ZBA Hearing - July 31, 2024

the structures have a uniform third story with zero setback, rendering that condition the most

appropriate to ensure a uniform facade. The existing cornice on top of the second floor

will be retained, and you can see that in the rendering up on the screen. Additionally, the lack

of third floor setback is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood, which includes a

recently granted variance at 1120 Mars Street, which I did point to in the image earlier on on

the aerials, which suffered from similar lot dimensions to the one that's before you today.

I have included that permit history at Exhibit 9. On the aerials at Exhibit 8, let me turn back

to those for a moment, I also attempted to give the board a more comprehensive sense of the scale

of the surrounding neighborhood. Everywhere that you see a star contains a third story with zero

front setback. You can see the one on Mars Street slightly better from the southeast view,

which I showed a little bit earlier, where you can see how these newer additions

which I showed a little bit earlier, where you can see how these newer additions remain

consistent with the existing two-story neighborhood. The applicant submits the

proposal is the least minimum variance and is limited just to the necessary relief to ensure

the third floor can be constructed without impact to surrounding homes while still creating viable

interior living space for Mr. Dolan. We submit the proposal will not increase congestion,

harm neighbors' properties or impair light and air. As shown, the front facade of this proposed

addition will be built in a mansard style, angled towards the interior of the property

to reduce the visibility of the addition from the street and to add architectural nuance to

this addition. This is consistent with the vast majority of third-story additions that surround

this property. The addition will have no impact on congestion and the structure will continue to be

used as a single family dwelling. Naturally, this applicant will have to apply for a building

permit and will comply with any particular requirements that are imposed under the building

code. Full analysis is provided in the memo of law submitted to the board at Exhibit 11.

As the board knows, we did also meet with the community. We met with East Pass Young Crossing

in June. And as is shown at Exhibit 14, their support was unanimous. At this point, I'd like

to call up my client to adopt my testimony and I can bring up the architect if there's any questions.

So Rosemary Dolan, if you are in the audience, if you could hit the raise hand button.

Rosemary Dolan has been allowed to speak.

could you please state your name is spelled for the court stenographer

my name is rosemary dolan r-o-s-e-m-a-r-i-e-d-o-l-a-n you swear or affirm to tell the truth

the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes sir please proceed counsel um miss dolan have

you heard all the testimony and evidence that was offered in front of the board today

Yes, I have.

And you are the current owner of this property?

Yes, I am.

Would you agree that the testimony given was true and accurate, and would you adopt it as if it were your own?

Yes, I would.

Thank you. Happy to answer any questions.

Questions from the board.

Yes, I have a question.

The neighbors that are on either side of the property, do you know if they were part of this support?

so they my client has been in touch with at least one of those neighbors that did reach out

um i don't know miss graham whether any of the immediate on either side had attended the meeting

i don't recall if they were there they were certainly provided with notice and given the

opportunity to attend but they have been in discussions with at least one of them

and was it favorable or do you know they they didn't offer any any position they had a couple

of questions on the engineering behind it but you know they they didn't seem to raise any objection

other questions from the board

questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson

not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience

i've seen no hands at this time chair planning commission thank you chair bergman and good

afternoon david effecto with the city planning commission chairman and board members the

comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa 5 residential single family zoning at this

location all of the homes on the east side of this block face are three stories tall so the

proposed lack of an eight foot setback will match the character of this block face the city planning

commission recommends the board grant a proposed dimensional variance thank you mi 2024 002 710

1706 south 11th street i vote yes michael johns my vote is yes cheryl gaston my vote is yes

Sennetta Graham my vote is yes

Ty Owen my vote is yes

James Snell my vote is yes

Ishmael Shaheed my vote is yes

Thank you counsel

Thank you

Number 14 MI 2024 002711

4500 North 20th Street

Justin Crick is the attorney

There is a letter of opposition from the 13th Ward RCO

so justin kirk is coming in as a penalist

good afternoon good afternoon council could you please state your name and spell for the

course stenographer yes justin j-u-s-t-i-n krik k-r-i-k

Yes, Justin, J-U-S-T-I-N, Crick, K-R-I-K.

Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do.

And could you identify your client and relationship to this property?

Yes. William Chow, he is the member of Three Munchkins LLC, which is the owner of the property.

Our vice chair has a few questions, sir.

Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?

i do 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 yes thank you council please

proceed and share your screen very good thank you uh members of the board um this is an application

for 4500 north 20th street the property is designated as an rm1 um zoning designation

classification however since it's uh since i guess almost the the dawn of time or so as far

back as records show this has been a commercial retail property um since in the 1960s there's

been a gas station there's been a dry cleaner and currently the owner operates and owns a

small uh groceries store with eat-in food capabilities um in a portion of this location

So I am going to jump for a moment just to give you an idea. We're talking about basically a strip center, shopping center, and the left side of this building is currently operating as a basically a small deli that has takeout food, also eat in, and it does have a license to sell alcohol in to consumers as they come and go along with the food.

The owner would like to, on the right-hand side of this center, open up a beer distributor and cease the alcohol sales out of this establishment and will obtain a different license, the appropriate license for beer distributor if allowed to operate a distributor out of this section of the property.

So to back up a little bit, the property is located on an island of itself at the intersection of Windrum, West Wing of Hocking, North 20th, and even Germantown Avenue.

This is essentially right next to the Wayne Junction train station, SEPTA train station.

And as you can see, it is zoned RM1, but as future evidence will show you and the historic zoning, there has not been a residential use on this property for quite some time.

So the approved use is a commercial use, and what we're seeking with the wholesale distributor would be a little bit more in the industrial realm.

And as you can see, that there is industrial zoning and CMX3 zoning nearby, albeit a lot of this is within the train track area.

You do have some. I'm sorry, let me just double check my audio there.

You're back. You're back. Thank you.

So so you would see that the there is some commercial use within this area.

it's not just the train station. But we are, again, as zoomed in, an island all of its own

with what would be from this picture, you can kind of take it as the blacktop roof is the

existing business in the one side, which would continue to exist, but no longer with the sale

of alcohol of any sort, if this side of the building, the white roof and a little bit of

the Black Group was allowed to be a wholesale beer distributor. So from many of the different

streets, you can see that there's ample parking in the lot to accommodate patrons of this business

and ample egress and ingress from the lot from many different areas. You'll also see that there

are street lights throughout the area that keep it lit, although the owner has indicated the

willingness and intent to clean up portions of the property and add lighting to the property.

You can see there's lighting along the front of the building as well for security purposes,

as well as cameras. Some additional angles and then the rear of the property. And some of the

concern dealt with the rear of the property of the neighbors, which I will get into shortly.

But there is a letter of opposition. There was a unanimous opposition to this from the neighborhood.

And I would like to go through why we believe that there is still hardship and that we are entitled to the variance.

Here is a site plan that was a little bit older, but it is one that still maintains the location of things on the building.

Again, you can see that we have no adjacent properties touching us, but we do have zoning of RS.

RS, we do have zoning of RM1, a lot of multifamily in the area, and then some single family nearby

as well. The property interior layout is very straightforward. As a beer distributor, normally

you might see it will have a single office and the rest be very open warehouse. These pictures

are what it is proposed to look like because the owner currently uses and is able to sell

alcohol out of the neighboring store. He has bought it in bulk for the time being,

but essentially the main difference here between the two establishments that addresses one of the

concerns that we think the neighborhood has is that the neighborhood felt that people would

take sort of the grab-and-go alcohol that's available under the license that is held by

the the restaurant uh portion or the deli local grocery store um and then loiter or or you know

not go too far before consuming the beverage uh while the owner who's on the phone could testify

he does not see that as regularly on his property but we do acknowledge that it is at least something

that the neighborhood has has claimed was an issue and in counter to that the idea of a beer

distributor is really one in which someone buys a larger quantity for taking and consumption

usually at a destination. It's not something that is oftentimes, at least in common place,

use of a case of beer versus buying a single beverage from the neighboring store. So we do

believe that the change in the type of alcohol sales actually decreases the probability of people

loitering to drink the beverage or consume it versus the idea of picking it up for the type

of wholesale distribution that it is for a final destination other than the property.

