May of 2022, this board heard a similar request for multifamily use at 3757 North 18th Street.
And this board granted that zoning request. So what we're asking for is similar to what was this board granted previously. In addition to 3757 North 18th Street, 3755 North 18th Street is three units by way of variance.
37 -37 North 18th Street, I guess that's that one.
Although, yeah, that's that one.
37 -61 North 18th Street is three units.
37 -65 North 18th Street is actually four units.
And 37 -58 North 18th Street is three units.
So while these properties are RSA 5, they do have not only a history,
but in active use for three units or more, and we're asking only for three units.
And then as you can see here where we are in the neighborhood, there is a diversity of housing.
You know, Kolaski cuts across this neighborhood or intersects this neighborhood, but there's a, you know, there's RSA 5, which we're here, but there's also RM1 and CNMX 1.
But there's also RM1 and CNMX1.
So what we're proposing is not out of character for this part of the neighborhood.
So what we're proposing is not.
Plus the RSA -5, there's a significant portion of our block, which even though it's RSA -5, it's multifamily in nature.
And then in terms of where we are in the neighborhood, we're walking distance, the Erie station.
And then in terms of bus routes, we have the 2, the 53, the 56, the H, and the XH as well.
So there's ample public transportation nearby.
And then photographs of the property.
This is our property facing forward.
This is proof of us posting for today's hearing.
The orange poster indicating that the hearing would take place today with the Zoom, and we provided the Zoom information.
This property has been vacant, a vacant lot, as far back as we can verify, because Google Earth only goes as far back as 2008 for this property, but it's been a vacant lot for some time.
I can't speak to how long it's been vacant before then, but clearly the zoning classification has caused issues for the development of this property.
And then this is North 18th Street to the right of the property.
And then I will point out that this is a porch block.
What we try to do is mimic the look of the properties on this block.
North 18th to the left of the block.
Again, a porch three -story block.
And in our plans and drawings, we try to match the height of this building.
The height of this building is 37 feet 6 inches.
We also mimicked the fact that we have a cornice up here.
We have lintels, the windows, like the alignment matches the alignment of surrounding properties.
We have the more traditional bay window here.
And most importantly, we have a porch area, which provides a sense of community in this neighborhood.
And then this is the rear of the property.
And then this is our site plan.
And again, as you can see, we eliminated a portion of the third story at the request of the community.
And then our floor plans are pretty straightforward.
You walk into the covered porch, you come into a common area, you make a left, that is unit number one, which is the first floor and lower level.
And then they have access to the rear yard.
You go up a flight of steps, that's unit number two, and that's a two -bedroom, one -bath.
and then you go up to unit three
and then that's where we conceded the bedroom,
but that's a one bedroom, one bath.
It would be impossible for my client
to build this property as a multifamily structure
by giving up that second floor rear bedroom.
And they could not afford to build this
as a single family home,
given the cost of construction and the rates
and what they could get for it in terms of rental
or as in terms of sale.
So we met with the community on October 30th. This is proof of our emailing the notice weeks before to the coordinating RCO and the other RCOs, as well as the district council members, zoning aides, Charles Richardson.
And 163 addresses were notified of our meeting, listed the addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses, our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of 3753N18th Street Holdings, LLC, our notice of refusal that went along with that, along with our project information form, our deeds to the property, showing that our client owns the property.
And finally, our Certificate of Tax Clearance, showing no real estate taxes are owed on their property.
With that being said, I would ask that, I'm going to share my screen, I would ask that Mr. Wise virtually raise his hand.
Brian Wise has been unmuted and allowed to speak, Chair.
Sure. Could you state your name, please, and spell for the court stenographer?
yes bryant wise b -r -i -a -n w -i -s -e you swear referring to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth yes i do chair receipt counsel uh yes um mr wise you heard everything
i had to state today about your zoning matter yes i did and is it true and correct
yes it is and do you adopt as your own testimony yes i do thank you thank you um questions from the
board no mr chairman questions or comments from our attorney
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Charles Richardson.
They have been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Mr. Richardson, you have already been sworn to state your name for the record.
Good afternoon again, Mr. Chair.
Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass Room, 508 City Hall.
And Councilwoman is going to withhold her opinion right now until after Mr.
Notcomson meets with the community again.
And then once they get some type of an understanding,
then she will give her opinion at that point.
Thank you for calling in with that information.
We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the first audience?
Chair, we have a caller with the phone number ending in 4608.
Caller, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Paula, with the phone number ending in 4608, please unmute yourself.
They're unmuted, Chair.
Hi, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Yes, Charles Karn, C -H -A -R -L -E -S -C -A -R -N, 13th Ward, RCO Chair.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Please proceed.
Sir, again, as Mr. Nachman said, we did have a meeting on the 30th.
The presentation was, drawings were inaccurate.
We, we asked for revisions of it based on what they presented. Again, that block has many existing multifamily units on it. We have no issues with multifamily properties on that block there.
We just asked that when the presentation was given, the drawings were inaccurate.
So based on the refusals, we asked that they come back.
And let's take a look at this here.
Because, again, it was quite a few directly affected besides, I think it was 51 and 49,
a couple of the blocks stating that it was incorrect, the drawings.
They had a fine presentation, but it wasn't accurate.
And that's what we're worried about on there.
Thank you for calling in.
We appreciate that.
And I see Mr. Nakamson shaking his head,
so I'm sure that'll be covered when they, future meetings.
Thank you.
Well, sir, sir, that's one of the reasons why I dialed in today.
So I could see Mr.
Well, thank you.
Thank you very much.
We appreciate it.
All right.
Thank you very much, sir.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no further hands.
Cleaning, do you want to withhold your comments until?
Yes, Chair.
I think that's best so that we get the full scope of the evidence.
So we will have a resumptive hearing.
um and why don't we what we'll do is we'll try to get this as quick as possible
when you get a date call the office and we'll see what we can do okay thank you so much mr
chair thank you i appreciate it right and mr mr chair this is hillary just to clarify for the
record the resumptive hearing will be um won't be for any follow -up testimony or letter from the rco
um response from the applicant um the council office and the planning commission otherwise
the record is closed and no other testimony will be taken i think you've got everybody covered thank
you okay thank you number 13 mi 2023 003 830 13481 damar drive stephen pollock is the attorney
There's a letter of support from Somerton Civic Association.
Steven Pollock is coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Pollock.
Good afternoon.
Mr. Pollock, how are you, sir?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the board. How are you today?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the board.
How are you today?
Good. Could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Could you state your...
Yes, sir. Stephen Pollack. Stephen with a P -H, S -T -E -P -H -N, Pollack, P -O -L -L -O -C -K.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chairman.
Would you identify your client and relationship to this property?
My client is DeMar Real Estate and John Capone. They are the owners of the real estate.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Certainly.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do, Mr. Shahid.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
We have, sir.
Thank you.
Please proceed, counsel, and share your screen.
Mr. Chairman, may I ask that?
You can.
You can.
But Nico left me for greener pastures, so I have Ryan Thomas who's going to help me out.
So if I can have Ryan.
