you're now live thank you um okay there's melissa i see
uh tanya and fatina we'll give you a few minutes yes thank you thank you
Thank you.
Okay, Chair, we have about 21 participants.
You can go forward as you wish.
Frank, you're muted.
Good morning, everyone.
My name is Frank DiCicco.
I'm the chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
I'll be participating in today's hearing along with our board secretary,
Confessor Plaza, and board members, Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James Snell.
Board Administrator Fatina L. and our Board Attorney, Ms. Melissa Freeman, are also in
attendance, as is our Zoning Board Administrator, Ms. Tanya Sunke. For those of you who haven't
yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you
can expect. First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their
testimony. Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that
by participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded and that the recording will be
made available to the public on the web or otherwise. Third, for anyone participating by
phone, if you wish to testify you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to
unmute yourself. I repeat. For anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise
your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself. Finally, to enter an appearance
statement, call Google 267 -270 -5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at
issue i'll repeat that to enter an appearance statement call google 267 -270 -5548 and leave
your email address and the address of the property at issue and i would also like to remind everyone
please do not attempt to testify in the chat any comments or questions you have please speak with
our board administrator, Ms. Fatina L. Having said that, I will read off on the 930 list.
Case number five, MI 2020 -002439, 2401 North 33rd Street is withdrawn.
Number nine on the 930 list, MI 2021 -001 -618, 710 -20 Montrose Street is being withdrawn.
Number 10 on the 930 list, MI 2021 -001 -575, 7248 Rising Sun Avenue.
is being requested at the request for continuance is made by the attorney for the applicant and
agreed to by the 35th Ward Democratic Club. Anyone objects to those cases being withdrawn
or continued, please raise your hand at this time.
i see no handshare you at this time i will ask if anyone would like to request a continuance
Thank you. At this time, I will ask if anyone would like to request a continuance or withdrawal on the 930 list. If so, please raise your hand.
If you're requesting a continuance or withdrawal on the 930 list, please raise your hand.
Chair, we have Leo Mulvihill. Please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair.
Good morning, Mr. Mulvihill. Please identify yourself and I'll square you in.
good morning chair leo mulvihill 315 green street first floor philadelphia 19123
your last name m -u -l -v as in victor i -h -i -l -l you swear for him to tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the truth i do please proceed uh this is for the property of 614 north 64th
street i'm not sure of the number requesting that's our request for a continuance please
Okay. Number eight on our list, MI 2021, that's 001 -675 -614 -North -64th Street is continued.
And Chair, as well, one more, it's 5928 Walnut Street.
Okay, MI 2021, that's 001 -633 -5928 Walnut Street is also continued.
Yes, thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Any objection to those cases being continued?
If not, is anyone else requesting a continuance or withdrawal for the 930 list?
Please raise your hand.
Chair, we have Petrina McFarling.
please unmute yourself and please wait for the
good morning ma 'am please spell your full name for the record and i'll swear you in
good morning um p -e -t -r -i -n -a um last name mcfarlane m -c -f as in frank a -r -l -a -n -e
or for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes purpose of yes ma 'am i just i just had a question i just wanted to make sure i understood
what a continuance meant in regards to the property at 614 north 64th street new date will
be issued for for a hearing i don't have that date it will be met you will be notified
the community will be notified a posting will occur and you'll be notified of the new date
okay thank you very much anyone requesting a continuance or withdrawal for the 9 30 list
chair we have laureen brown please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair
good morning ma 'am please identify yourself for the record spell your name and i'll swear you in
Good morning. My name is
Maureen Brown
L -O -R -E -E -N
We're going to affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth
Please proceed
I just
wanted to know
when the new date
will be
the continuance
well that that'll be made known we don't have a date yet in front of us staff will will put out
a notice of that new date okay okay thank you anyone would like to request a continuance or
withdrawal i see no handshake thank you we'll now go to the add -on list
MI 2021 -001485, 5212 Beaumont Avenue, and MI 2021 -001484, 5307 Chester Avenue.
Mr. Slepner is the attorney of record.
and i believe mr slepner are you there
good morning uh chair members of the board
good morning chair members of the board isaac slepner uh s -l -e -p -n -e -r with matione limited
100 North Independence Mall
West Suite 5A
Northwest, Philadelphia
PA 19106
here on behalf of the
applicant
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth,
nothing but the truth? Yes, I do.
Yes, I do. Please proceed. And then I have a statement from Councilwoman Gauthier's office, which I will read into the record.
Please proceed
and then I have a statement from
County
Okay. As the chair may recall, the board had held this for a board vote because although we have a letter of support from the RCO, the coordinating RCO, for both of these properties, the meeting summary did not bear a vote total.
I would point out that we do have support from the RCO for both of these properties for 5212 Beaumont, as well as 5307 Chester.
And we did submit those letters to the board, as did the RCO.
And, you know, I would point out that the code doesn't require that the vote totals be printed.
Each RCO has its own bylaws and its own way of doing things.
I'm not entirely, I'm not an expert, shall I say, on the procedures and bylaws of the 51st Ward Democratic Committee. But, you know, I will take them at their written word if they support our variances, that we have their support.
It was my recollection that Mr. Goodman had objected, and that was what held the vote. But I did a bunch of due diligence. I attempted to get in contact with these RCO chairs. Our last hearing on this was August 4th, and as of the morning of August 5th, I began trying to get in touch with them, myself and my paralegal, Sarah McAvoy.
I sent to Ms. Saleta a stack of correspondents, and I can present that to the board now if you would like, stack of correspondents between August 5th and yesterday, August 17th, to both Greg Benjamin, who I believe is the ward leader, and Mark Harrell, who I'm pretty sure is the zoning chair of the 51st Ward Democratic Committee.
Neither of them responded to me over the past 14 days. So we have been diligently attempting to obtain vote totals, sign -in sheets, further evidence of that in attempting to cooperate with Mr. Goodman and find out the vote totals.
I can understand why he might have wanted to see that. I would have been interested in myself.
But regardless, the RCO supported us. And as I recall, I had presented the specifics of our
projects at our initial hearing, and today was just held for the board's vote. But if I am
in error in any of that, by all means, Chair, please correct me.
but there uh i'm still a little confused myself uh you said that the rco supported which one are
we talking about beaumont or chester uh both both beaumont and chester yes all right why don't i
why don't i do this let me read into the record uh what was given to us by mr goodman of council
and gaultier's office all right then then we'll have a discussion so as it relates to 5212 beaumont
Avenue. This is from the Councilwoman's office. Our office opposes the granting of this variance
as we have others of its kind to preserve the single -family zoning of these especially
small streets in southwest Philadelphia. As it relates to MI 2021 -001484 -5307 Chester Avenue,
our office opposes the granting of this variance and asks that the applicant meet with the
coordinating RCO again to discuss revisions to the building design to be more consistent
with the context of the block so on one of them it's obvious that they're the councilwoman is
opposed but she's asking that you go back to the rco uh the 31st ward rco and have further
conversation as it relates to chester avenue my my i'm sorry you have a comment because i have a
suggestion i'm going to make um yes chair i would just point out that we actually had uh we had an
initial meeting with the RCO um with regard to 5307 Chester at that time they hadn't uh voted
on us or otherwise given us indication of support or non -support we actually went back to them with
revised plans uh that because we had had that conversation and I think Mr. Goodman had and
that's why he's saying what he's saying in this email Mr. Goodman had been there for that and
Mr. Goodman had been there for that and had suggested that at that time, we had actually gone back to the, literally to the drawing board, our architect redesigned the plans to have an outdoor porch, you know, a front porch that is, would line up with the adjoining neighbor 5309, which is an existing row with a porch, front porch on that portion of Chester Avenue.
