please good afternoon again mr chair charles richardson office of councilwoman cindy bass all
Good afternoon again, Mr. Chair. Charles Richardson, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N. Just wanted to add another little wrinkle in here.
There is a community organization on Mayland Street that's led by Reverend Reed, and she claims that she owns that portion or was gifted that portion of a lot in the back of the property and that it belongs to her community organization.
And that may be the impetus of no parking on the lot or something along those lines.
So, you know, and I know that this has been existing, you know, existing issue for a number of years with regard to their claim for that portion of the lot versus, you know, the portion that's connected to the garage.
And, you know, it's a sticky, wicked issue.
So if necessary, I can try to bring some clarity to that before you guys do any voting or anything along those lines and see what the actuality might be.
And Mr. Richardson, why don't we talk offline and make an introduction?
That's the first I've ever heard of that.
So I obviously don't we don't want to, like, impede anyone's property interest, which is not zoning related.
But obviously we want to deal with that outside the bounds of this appeal.
that works not a problem yeah and and please yeah please loop me into that discussion as well i know
there is like uh some vacant land in the rear yard next to the garage i don't know if that's
what's being referred to as opposed to the garage um but yeah we should make sure all of that is
is clarified um for going forward no problem i will do that thank you mr richardson thank you
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No hands, Chair.
Hillary, should planning take a vote or hold the vote?
Yeah, no, planning can absolutely weigh in.
It's just, we're just going to get clarification on the parking.
And if there's an ownership issue that we need to clarify as well, we'll just make sure that that's taken care of.
Okay, thank you.
Mr. Waldman?
Good afternoon, Chair, members of the Board, Gregory Waldman, Planning Commission staff.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single-family zoning.
In 2016, the Zoning Board granted the variance for four units with three-year temporary proviso.
Given the existing physical condition now established without presenting detrimental impacts to the character of the block,
the City Planning Commission recommends granting the use variance.
Thank you.
Okay, so we will hold this until next week at 2 p.m.
Does that sound okay, Hillary?
Yes, that's fine.
And we will close the record except for any additional information from L&I or regarding the ownership.
But otherwise, the record is closed.
Except for additional information from ownership or L&I.
Thank you, Mr. Nockamson.
Thank you.
Number five, MI 2023-006-504-2018 North Marshall Street.
Oh, Alan Nockamson is the attorney.
There's already a meeting with APN.
second meeting is planned for
2-22-24
so we're still waiting
for the RCO
Nockmson
yes I think
I heard in transition
North Marshall Street
yeah so my understanding
Mr. Chair I think I heard in transition
that we're going to make a presentation
we're going to hold it
for or have the hearing resume just solely for the purpose of, you know, for the community to
give their letter and for me to respond. Okay. All right. So first of all, could you identify
the owner of the property in a relationship? Yeah. So there are actually two LLCs that own
these properties, 2108 and Marshall LLC and 2203 and 7th LLC. In a virtual audience is
Andrei Yefimov of the ownership group.
And Mr. Holliman has a few questions for you.
Good afternoon, counsel.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to his accuracy?
We do.
Did you e-mail all of the exhibits and documents as required five days in advance to this hearing?
Did you email all of the exhibits and documents as required five days?
Yes, we have.
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
I'm here to present this project at 2108 and dash 10 North Marshall Street.
this is a proposed consolidation of two lots are rm1 in nature and what we're trying to do is put
a socially responsible apartment building there as you can see it's built to grade so you know
there are accessible units on the ground floor you'll see during the presentation that there's
no living below grade, that there will be storage units for the residents in this apartment
building, as well as there will be a trash storage room in the building accessible to all
of the occupants in this apartment building. What you'll also see in the floor plans is that
every occupant has access to the rear yard, which will be a common area for recreational purposes.
So during our presentation, we'll review the notice of refusal.
It does have a placeholder for correspondence from APM.
We did meet with them once.
I don't think they came to a resolution that they felt comfortable with.
So they wanted us to represent.
It was a rather long meeting.
So I think they just ultimately ran out of time.