Well, he'll just take care of the screen for you, right?
Elevate it.
I knew I'm going to tell him that you missed him because I told him you would miss him.
Ryan Thomas has been promoted, Chair.
Okay, thank you.
Okay, great.
There he is.
All right, Ryan, you want to share your screen for us and we'll get it going.
Mr. Chairman, members of the board, this is an application to subdivide two lots into five lots to build two new sets of twin homes.
What you see in this very first picture are the two sets of twin homes that were approved by the zoning board back in 2016 for prior variants for DeMar Drive.
What we're doing is taking the next lots that are adjacent to these two dwellings and create two new sets of twin homes.
So, Ryan, if you want to go to the next picture you have just to show, there's just another one.
That's the corner property, DeMar and Southampton.
This is up in the 58th Ward off of Southampton Road.
That's the last set of existing twins.
And to the right of that is where we're going to be building the new property.
Go ahead.
Next one.
You want.
You can go past that because that's the same.
And then we have the next picture show that we had a post and we posted the property in two locations because it's 13481 and 13491 Damar Drive.
Go ahead. And just another picture of where the lot is. We have behind us a Pico right -of -way and a Conrail right -of -way. As you can see, the high wire transmission line behind us. Go ahead, next.
go ahead same similar shot and this is looking from um demar drive towards uh north along demar
drive towards southampton road that white house on the side is the side of the the second set of
twins and where i where my shadow is that's me taking the photo is about where uh the demarcation
line is between where the industrial development of demar drive picks up uh demar drive is a tale
of two cities or two streets. Long ago, the side to the left of this picture was allowed to change
by variances from industrial to residential and has been remapped to RSA2, but there are five
sets of twin homes directly opposite on the left -hand side. In allowing us to build the first
two sets of twins, we were starting to have the residential and got rid of some industrial
outdoor storage that my client had, and we're trying to move that even further up.
So if you keep going to the next photo, just a little bit further where you can see how
it's being, where we're going to be developing it, and you can go, there are those twins
across the way that are directly across the street from us, and when we build our last
home will be even with the last home on the other side of the Mars. So keep going.
Another shot looking towards Southampton Road, where we'll be building these
two sets of twins. And there is a fifth lot that will be vacant, that will be retained as vacant
for right now development. And that's probably about where my shadow is. But keep going. And
Let's get to the site plan for a second, if we can, at A71 and A72, so we can give the board a sense.
So highlighted in yellow are the two lots that we're converting into the five lots down below, and then if you go to the next one, A72, you will see.
And then if you go to the next one, A72, you will see the four lots and then an L -shaped lot that will be retained in the back.
But those four lots are 40 feet by 100 feet.
The RSA two dimensions across the street are 35 by about 100, even a little bit less.
We're going to be 40 by 100, so we've got 4 ,000 square feet of home.
The home itself is 24 feet wide.
And if we go to our A8, where we have the plans, there'll be a three - and a four -bedroom option.
Just A7 -3 shows the streets department approved the curb cuts.
And we have plans that show basically that it's going to be a little large.
But that's if you get past that open page, the cover page and keep going down.
That's a side view, I guess, or the front view.
Go ahead. Keep going. It's getting a little difficult.
But there are three, four bedroom homes. Keep going. Keep going.
We're getting there with a garage. That's the first floor plan.
Here's the second floor plan for the three bedroom and the four bedroom.
And these homes will fit in, as you've seen, as shown on the adjacent property.
We have a hardship to the ground is that through the development of granting us a variance of the first two homes and what's across the street, as I said, this really is a tale of two streets.
In this beginning part of the stem of the bulb of the cul -de -sac, it's really become residential.
And by allowing these two other sets of twins to be developed, we will be pushing any more industrial away from and creating sort of a pocket for the industrial.
So it's the old Valley View case that there's sort of things around it have changed and been zoned and other uses have been permitted that allow a residential use for this for this property.
If we go back to the photos real quick, and we went those last ones, Ryan, like 31, 32, 33.
And then we have behind those existing homes, if you keep going, I think it was photo 31, 32, 33.
There we go.
So if you see, Mr. Chairman, that's the backyard of the closest, the last set of twins.
There's a privacy fence that's in the rear.
We agreed, Somerton Civic in their letter wanted us to put a privacy, continue the privacy fence behind lots A, B, C, and D, which we're building the four.
So we said we'd be willing to do that.
And then the other thing was, we discussed about putting up some shrubbery and sealing off where the residential ends.
So we have a proposed proviso, and if you could pull that one up, because we think that where Ryan, where Chris Borderline showed it on his image too, he showed shrubbery on the wrong side.
So we've proposed that, and we'll have it, we have proviso language.
It says that we would put the privacy fence in the back where the yellow line is behind lots A, B, C, and D, and along the side of the last lot D, and then we would put a buffer on the other side, fence side, our side, lot E side, where the green is, and also a buffer in that back L.
If you want to show, please, Ryan, the language that we have with that so that the board was willing to adapt it.
Because we're trying to accommodate what came up with Somerton Civic to wall off the residential firm industrial.
So we would just be saying applicant to wreck the six -foot high fence on the rear.
Property line of the proposed lots, A, B, C, and D, as shown on that attached image number two.
Applicant to extend the six -foot high fence along the side property line between proposed lot D and proposed lot E.
from along the side property line as shown in yellow
in that attached image.
And then we will provide landscape buffer
on Lottie as shown in green.
So that would be what we would ask
if the board is willing to grant us a variance today.
So they're trying to accommodate.
Okay, hold on one minute, hold on.
So Hillary, if we were gonna approve this,
is that appropriate?
So typically landscaping,
we we don't um we don't do provisals for landscaping um because that's
we don't um we don't do provisos for landscaping um because that's not not something that we review
um with the with the fence um that would be better i think in a proviso plan because you know fencing
has specific requirements in terms of height and opacity depending on where it's located
so i would be i would be hesitant to to do just a proviso for for a fence
without having revised plans that could be reviewed
we were i know that the six foot high fences is zoned i and i1 industrial was allowed in the rear
i think it would also be allowed along up to the front on the side because i1 does not have a
building setback and therefore uh we could still have a six foot high fence so i i would i would
suggest that i mean if that i think this we're trying we were trying to accommodate
right no i i understand i understand yeah typically fencing fencing needs to be reviewed
by lni so i i i'm hesitant to just add it as a proviso without having it you know in in plans
that can be reviewed so that's that's my well as i said what we were trying again if we
well the only other way i guess would be to hold hold your vote on and let us present a plan but
you would want us to have when i look at it and see if it's okay and all that kind of stuff yeah
i would think so yep or we could because i know we could we could uh present shrubs hang on i'm
get no i was gonna say you could also just get a separate permit for you know what we'll go for a
separate permit for the fence yeah because if it's by right if you do it completely by right that
will be a problem yeah that would be the best way i think all right we'll withdraw forget about
as i said we were just trying to in a nice way that's fine that's fine we could accommodate
accommodate summer and civic i grew up being the first civic association i represented way back
when was uh because i lived up in summer in the 58th floor was the summer and civic so i always
have a soft spot in trying to accommodate summer and civic but we'll withdraw any request for
offense at this point and we'll because i think they're as of right and we'll be able to just
follow through with it okay and then just ask the board to consider uh all our exhibits from a
1 through a 16 which shows uh and ask that our explanation of them be included i have john
Caponi available so Mr. Caponi can get on and verify what I've stated and adopted.