had suggested that at that time uh we had actually gone back to
precisely because the initial design
was more in line
with the front porches
and the design of that section of Westville
yeah I mean I just
this was just forwarded to me by Sharon
about 15 minutes ago
is Mr. Goodman on the line
by any chance
I don't think he is
that's why he sent this over and no chair I don't see you thank you I don't want to keep belaboring
this on the point and continuing this case but in all fairness to everybody I think it might be
helpful Mr. Schleppner if you reach out to Mr. Goodman and have this conversation he may or may
not be aware i think you said he was at one of the meetings he was at the meeting on chester avenue
chester avenue yes yeah but i understand that but he's also saying that he's basically asking that
you go back and have further conversation now i don't know if that was this was written prior to
that meeting so here's subsequent to the meeting so i'm i'm at a loss i mean we we can certainly
attempt to do that, but you may have seen, I don't know if Ms. Zaleta forwarded to you the stack of
emails that I had forwarded to her yesterday. Maybe she did this morning prior to opening the
session. Like I said, we've been attempting to get in touch with these RCO chairs for the past
two weeks. And even before these past two weeks, it was not easy getting in touch with them or
getting a meeting scheduled with them so i understand what you're asking chair and and
i understand why you're you're requesting it um but i feel like we've done plenty of our due
diligence and plenty of of reaching out to the community and it's it seems to me like it may be
we may be chasing our tail here if we're attempting to um go back to these uh this rco
why don't we do why don't you do this just just a suggestion yes i mean because the councilwoman's
opposing both of them but on one of them as it reads you know she's willing to asking suggestion
to go back to the rco you're having a hard problem reaching the rco um i think that might be helpful
if you have a conversation with the councilwoman and or mr goodman and we we can hold this uh as
make this an add -on if we can tanya for next week hopefully you'll have that discussion
over the next several days i don't want to vote something up or down when the councilwoman is
suggesting that you go back and you have gone back you've done your due diligence but obviously
maybe she's not aware that you're not getting any response from the rco well i mean we have
we have letters we have letters of support from the rco um the rco has has met with us it's not
that they haven't met with us it's just that it's you know and you understand these rcos are all
volunteer people so it's it's sometimes it's difficult to get get everybody together in one
spot or behind one zoom screen you know um i mean it's not we can vote on them today i just
it's it's it's unusual um
they have the councilwoman saying she's opposing it but off offering you to go back and meet with
the rco which you've already done you got letters of support i am more confused today than i was
a week ago um i was wondering would we be able to hear from uh the planning commission yeah yeah
i'll get the planning commission on so all right uh i know the board's been listening to this and
if you have any questions please ask mr slepner if not we'll move on no
i'm okay with it no question anyone else is there anyone else who would like to testify
in this case in these cases i should say
i see no hands thank you planning commission
morning chair to chico ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission
h -e -g -a -r -t -y we're a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir, I do.
Yes, sir, I do.
All right, members of the board, I'll start with 5212 Beaumont Street.
Comprehensive plan recommends the property for residential single -family use.
This is a 1 ,000 -square -foot lot.
There are no unique circumstances of the lot, though, that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
And so with regard to 5212 Beaumont Street, we recommend the board deny the variance.
With regard to 5307 Chester Avenue, comprehensive plan recommends this property for residential single -family use.
The map was amended here in 2019, according to the comprehensive plan recommendations.
However, L &I's zoning archive indicates that there are several adjacent nonconformities.
Two houses on the block have two units, two have three units, and two have rooming houses.
So given the adjacent non -conformities and the revisions to the plan that changed the exterior appearance,
we recommend that the board grant the variances for 5307 Chester Avenue.
Mr. Slepner, on the 5307 Chester revised plan, how many pages?
um i think our revised plan the revisions were only one page uh and i we had submitted those
prior to our hearing on the fourth with a revised plan sheet okay i don't have that in front of me
that's why i asked okay okay yeah all right uh mi 2021 -001485 5212 beaumont avenue my vote is no
my vote is no confess my vote is no thomas holloman my vote is no
mi 2021 -001484 -5307 chester avenue my vote is yes with the proviso
revised plan one page approved today professor plaza yes with proviso
james snell yes with proviso thomas holloman yes with proviso
Thank you. We will now go to our regular list. Item number one, MI 2021 -001 -626, 1412 South 23rd Street.
Zen Jin is the attorney of record. Point Breeze Community Development Corporation sent a letter of support.
Mr. Jin is coming back in as a panel.
Thank you.
good morning good morning mr jen please identify yourself and i'll swear you in
short then jen z h e n j i n 1617 john f kennedy boulevard suite 1838 philadelphia pa 19103
here on behalf of the applicant we're a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the
truth. I do. Thank you. Mr. Jinn, you agree to wait the reading of its refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy? I do. And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents,
proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five
days prior to this hearing? I have. And have you met with the RCO and have a letter? Yes, we do.
Thank you. Please proceed. Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the information related
to this case. We have submitted to the board the copies of the refusal, RCO letter, plans,
photos, and related documentation for today's hearing five days ahead. The refusal for this
application is based on the zoning district of the area being RSA 5 single -family, whereas we
have an existing two -family dwelling in this existing structure, so the proposal is to legalize
what is in existence here. We met with the RCO, Point Breeze Community Development Corporation,
and they voted in support. I want to point out that while the board of the community only voted
two to one, the position from the community members present was six support, zero post.
That is partly because this building has been in this condition of duplex historically for many
years. In the front, although looking at it, you cannot tell that it is a duplex. Once you open the
front door, it's pretty clear that it is in fact separated into two units. There are other single
family and duplex units on the block, and this is also a corner property. So for the community,
many of the people actually recall the building being used in that way for a long time, and
therefore did not specifically object to the use itself. In addition, because of the corner
Because it's a corner property, trash management is relatively easy in that the rear yard is accessible by both units.
property, trash management is relatively easy in that the rear yard is accessible.
The property itself is currently vacant.
We have the rear, this is the rear of the property.
I wanted to jump to the front entrance, which is what really gives the best view of why this building is historically a duplex.
in that the front door of the property, once you open it, there are two doors already in existence
built in. And one leads to the first floor unit, while the second one leads straight up to the
second floor. We are not proposing to really change the property. This is a legalization.
So my client's primary goal here is to make sure the property gets updated and renovated
accordingly, but the exit entrance settings for the two units are, in fact, already existing. As a
result, the community did not oppose our request, and in fact, most of the neighbors who were aware
of this property actually voted in support. So in consideration of the historical existence of
the duplex and the difficulties in converting this building into a single -family structure,
I would ask the board's favorable ruling in our request for variance.
I'll be happy to share any additional information or answer any questions the boards may have.
Thank you. Is your client available to adopt your testimony?
Yes, my client should be here, Mr. Kelvin, last name H .O.
So, Calvin, can you raise your hand on Zoom so that you can be identified?
Hi, my name is Calvin.
Please spell your full name.
Calvin is C -A -L -V -I -N.
Last name is Ho -H -O.
You swear if I'm going to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Thank you, Mr.
Thank you. Calvin, you heard my testimony to the board and saw the presentation.
Can you verify that my testimony is true and correct and adopt it as your own?
Thank you.
I can verify that.
Thank you. Any questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Anyone else would like to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
Chair, we have one calling user.
user please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair
in person please identify yourself spell your full name
Tiffany Green uh because I'm supposed to point breeze I just want to say that this particular
project Ms. Green Ms. Green just you swear if I'm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
about the truth oh yes always thank you please proceed excuse me this is the court reporter
could I please have the call and user state her name again I did not hear it clearly oh sorry
Tiffany Green thank you please proceed Ms. Green yes I I didn't receive your information on this
okay and I didn't receive a packet on this and um uh looking at my email and I'm sorry because
this goes back some time back in April or May okay and uh we never received your information on this
I can't confirm that the community really supported this project at this particular time.
I'd just like to ask, because I'm not sure if I was, do you have a support letter from the RCO Point Breeze CDC?
We have the support letter from the Point Breeze Community, not Community Development Corporation.
It is, in fact, a letter from the coordinating RCO, which was submitted with our exhibit.
and I can go ahead and share that again.
Yeah, it is Point Breast CDC, yes.
We do have a letter from them.
Okay, well, I won't oppose the project then,
but I do want to say to the board
that I think it's important
that the Coordinated RCO
send a copy of the summary letter
to the other RCOs
so that we can have an idea
of who voted and who did not vote it.
and this is a concern especially during the whole zoom issue um so i don't know if that can be
implemented but that would be good for us to know uh what happened at that meeting uh regarding that
all i know is that i did not receive your zba packet which you did not you know you're supposed
to send out to all the rcos and let us know about the information nor did i receive you know when
you were having your um i want to point out that uh the meeting itself had a participating rco of
meeting itself had a participating RCO of Concerned Citizens of Point Breeze.
concerned students of Point Breeze.
I recall that your representative from your organization was present at that meeting.
The meeting had more than one matter during the presentations, and I distinctly recall
hearing from Concerned Citizens during that meeting. There were 29 attendees during the
actual meeting itself. Right. There was an issue during that meeting, so I will not put on something.
i'm not going to pose your project because there was another issue regarding the zoom and being
uh maybe being cut off so i can't really recall at this point so i won't suppose it
it's great if i can suggest that you reach out to the point breeze community development
corporation and express uh your you know concern about not having been notified
thank you i appreciate that thank you okay anyone else to testify in this case please raise your hand
yes chair we have petra gamble ms gamble please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair
good morning ma 'am please spell your full name and i will swear you in
patina is there anyone else
no chair planning commission
thank you chair to chico members of the board ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning
commission the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing single family zoning
at this location however this is a long -standing conformity without a history of documented adverse
impacts and so the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variance
Thank you. MI 2021 -001 -626. 1412 South 23rd Street, my vote is yes.
Professor Plaza, my vote is yes.
James Snell, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Number two on our list, MI 2021 -001 -672. 1836 North 22nd Street, Mr. Jin, you're up again.
