I've worked at other jobs just to try to pay
and really just do everything in compliance
of the city to be legit. And now I'm here
and I would just like to be, you know, get over the huddle.
The hurdle. Thank you, Ms. Stanton.
So to reiterate, we understand that the situation
for the zba might be different in where folks have purchased properties while the ordinance has well
been in effect but we're hoping for folks that have purchased and operated previously that there
is um the ability for for the zoning board to see some leniency with the granting um at least
a temporary variance thank you thank you questions from the board no mr chairman no chair questions
or comments from hillary emerson our attorney not at this time mr chair questions or comments
from the virtual audience yes chair tina marie russell has a hand up and has been allowed to
speak all right tina could you state your name please and spell for the stenographer
sure tina marie russell t-i-n-a-m-a-r-i-e-l-l-c that's my email uh russell r-u-s-s-e-l-l
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Okay, so I did send the documents into my packet into the zoning board and council yesterday.
This is my first time back in about 12 months, so I'm kind of a little bit rusty, and I explained that.
Then I sent in a new packet today because I realized that I had submitted the wrong letter, so I wanted to make sure you had the right letter.
So Tanya did say that she received it and she would disseminate it to the board members.
And that was last night.
So I'm going to go in and say some points and then I'm going to go back.
So originally the applicant was asked to put in apartments.
I don't know when they were granted the permission to switch from a residential to a multifamily,
but i wasn't rco i wasn't you know active at that time so maybe that's what happened but
irregardless they were given a permission to create apartments three apartments so this is
why you know and then somewhere along the line it went according to what the attorney just stated
that they originally never thought about making apartments they wanted to make airbnbs so the
The question I have then is that that's not what was said at our meeting when you had the guests and applicants come to the meeting.
And at that time, we had at that meeting, the city council district area, Jeffrey Young.
We also had state representative Donna Bullock.
And we also had two, no, excuse me, three RCOs and one block captain, as well as other people from the community.
So we were, the community voted no, and the political council person, councilman member also voted no.
And our main reason is because we have a vision, we have been working on a vision for the area, and this does not comply with that area.
This area is not a safe area.
There was just a shooting down the street on Saturday.
You probably saw it in the news.
And if you look at the attachments, you'll see multiple shootings in that area.
And if you look at the attachments, you'll see multiple shootings in that area.
It's across the street from a low-income apartment complex, which is already heavy saturated with people.
It's across the street.
They're all low-rises, by the way.
And the church that I have my office in is right there on the other side of that corner of this building.
And I've seen one day we actually had students out there working in the garden when there was a shooting right there on that parking lot, which is right across from the applicant's location.
So it's not a safe place. It is also not next to Temple University Hospital. It is next to Temple University College, University.
So it's too close to where we have enough disruption at. And I don't know if you have enough time to have read the letter.
So I would just say that the choices that the zoning permitted in this area does not permit for that particular type of usage.
The owner actually said she wanted he and she wanted to use it for three apartments.
We feel the owner has shown no hardship, meaning that if you set up to make apartments, use it and you were granted for apartments, then you should use it for apartments.
They never set up to actually use it for apartments.
This is why we don't feel like they have a hardship, because they did not take the time to even make it work as apartments, which is what they got granted for.
Let me see. The owner created a foundation. We talked about that already.
We talked about the heavy risky usage, and I have documents attached to my email, which also talks about the higher level of risky behavior.
If you look at any newspaper in Philadelphia, we are facing enough violence in our community.
We don't need an additional element to make more violence, you know, happen.
We had 500 cops out on board in Cecil B. Moore this weekend.
So we are oversaturated with this.
This over-densified, meaning that they have three apartment setups in this building, plus the basement level.
And they want to, the applicant stated at the meeting that they want to use all three of these apartments units as Airbnbs.
As you can think about this, you're looking at three different units being used by multiple people on a daily basis.
It's too much, people's tempers are too hot right now.
And we feel like in conjunction with whoever's there, in addition to the people in the community, it's just asking for trouble, which we have enough of.
