Thank you.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this meeting at the Philadelphia Zoning Board of Adjustment.
With me is our board vice chair, Tanetta Graham.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board secretary, Cheryl L. Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, Michael Johns.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, Ty O'Wynn.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our board member, Ryan McAdams.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also, here is our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
our zoning board director ian haggerty and our board administrator lakeisha dandy recording of
this hearing will be posted on the zba website by participating you consent to be recorded this is
an in-person meeting with remote capabilities whether remote or in person if you're called to
speak you must state and spell your name then wait to be sworn in once you've been sworn in
please state your name each time before testifying any person may enter their appearance to become an
interested party there are three ways to enter you can identify the case property address in
your zoom webinar registration you can see a staff member or you can call the zba appearance line by
the close of business tomorrow call 267-270-5548 leave a message that includes your email and the
address of the property of the appeal case following guidance is for our remote attendees
when directed you must raise your virtual hand in order to be recognized to speak second if
you're called to testify you'll be prompted to join as a panelist please accept the request and
turn on your camera third the webinar Q&A is for questions about the hearing do not comment on the
cases in a Q&A fourth if you're participating by phone press star nine to raise your hand and star
six to unmute for our in-person attendees please refrain from talking eating drinking or during the
hearing. Verbal and physical aggression will not be tolerated. Restrooms are across from the
elevators. Water fountain is just outside the room to the right. When speaking on the record,
you must speak directly into the microphone in order to be heard by all attendees and the court
reporter. In the event of an emergency, please follow the directions given over the public
address system or by the staff. The main exit is through the double doors at the rear. The nearest
stairwells to the left outside the doors. In case of an evacuation, the rally point is Love Park
directly across Art Street. Please remain here so we can account for you. Let's look at our
schedule for this afternoon. Number one, MI 2025-005-574-765 South Christopher Columbus Boulevard.
This case has been continued attorney moving party.
number three mi 2025 006 261 1135 to 43 south broad street at case being continued to may 6th at 2 p.m
number six
scroll here
number six mi2025-006-267 541 east worcester street that case has been continued until may
6th at 2 p.m. And number 10. MI 2025 006372 434 Dickinson Street. That case has been continued
to May 6th at 2 p.m. Are there any other requests for continuances?
I see no hands at this time. Thank you. We're going to go to our add-on case. So MI2025-002-846-5001 Frankfurt Avenue.
i vote yes with proviso revised plans two pages stamp by stamped by zba february 18th 2026
february 18th 2026 an updated min overlay district applicant acknowledgement form
an updated min overlay
must be reviewed by the planning commission prior to permanent issue
michael johns my vote is yes with proviso general gaston my vote is yes with proviso
tenetta graham my vote is yes with proviso ryan mcadams my vote is yes with proviso
i win my vote is yes with proviso we're going to go to our uh our first case um michael john has
recused himself from this case so it's mi2025-006-253-230 north 53rd street verna anastasio
is the attorney they're being promoted to panelists thank you
afternoon mr chair good afternoon council council you've already been sworn just for the record
could you please state your name and spell it for the stenographer yeah it's verne anastasio
a-n-a-s-t-a-s-i-o on behalf of vincent447llc and terry dowd all right and i i um there is
a letter of unanimous opposition from the 44th ward 15 votes our vice chair has a few questions
sir thank you good afternoon definitely have you uh submitted your documents and exhibits five days
in advance of this hearing yes and do you waive the reading of the refusals and stipulate to the
accuracy i do thank you you can show your screen and proceed with the case thank you
To 30 North 53rd Street.
The application is for a three-family dwelling.
This initially was for a four-family dwelling.
My client then came to me.
I reviewed the proposal.
I believe that the three-family dwelling made more sense,
so they are not touching the existing accessory garage structure,
and therefore we're proceeding with a three-family dwelling.
It is zoned RSA 3, and that's why the property was refused.
I mean, the application was refused.
Let me take a show you the interior layout. This is a shell. It's been vacant for quite some time. It's been squatted in. It's been broken into. It's been pipes and materials have been pulled out. The garage was battery rammed. The property has been vandalized repeatedly.
My client did put it up for sale. He purchased it for $215,000. By the way, that's in the exhibit packet that I submitted to evidence, page 31.
The value of the property as of today, page 34 and 35, is $231,000.