You've already been sworn in.
So I will ask Mr. Plaza to.
So, Jim, you agree to wait the reading of its refusal and stipulate to attack your seat?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
I have.
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
We do have a letter and we have met with the RCO.
Thank you.
please proceed. Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the information relating to this
application. If I may be given just one second.
Thank you. So we submitted to the board as part of this presentation, copy of the refusal,
the RCO letter, zoning history of the property, photos, plans, and related documentation required
under the code. This application for 1836 North 22nd Street is an application to erect a new
structure to be used as a multi -family dwelling six units. Now the block is actually zoned RSA 5
for the vacant lots, but there are RM1 buildings and RM1 zoning right around the property.
Historically, these properties are all residential multifamily.
And even though we have met with the RCO twice, the RCO itself did not take a position on this matter, partly because while there's a history of multi -units and we have a sanitation plan that we have discussed with them, there were concerns of low -income housing and whether low -income housing could be placed here.
However, this particular application is for a new structure, and while we are cognizant of the desire for low -income housing, the project itself is not specifically geared towards low -income housing.
I want to point out that this property before it was taken down with a five family dwelling for many years and the actual block itself currently is a mix of old buildings, some of which are multifamily and new construction, which are multifamily.
My client actually is in the process of building right next door a new structure that was approved for four -family use, which is very similar in design to this particular property.
And again, if the board wants to take that into consideration and would require a slightly less number of units, such as what was approved next door, we are certainly...
a slightly less number of units such as what was approved next door. We are certainly happy to
accept that as an alternative. The plans here shows basically a structure that is going to be
almost identical in setup to what was approved next door and is currently being built.
I will zoom in because this plan is pretty dense and it's hard to see details without looking at
everything. What the board needs to take into consideration of the height issue,
I know there's a height refusal on this of 44 feet. The actual building front and back line
is at 33 feet. We're not trying to build a building at 44 feet that way. What caused the
44 -foot refusal is because the way the building is designed, there's a central staircase going down
to allow access to units front and back.
And there's basically two roof deck access on the top,
which as a mezzanine access triggers the height refusal.
The actual design, the reason why the staircase was located centrally
is because by putting it in the central location,
we are able to build a access hallway with two means of egress
and also allowing access to the rear yard by all units.
This allows everything to be centralized and shared
by the entire building, front and back,
as far as access is concerned,
that makes trash management a lot easier.
The building is basically divided into front half, rear half,
which is why, given each floor has one front unit,
one back unit is why the six unit proposal was the original proposal that was given to the board.
The units themselves are actually small one bedroom units. So the overall density despite the
the count of the units actually isn't that substantial. The only two bedroom units are
on the first floor and the upper floor units are actually one bedrooms. So even though there are six
units, the bedroom count is not much greater than what a four unit, in fact, it's actually
probably less than what a four unit setup would look like. However, we do understand that unit
count is always a concern with regard to density. I want to point out also that with regard to the
property itself, the property is located on a block that on this side of the block,
There are multiple multifamily units.
Down further here, it is actually zoned multifamily as well.
So partly the reason that a lot of this is a single family zone is because these are
already vacant properties, and I believe they were zoned back to RSA 5 by default.
So again, we have what is essentially the same project being built already next door.
So we would ask the board consideration in granting this building, which is going to be built almost like a sister building to the next door building and will be used in a similar manner.
Again, with the block being mostly multifamily, we do not believe there will be negative impact to the community greater than what the original use was, which was actually a five unit building at this location.
I'll be happy to answer any questions from the board and redirect to any particular exhibits the board would like to see again.
What is the unit count of the adjacent building?
Four units.
Are there two bedrooms?
Yes, there are two -bedroom units.
I'm not sure. I believe there are two -bedroom units because the two top floors will be combined into bi -level units.
Questions from the board?
No, Chairman.
no no anyone else anyone else would like to testify in this case please raise your hand
here we have mary jones
good morning ms jones please identify yourself with a record and i'll swear you in
good morning mary jones from council president daryl clark's office
we're from to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do thank you please proceed uh yes upon review of this project and uh just in communication
with some of the neighbors we just passes this project be limited to four units like the adjacent
building you um anyone else like to testify in this case please raise your hand
Anyone else would like to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
Here we have one caller and user. Please unmute yourself and please wait for the chair.
Yes, good morning.
Name please.
Yes, my name is Judith Robinson.
Representative.
Please spell your last name.
R -O -B -I -N -S -O -N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Thank you, ma 'am. Please proceed.
Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to speak.
We had two meetings regarding this project, the history of the project,
the history of the building, I'm sorry, prior building being over four units.
it was a five -unit building, the sanitation plan, the fact that it's on a wide street
where transit is there, I would respectfully request that we proceed with a multifamily
building. If it is reduced in size, so be it. But this is a block that has PHA, not in the best
condition. Because of the fact that we would like to see our community develop and develop in a way
that's respectful of the size of the street, et cetera, I think this project does fit that bill.
It's not being squeezed into one of our smaller blocks.
So although the RCO had to not make a decision on this project after two meetings,
we were looking at this project individually and as the developer individually
individually for the request that, or I would say the, he was going to honor his word in
saying that the properties would be affordable.
Now, he mentioned a figure under $1 ,000 per month.
And for our community that is not receiving any rental schedules under $1 ,300, we thought that was a major positive, too.
However, with the cost of building, we may have to revisit that figure, as it was very low.
Unbelievable.
Real affordable.
And we don't hear that often.
Excuse me.
you'll have to discuss that with the developer right i understand that i understand that but
affordability in north central is very important so with that i'll put a pin in it thank you very
much is miss jones still on yes i'm here yeah miss mary um i was just wondering i i know you
the council president would like to have this at four units i believe that they would be four
two -bedroom units which means you'd have eight beds and the proposal in front of us is six six
one -bedroom units so you have six beds that right correct that um chairman it the first floor units
are two bedrooms so it'll be um eight bedrooms total either way okay either way yes i'm sorry
all right thank you for clearing that up thank you mary all right anyone else to testify in this case
i see no handshake thank you planning commission
thank you chair to chico members of the board ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning
commission in 2014 the zoning map was amended from rm1 to rsa5 at this location
while there are no unique physical circumstances to support a claim of hardship there are
As council has pointed out, numerous adjacent non -conforming buildings, including multifamily and rooming house uses.
The city planning commission recommends that the board grant the variance with the condition suggested by the council president's office that the dwelling unit count be reduced to four dwelling units.
Thank you. MI 2021 -001672, 1836 North 22nd Street.
Chairman, if I may have my client just adopt my testimony.
I'm sorry, please proceed.
Thank you. Mr. Al -Haddad, Mike Al -Haddad, should be with us. Mike, can you raise your hand in Zoom? Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Al -Haddad, Mike Al -Haddad should be with us.
Mike, can you...
Good morning, sir. Please identify yourself. Spell your last name and I'll swear you in.
Michael Al -Haddad, A -L -H -A -D -A -D, is the last name, representative for 1886 North 22nd St. RLC.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you, Mr. Jim.
Thank you. Michael, you have heard my testimony before the board and saw the presentation. Can you verify that my testimony is true and correct and adopted as your own?
Thank you.
Thank you. MI 2021 -001672, 1836 North 22nd Street. My vote is yes with the proviso of maximum four units.
Professor Plaza, yes with proviso.
James Snell, yes with Proviso
Thomas Holliman, yes with Proviso
Thank you
Number three on our list
MI 2021 -001107
2102 St. Vincent Street
I believe this is a pro se case
And the name of the representative is
Z -U -L -M -A
Last name Vels
V -E -L -E -Z
We have no exhibits, and this is the second listing.
Is there anyone here for 2102 St. Vincent Street?
I see no hands, Chair.
Thank you. MI 2021, that's 001107, 2102 St. Vincent Street.
My vote is to dismiss.
James Snell my vote is to dismiss Thomas Holloman my vote is to dismiss
number four on our list MI 2021 that's 001620 215 East Evergreen Avenue Mr. Anastasio is the
attorney of record. There is a letter of support with provisos from the Chestnut Hill Community
Association and a letter of support from the Chestnut Hill Conservancy. Mr. Anastasio,
you know the drill. Please identify yourself and I'll swear you in.
Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Vern Anastasio, A -N -A -S -T -A -S -I -O,
1315 Walnut Suite 1006 Philadelphia 19107 I'm on behalf of Mr you swear or affirm to tell the
truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do sir thank you please proceed I'm here
representing Richard Corkery who's the owner of 215 East Greenfield and please allow me to share
my screen which now I can't seem to find hold on please
That's not it.
there it is thanks for your patience so 215 east evergreen street is a relatively large property
in chestnut hill evergreen avenue is right here here's the main house when my clients purchased
the property there was an existing structure accessory dwelling unit in the rear of the
property accessible to a private driveway from evergreen place and the refusal is multiple
principal buildings on the same lot and of course having the two homes there is in fact a two -family
dwelling let's say even though it's a small place it's a fairly livable space with a open area
living room and kitchen with a bath on the first floor, and then a large master bedroom up top.