John Caponi, if you're in the virtual audience, please raise your hand.
He's going to be a phone call, a phone number.
Chair, we have a caller with the phone number ending in 2800. Is that him, Mr. Pollack?
Yes. John, is that you?
they've been
unmuted and allowed to speak
sir could you state your name please
sir could you state your name please
and spell for the court stenographer
john are you on
mr caponi
i'm texting him
he usually is pretty quick
he's reconnecting he's telling me okay
mr caponi
mr pollack mr pop yes sir you're as an officer of the court if you will accept my
I can't lightly accept your testimony.
I can't accept my testimony yet.
Questions from the board.
Questions from the board.
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have Alice Udovich.
They have been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Alice, you've already been sworn today.
just state your name for the record and and please testify good afternoon chairman members of the
board alice udovich a -l -i -c -e -u -d -o -v -i -c -h and uh chairman uh the councilman is happy to support
the granting of the variance at this location thank you very much for calling in alice we
appreciate it is there anyone else in the virtual audience i see no hands at this time chair
planning commission
i'm sorry i was i i didn't that's okay that's okay great good afternoon uh chair members of
the board this is greg waldman planning commission staff the comprehensive plan recommends no change
to the existing late industrial zoning the appellant has not supported their hardship
claim with evidence of unique fiscal circumstances or conditions of the property which is a vacant
lot additional residential uses would impair adjacent existing operating uh industrial
businesses that may present noise or emissions unwelcome to new residents the city planning
commission recommends the zoning board deny the variance thank you mi2023 003 830 13481
Demar Drive
I vote yes
Thomas Holloman
my vote is yes
James Snell my vote is yes
Ishmael Shahid
my vote is yes
thank you counsel
thank you Mr. Chairman
always a pleasure members of the board
take care
is there anyone in the 2pm
hearings
their case has not been called
i see no hands chair we're going to take a five minute break then we'll come back and
we'll go right through the 330 list okay thank you everyone thank you chair good afternoon
good afternoon my name is bill bergman and i will be chairing the 330 zba hearings
with me is our vice chair ismail shaheed
present mr chairman our board member thomas holliman present mr chairman and our board
member james snell present mr chairman also present is hillary emerson our attorney and
our executive director tanya sunkett is also here here's our virtual format be advised the
proceedings are being recorded. A video will be available by contacting tonyasunkett at phil .gov.
For the benefit of our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify
themselves before testifying. If you are participating by phone, if you wish to testify,
press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute. To enter an appearance statement, call
267 -270 -5548. Leave your email and the address of the property in question. And finally, the
question and answer box on the screen is not for comments or testimony. All comments should be
directed to our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken. Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
Number four, MI 2023 -002 -415 -1941 East Tioga Street. That case is continued, attorney moving party.
number nine
MI 2023
North 32nd Street
that case is continued
we also
is there any other
requests for continuances
I see no hands
at this time chair
thank you
We also have a few cases that have no exhibits. So MI 2023 -002 -403 -3229 Rohrer Street. Madeline Gonzalez is the owner. There's no exhibits. It's the first listing.
chair we have someone by the name of madeline murphy they've been unmuted and allowed to speak
i could you could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
my name is madeline murphy gonzalez okay i may spell your name please for the court reporter
Madeline, M -A -D -E -L -I -N -E, last name Gonzalez, G -O -N -Z -A -L -E -Z.
We're referring to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Ms. Gonzalez, we do not have any exhibits.
This is the first listing, but we do not have any exhibits from you.
I did mail, I did email the exhibits.
I emailed them to the RCO, I mailed them last week.
um the rcozba i did send them and i did
um the rcozba i did send them and i did speak to the young lady at the office
who stated that she has received them okay um
why don't we do this why don't we take take a look to see if we can find that we'll get back to
you okay hillary or tanya could we see if we we do have these yes chair we're right on it all right
Thank you. So, Ms. Gonzalez, we'll be back with you shortly. Okay?
Okay. Thank you.
All right. And number eight, MI 2022 -004 -360 -10960 Dutton Road. This is the fourth listing.
Mr. Ward is the attorney. Mr. Ward's not available today, so MI2022 -004 -360 -10960,
Dutton Road, I vote to dismiss. Thomas Holloman, I vote to dismiss. James Snell,
my vote is to dismiss ishmael shaheed my vote is to dismiss thank you we're going to start with
uh number two and i excuse me mr chair um can we just um uh address sorry number six and i saw
um someone related to the case jason long raising their hand um we do need to continue
this matter because an attorney is necessary the property is owned in the name of an llc but i did
see Mr. Long's hand raised. I'll call that. Okay. MI 2023 -002 -438 -7701 Gilbert Street. Jason Long.
There's a letter of support from the 50th Ward Democratic
Executive Committee. Mr. Long. Jason Long, can you please raise your virtual hand?
chair jason long has been unmuted and allowed to speak
all right could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer yes jason long
j -a -s -o -n -l -o -n -g right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do do you understand you need an attorney i do okay uh your case is going to be
continued, okay? Yes. Okay. MI 2023 -002 -438 -7701 Gilbert Street. This case is continued. Mark must
be heard the next time. Thank you for calling in, Mr. Long. Thank you. We're going to move to number
Number two, MI -2023 -002 -5453 -9201 James Street.
Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from East Tarsdale Civic Association, a letter of opposition from Council Member Driscoll.
There's also 14 neighbors who have signed a petition.
Mr. Nockamson.
He's coming back in as a panelist now, Chair.
just state your name for the record we've already sworn you a few times
alan knockamson okay could you identify your client in the relationship to the property
yes direct auto sales speeding inc uh and in the virtual audience is its president
albert belfer belfer and our vice chair has just a few questions sir
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, we have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
and uh just to be clear i said you know um i believe uh mr shahad stated the word we said
refusal this is actually a referral so i just want to make that perfectly clear standards you
know slightly different so for 9201 uh james street we're going to review first the notice
of referral then we have a letter of support from east toursdale civic association so this is a very
well attended meeting. Overwhelming support. And we also have a petition from nearby neighbors as
well. Well, just as a matter of background, my client owns a dealership on the same block.