Property was listed for sale just around that asking price, that valuation price, and no one was interested in purchasing it for that price.
It is ostensibly a shell.
What my client, after having put the property up for sale with no legitimate bites, my clients decided to, hoping to renovate the property, move into one of the larger units here.
It's color coded and then still have the benefit of two other units to help offset the cost of the renovation.
And we're going to get into some of that.
But this is this is the front unit here.
I'll zoom in for you.
which is a smaller unit, as you can see here.
When you come into the door and make a left, you'll enter unit two,
which will allow someone to enter the housing market at a more affordable price point.
To the right will be unit one, as you can see here.
This will be the unit my client plans to live in with his wife.
And then above, you have the larger unit for bed three bath, which is ostensibly just using the existing flooring with no additions whatsoever.
But with no additions whatsoever to note, the rear yard access is not through a bedroom, it is through a common hall.
I shouldn't say a common hall, but a public call on the larger unit.
So they'll be able to access the rear yard for trash without having to go through a bedroom to do so.
So, here's some photos of the property.
As you can see, it's in various stages of major disrepair.
It is ostensibly a shell.
This is the block itself.
There's proof of posting.
There's the letter that went out to the RCO, 44th Ward, Democratic Ward, 168 individual
households were mailed.
And we have the deed as well showing that, in fact, he purchased it for $215,000.
This is Haverford Avenue right here, by the way, making it very close to public transportation.
Property is currently valued at $231,000, as is its 3,600-square-foot home.
and a complete shell there's the valuation from from zillow i'm going to close this for now i'm
going to share something else to renovate the property at least one by one estimate that we
You received $145 a square foot.
And mind you, the property, again, is the house is 3,600 square foot a shell, as the photos show.
At 3,000 square foot, we're looking at just under half a million dollars.
$435,000 to renovate a property that's valued at $230,000 that my client already purchased for $215,000.
The only way this works is if it's renovated, lived in with the benefit of some sort of rent roll.
Otherwise, it's a white elephant.
And anybody who would attempt to renovate and try and sell or rent it as a single family would be completely underwater.
There is no comparables in this particular section of the city to even come close to what my client would have to put into it.
after purchase to make this work for anyone.
So I wanted to make sure that we understood that.
As I said, my client plans to live in the property.
The cost of renovating it is approximately $145 a square foot,
making a total investment of nearly half a million dollars.
And then the only way it would work is by the benefit of some rent rolls
as he makes this his primary residence.
As I also said, that steps from Haverford Avenue, making this proposal what we like to consider transit-oriented proposal of modest density,
bringing it down to the two units.
I've also, under separate cover, have submitted voluminous evidence of histories of uses just like this one on the block.
200 North 53rd is a duplex, legal, approved by this board.
204 North 53rd, a legal duplex, approved by this board.
206, a legal duplex, as far back as 1946, approved by this board.
202, by the way, is long, vacant, and distressed and remains as such.
230, the subject property, if you go back, and the Planning Commission will be able to confirm this, has historically been a two-family dwelling.
And the 228, which is just down the block, a couple doors down, another since 2014, two units.
This one was a commercial mixed use with an office on the first floor and a unit and a residential above.
So, plus, there's additional multifamily and that's just on our side of the block. There's additional multifamily across the street as well, not quite sure that they've all been approved by L and I, or the zoning board of adjustment, but they are in existence at the meeting at the 44th democratic ward meeting.
There were lots of talk. There was lots of talk about the challenges of multifamily dwelling, specifically from 1 specific property.
about the challenges of multifamily dwelling, specifically from one specific property on that
strip. That property was, I've found the history of it, was a former funeral parlor that was
converted into a multifamily home. It is five times the size of my client's property. So it's
just, it does compare, those challenges really wouldn't translate to what would ostensibly be
a 3,600 square foot home in this particular Senate.
Because of the property's history itself as a legal duplex, because of several pieces of real estate on the block that I've already submitted evidence of also being anything but a single family home,
because the numbers to renovate would turn this into, you know, make it unconscionable
to turn this into a single family that could be viable. We're respectfully requesting the modest
variance of a three-family dwelling here so my client could live, maintain, and afford the
renovation that this property so desperately needs. And with that, I'm going to rest and I'm
to ask my client terry dow to raise his virtual hand thank you
share i have uh two hands up one from terrence dowd and one from brandon powell my client is
Terrence Dow. Terrence Dow. Okay. I'm going to promote Terrence to panelists.