When my clients purchased the property, they actually ended up living in the back house
while the main house was being renovated. But the back house has been in existence
for many years based on everybody's, even the neighbors, immediate neighbors. They acknowledge
that as well. We have proof of posting. We met with the community. I have also a letter.
We have proof of posting. We met with the community. I have also a letter from the Chestnut Hill RCO, who do support the granting of the variance with some minor provisos. Also, we have a petition of absolutely everyone who lives on Evergreen Avenue and the surrounding neighbors, all impacted addresses from the Planning Commission that was given to us.
And yes, it's in full support.
Chestnut Hill Community Association asked that there'll be no short term rentals less than six months, which is easy to agree to.
And no permanent parking space will be assigned to this to the rear unit.
And that's also something that although it may not be enforceable from the zoning board, it's something that we have agreed to.
we also have a letter from the chestnut hill conservancy also um saying that they had a vote
and the motion carried seven to zero in support of this particular proposal with that i'm going
to show you my proof of mailing it was uh 80 unique pieces went out to the community
we had four separate meetings with the rco because they have various committees their
structure is a little unique than than the others but at every level uh it was unanimous support
and with that i'm going to rest my case uh and it's open for i'm open for questions uh before
i introduce my client uh why don't we get your client on demo ask questions fair enough mr cork
Corkery, can you raise your hand?
Yes, this is Richard Corkery, C -O -R.
Okay, spell your last name.
Thank you.
Corkery, C -O -R -K -E -R -Y.
We're affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you, Mr. Arnold Stabbs.
Mr. Corkery, did you hear my presentation to the board this morning?
Yes, I did.
and is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge yes it is and would you adopt it as
your own testimony if need be yes thank you that's all i have thank you questions from the
board no no no mr chairman anyone else like to testify in this case please raise your hand
yes chair we have mr charles richardson please unmute yourself and please wait for the
good morning charles please identify yourself and i'll swear you in
good morning mr chair charles richardson from the office of councilwoman cindy bass room 312 city hall
where from to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do thank you sir please
proceed uh councilwoman is not opposed to granting this variance thank you anyone else to testify in
this case please raise your hand i see no hands thank you planning commission thank you chairman
to chico ian hegarty for the philadelphia city planning commission members of the board the
comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential zoning at this location but
it does include a recommendation to promote accessory dwelling units as a way to provide
lower cost housing in higher amenity neighborhoods this proposal conforms to this recommendation from
the comprehensive plan and so the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the
variants. Thank you. MI 2021 -001620. 215 East Evergreen Avenue. My vote is yes.
Confessor Plaza. My vote is yes. James Snell. My vote is yes. Thomas Holloman. My vote is yes.
Number six on our list. MI 2021 -001576 -2901 North Bonsall Street. Mr. Anastasio is the
attorney of record, you're still under oath. There is a letter of support from Allegheny West
Civic Association. Mr. Anastasio, Mr. Plaza has questions for you. Mr. Anastasio, you agree to
make the reading of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed an exhibit
packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tag compliance, copy of the
refusal or referral folders and plans past days prior to this hearing? I do. And have you met with
the RCO and have a letter? I do. Thank you. Please proceed. Okay. I'm going to ask permission to share
my screen again. This is an application for a vacant commercial space on the first floor in
the same building with a single -family household living above. The single -family household living
has been um in existence for quite some time um the first floor historically has been a commercial space grocery
The first floor historically has been a commercial space, grocery store, dry goods. There's always been a commercial space on the first floor. As you can, it's pretty obvious and apparent by its construction.
And there's also a side entrance to the second floor apartment.
What we are intending on doing is taking the commercial corner space, which is this is I'm sorry, the this is right now it's a living room on the first floor and a bedroom in the back.
At some point, the commercial on the first floor became no longer viable, and subsequent owners turned it into an apartment building, and I believe they did so without proper permits.
We would like to return this first floor into a vacant commercial space with a restroom and an office in the rear.
My client believes that there will be a market for a neighborhood -based corner store of some sort in the future.
And of course, the second floor, one bedroom unit will remain.
We met with the community group in question.
We have interior photos of the property.
And we met with the RCO.
We have proof of posting.
We mailed to 270 households.
And as a result, we have, from the Allegheny West Civic Association, nearly unanimous support for the project.
And with that, I'm going to have my client, David McField, raise his hand to be recognized.
Mr. McField, please spell your full name and I'll swear you in.
he hasn't raised his hand and I checked no one's listed underneath that name
John Anastasia you being an officer of court will stipulate your client would have adopted
your testimony is there anyone else who would like to testify in this case if so please raise
your hand yes chair we have Charles Richardson Richardson you're still under oath just identify
yourself for the record yes mr chair charles richardson from the office of councilwoman
cindy bass room 312 city hall councilwoman is not opposed to granting this variance
i've failed to ask any questions from the board no mr chairman no you playing commission
thank you i'm sorry chair yes this is tanya before we proceed we do have a call -in user
who wishes to testify okay thank you yes absolutely thank you call in use uh would
you please spell your full name and i'll swear you in um yes adrian fernandez first name a d r i e
last name F -E -R -N -A -N -D -E -Z.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth,
the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed.
Our RCO, Swamp Brutal Neighborhood Process Association RCO,
is an affected RCO for this address.
We support the project.
However, we have two provisos.
The first one is that the first floor be limited to CMX 1 due to our participation in Philly 2035 for our decision, our community decision for corner addresses with CMX on a single -family block.
This property was traditionally for the last 20 years before it was partially vacant.
It was a bicycle shop, which worked well, used mostly by children in the neighborhood.
The business only stopped because the owner died and then sold the property to Mr. McField.
The other thing is that there's a tremendous dumping and trash problem.
Part of it was even due to the second floor resident, which I talked to Mr. McField about, and he tried to rectify that.
So we're asking that our trash be placed indoors as a proviso except for on trash days.
And I have other information about this that I need to put on the record.
First is that there was only one notice sent out for a meeting that never held to affected RCOs and affected neighbors.
to affected rcos and affected neighbors and that was the respectfully uh i have to respectfully
And that was...
let her finish and then you can respond please i just want to do object but okay thank you
everything i'm saying is documented in email and the planning commission is fully aware of
of all of it also the planning commission within the last week sent out an advisory about this
which is becoming rampant where RCO coordinators, some RCO coordinators and some applicant, usually attorneys, are working together for the benefit of the developer, the applicant, to restrict the affected neighbors from participating at the meeting.
So what happened here was that there was one required notice sent out, and that was many months ago.
The notice was sent out without the required consultation per the zoning code with all affected RCOs and the applicant.
As far as we can see, only the applicant was consulted with.
Therefore, the meeting date was planned without the required consultation with all affected RCOs.
That causes severe conflict, especially now during Zoom, where it's difficult to do more than one or two addresses per meeting.
As before, when we were doing physical meetings, we could do more than two addresses.
Now there's many dates, and we desperately need to have RCO coordinators and applicants follow the law as far as meeting consultation and meeting notice.
um allegheny west foundation they're using different names but the name they use on
the rco is the allegheny west foundation uh sierra martin was the person who sent emails
i'm sorry chair miss miss yeah thank you adrian please you're giving us a dissertation on on
rules and regulations uh what is your position what is your position stated your position
on this beginning right okay beginning all right well thank you mr chair just let the record
reflect that the this swamp poodle supports the granting of this variance uh the intricacies and
the uh you know the goings -on between our several rcos in a particular neighborhood i think that
all that stuff needs to be worked out among themselves we follow the we follow the code to
the letter. Thank you. Anyone else to testify in this case? I see no other hands, Chair. Thank you.
Planning Commission? Thank you, Chairman DeChico, members of the board, Ian Hegarty for the Philadelphia
City Planning Commission. The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential
zoning at this location. However, the proposed use is consistent with documented previous uses
on the property and with the building itself. The City Planning Commission recommends that the
board grant the variance. Thank you. MI 2021, that's 001576, 2901 North Bonsall Street.
My vote is yes with a proviso trash to be stored indoors. Professor Plaza, yes with proviso. James
Snell, yes with proviso. Thomas Holloman, yes with proviso. Thank you all. I believe that completes
the 9 30 list has anyone been left out if so please raise your hand
i have a calling user chair uh okay let's see who it is oh no that was just who we had
right oh okay okay i'm sorry sorry no hands here all right no no worries thank you uh any
unfinished finished business tanya
i believe that's all chair okay see everyone back at two o 'clock
thank you see you later bye -bye thanks everybody all right see you
we're recording
thank you um we'll give tanya and jason a few minutes you'll let us know when you're ready
we are ready now chair very good thank you good afternoon again everyone my name is frank
DiCicco. I'm the chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment. I'll be participating in today's
hearing along with our board secretary, Confessor Plaza, and board members, Mr. Thomas Holloman
and Mr. James Snell. Board Administrator, Jason Hand, and our board attorney, Ms. Melissa Freeman,
are also in attendance along with our Zoning Board Administrator, Ms. Tanya Sunkett.