The housing stock that we're having right now is at risk.
We already were overwhelmed with apartments.
Well, now we need apartments because people can't buy houses.
So we can't even, now we say we don't have apartments for you, we don't have houses for you, but you can spend money, which we know people are doing in our community.
They're forced now to have to rent out Airbnbs because they can't get an apartment.
So that's not fair to our community because it costs much more money to rent out an Airbnb than an apartment because it's on a daily basis, not a weekly, monthly basis.
So it reduces our community housing structure.
In conclusion, the community that, again, attended was a number of political people who are working with us, the community, the state rep, the city council member, Jeffrey Young,
The block captains, the RCOs, and the citizens are working really hard to try to create a plan, and this is more disruptive to our plan, that we have a right to because it's included in a 20-35 year plan.
So we would ask that the board allow us to let the applicant utilize the building as they asked for in the beginning, which was for a three-unit apartment building, and then let us continue our quest to try to create a safer north-central Philadelphia.
for everyone to come in, rent, own, and live
without the violence that we are currently facing
and we are trying to create a better place
for people to be.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Is there anyone in the virtual,
anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yeah, the next person would be
Charbonnet Anderson again.
the owner okay mr counsel do you want your client back on uh if if any rebuttal is necessary i mean
we didn't get a letter from the the council person to to say that that's how they feel so i think that
was incorrect i say that again mr there was there was no there was no council person's letter
submitted um as intimated by by tina marie and also um the the implication that this somehow
The implication that this somehow leads to some kind of increase in violence, there's, I don't think anyone's ever made that claim before, so I would just dispute that.
leads to some kind of increase in violence there's
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Tina Marie Russell has her hand raised again.
Bring on one real quick.
Real quickly, I didn't say that anyone wrote a letter.
What I did state was that they were present.
and they made their opinion known at that meeting that they were not in favor of that.
And so, Tina, just so you put, I think what the council was saying, we didn't receive any letters from.
No, we didn't get any letters yet, but that's because everyone's going to be right now, I guess.
And I've only been asking.
All right.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
There are no more hands, Chair.
Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair and members of the Board, Greg Waldman, Planning Commission staff.
In 2014, the zoning map was amended in this area in accord with recommendations from the
comprehensive plan.
This parcel is intentionally not changed from its existing residential multifamily zoning.
There is no unique physical condition that would prevent this property from being used
in conformance with the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board deny the variance.
Mr. Consul, I'm going to take this under consideration. I'm going to talk to the other two board members next week. We will vote on this next Wednesday at 2 p.m.
Thank you, Chair.
And thank you for your presentation.
Number, let's see here.
Number eight.
Mr. Chair, I just want to note in that last case, the record is closed.
It's closed. Everything's closed.
Number 8, MI2023-006-566-917 South St. Bernard Street.
Alan Ockamson is the attorney.
Let's see.
Letter of non-opposition from Cedar Park Neighbors.
RCO has asked ZBA to hold the vote
until proof of current fire alarm
certification is provided. The applicant also provide
a petition of support by 25 neighbors,
including 11 from that block. And then there's
an opposition letter from one of the neighbors.
Chair, Alan Nockmson does not have his hand up, but Jared
Klein does. Okay.
all right yeah jared klein is now with knockamson pc so he may be handling this matter
okay he's been promoted to panelists
hi mr klein how are you sir could you state your name and spell for the sonographer good afternoon
mr chair members of the board nice to see you uh jared klein j-a-r-e-d last name is k-l-e-i-n
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, the relationship to this property?
Certainly. My client is Latoya Samuels, who is the owner of this parcel.
Mr. Holloman has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
Good afternoon, Mr. Holloman. Yes, I do.
did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance at this hearing
yes i did thank you please proceed and share your screen thank you very much so uh yeah as as was
noted i i am now with uh knockamson pc and i'm i'm pleased to present this case on behalf of
our client latoya samuels uh 917 south saint bernard street uh is an existing structure that
you can see on your screen now. And this application is essentially seeking a legalization
of an existing triplex. This particular property has been used for three-family dwelling for many,
many years. There were earlier attempts to zone it in conformance with the zoning code, and for
a variety of reasons, the owner was unable to take that all the way through. But she is dedicated
now to making sure that this property is zoned and permitted the right way. And I'll note that
she is doing this now in advance of receiving any violation from the city. So it's not as though
she is responding to a notice of violation to legalize it. This is something that she
brought to the city's attention on her own and is trying to correct.