Mr. Dale yes hi could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer and if
possible could you turn on your uh video turn it on
thank you sir hi do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes i do please proceed counsel thank you mr chair mr dow did you hear my presentation to
the board today yes true and accurate to the best of your knowledge yes adopted as your own testimony
yes thank you i rest mr chair so so vernon i i noticed you know you did not have a good vote at
the the rco did and and and i noticed usually you put in petitions did he sign have any petitions
signed from support from the block we did not do any petitions on the block mr chair all right
thank you uh the the again the rco had legitimate concerns about a multi-family dwelling that's on
that strip but it again is five times the size of my client's property uh it's comparing apples
to oranges uh he didn't go next door or anything like that next mr johns lives next door mr chair
and that's why mr johns recruits is there another side or is this on the corner uh there's uh this
is in the middle of the block but there is no adjacent there is nothing else uh you know attached
to this house on the other side all right thank you oh i have a question so um the rco uh was
opposed were they are were they opposed to the four units as you presented them as well as the
three that you're currently presenting now? We didn't even present the four. As soon as Mr.
Dowd came to my firm, I killed the four idea because I just thought it was an overbilled,
you know, and I'd like to, you know, for credibility purposes, I only bring winners
to this board as much as I possibly can. And I thought the four was an overbilled. So by the
time we got to the RCO, it had already been what we saw, what you saw today, which was two ample
size units and one moderate sized smaller modest size unit okay and then you um you mentioned that
there were other multi-flammies on the block but most of those were duplexes so was there um any
kind of uh feedback from the rto uh in terms of them being approving a duplex instead of a triplex
we certainly did uh bring that up but they uh were pretty adamant that they wanted a single
family home. We did try and explain that the numbers just don't. I mean, this is not a matter
of opinion or interpretation of law. The numbers don't lie. And you just can't renovate a property
of this size at $145 a square foot and come out with a single family home that makes any sense
Come out with a single family home that makes any sense for buyer seller or renter. Okay. And my last question is, what is the plan for trash for all the 3 units?
for buyer, seller, or renter.
Well, 2 of the units on the 1st floor would have access to the rear yard. And then the top unit is large enough to have a vented trash closet.
other questions from the board yeah um i do want to just point out that the notes on your plan
are incorrect you have mislabeled the number of bedrooms and bathrooms and i do think one of the
concerns that i just have generally about the layout is that for the larger of the units which
is the upstairs one it's currently listed it's a five bedroom i think four bath you have it listed
as a three and three or three and two and it's a very large unit that's typically would be more
suited for a family and there's not a lot of public space like there's almost no public space in that
in that unit um which may i think it's going to make it hard to even fit the trash closet in there
comfortably um and the bathrooms aren't really set up for um you know family use um and it's going
to be i think it's hard to rent an upstairs apartment but i mean that's your real estate
decision um he's not married to he's not married to occupying the first floor i mean again the the
the large one of the two larger units is what he's going to occupy uh and the interior layout
should be taken as a representation this is a shell uh this is a complete shell and we can't do
anything with it until we get zoning and then building permits so i think my larger concern
My concern is with the case for hardship. I think one, I think my first question is when did your client purchase this property?
It's Mr. Dowd. What year did you purchase the property?
Three years ago, I believe. Okay.
20 to 20, according to the records, it's 20, 22. So I think, you know, when you purchased it, it was RSA.
three rsa three properties are larger by nature by definition in the city code the lots are bigger
the properties are bigger these are generally minimum two thousand twenty five hundred square
foot lots which means like it was always going to be a larger house um i think 145 dollars a square
foot is pretty typical it's been about what it's cost to build anything in philadelphia
for the past 10 years so i feel like if anybody was going to go into a reasonable real estate
decision this is not an economic hardship it costs what the market tends to cost so i'm still
having a hard time understanding though i think it's the very definition of an economic hardship
when you purchase a property valued at 230 and you buy it for 215 and to make it even minimally
habitable 30 in its current condition which is a shell yeah but but the valuation is is nowhere
near the six thousand six hundred and fifty thousand dollars that this is going to cost