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