Um, the refusals that we have, uh, are two. Um, one is the multifamily living inside the RSA three property. Uh, and the other is for the, uh, parking. Um, as the board is aware in the RSA three, you're required, uh, to have two, um, accessory parking spaces for an application like this, um, with the existing structure on the lot.
The refusals that we have are two.
And given how the existing structure is situated in the line, it is not possible for us to add any parking to this application.
So we are seeking relief from the code for that as well.
To orient the board as to where we are, this is our property here.
These purple dots reflect the signatures on this petition of support that was circulated.
And again, those addresses are matched to those purple dots. And we have two pages of petition signatures indicating that people were okay with this application.
The surrounding area does have other immediate multifamily. There's three units at 926 South St. Bernard, and there is other multifamily on that block that we discussed with the community during the RCM unit.
Just to give the board some context as to how this property has been perceived publicly,
this is a Redfin listing for this parcel with the estimate,
and it is being described as a multifamily two- to four-unit property.
Again, not an official listing, but certainly indicates that,
at least from the public perspective, it has been multifamily for quite some time.
Zoning map, this is our parcel here.
We're in the RSA 3. We're not too far away from multifamily zone lots, and there is a lot of multifamily use in this area through variants or otherwise. Map of the parcel, and then to show some photographs for context, this is the front of the building, as you saw.
uh orange zoning notices up on the property and you can see i'll zoom in there are three
mailboxes that are already there on the on the front front of the property and have been there
for some time um this is taken from august of 2007 uh this is here again just to show that again
those mailboxes are there on the front of the property it's 2007 to the right of the property
it is a street that has a very similar housing stock to each other with some vacant parcels
mixed in. And this is the view to the other side of the street. These are the existing electric
meters. We don't have a specific date that they were installed, but as you can see, there are
three of them, one for each unit, and then a fourth unit for the common areas. And given the
rust and other wiring we're seeing here. We're, I think, safely assuming that these have been
here for some time as evidence of that multifamily use. There's also a side entrance
to the property. And again, this has three doorbells and or additional mailboxes on the side
showing that three-family use rear yard of the parcel there. The interior of the units
are shown here. They're each approximately 1,000 square feet,
and they're stacked on top of each other, one per floor.
The units are all occupied at this time. The photos from that first unit were obviously when
it was vacant. This is unit number two, and you're seeing this one having some possessions in it.
In terms of the architectural plans, it's a very basic floor plan. As I said, the units are stacked
on top of each other, so you've got the same layout for each of the units as they go up through
the building. I believe that I heard as I was coming in notes about the RCO meeting.
So we did meet with Cedar Park neighbors and they gave a letter of non-opposition.
We're aware that they did have a proviso in there about the hardwired fire alarm.
My client is working on that. She certainly doesn't object to getting it.
In terms of enforcing it as a proviso, I would respectfully suggest that in order for us to occupy this building legally, if the variance was granted, we would have to get a certified fire alarm system along with the rental licenses that would come with the three units.
So we think that that is something our client would be obligated to do anyway, and so would not necessarily.
So we think that that is something our client would be obligated to do anyway, and so would not necessarily need to be a supervisor.
So in conversations we've had prior, whether we vote for this or not, what we would do is recommend a proviso that would say, must obtain a certificate of occupancy.
Yes, and we would have no objection to such a proviso.
With that, I would like Ms. Samuels, if she could raise her virtual hand so that she might adopt my testimony.
latoya samuels will be allowed to speak and could you please state your name and spell for the
court standoff hello my name is latoya samuels l-a-t-o-y-a last name s-a-m-u-e-l-s do you