For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through
some of the basics of what you can expect. First, we will be administering oaths to
First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
individual participants prior to their testimony.
Second, we'd like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded and that the recording will be made available on the web, to the public on the web or otherwise.
For anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star 9 and then star 6 to unmute yourself.
I'll repeat.
For anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star 9 and then star 6 to unmute yourself.
Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267 -270 -5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue. I will repeat, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267 -270 -5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
and i'd like to remind everyone please do not attempt to testify in the chat any questions
comments or issues of concern please direct them to our board administrator mr jason hand
With that, I will read off on the two o 'clock list. Case number eight, MI 2020 -002036, 539 North 22nd Street is withdrawn.
Case number 9 MI 2021 -000027 -9201 Busselton Avenue is continued.
If anyone disagrees with the withdrawal and the continuance that I just read into the record, please raise your hand at this time.
Only if you object to the withdrawal and or the continuance that I just read into the record.
I see no hands, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
I will now ask if anyone would like to request a continuance or
withdrawal to raise your hand at this time.
If you'd like to request a continuance or withdrawal on the 2 o 'clock list,
please raise your hand at this time.
again no hands at this time sir thank you jason uh with that we will begin with case number one
mi 2020 -001789 1213 -19 walmart street the attorney of record is mr ron patterson
there's a letter of non -opposition
from Washington Square West
someone by the name of Thomas Jefferson
University by something has to hand
raised do I allow him to speak
it's Ron Patterson you can go ahead
and promote him
he's been promoted to panelists
good afternoon Mr. Patterson
Please identify yourself, spell your name, and I'll swear you away.
Okay, thank you.
I don't know why it listed me as Thomas Jefferson, but we have the new Ronald Patterson, Claire Harrison Law Firm, 1835 Market Street,
but LPPA 19103 on behalf of the applicant, owner, and tenant.
We're a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
I don't know if Mr. Thane, T -H -A -N -E, Wright is here as well.
We can promote him while I'm speaking.
So if I can share my screen.
This application regards the building at 1213 Walnut Street,
fairly new building, as you may know about.
It is a 20 -story building that has a mix of uses,
residential and commercial 344 single family dwelling units mr patterson uh one second
sorry to interrupt are you uh proceeding with your case yes please confess sir okay i'm sorry
i thought you was gonna ask for a continuous uh do you agree to waive the reading of its refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy i do and have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required
documents proof of ownership proof of tax compliance copy of the refusal or referral
photos and planned spot days prior to this hearing? I have, yes. And have you met with the RCO and
have a letter? I do. Thank you. Please proceed. Sorry about that confession. Yeah, sorry about
sorry about that confession uh yeah sorry about that as well uh so uh and so this application
that as well. So
regards uh the vegan commercial space on the first floor depicting here um right here
give you some more viewpoints of it
There's a view from this little walkway that goes between Walnut Street and the street in the back.
So here's the side of it. So the application is for a restaurant takeout because the property is located on Walnut Street.
it's subject to the zoning codes special control overlay district that requires that all restaurants
on the street as well as chestnut and south broad street i need special exception approval from the
board and so that's why we're here today um is mr wright here or eric as whisks
can you raise your hand sir
hello what oh here he is yeah mr wright please spell your full name
t -h -a -n -e w -r -i -g -h -t the j should not be in there you swear affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Mr. Patterson? Oh, thank you. Hi, Thane. How are you?
Good, buddy. So you've heard what I stated so far. Would you agree it's true and accurate
and you would adopt it as your own testimony? Everything you said. Okay, thank you. So if
briefly, if you could, you know, explain to the board the nature of your business here and how
it's related to your Bauer Cafe at 10th and Spruce Street, particularly about the podcast
and things like that, just to give a flavor for what's going on here.
So we're doing coffee, obviously, tea, pastries.
There's a toast program and there's a cured meat program.
The cured meat and the toast are married.
um we also have smoothies other tasteful items for takeout or dine -in um we have a podcast booth
that is going front -facing to walnut street which basically is there to provide a voice
for um the public so i know a lot of friends who have businesses that have not succeeded
through um the pandemic or have switched over their businesses to wholesale or closed down
altogether and it's not just the food industry it's um there's some doctors there are some
musicians there are some hair salons there are um yeah just a lot of people have voices who do
podcasts at home who don't necessarily want to do them at home so i have a booth that will be
available for rent and we will have our own podcast um that will probably air once one to
two times a month um about you know your every day um so so this is more of like a you call it
a neighborhood gathering place um did you let the board know uh you know the custom or cool
things about your menu yeah well um what do you mean uh repeat that question again the meats and
and the okay so yeah we use cured meat which is um definitely not what you see every day
um we do coffee and cured meats i don't make the cured meats in -house we purchase them
i have a friend um who has a shop in new york who's currently being switched over to usda
um i will be using his product but for now i'm using a local product until he is finished
um we sell it by the pound there's a long list of cured meats mainly beef and pork
um that you can purchase or eat on the toasts um we met through doing pig roasts in new york city
And I wrote a business program that is infusing coffee and cured meats.
Essentially, it's very European, but to make it basic, it's just coffee and food.
Great. So what is the days and hours of operation here?
What is the days and hours of operation here?
Well, to start, we've made...
Well, to start, we may run similar hours, 7 to 5, Monday through Friday, and then 8 to 5, Saturday and Sunday.
But that may change quickly just because of the neighborhood and the building.
And how many employees total would you guess?
That also may change just based on the footprint and anticipating volume.
I could see, you know, five to six people on at a time.
So that would be 12 employees.
And finally, how many, how many chairs for occupants?
Thank you.
So as I mentioned, we did meet with the Washington West, or as it was mentioned,
Civic Association, and they have provided their letter of non -opposition, which I'm
putting on the screen now.
So if there's any other, anything else you'd like to add?
Any questions for the board?
Any questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Anyone else would like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
I see no hands at this time, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Planning Commission?
Good afternoon, Chair. Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do and for the record spell your last name for the court reporter please
my last name is spelled b as in boy a as in apple r as in roger n as in nancy as an apple
r as in roger d as in dog please proceed this property is indicated for commercial mixed use
on a comprehensive plan we feel the proposed use will not cause detrimental impacts for the
the neighborhood beyond which normally might be expected.
Accordingly, we support the granting
of the special exemption.
Thank you.
MI 2021 -0017891213 -19 Walnut Street.
My vote is yes.
Professor Plaza, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
mi 2021 -001 excuse me i'll start again mi 2021 -001798 1324 mifflin street
rco letter of support i assume that's passion crossing i don't see it on my notes
but i'm familiar with the neighborhood and mr orphanetes is the attorney of record
Mr. Orphanides has been promoted to panelist.
Good afternoon, Mr. Orphanides, please identify yourself, spell your name, and I'll swear
you in.
And then after that, Mr. Plaza will have some questions for you.
certainly david orphanetes orphanetes and toner 1500 john f kennedy boulevard suite 800 philadelphia
pennsylvania 19102 you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing about the truth
i do okay mr plaza orphanetes you agree to waive the regain of its refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy i do the refusal that is the amended corrected notice of refusal that is included
with our exhibit book, which was just uploaded, well, added to our exhibit materials yesterday
because we just received it yesterday.
Yes, dated 8 -17.
Ryan, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership,
proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos, and plans five days prior
to this, Aaron?
Everything was forwarded.
And again, the refusal has been swapped out as of yesterday because we just, again, received that corrected amended notice of refusal yesterday and it is dated 8 -17.
So that change was made yesterday.
Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
We did meet with the RCO and it's our first exhibit in our exhibit package, which if I can share my screen, I can show you.
but we did have a meeting.
It was advertised in accordance with 1430312
with the zoning code.
We actually had a preliminary meeting
with the leadership of the community group
prior to our community meeting.
And as you'll see when I'm able to share my screen
that we garnered the full support,
unanimous support of those who were in attendance
for that remote or virtual community meeting.
Thank you, please proceed.
Okay, I'm going to share my screen, so I'll give you one minute.
I'm going to share my screen.
One second, I'm having a little bit of an issue.
Fortunately, it is not allowing me to share my screen.
Hold on one second.
I'm not sure what's happening here.
Here we go.
So now we should be able to see if that.
Can you see my screen?
Thank you.
Sorry about that.
Apologize.