They're trying to sell cars via the internet because of state law. They need to have a
they need to have a separate location. They can't sell their cars on the internet in the same
separate location. They can't sell their cars on the internet.
location in which the dealership is located. So my client bought a property that's ICMX,
which is across the street from I2, to literally have an office space where they can then sell
their cars on the internet to be in compliance with state law. So this is a very minimal use
of this property under the circumstances as icmx as well as being neighboring i2 um and you know
you know we we thought we were going to have smooth sailing here we had a you know over 30
people supported at the community meeting we have a petition overwhelmingly in support
in our left field uh we get this letter of opposition from the district council member
Again, if you read the application itself, it seems like we're selling cars on site. We're not. We can agree to a reasonable proviso in that no cars would be physically located on the property for sale.
that's not my client's intention. We had conversations since we received a letter
of opposition from the district council members. Stan from the office indicated that there was
grumblings with my client's use of the property next door and how they park cars illegally on
the street. So I talked to my client about it and that's not the case. We, you know, there are a lot
of cars that for whatever reason are dumped in front of our property. I feel like he stated that
this, the property previous to his use and ownership of it, um, was basically a salvage
yard, which he cleaned up. So for whatever reason, I think some people believe they stole a salvage
yard and they dumped their cars in front of my client's property. We've called the police on
on the occasion saying, why are people, you know, someone's illegally dumping cars in front of our
place. So I think maybe that's the issue here, but it's nothing what my client's doing. And again,
this is a referral. Is the use what you would expect typically for that zoning classification?
Are we worse than what you would expect of this particular use? The answer is no. I mean,
again, we're a responsible operator. And what we're proposing to do, there's other nearby
automotive uses, what you'll see. And again, the petition you'll see too, we made a conservative
effort to reach nearby property owners and occupants. Then you'll review maps of the area,
photographs of the property, the interior of our current property. So my client built out this,
You know, the interior of the property, you'll see it's a really de minimis use of the interior.
There are like four offices, a reception area, and a bathroom.
The hours of operation are from 10 to 6.
And again, we're not putting any of our cars for sale on this lot.
It's just because of state law, we need to have a separate location.
We're trying to encourage business development in the state of Philadelphia.
And this is how my client needs to earn his living.
And again, it's just because of this requirement under state law.
Then we have floor plans, our RCO meeting notice.
It was a very well -attended meeting, and we had overwhelming support.
Our application for a special exception, our deeds to the property showing direct auto sales,
Speedy Inc. is the owner of the property, and our certificate of tax collectors.
Again, at the conclusion of my presentation, I would ask that Mr. Belfer virtually raise his hand,
be sworn in and have a few questions for him again the application here that's as part of
this referral is the application for personal vehicle sales and rental no sale of used auto
parts on the same lot with all other uses previously approved again we're not having
these cars physically on this lot like they're next they're like on the street you know at the
dealership. We just need this separate physical location to do business on the internet.
So we met with the East Torresdale Civic Association. We had overwhelming support.
30 individuals were in support of this matter. Only six were in opposition to this matter.
And it's shown here as well.
and then again um there's indication by council member driscoll's office that you know we are a
nuisance to to this block that is incorrect and i have my client who will testify to that fact
Um, and again, we're focused on this property itself.
and again we're focused on this property itself
yourself.
We're not focused on the dealership.
So irrespective of what the allegations are, which are not correct, this use of the property,
given its location, we can't be a nuisance.
We're tucked in.
We're, we're, we're, we're on a dead end street and you'll see that as well.
so nearby automotive uses we have these six instances which one of us one of them is us
we have modern auto detailing intent 925 auto repair services center speedy use car dealership
liam's auto repair shop um service excuse me and um one more about game blocked from there
from my screen. But again, what we're offering conceptually, like from what you would see from
the application, it's not out of character. And you can see where we are here. And you'll see
from the photographs, no one can even see us. Like we're tucked in. We're on this street,
James Street, which is one of these streets that no one really can see from the outside,
really State Road. Even my client stated, everyone knows him being on State Road because
for whatever reason Google doesn't recognize James Street so it's really hard for people to
find his dealership location so the petition in addition to him there are over 16 there are 16
addresses which support our use of the property and you can see it's all the people who surround
us so you know again it was a little bit surprising like we kept reaching out to
stand from council member's office just to get a letter of support. And when we saw the letter
of opposition, we were shocked, honestly. Because usually if there's an issue with an applicant,
you'll hear it from the community meeting. We didn't hear any of this. And then this is our
backup for the petition of the people signing. And then the maps of the area, again, we're
across the street from I -2, which will be allowed as a right to ICMX. This is just a referral.
and then you can see some of those locations I mentioned about having you know automotive use
on this block and then photographs of the property you know this is our property from an exterior
point of view proof of posting for today's hearing and then you can see here so there's no
so we're at the end of this street right there is no access there's large trees you cannot see
you cannot access our property directly from the street, from Linden Street, and you can't even see
our property anywhere from Linden Street. So we have no impact essentially with this proposed
use of the property for this particular property. And then interior photos, this, my client built
it out, hasn't used it, but like hoping to, you know, very clean, very efficient, you know,
Hoping to use this for his internet sales for his dealership was on the same block.
And there are plans and drawings.
You walk in, you get a reception area, a waiting area, four offices, and a bathroom.
Right now, he would anticipate having two employees here.
And his hours of operation would be 10 a .m. to 6 p .m.
Meeting notice, we met in mid -August for this matter. Proof of email to the coordinating RCO as well as the district council member's office for the community meeting. That email was sent two weeks before the actual community meeting itself.
27 addresses were notified of that meeting.
Proof of mailing those addresses or application for appeal.
And our deed to the property showing that Speedy Inc. is the owner of the property.
Along with the certificate of tax clearance.
So, again, I'm going to stop sharing my screen.
We had a very well -attended community meeting. People overwhelmingly supported this. We had a petition circulated of all the surrounding properties, and they supported it. So, Mr. Belfort, can you virtually raise your hand?
Mr. Belfort, can you please raise your virtual hand?
Chair Alba Belfort has been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Could you state your name, please, and spell for the course stenographer?
Mr. Belfort, Mr. Belfort, is he, Albert, you have to unmute yourself.
Mr. Belfort?
yvette is he unmuted there it is mr belfer please unmute yourself
it looks like he's a muted chair he might be having some technical difficulties
okay well mr knockamson you're an officer of the court will gladly accept your testimony
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney,
Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have a Stan Sawinski.
They have been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Sir, could you state your name, please,
and spell for the court stenographer?
my name is sean mcdermott it's s -e -a -n -m -c -e -e -r -m -o -e -t and i'm a one i'm an owner
on this james street block i own all right 92 zero hold on sure sure you swear a firm to tell
the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth only yes please proceed thank you um i own
the properties at 9203, 9205, 9207. And I also own two other properties at 9211 and 9213 with
my business partner, Ray Flanagan, that we run our mechanical contract and business out of.
That's called precision mechanical services that we use for loading and distributing work out to
mechanics um but the um yeah so since this group has been they're actively selling vehicles right
now um it's it's been very very difficult for us to get any anything down the street from
deliveries um it's it's it's been a hardship for everyone um and he is a 9201 um which blocks
our our entrance for my tenant at 92 or three sometimes um cars are parked illegally there
are cars actively being sold there because they're they're about three deep right now
in front of his place and they've been being sold for probably three or four years um so there's
there's cars everywhere this is this is for loading only it's it's incredibly hard for us
to operate our business which we have been for over 10 years to when you know when someone wants
to start selling vehicles they're not going to be keeping them off site because they're already on
site okay okay um thank you mr knockamson do you have any questions yeah so um some comment i think
he's referencing the dealership there is no cars being stored or parked there for sale at this 9201
James Street location. We're trying to get this approval by way of a special exception
to allow us just to operate for internet sales. My other understanding is that this individual,
my client would testify to this, was trying to purchase this property prior to my clients
purchasing this property as well. I'm not getting into that, but that's the, and I don't know why
it's under Mr. Simwinski's
name that this
is, you know, that he's testifying
under. So that's a little
peculiar.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, we
have a Peter McDermott.