But we did canvass the neighborhood and we have a petition as well as letters of support
from nearby property owners and i'll read one in particular one was not even a form
one that we usually give out for people to sign one was from a nearby resident who i believe
is associated with the 37th democratic award which explains better than me some in some cases
like why this project should be approved by the zoning board by way of variance
And then you'll see nearby comparable projects. So, you know, this is an area in desperate need of density to help not only support, you know, the community as a whole, but their commercial corridor.
And then we'll review the Philadelphia 2035 plan, where the density that we're creating is, you know, something that the, you know, that the city planning commission has pushed as part of their 2035 plan for the lower north district, which we're in.
Then we'll view maps of the area. Again, to reiterate, this is an RM1 property. Are we asking for more units that is allowed by right? We are. But there are reasons why, and we'll go into that. And then we'll have photographs of the property in the surrounding area, our plans and drawings, our RCO meeting notices, our application for appeal, our diesel property showing my clients own these properties, and our certificates of tax clearance.
Again, the conclusion of the presentation, I'll ask the owner's representative to virtually raise his hand.
I'll have a few questions for him, and then we'll be more than happy to take any questions from the board.
So in notice of refusal, again, we're looking to put a 12-unit apartment building here by consolidating two lots.
Birth refusal has to do with density.
While six units are allowed as a right, we're asking for 12.
And so, you know, this is the issue here in this part of Philadelphia. My client could build two triplexes here. He doesn't want to build two triplexes here. Why? Because they're not working in this area and they're not efficient.
So there are many triplexes that have been built in this part of town. There's not a market for it. What there is a market for is the elderly population who are looking to downsize and are looking to stay in this community. And that's why we're offering 12 one bedroom units.
They don't want a lot of space, but they want nice housing, which there's not a stock of, one bedrooms.
And then there are other members of the community who have lived in this community over the years, have moved out of this community, but their parents are aging out.
And what they're looking for is they don't want to live with mom and dad anymore or their grandparents.
But those people who are aging out need help.
And so my client is looking to have one bedroom apartments for those individuals as well, which are more affordable than the two or three bedrooms, which are not renting at all in this community.
Also, by combining these lots for 12 one bedrooms versus three, you know, to have two triplexes there, you know, you would have basically.
you know you know to have two two triplexes there you know you would have basement living there
which is not preferred by the community you would have roof decks which is not preferred by the
committee um by the community you would have like irresponsible trash storage and maintenance of
these properties by combining these properties these properties together by doing 12 one bedrooms
as opposed to potentially two triplexes with two to three bedrooms each we have less bedrooms i
understand we have more households, but we have a more responsible plan. So we're trying to stay
within the confines of the Philadelphia zoning code, but it's really hard, you know, because
if you do, you're going to have projects that don't work for the community. So that's the
density matter. The second refusal has to deal with the rear yard. We're saying we're providing
zero rear yard setback. That's not the case. There's a portion of the rear yard that is,
you know that there's a built the building structure there but we do have a you know a
rear yard setback and an ample rear yard for all the residents and we'll show you as part of the
presentation the next refusal has to do uh with the with the i guess the rear well actually one
says rear yard area which we do have rear yard area the next one has to do with rear yard setback
which we also have rear yard setback the next refusal has to do with the occupied area that's
a de minimis refusal, where we can only occupy 75% of the lot. We're asking for 82.6%, which is
de minimis in nature. We're trying to have functional floor plans for all these one-bedroom
units. There's really no development on this block. We're not taking anyone's light in there,
and we're trying to do a responsible building structure here. So we're asking the board to
accommodate that de minimis variance. And then the final one, in some ways is self-inflicted,
is that we're asking for a side yard we want to we we do anticipate that hopefully that our
project will spur development on this block similar to ours we're we're asking because
we're putting an apartment building here that's you know combined 12 units you know no height
variance but we're asking to have a side yard of five feet what does that allow us to do now the
interior of the building structure you can go from front to back to the rear yard we also want some
some outdoor space on the side yard of five feet. Well, technically under the code, we're supposed
to do 12 feet foot rear yard setback or side yard setback. That would destroy the building as a
whole. But we think a five foot side yard setback is a positive. It gives some breathing room for
the person to the building that hopefully we build to the left of us. We can also do some landscaping.
You can have people, you know, again, go from either the interior of the building from front to back or the side of the building from front to back.
But we think that that's actually a good design element.