So again, our first exhibit that you'll see right here is a letter from East Passion Crossing.
The chairman has indicated that he's familiar with this group.
I would understand why. The date of the meeting is indicated with 6 -14 -2021. It was handled via Zoom.
There were approximately 30 people in attendance, and as you can see from their letter, every member of the community group,
zoning committee voted in support, as did those who voted that were in attendance.
The application involves a property that's extremely unique in its location and its configuration.
As you can see from this map, it is a split zone property.
There's a portion here that's located that's zone CMX2, very extremely irregularly shaped.
There's an alley to the west, and then there's an alley on the east side and an alley on the north side.
There's also an RSA 5 portion that you can see here.
But what's interesting about this is that if you, and I'll show you in the photographs and in the aerials,
that the portion in the center is basically an island that's located to the rear of the properties
on the west side of East Pass Young, on the west side of South Juniper Street, and then on the south
side of Mifflin Street. It is, as you can see from our aerial, there's an existing two -story
warehouse structure that takes up almost all virtually all of the CMX 2 portion and then
there's an existing residential structure that's located on the RSA 5 portion fronting on Mifflin
Street. Here's a closer up view of that and as again as you can see this property is the
lion's share of it and the CMX 2 portion is an island that's surrounded by the other properties
fronting on the surrounding streets. Here's a view from the north. You can see the single -family
residence that's located on the south side of Mifflin Street. There's currently an access drive
which will be used for the proposed development in the center portion, the rear portion of the
property that will be maintained, and you can see the existing warehouse structure. You can see that
portions of the roof are currently missing. If we went through the photographs, you can see that
the windows are open, the building's in a poor state of repair. My clients just acquired the
property in the middle of July. They were under agreement when we commenced the process, the
zoning process, and when we went to the community, they had closed on the property since that time.
Here again is a view from the west, view from the south, and a view from the east.
Again, you can see the condition of the existing warehouse that if you drove by you would never
know it was back there. Apparently it has a very interesting history to its past use
from manufacturing nurses outfits and uniforms up to I believe it might have been a club at some
from manufacturing nurses' outfits and uniforms.
point. Here photographs you can see the existing drive the existing structure the front structure
I was unable to get inside it's in worse state of disrepair than the warehouse structure to the rear.
You have where the plan is at the present time and I'm just going to cut right to that
submitted with our amended notice of refusal or amended application that generated the amended
notice of refusal that was issued yesterday. No new refusals turned out being generated by our
amended application and no previously cited refusals were increased. The application is for
a single family dwelling on the RSA 5 portion. Again, the drive underneath that building will
be maintained. There are decks off the rear, roof deck with pilot house. To the rear and the CMX
two portion, which could be utilized for a multifamily dwelling, we're proposing three
single -family dwellings. My clients who are on the phone right now, Rustin Oller, Andrew Sino,
and Nick Kerr are the three, the owners of the entity that own, have acquired the property,
and the intention is for the three of them to occupy the three single -family dwellings with
their families once construction is complete. Each of the units will have one car off street
parking that is accessed by a shared drive. Each will have a roof deck with access by a pilot house.
There'll be a pergola or on top of the roof covering part of the roof deck. There are decks
off the rear at the second floor level and there are steps leading up from the rear yards to the
decks to the rear. That is one of the refusals that we were issued both initially
and with the amended application. You can see right here the zoning code does not allow when
you have an attached or semi -detached structure to have stairs leading from a rear yard up to a
deck. Our other refusal has to do with the fact that, and I could argue as to the technicality,
whether it's actually accurate, but as you know, CMX2 requires the first 30 feet of a building
at the ground floor to be utilized for non -residential and non -parking purposes,
and we are not. We're using the rear portion all for fully residential use for, as I said,
three single -family dwellings. If you get into the definition in the zoning code about building
front building frontage this but these structures don't actually front at the property which is at
mifflin street but regardless we we proceeded to the community group and presented that refusal
uh the other issue is is that we have a height refusal permitted height is 38 feet we're proposing
a height of 45 feet um that's largely due to the the providing the ground floor parking uh with
these particular structures fitting in the three single family dwellings and the oddly configured
CMX2 rear portion of the property has required us to go a little bit up in height, and I could
have Rustin Knoller speak to that. Here are, if you just so desire, here are sections of the
buildings. To the right is the RSA 5 portion. That is what you'll see at Mifflin Street is
built to the 38 -foot maximum height permitted in RSA 5, so it's only the rear buildings,
the three single families to the rear that are the 45 feet.
Just so you know, originally there was some plans in development to develop this as a multifamily
project that were brought to the current architects previously by the prior owners,
and again that could have been by right a multifamily dwelling. Here's a rendering of
what the building at the front the single family at the front is going to look like once it's built
and here are some renderings of the three single families as you come in the shared drive
you can see the uh the car parking the garage parking and then here's the view
from the rear yard and you can see the stairs leading up to the deck
um here's a ground view floor plan that shows the parking the rear yards and the decks and
the shared drive again this is a project that um was fully supported by the community
um it's obviously an extremely unique property i can't see it say that i've seen one like this
in all my years of doing it, doing this. And I think it's clear that there's the basis
for the granting of the variants here, the required variances here. And in truth, the
And in truth, the thing that was very appealing to the community was the fact that it could again be developed much more intensely as a as a multifamily dwelling.
thing that was very appealing.
And we're only proposing three single families. And that was something I think that the community found again very appealing.
Here's actually an image of what the by right multifamily what we'd be talking about.
so we'd be talking about a total of 15 units um and instead we have three single families to the
rear of them and this is just the cmx2 portion um and that would obviously provide the commercial
space which you know would be pretty strange to have to go down an alley to get to a commercial
space so there are a lot of things about this property that are very odd very unique and again
we feel warrant the grading of the variance with the full support of the community
um i do have a question uh i'm very familiar with this uh location um you have a garage door
leading into the uh i don't know is that is that considered part of clarion street is it
that that uh pathway is it is it is it on the city map as a street or is it just an alleyway
it's just the driveway it does look at one point that you know because you have the inlets at the
corner let me just go to a photo and and russin can probably speak a little more yeah i just was
i just was curious about it to be honest with you yeah so you can see i actually took photos
step off it's like a curb on each side and yeah you can see you have inlets and curbing that
actually come around and you can see here here's the inlet and here it comes around but
we don't have any information right now that you know that we were able to secure and rustin if
you'd like to be sworn in you can chime in with anything differently that it's not it's not that
i just was curious because i know it runs back like it was may have been at one time you know
years ago as as a city street but that's immaterial i just you know the thing that's
interesting is that it dead ends at the building yeah like it doesn't go through the property it
doesn't go out the other end it goes right to the property it goes right to the garage like if we go
here it goes underneath the building you can see here that's the rear of the building and this is
the front of the warehouse to the rear like there's and there's the alley on the west side there's the
alley that goes on the north side of the warehouse so there's nowhere if it had been a street there
was nowhere it would have been had to have been long before this warehouse was constructed because
there's nowhere for it to go other than into the building to lead into the building the only other
question i had is there any as it relates to the new proposal with the garage door
is there some sort of a warning system for pedestrians anything like that
uh we had not discussed that uh that did not come up at the community group meeting um
Right. But it is I mean, I don't think it's any different than any other garage door located on the city street.
But I don't know that that would be a problem to provide.
Russ, do you want to be sworn in and chime in on that? Yeah, sure.
Please spell your full name. I'm not going to be labored this hearing. I just was curious about it.
All right. Russ Knoller, last name, O -H -L -E -R, address 1405 Wharton Street, Philadelphia, PA.
where from to tell the truth the whole truth nothing about the truth i do sorry chair can
we have a spelling for the first name as well yeah uh rustin r -u -s -t -i -n yeah rustin uh i just
was good is there any um as it relates to the garage door opening is there any uh device that
will you know warrant pedestrians or um that's not something we talked about with the community but
but we'd be happy to introduce one.
The only thing we spoke with the near neighbors about
is that we would allow them to have access in there
if they were needed for the alley
or maintenance of the back of their home.
To answer your first question briefly,
that never was a formal street that I did a bunch of research
and spoke with the survey district.
It's always been private property and privately owned,
so it's never been a city street.
and that was designed and done that way when the carriage house was when the warehouse was built in
the back it was originally a carriage house and had horses yeah figure the carriage house okay
just questions yeah all right mr chairman we're maintaining this we're not widening this opening
um we're going to maintain the curbing so that was another thing that appealed to the community
that in order to gain access we weren't we weren't going to be jeopardizing or losing
any on -street parking by needing to make it wider we're gonna very good thank you any questions from
the board no mr chairman no uh mr orphanages do you need to have your client adopt your testimony
Mr. Orphanitis, do you need to have your client adopt your testimony?
I do. Rustin, I'll have you, since you're the client and the architect,
did you hear the statements I made to the board?