Because there has been talk and discussion about some of the safety in the area overall,

which we have not seen anything that indicated that the sale of alcohol in this other manner

would be any different than the sale of alcohol that is allowed in terms of what they're claiming

is a result of the alcohol sales, is that the street would be cleaned up a little bit in the

rear. There already are cameras, and there would be additional lighting placed there with respect

to the neighbors that are behind it, because there are neighbors behind the building as well.

um just to jump through a few things very quickly and can i ask can i ask where's all the

beer being stored now this is where the beer is being stored in the so i will scroll up for one

moment if you look at this building and cut it in half this right inside that says story building

is the existing business in which um in which uh he operates and is allowed to sell alcohol but not

in bulk he's allowed to sell it in smaller amounts so he currently stores some of it in this right

in this left hand side but this is what would become okay so when i said to him i said i hope

you're not operating a beer distributor right now he said this is not customers do not come in here

this he buys in bulk because instead of buying every couple of you know every two weeks or

something, he buys it once in a while. This could be resold as the distributor if this was granted

and when, but the hope is that this inventory is just here in place of it being stored elsewhere

for his business that does allow alcohol sales. So with the alcohol sales in this business

that's existing, again, the idea is that because it has tables and chairs, because it is allowed

for Eden and take out of this alcohol. It has been basically people, the neighborhood has felt

that people have continued to use the alcohol or take it out and imbibe right there or in the park

nearby. Again, the change from this e-license that they have to sell the one-offs over to a

distributor license where you sell, you know, larger case or so at a time would be, in our

opinion, a reduction in the on-site or on-premises or even nearby consumption that people had

complained about or, you know, believe that was going on. I would, I do have the letter from the

neighborhood and I would like to address that, but let me preliminarily just show that we have a deed

from the llc evidencing uh ownership of the property it was purchased in may of 20 uh 2021

there are no real estate taxes uh currently outstanding on the property and we did meet with

And we did meet with the 13th Democratic RCO, 13th Warder RCO in June and sent it to a long list of individuals.

the 13th um 13th democratic rco

So I will also show that postings were placed on various facades of the building as it's got a lot of different sides to it and frontages.

and then this was not included in my materials

because I just received this as the board may have

but this is the RCO's report

and as you'll see

they indicated that a few items in particular

we do know that this is not a buy right request

we did not see how the additional sale of this type

this type of sales of alcohol, where alcohol sales already are permitted and do exist

in the neighboring store, how this would directly affect or deter property ownership.

We also did not see how it would decrease neighboring property values by having this

type of business. And because, again, the stop and go is associated with this owner,

we were able to take into account a lot of the concerns that were made or brought to our

attention by this owner. And in our opinion, most of them, again, stemmed around the idea of people

consuming alcohol right on the premises or nearby. We asked about negative effects on local

residents. We understand that the type of business of alcohol sales is not one that's often preferred

in neighborhoods, but we also did not see how this would increase any current density in the area as

proposed or how it would directly affect the RSA families just by having this as an option

for purchase. While the premises is located in other zones that prevent certain type of businesses,

for instance, narcotic injection sites and so forth, the idea of sales of alcohol is not

necessarily prohibited other than the fact that, again, this property is improperly

designated historically as residential. So as they did indicate for us, we did

allege and maintain that the community, that local residents would basically carry the

purchase home with them or somebody would stop and pick up the alcohol to go. So we do believe

that with the idea of if this is granted, we have agreed with the neighborhood to cease the sales

in the way that they're being sold at the grab-and-go location.

And we would have approximately two to three employees at the site for security.

There's camera and lighting around the property.

The parking lot's large and does accommodate any amount of foot traffic or car traffic.

But again, we did get a pretty much basically unanimous no from everybody who was at the RCO.

But don't believe that they provided any any real insight as to why this specific use, where there is already alcohol sales on the premises or on the property, why this use would be any worse when we actually believe that it would help the conditions that are most concerning to the neighbors.

um we also uh had put out there to the neighborhood a willingness to agree to certain

hours of operation if that was required or by proviso uh to to close by 10 o'clock

uh in the evening and then you know obviously in accordance with the sales uh under the liquor

control board laws as well for this uh for this type of use um i do have uh william chow on the

phone if he is available to adopt testimony. Mr. Chow. Mr. Chow has been allowed to speak.

Sir, could you please state your name and spell for the court's stenography?

William Chow, W-I-L-L-I-A-M-C-H-O-W. Right. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth,

the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Please proceed, counsel.

Thank you. Mr. Chow, have you heard my testimony to the board today?

Yes, I have.