So that's the last refusal.
So, again, we met with the community on January 25th.
They didn't come to a vote.
We plan to go back to them February 22nd.
We would ask for a resumption hearing once we have a decision from them where we could comment as well.
And our petition, again, we, my client's pretty diligent about reaching out to the community. And they did. And, you know, I think this petition shows that, you know, there are a lot of people in this community who want this type of use.
And then, you know, Denise Armstrong, like I said, my understanding is she's affiliated with the 37th Democratic Award.
But, you know, she said that she has strong, she is in strong, she lives at 2842 North 12th Street, which is not far from there.
And she's in strong support of this proposed project.
And she says, as a longtime resident in the area, she's witnessed this vacant lot unused for years, accumulating debris and becoming a ground for illegal dumping.
The current state of the lot is not only an ISRO, but a detriment to the overall well-being of the neighborhood.
And we'll go over, there's an article actually that we found where it states that vacant lots are, you know, obviously dangerous for the community because of crime, but it also, by having these missing teeth filled in, it actually decreases gun violence, and there was a study on that.
But, you know, she stated, it's evident to me that it's time for a change rather than allowing this parcel of land to continue being a magnet for trash and neglect.
I firmly believe that development, hold on, let me read the rest of it, that developing housing units on it would be much more beneficial use of the space.
Housing is a critical need in our community, and this project presents a valuable opportunity to address that need while simultaneously revitalizing the neighborhood.
So, I mean, it goes on further, but I really do think that, you know, that letter speaks volumes about why this project should be.
you know that letter speaks volumes about why this project should be approved
and then again we have our forum letters that we have a lot of you know individuals
that we reached out to who are owners or occupants within the community who are also supported this
project and then it's not uncommon for this board to grant variances of this sort i it's really
tough especially in these more transitional neighborhoods to conform to the confines of the
philadelphia zoning code um you know especially again we're dealing with high interest rates
right you know construction costs that make it very difficult for these projects to work
and pencil in especially and some might some people have tried to do that and you'll there's
a huge amount of vacancy of new construction for two-bedroom and three-bedroom units in these
duplexes and triplexes. And, you know, we're trying to do something different, make it more
affordable. My clients are focused on the elderly population, as well as people who live in the
community, and they think that there's a market for these one-bedrooms. But, you know, for 2215
North 7th Street, this board approved similar increases in density
by way of a permit you see here 22 24-50 germantown as well
and then the lower north district plan again a couple things to highlight there's a commercial
corridor near us on germantown avenue that's been struggling forever like the you know the 2035
plans stating like we need to develop these assets, these residential assets near us to
help support those commercial quarters and shopping centers. Like there's a shopping center nearby
where there's the Cousins Supermarket. They need this density to help support those commercial
quarters. So what we're doing is trying to follow the guidelines that the City Planning Commission
has instituted aspirationally through the 2035 plan.
And, you know, but, you know, that's, you know, that's where we are with that.
Then we also looked at the American Public Health Association.
And again, they stated a solution to gun violence or firearm violence in many cities
is to deal with these abandoned lots that we have, or not abandoned lots,
but more so vacant lots.
But like, that's what we're trying to do here.
We have that article, feel free to read it.
I, you know, I think it's the beginning of the article.
I don't know if we have the full article here,
but we highlighted the portion about like making sure
that we're fulfilling a lot of the needs
of what this community wants and needs.
And then the zoning map,
we're not taking an RSA 5 property
and converting it into, or trying to convert it,
so to speak, into a multifamily. This is RM1. And we think that this property responsibly fits
within this community. As you can see, there's even CMX2 across the street. This is Germantown
Avenue. This is the commercial quarter that is in desperate need of help. Without these properties
being built and occupied, that commercial quarter is never going to flourish. So we're hoping that
this board understands that and then again you can see here where we are in relation to that
and then cousins is down here where that shopping center is and then photographs of the property
um it's a vacant lot you know here's you know proof of our posting for today's uh hearing
and then this is more north marshall to the right of the property uh north marshall to the left of
the property. And then our plans and drawings, again, we try to do is have a property where at
least the ground floor is accessible to the elderly population. And then, you know, the
basement level, again, no living in the basement. We're having storage here for storage lockers for