They've been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Mr. McDermott,
state your name, please, and
spell for the court stenographer.
my name is peter mcdermott p -e -t -e -r mcdermott m -c -d -e -r m -o -t -t i am the brother
wait wait wait wait one moment do you swear we're firm to tell the truth told truth nothing but the
truth i do all right do you have anything to add to what your brother said that's different than
what he said yes so i visited so he's my brother and i do some consult i do some consulting
So I visited, so he's my brother and I do some consult, I do some consulting work with him. I'm very familiar with zoning. I sent some exhibits in that show the sign postings in accordance with the code, title 14, the sign postings at this property at 9201 James Street.
9201 James Street is a corner property.
So the Linden Avenue facade, which Mr.
Nockamson actually referenced, has no postings whatsoever on Linden Avenue.
Furthermore, the view of that facade is obstructed with shrubbery and trees.
Now, the posting that is there, and I can share my screen if you want.
I'm on my phone, but I can share.
The posting that is there is posted on a movable, operable door. It's the only posting. That doorway can be opened and closed to make sure that the passerbys and the general public cannot see what is actually being presented and asking for a deviation from the code.
The hardship on this location is being pushed onto all the other property owners from Mr. Belfort.
I can show you photographs right now that back up what my brother put forward and that the cars right now are three deep at 9201 James Street.
I don't know when the last time he was there, Mr. Nockamson.
Mr. McDermott, that's what I said.
We heard that from your brother.
if there's anything else you want to add please tell us besides there's photographs I have I
have photographs well I I take your brother's testimony I mean we understand what he said and
you said the same thing so I we appreciate in addition to that in addition to that they didn't
properly post it it did not properly post a property Mr. Bergman and I have photographs
which were sent to Tanya as well stating the exact same thing I thank Mr. McDermott thank you very
much. Is there anyone else in the virtual audience
who has comments? Chair, we have someone else by the name
of Stan Sawinski with their hand up.
They've been unmuted and allowed to speak. Please. Hi, could you state your name
please and spell for the court stenographer? Hi, my name is Stan
Lee Sawinski. S -T -A -N -L -E -Y -C -Y
W -I -N -S -K -I. You swear or affirm to
tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do uh one question i wanted to address
is uh why my name was coming up twice uh i accidentally shared my link instead of the
the uh zoning's link uh with uh with mr mcdermott so that that's what happened there okay what's
your testimony sir and uh i just wanted to say that the letter of opposition from the council
office. We actually visited the location in person, and it was not a pretty site. And these
issues that we're talking about today, they're not issues that have recently cropped up. They
have been around for, from my knowledge, at least three and a half years. That's all I wanted to
say thank you mr mr winsky we appreciate your call thank you is there anyone else in the virtual
audience here i see no other hands at this time planning commission this is ron bednar city
planning uh the comprehensive plan recommends no change the existing industrial commercial mixed
juice at this location the proposal should not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood
beyond what's normally might be expected given its specific location, provided that all vehicles
and equipment storage for this business are kept on the property only. Therefore, we recommend that
the Crestford special exception be granted. Obviously, we've had a little bit of different
testimony here, and I would really want to take some time and talk to the other members of the
board um we will vote on this hillary could we do two o 'clock next wednesday yes mr chair we'll vote
on this two o 'clock next wednesday mr knoxon thank you and the record is closed record is closed
we're going to go to number one mi2023 excuse me mr chair before we before we do that can we go
back to number three um rower street and we do not have a complete exhibit packet we need to
we need to continue that matter okay all right um mi 2023 002 403 i think you're just using
32 29 rower street i'm going to bring miss gonzalez back right
I'm going to bring Ms. Gonzalez back, right?
miss gonzalez
Ms. Gonzalez?
She's been unmuted and allowed to speak, Chair.
Ms. Gonzalez, we do not have a complete package of what you mailed in.
Call the office, and they will explain to you what you need for the next time your case is being continued.
I understand that, but I did say it myself.
Ma 'am, you spoke to the staff. This is Tanya from the ZBA. The staff has explained. They spoke to you and told you what was required. That information was not submitted. Therefore, you will be continued. Thank you, Chair. You may continue.
Thank you. Thank you. So MI -2023 -002 -403 -3229 Rower Street. Cases continue.
We're going to number one. MI -2023 -001 -269 -709 West Butler Street. Lynn Nichols is the attorney
for the owner. Letter of non -opposition from Aspera. Letter of non -opposition from Council
member Lozada. Lynn Nichols is coming back in as a
panelist now, Chair. Good afternoon,
Ms. Nichols.
Good afternoon, Chair. Hi. Could you state your name just for the record
and spell for the court synopsis? Lynn Nichols, L -Y -N -N,
last name N -I -C -H -O -L -S. Do you swear
or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
oh i'm sorry i had turned my stupid all right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth nothing but the truth yes i do could you identify your client in relation to the
property yes um the owner of the property is miss nolasco johanna ciprian however chair um her
husband was seriously injured and isn't available today so is it acceptable that i present the test
Absolutely. You're an officer of the court. We will gladly accept your testimony.
Our vice chair has just a few questions.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do with one caveat. We are reducing the number of units from three to two based upon the existing structure, and that was represented to the RCO as well.
Understood. Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes. Thank you.
Thank you. Please proceed, counsel, and share the screen.
Yes. Thank you.
All right. Are you able to see my screen?
We can.
Okay. We submitted our exhibit packet, which includes the application for appeal, the project information form, the deed for the property showing that the property was purchased at a sheriff's sale,
as well as the list of addresses that were notified for our meeting that we held on October the 17th, 2023 with the RCO.
We also included photographs. Here on the left is a photograph looking at the property.
There's a side area here, which you see is the yard.
The photo on the right is looking to the right of the property.
If you look in this photo here, that's on the right, there's an entrance that goes into the basement of the property that the owners added in 2015.
Those were the only changes they've made to the property.
When they purchased the property, it was already developed as a duplex.
So we're here today asking to legalize the property as a two -family, multifamily household living in an existing structure.
Here's the zoning notice.
You can see here is another photograph of the property on the left.
Here on the right, we have a site plan showing that this is an existing two -story multifamily
dwelling duplex unit.
The next photo shows the interior existing as it is.
On the first floor, you have a porch, well, the first patio, the porch, living area.
There's a foyer with stairs that go up to the second floor.
On the first floor, there's the kitchen and three bedrooms.
On the second floor, there's one bedroom, a living room, kitchen with another bedroom,
and the roof is on the rear of the bedroom in the back.
And there's storage in the basement as well as where the utilities are held.
held. And attached also is the letter of non -opposition from the coordinating RCO.