Rustin?
And were they true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
And would you adopt them as your own, both as one of the current owners of the property
and as the architect on the project.
Thank you.
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
Please raise your hand.
You know, I have to do this time, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Planning Commission.
Good afternoon, Chair.
Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
This property is indicated for commercial mixed use
and single family residential in the comprehensive plan.
We feel there is a demonstrated hardship
to meeting the requirement of commercial retail
because the property does not have frontage
on Passy Yonk Avenue.
However, we feel the applicant has failed
to demonstrate sufficient hardship for height.
Furthermore, the applicant could build
the proposed height as of right
if they make use of the mixed income housing bonus.
Accordingly, we support the granting of the variance for use,
but not the variance for height.
Thank you.
MI 2021 -001 -798, 1324 Mifflin Street.
My vote is yes.
Professor Plaza, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Case number three on our list, MI 2021 -001 -826, 1331 North 8th Street.
Brett Feldman is the attorney of record, 14th Ward, Democrat Executive Committee, sent a letter of support.
Mr. Feldman has been promoted to family, sir.
Thank you. Good afternoon, Mr. Feldman. Please spell your full name. I'll swear you in, and then Mr. Plaza will have some questions for you.
uh good afternoon um brett feldman 1835 market street philadelphia pennsylvania
uh i represent uh the spell spell your full name please okay b -r -e -t -t feldman f -e -l -d -m -a -n
and i remember you swear a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
Mr. Feldman, you agree to wait the reading of his refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral, photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I have.
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
We do.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Okay. I'm going to share my screen now.
Yes, please.
Can everyone see it?
Not yet.
Should be the cover page with the exhibits.
No, all we have is a black screen with Brett Feldman has started screen sharing.
can you still hear me we can hear you we can hear you there's nothing on the screen
yeah it looks like my video is locked up here um
let me let me do this um i'm joined today by um janet stearns from uh project home director
or development uh as well as the project home um okay and uh our project engineer ed gleason
um if they may also be uh unmuted and let me try to share the screen again
okay okay we got it now yes okay okay great
so i was going to go have them share screen but now we're good so i'll get right to this here uh
is our exhibit package uh one through eight which i'd asked to be incorporated into the record
i represent uh project home this is an application um probably about 10 years ago the zoning board
Um, probably about 10 years ago, the zoning board, uh, started seeing, um, we obtained approvals for two, um, um, project home multifamily buildings on this, on this property.
uh started seeing um
The property used to be, uh, operated as a large parking lot, uh, for the Northeast or for the, uh, North Philadelphia health system.
And right now, the two multifamily buildings are now complete. And this is an application to create a small, tiny six -car parking lot that would support the two project home buildings, the employees of those buildings, so they don't have to park on street.
So that's what this project is about. It used to be, the whole thing used to be a parking lot. Now it's just would be a very small smidgen of this lot. So let me just go through this real quick. We have, there's five lots that we're consolidating.
We've worked, we obtained some of these lots from North Philadelphia Health System, some from the RDA, some from the land bank, and there's probably 55 pages of documentation showing the accumulation of those lots.
I'm going to go right through that quickly here.
These are all these different understandings for all these different lots.
Next time I'll put them at the end, we have our tax clearance, right here.
And then this is the zoning map, we're at North 8th Street, North Percy, West Thompson
Street, Girard is to the south, and then there's five lots here that are still zoned single
family even though they've now been developed with multi -family buildings that we're putting
together one two three four five for this small parking lot here's what it looked like here's
what it looked like when we first started this massive parking lot the red is just the lots that
we're talking about today and then over the last 10 years this is the first building that project
home developed um i believe that that building has 30 units um and and this is what it looked
like before development this is the this is where the parking lot was and would go again but much
improved as you'll see just going through this real quick and then here is um you know really
just you know showing the amazing work that the project home has done here's building number one
that was developed here's our here's our parking lot here that was the staging for these
multi -family buildings which are wrapping up right now this is building number one
and then to the south is building number two and I just wanted to show you those pictures
just it's been a heck of an accomplishment to build these two buildings out there
that's the parking lot that we want to develop that's it again and that this parking lot would
support the two residential buildings. And this is just for employees. Most project home
residents do not have their own cars, as you can imagine. But we have employees that are 24 -7.
And instead of kind of imposing on the neighbors, we wanted to have a couple spaces just for our
employees, the different hours, the notices, the posters. Here is the letter of strong support from
the community group and then i'll just get right to it um pictures summarize that would be yeah i
just want to just show you real quick um these are the building that's going to support the
refusal is primarily because it's still zoned single family um this parking lot if it was part
of the other lots it would it would be fine but it's on its own separate lot so it's considered a
non -accessory parking lot which you can't have on rsa5 um but we couldn't put this this lot with
other lots because of the um the way this staggered accumulation of the lots and then here's here's
the parking lot i just want everyone to see um this would be a heck of a nice parking lot uh
fully landscaped um fencing um trees uh there's only one way um in and out uh off of north 8th
street uh landscaping along the residential area in the back on the side um we have bike
spaces and here's just a close -up of it fully stormwater management ornamental fences I mean
it's it's actually approaching a million dollars I think for this for this parking lot we met with
the community group here's the notices and they were strongly in support they were they were one
of the groups when we first started this project that said hey hopefully you can provide some
when we first started this project that said hey hopefully you can provide some parking
parking for your employees because parking is increasing
your employees because parking is increasingly tight over there so uh with that um i would ask
if the board has any questions but this is kind of the wrap -up of now 10 or x 10 or plus years
uh of the redevelopment of this uh this whole area um this final parking lot
do you have a client to test to adopt your testimony yes i believe uh cassie anderson
from project home uh is is on the line cassie yes i'm here hi please spell your full name
and i'll swear you in c -a -s -s -i -e -a -n -d -e -s -o -n where if i'm going to tell the truth the whole
truth nothing but the truth yes i do thank you mr feldman and cassie can you just uh provide the
board your your title with project home yes I'm an assistant project manager and in that role
you've been working on the redevelopment of this of the two buildings and also now this
parking lot accessory to those two buildings correct that's correct great and and you you
heard my testimony yes I did uh and was it uh true and accurate yes and you adopt it as your
on? Yes, I do. Great. Thank you. I have no further questions of Ms. Anderson. Any questions from the
board? No, Mr. Chairman. No. Anyone else like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your
hand. Chair, Ms. Diane Munro has raised her hand. I will honor to speak at this time. Thank you.
Good afternoon, Ms. Munro. Please spell your name and I'll swear you in. Good afternoon.
Diane, V -I -A -N -E, Monroe, M -O -N -R -O -E.
Did you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I did.
Thank you, ma 'am. Please proceed.
Okay, thank you.
The community supports this project and addition of the parking lot.
It will be an add -on to the community.
The community welcomes it.
um primarily because it'd be less cars to compete with and that curb cut will not interfere with
the um community because it's always been there in existence so we wanted to say thank you very
much thank you for your testimony i should have mentioned that the curb cut's been there the whole
time it's going to be accessed because it wasn't parking lot before thank you diane thank you
anyone else to testify
no further hands at this time sir thank you planning commission
good afternoon chair peter bernard for the planning commission
this property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan and has not yet
been remapped given the relationship to the adjacent property we feel the requested variances
are de minimis. Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the variances.
Thank you. MI 2021 -001 -826 -1331 North 8th Street. My vote is yes.
Confessor Plaza, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes.
Thank you for your time and consideration. Be healthy, everyone.
MI 2021 -001111 1917 Dennie, D -E -N -N -N -I -E Street.
This case was continued from July the 7th.
Is there anyone here representing 1917 Dennie Street or Dennie Street?
i see no hands sir thank you mi 2021 -001111 1917 denai street my vote is to dismiss
confessor plaza dismiss
tom holloman are you there
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Our vote was to dismiss.
My vote is to dismiss.
Thank you very much.
I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman.
I was having trouble getting on.
I'm sorry.
My vote is to dismiss.
Thank you, Jim Snell.
Thank you.
Number five on our list, MI2020 -00324.
Number five on our list, MI 2020 -003 -245 -2406 North 2nd Street.
Sarah Alderfer is the attorney of record.
Norris Square Community Alliance sent a letter of support.
Ms. Alderfer.
Ms. Alderfer, if you're in the virtual audience, please raise your hand so that you may be
promoted and sworn in.
Chair, this is Tanya.
If I could respectfully request that this case be continued.
It's my understanding that Ms. Alderfer is, I believe, no longer representing.
And I would like to see if we can reach out to the applicant to determine who and then send the documents accordingly for the next continuance.
Very good. Thank you. So, AMI 2020, that's 003245.
2406 North 2nd Street is continued.
We'll now go to case number six, MI 2021 -001 -832 -5102 Larchwood Avenue.
Mr. Schlepner is the attorney of record.