And attached also is the letter of non -opposition.
As I stated when I first started our presentation, the applicant decided after consideration to only
request two families because this is already an existing two -family property which they
purchased and know that they needed to legalize it. And that's what they're asking from the board
here today. So with that proviso, we would request the board to grant the variance for the use of
this property, which can house the two families because of the size of the property. And this was
not a hardship that was created by the applicant. It was a property that was already developed in
this manner when they purchased it. Therefore, it would be economically a financial hardship for
them to have to renovate it in order for it to be used as a single family property we would
submit that it would not harm the neighborhood neighbors or any other part of the community
there and as you see there's no opposition from the community does anyone have any questions
about the exhibits from the board no mr chairman no questions or comments from our attorney hillary
emerson um mr chair i just want to note as miss nichols pointed out that if the board decides to
grant um we would include improvise those specifying two dwelling units thank you
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands chair planning commission this is uh ron bednar city planning the property is
indicated for residential use on the city plan the physical condition of the site is documented
use history uh we recommend your question variance be granted thank you mi2023 001
269 709 west butler street i vote yes wood proviso maximum two units
thomas holloman my vote is yes with proviso james snell my vote is yes with proviso
ishmael shaheed my vote is yes with proviso thank you counsel thank you have a great day
number five nmi 2023 002 455 23 55 garage street sherman tompin is the attorney
We do not have an RCO letter as of yet, but there was a meeting held on 8 -28 -23.
We also have a petition in support signed by three neighbors on the block.
The chairman is coming back in.
Is it a panelist now, Chair?
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
Good evening.
Good evening.
Right. Could you state your name and spell it for the court stenographer?
Yes. My name is Sherman Toppin, S -H -E -R -M -A -N -T -O -P -P -I -N, address 1800 JFK Boulevard,
suite 300. Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. Identify your clients and their relationship to this property.
Yes, my client is Reuven Narayan. He is the member of RON Investments, LLC. He should be on the call here today.
All right, and our vice chair has just a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do, yes.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay. I believe my screen should be in front of everyone. Can you see?
Yes, it is, sir.
Oh, it is? It is. Okay. So, we're here with 2355 Garrett Street.
It is a property nestled between South 24th and 23rd Street, narrow street.
This particular street is one of those one -way driving streets where most of the properties were two -story,
but there's a change in the development character of the property that we'll talk about in a bit, which brings us here today.
I've included my typical exhibit package that I'll walk through as we speak today.
are the refusal, which we have waived the reading of.
But this is the only thing that we're really here to talk about
is a dimensional standards for lowering the density of the third floor.
What we're proposing is to do a three -floor flush facade rather than the setback.
That is the only item that has triggered the refusal.
And the only reason why we have to do that is because this property is between two, two -story.
why we have to do that is because this property is between two two -story properties so the code
requires that if you're going to develop a property between two two stories your third floor
has to be set back we don't want we are seeking a variance because we believe that's a hardship
for our particular situation and because of the the way the block is developing right now and
we'll see that in a few minutes i'll just just move by the the easy stuff here's the deed my
clients owning the property their llc and the tax clearance for their llc and as we get down
to the application for appeal we'll talk about the the uh hardship a little bit more when we
get to the pictures will be better said then project information sheet exhibit five exhibit
six as you can see what we're talking about is a property that is one property off the corner
on the corner of South 24th and Jarrett. And there it is in that circle. All the properties here,
we're not looking for anything different. It's going to be single family, new construction.
And as you saw, this particular property here in the red box is going up three floors. Now,
the board, just so the board is clear, the third floor that it looks like it is already there
is a hardship created by my client. That's not why we're here. On the pleasure of the board,
if we must remove it, we will. But if you can look just two properties over, you can see
by right, there's a three -story property that's built, and we were looking to basically match
that. Across the street from that, there's three others. Right across the street, one, two, three,
on the same street, just a few blocks up, all three stories straight up, and right across the
street is a three -story property. And so this is what we're going to get to as far as what the
development character of the block. This block is beginning to develop as a three -story flush
facade type of block. There are a couple that have the setback, but because of that, those blocks,
it is a compromise of the sale price. My client's taking the position that if you don't do the
three -floor flush with the full roof deck, you're going to be stuck in a market where your third
floor is much smaller and people don't want to look out of a balcony looking at the house next
door. They want to be on the roof deck. They want the larger square foot interior with the fuller
roof deck. That's more marketable and that will prevent the economic hardship that he foresees
in this particular development. So as we move through the exhibits, again, you see the property
and just looking at what we have here on the just and this is going to play into what we will be
talking about when planning comes in we are here because we need the variance to do the three four
but this property of the corner does not because of the way the code is drafted so this property
will be able to go up three floors flush this property on the next the two -story property here
we believe that that is a that owner should be on the call today in support of our project
he would be the most, I guess, affected neighbor being right next door. And this owner is in
agreement with it, with our zoning request. So again, this property is a matter of right,
can go three stories flushed if it's ever redeveloped. As you can see further down the
block, this is the property that is identical to what we're doing. This is the one that's set back.
so you have one setback and you have one that's three stories straight up the one that's here on
the corner next to it that can go three stories straight up because it won't have a two -story on
either side of it so that one so you count two now that can be three stories without this planning
commission um relief and then if you go down the block you see the other three here so that means
this this building can go three stories if it's ever developed with flush without the zoning
board being involved. And if it does, then so will this one, and then so will this one.
So the way this block has been developed, three -story flush facades are going to be the
direction that you'll see most of the houses developed. And that's what we're arguing as a
hardship. Across the street, looking towards South 24th, that block, there are no three -stories.
That's going to stay pretty much the same. Immediately across the street, these are the
stories that are again the older housing stock that are a part of the legacy of the property
but right at the corner again this is the type of construction that is marketable that people
are buying on the block um and and as we go through again these are the three that are already
on this block they didn't have dakota zoning because of the configuration of not being between
two two stories but they're right there um and we we see that this is exactly what my client
believed that he could do when he started his construction stopped it before you know and to
come to the board to get the uh the approval to proceed uh and again this is just another view
the approval to proceed and again this is just another view of the same argument that we're
of the same argument
making that this type of construction three floors uh flush facades is the marketing direction of the
development of this particular corner and street as we go down further again that's just another
picture here looking into the inside all we've got is the property is basically you know studded out
first floor is second floor going up third floor it's just started out there's nothing else
happening in the property but this they've stopped all construction pending the direction of this
basement is here the mechanicals are basically roughed in and that's where the property is at
this point in time awaiting the outcome of these proceedings this is the rear of the property as
can see again just started out and waiting awaiting the outcome of this and this is the
little patio space this it should be mentioned that this particular property is 14 feet wide
and 48 feet deep it's small that means every bit of square foot is needed for marketable square foot
for sale and we feel that if we start to chop away at that on the third floor it will really
compromise the ability of this particular owner to sell it and recoup or he'll face what we believe
a financial hardship so just looking at let me bring this down a little bit smaller so we can
look at the layout of the floors and nothing nothing unusual to see here that we would not
expect basement is just going to be undeveloped with mechanicals in this crawl space there'll be
a window for egress on either side the front and the rear to get out of that basement as you walk
up the stairs to the first floor there's a living room dining room kitchen basic setup walking out
to the small patio in the back the very small patio there as you go up to the second floor
there's a bedroom on the front and the back with a common bath in between those two and as you get
into the third floor and this is where we feel is the most marketable value of the property is that
there's a primary large bedroom there with the clause walking closet and either this can either
be developed into with a walk -in bath with a full closet here or there's different options but i
think this is what this is what we feel is the marketing the owner's area of the house and why
we think it's important to have that full uh that full layout there as you get into the top you have
a fuller roof deck as well and again we're just talking about a property that's 14 feet wide by
48 in depth all done it will only have 14 and 1440 square feet which is still relatively small
to carry the price um that they're seeking or that the market will bear at this point in time
so let's go down let's go further down through the the through the package here we have just more
visuals of the property how it will look on the front you've kind of seen it as it's roughed in
door first floor window second and third with the roof deck up top and uh and the uh basically the
you know straightforward layout nothing nothing unusual or different so we did send to the rcos
a notice as we can see here this we also with this notice sent the refusal as well as several
pictures of the property that meeting was not attended so well but we did mark we didn't send
it to 175 different near neighbors. And this is the list of those folks and their certificate of
mailing. We do the old school. We don't do VISTA. So we actually have to do it six to a page. So
there's all of our postings of certificate of mailing. The zoning board, the zoning ZVA notice
poster, as you can see here, was posted on the property at the appropriate time before the
hearing. And we did walk, and I personally walked a petition out to the neighbors so they could see
what we're trying to do and to understand it even easier. And so the kind of petition we put was
very clear. The code requires this middle look, but we're looking for this corner look. And we
asked members of the community that were there on that day when we did the door knock, what was
their preference? And we got from that three members of the community that those were just
the three that were there. Everyone that basically we met and encountered that would talk to us
said that they were fine with an approved and signed this petition didn't have very many people
so I guess it's a very narrow block and we went there around 10 o 'clock during the day so there
may have been people at work but during the actual ZBA hearing meeting there were 10 members there
but not in the affected area and so that's why we do have well we did get last night um a um a sub
letter of non -opposition from Point Priest Community Development Corporation so we have that
And I added it to this presentation here today, but it should be coming from Point Breeze.
And as you can see, they mention here that they don't, that the reason why they're taking non -opposition because although there were 10 persons.
they don't that the reason why they're taking non -opposition because although there were 10
persons that attended the meeting there were none within the two within the you know the the radius
that's required and as a result they um they took a neutral position on the project uh knowing that
we did a petition and did other things there so with that i would like to advance um mr narian
with if he can raise his virtual hand
Reuben Narayan, please raise your virtual hand.
He's been unmuted and allowed to speak, Chair.
Sir, could you please state your name and spell for the court's sonographer?
Reuben Narayan?
Spell your name, please.
Hold on a second.
And maybe I can do something here.
Microphone, speakers.
We hear you.
Just one of you.
Oh, okay.
You don't need to see me.
I'm sorry.
State your name and spell for the court stenographer.
My first name, Reuven.
Last name, Narayan.
First name spelled R -E -U -V -E -N.
Last name spelled N -A -R -Y -A -N.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
please proceed counsel uh yes mr narian have you been listening to the testimony that i've
been making on your behalf for the project of at 2355 garrett street yes sir and would you
adopt this testimony as your own testimony yes sir and is there anything that i've omitted or
didn't say that you'd like to add to what i've already testified to on behalf of the project
and yourself uh no everything seems to be in order um um just the third floor it's going to
be like the master and the bed in the back like uh like you said and it's going to be a walk -in
closet and the and the the area that is closer to the to the street is going to be like the master
shower so i heard that you weren't so sure about that but it's uh this is the layout if it makes
any difference it's in the plans as well oh yes yes see that that thank you for clarifying everything
besides that sounds correct yes sir okay well i appreciate that so at this time if there's
any further questions for the board i'd like to answer them questions from the board no chair
no mr chairman questions or comments from our attorney hillary ramson
just a brief comment mr chair um we didn't receive the letter from the rco so mr top and
And if you could please forward that as soon as we're done, that would be great.
Thank you.
Yes, I will do that.
I will do that.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Chair, we have a call -in user four.
Call -in user, please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the course stenographer?
Hello? Is your hand still up? Yes, their hand is still up, Chair. Call and user, can you
please unmute yourself? Yes, hi, Tiffany Green, concerned citizen of Point 3, RCO. Hold on,
Do me a favor. Could you spell your name, please, for the court stenographer?
C -I -F -F -A -N -Y -G -R -E -E -N.
Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Okay. First of all, I have not received anything from this particular developer at all.
I didn't even receive a notification that he sent out.
We have not received anything from him regarding this project.
But yet, so when we went to the meeting, we were at the meeting, there was considerable, you know, opposition from us.
And I think .3 CDC, I believe because the person that was heading up the meeting then, she talked about it.
And we talked to him about doing the setback.
What happened, and I'm trying to – my notes are really sketchy, but that he had built straight up,
and then he did not follow the rules in terms of doing a setback, okay?
And so the thing about it is that now he wants to legitimize this because he didn't follow the rules.
And we don't think that this is correct because of the fact that what's bothering me here with this is this, okay?
And I'm going to say this and put it on the record.
Okay, Point Breast was one of the first communities, and when we met with Deputy Mayor Greenberg back in 2013, it was stated to us that this was their way up because we did not want the three -story houses in the middle of the blocks regarding privacy, skyline, whatever you want to say, that they were going to do the setback.
Now, it was supposed to be the setback period on two both sides.
Now, it was supposed to be the setback period on to both sides.
Now, what this came in with about the lots, this was something that city council snuck in.
We don't know anything about that, but I know that the setback was supposed to be so you wouldn't be up on the neighbors.
And I feel that, you know, at this point that a lot of this is being changing, and I feel that this should be upheld.
Okay, because it's not right that a lot of the community at this particular point are not, you know,
A lot of times people are busy, they can't come, they can't sit.
Like, it's very hard to sit through this for the whole day up until 3 .30,
and then you expect people to sit on here and wait just for one project.
So the thing is that there's no real variance.
There's no hardship here with him.
There's no hardship why he needs to have this variance done.
Where is it?
This is Sussan Pol's hardship, and I don't see or we don't see where he actually had a hardship here
with somebody that didn't follow the rules and tried to get over and he got caught.
That's what it feels at this point.
And we're saying that we're asking the zoning committee to uphold this.
This is not right.
This was supposed to be about part of character and maintain the character of two -story communities.
And constantly coming into our neighborhood where you have mainly newcomers or sometimes voting
because they're living in three -story, that's not right to the two -stories, you know.
And right now, if there's no hardship for this or whatever, then it should be stuck with the rules,
which is do a setback in between the two stories.
That's our position.
And at the meeting, we really talked to him about this and everything.
They were trying to make a position.
He was supposed to go and talk to the neighbors.
I don't know.
He said he came back with three.
I have no information.
I have no copy of a petition.
I have nothing at this point from him.
He didn't even hold up the rules to notify us as an RCO of when the meeting was coming.
Thank you for calling.
Thank you.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Chair, I see no hands at this time.
Mr. Toppin, you have a comment?
Oh, yeah. I just want to say that it was typical for our office.
We send our notice and request for a meeting to all the RCOs at the same time.
And the lead RCO, which is Point Breeze,
connected to us and they coordinated all the other RCOs.
All information that we sent was to all RCOs together by email.
Point Breeze, and that's how I guess Mrs. Green, I appreciate her being here, she was at the meeting because she did get notice either from us or from the actual RCO.
In that meeting, it was my commitment to walk the block myself with the petition I just showed and shared and to do a doorknock to see what the people wanted because the meeting wasn't attended by folks on that street, which I have done.
What Mrs. Green has not done is shown me anybody who lives on that street that is opposed.
and so there was no one in the in the in the affected area at the meeting there's no one in
the effect the in the affected area in this meeting in opposition to our request for variants
um and we do we recognize what the intent of the the planning was for this but we see that intention
has been it is it as it is in practicality more three -story facades will be built on this street
and it is happening as we can see it.
So with that said, we'd like the rest there.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
This is Ron Bednar, City Planning.
The property is indicated for residential use on the city plan
or adopted district plan recommends no change
to the existing zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence
of unique physical circumstances or condition of the property.
and would prevent it from being used in conformity
with the dimensional requirements of the code,
therefore, we recommend the request of that is not be left.
NY 2023, 002 -455 -2355 Goward Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, I vote no.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you. Thank you, Lord.
MI 2022 -001 -395 -341 North 52nd Street.
Vern Anastasio is the attorney.
No RCO letter, but meeting was held on 6 -29 -23 by the 44th Democratic Ward.
Mr. Chair, I just want to note that we did receive the proof of posting that was requested.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Anastasio, you have been sworn before to state your name for the record.
Yes, my name is Vern Anastasio, and I represent Mr. Kester Osuji, who is in the, should be here today.
Yes, my name is Vern Anastasio, and I represent Mr. Kessi.
Okay, and our vice chair has just a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents that is needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you. Please proceed. I see you sharing your screen.
Yes, sir. Thank you. Mr. Chair, this is 341 North 52nd Street. This is a portion of 52nd Street
that is ostensibly a commercial corridor. I have an exhibit packet of 62 individual
documents in addition to a memo brief that I put up here just now. I sent it over to
Attorney Emerson after I sent over the binder, and I realize you have not had an opportunity
to review the memo brief, so I will understand if you decide to review it prior to voting
at the conclusion of this hearing.
But just to be clear,
we meet the unnecessary hardship under O 'Neill
and the Marshall Courts
and all relevant statutory requirements
for granting of the use variance
because for decades,
this property has always had
two commercial operations in this property
in addition to the multifamily above.
Our application is for takeout restaurant for one of them and personal services in the other.
And for as far back as one can determine and the history of the property is in my exhibit packet for evidence.
It's always been commercial spaces, either for retail or some other very high dense density and high activity sorts of uses.
The personal services uses and the takeout restaurant are actually less activity than what we could have as a matter of right in an RM1 property.
There are commercial uses that are permitted, and those commercial uses run everything from a hospital to a religious assembly.
And obviously far more detrimental to the community, far more congestion, far more traffic than what we're proposing today.
Okay. So with that, I'm going to share, show you the interiors. Here's the third floor apartment
that we are proposing. And then here's the living space on the lower level. See if I can
come out a little bit here. There we go.
that's the second floor and then on the first floor we would have two commercial spaces one
518 square feet one 570 square feet when we did meet with the rco we presented a trash plan a
lighting plan and a security plan for the entire corner obviously we want to make sure that this
facility is lit well and safe not only for our folks who will be occupying the building but for
the surrounding community this is the property in question as you can see there historically has
always been a commercial space right here on the corner and historically always been a separate
commercial space right here on the side and it's a very long history of that the unique physical
condition here is that this property is already laid out it's already separated it already has
two long -term long -standing commercial spaces and to convert this property now
to residential would would be a herculean task on the first floor especially given all the
different entrances and the roll down windows and and the like so there's the area in question
there's the property again we have interior photos as well
this is what we'd like to do to the property
obviously we'll make it facade improvements we'll have a handicap ramp
here's the facade improvements on the side of the property
that we plan to make.
So it'll be certainly an upgrade to what there is now
and what there has been for quite some time.
for quite some time if you bear with me we were in fact able to get
If you bear with me.
signatures of support in our exhibit packet
i've already submitted them submitted them to them to the staff but we do have a petition of
support from 13 individual households on the block both on haberford and on i'm sorry
on 52nd street and on vine and in addition we did meet with the rco as you can see here
the history has been a retail store a sandwich takeout a restaurant i mean there's a history
of this use going all the way back to the 80s 181 individual households were mailed we did meet with
the community and we were under the impression that there was going to be a letter sent but
there are times when that doesn't happen so with that i want to move this and the
memo brief into evidence and i do want to once again want to reiterate that we do meet the
the case law and the statutory requirements for a unique physical condition of the property on the first floor with two separate commercial spaces and a long history of over 40 years of the exact use we're trying to legalize today.
And with that, I'm going to rest. I would like to call Mr. Kester Azuzi to the stand in order to be sworn in.
Kestor Osuji, can you please raise your virtual hand?
Chair, I see him in the audience.
He just raised his hand, Chair.
Thank you.
Please unmute yourself and wait for the chair.
Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Yeah, my name is Kestor Osuji, K -E -S -T -E -R, and my last name is spelled O -S -U -J -I.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Mr. Osuji, did you hear my presentation to the board this evening?
Yes, I did.
Is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Yes, true.
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, I do.
Thank you, Mr. Osuji.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments for our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Yes, Mr. Chair, just a brief question.
Mr. Anastasio, the listed owner is Bernice Osuji.
um is is that another name for kestero suji or are they related or it's his wife oh it's his
wife okay it's wife's property okay thank you yep it's your comments from the virtual audience
i see no hands at this time chair planning commission i'm betting our city planning
while this property is currently indicated for residential use on the city plan given its
documented use history. We have no objection to the
request advance. Thank you.
Do we want to take one more week and see if we can get something from the RCO?
It's up to you, Mr. Chair. According to my notes, the meeting was held in June.
Is that correct, Mr. Anastasio? It was. And this is like the
third listing. And this was not the first
RCO meeting, by the way. Okay, thank you.
MI -2022 -001 -395 -341 -North 50, 2nd Street, I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahi, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you all. Have a good evening.
Is there anyone in the 3 .30 hearing list in the virtual audience whose case has not been called?
I see no hands, Chair.
Thanks, everybody.
Got a lot of work done today.
We cleared up a lot of the backlog, and, you know, I appreciate what everybody did today.
Thanks, everybody.
Great job, Chair.
Here we go.
Thanks, everyone.
Thanks, y 'all.
Have a good night.
Good night.