Guarding Court, a community association, sent a letter of support.
we'll be coming back in as a panelist
good afternoon chair and members of the board
Isaac Slepner with Mattione limited 100 north
independence mall west suite 5a northwest
Philadelphia PA 19106 here for the applicant
Mr. Slepner hold on please you're still on the oath from earlier would you please
just spell your last your full name sure my first name is isaac i india s sam double a alpha c
charlie last name slepner s sam l larry e elvis p peter and norman e elvis r robert
and mr plaza has questions for you the slepner you agree to wait to read in of his refusal and
to its accuracy i do and do you agree to i'm sorry do you um have you met with the rco and
have a letter we have and we do and have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required
documents proof of ownership proof of tax compliance uh copy of the refusal or referral
photos and plans five days prior to this hearing yes we have thank you please proceed all right
Thank you. Members of the board, I am going to, without further ado, I'll take you through our presentation.
So I will be sharing my screen and I have with me after my presentation, my client, Michael Miller, who is the principal of the Owner LLC.
We'll begin with item one, exhibit one, I should say.
Exhibit 1 is a certificate of tax clearance for 5102 Larchwood LLC, which is the owner of 5102 Larchwood.
I don't know why the form says tenant.
And that was issued on 817 just yesterday.
The owner is compliant with all property taxes.
Exhibit 2 is our refusal, which we just stipulated to.
So I'll scroll through that.
Exhibit three is our letter of support from Garden Court Community Association.
I believe that the board has a copy of that letter in front of them, but if they don't, I'll scroll through it slowly.
The RCO did take a position of support, and the vote was a total of nine, two, and one.
That was on July 14th, so just over a month ago.
Andrew Goodman from Councilperson Gauthier's office was CC'd, as was the Planning Commission and other interested parties.
The RCO wrote a bit of a narrative about just, you know, the contents of the meeting and the contents of our conversation about their support of the project.
um exhibit four is our floor plans and what we're here on today is simply legalizing the existing
use of the property as a three unit um so these are as built plans and i'll i'll show
And I'll show and I may ask my client a bit more about this just to clarify, but these are each small one bedrooms and you'll see that you've got your first floor.
and i may ask my client
uh these are again as built so your first floor encompasses the porch um and you enter directly
off the porch into the kitchen there's the living room uh bedrooms at the back and first floor unit
has the use of a rear deck and bathroom um if you enter in the foyer to go up you'll go up these
steps to the second floor unit the second floor unit's actually a two -bedroom you've got the
front bedroom at the front of the second floor, small kitchen, entry hall over here, kitchen. This
is a vent shaft for lack of a better term over here. Small living room, bathroom, and second
bedroom at the rear. And then the third floor is a small one bedroom. You continue up the steps up
here, enter in here, main room, living room, kitchen, bedroom, and bathroom at the rear.
So those are the floor plans.
Exhibit 5A are photos of the current property.
And so this is us at 5102.
Apparently the one is missing.
My client just very recently hired a new management company
who are working diligently to clean this place up
in addition to, you know, managing the tenants and general upkeep of the place.
This is us 5102.
Next door is 5104 Larchwood, which is also a two unit.
This is 5100 Larchwood, which the last time I was there, which was not all that long ago,
maybe two weeks ago, there were permits.
There was also a stop work order on this one, but that looks like they're converting that
to multifamily as well.
This is a closer up view of our property 5102 in the middle there with the red door.
Right next to a 5104, you can pretty clearly see there are two mailboxes there indicating multifamily use.
This is a close up. Actually, that's a close up of 5104.
Now we're getting into adjacent properties. So 5104 has some multifamily.
This is a view and these are all in the immediate neighborhood.
This is 5050 Larchwood, which is just across 51st Street to the east.
And this is at least a three -unit.
You can see one, two, three mailboxes there.
This is actually, there's four electric meters there at 5050 Larchwood.
That's, I want to say, 499 South 51st, which is across the other corner of 51st and Larchwood.
And they've got multiple mailboxes.
this is the side of 499 South 51st. So point being there's quite a bit of multifamily already
in that immediate vicinity. 5108 is also a multifamily. That's another corner view. The
other corner of 51st and Larchwood is Malcolm X Park. So exhibit 5B are photos taken at least
21 days ago, of the orange notice of hearing at the front door of our property. You can see it
right there on the front door. This is a bit more of a close -up shot of it, and this is a very close -up
shot of it. Exhibit 6 is our timely application for appeal. The application for appeal was filed
on 4 -20 -21. Exhibit seven is our project information form with all the information
requested by L and I at the time of filing the appeal. And exhibit eight is an affidavit of
service that on June 17th, a representative of my office mailed first -class mail to all of the
address is a letter from our office with notice of the RCO meeting. Exhibit A is our letter to the
neighbors dated June 17th regarding 5102 Larchwood, describing the refusal and describing the RCO
meeting. That was a Zoom -based meeting. Everyone who was cc'd, including Mr. Goodman of the
council member's office, the various RCOs in the neighborhood of which there are many
signed by me, all the CCs, along with a copy of our refusal and along with a copy of all
the addresses to which we sent postal mail. And I am not good at gauging numbers, but
And I'm not good at gauging numbers, but there's about 70 of them or so, 75 of them.
there's about 70 of them or so.
Exhibit 9 is a deed in favor of 5102 Larchwood, LLC, recorded on 8 -21 -15, and 5102 Larchwood, LLC is the current owner of the property.
And at this point, I would call my client, Michael Miller, to adopt testimony.
Mr. Miller, are you out there?
Michael Miller, hello.
I'm here. Can you hear me okay?
Yeah, Mr. Miller, please identify yourself with the record, spell your full name, and I'll swear you in.
Michael Miller, M -I -C -H -A -E -L, M -I -L -L -E -R.
You swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you, Mr. Slepner.
Mr. Miller, are you the principal member or sole member of 5102 Larchwood LLC?
And did you hear all, and 5102 Larchwood LLC is the owner of 5102 Larchwood Avenue?
That's correct.
And did you hear all the testimony that I offered to the board today?
I did.
And is all of that testimony true and correct to the best of your knowledge and understanding?
It is.
And would you adopt all of that testimony as though you had offered it yourself today?
I would, yes.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I have nothing further.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Anyone else like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
All the hands, sir.
Thank you.
Planning Commission?
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission
this property is indicated for single family residential in the comprehensive plan
it is clear the property has a long history of being used as multi -family that the applicant
has demonstrated sufficient hardship accordingly we do not object to the granting of the variance
Thank you. MI 2021 -001 -832 -5102 Larchwood Avenue. My vote is yes.
Confessor Plaza, my vote is yes.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes.
Let's go to case number seven. MI 2021 -001.
Thank you, members of the board.
Start again. MI 2021 -001329 -503 -05 South 6th Street. Mr. Michael Marcioni is the attorney of record. Queen Village Neighbors Association sent in a letter of support.
I have a notation that was given to me earlier by Ms. Saleta.
All exhibits from the original testimony are incorporated
and the request for variance has been granted.
Mr. Marioni.
Mr. Marioni has been promoted to panelist.
Good afternoon, Mr. Maddione. When you get on, please spell your full name for the record and I'll swear you in.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. Michael Maddione, M -A -T -T -I -O -N -I.
We're affirmed to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
I do. Mr. Confessor Plaza has questions for you.
Mr. Medione, you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
I did.
Have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Thank you. Please proceed.
Thank you, Mr. Plaza.
I don't know what happened to my document.
I'm sorry, I'm having a hard time finding the right document.
Anyway,
This is a reconsideration hearing on 503 and 505 South 6th Street.
Um, um, South 6th street.
This is a matter and mayor Badoosh, I believe the owner of the property is supposed to be
with us as well.
Um, and I don't know why I can't get the proper screen share or here it is.
It's not working correctly.
I cannot seem to get the proper screen to work.
Oh, there it is. I'm sorry. Is that up now?
You have to tap on your document. Yeah, now it's up, Mr. Medione.
Thank you. Sorry about that. Making me crazy. Sorry.
Anyway, we've submitted the refusal, the request for reconsideration, letter granting reconsideration, revised plans and form, and the support letter from QVNA.
My client owns the two lots, 503 and 505 South 6th Street.
He originally applied for variances to develop them as two single -family homes with front -loaded garages.
That was objected to by QVNA, and the original zoning application was denied by this board.
We then sought reconsideration after he removed the front -loaded garages and also the rear deck at 503 South 6.
So it was a substantial redesign.
With this, there's no garage on 6th Street.
It provides eyes and ears on the street, improves pedestrian access, and we'll put the site plan.
It's a much better plan now.
As you can see, this is 503.
there's a just a front door and windows and eyes and ears on the street on 6th
Street the same thing is true with 505 going back to 503 there used to be a
rear deck proposed back here and we have removed that at the request of the RCO
so in 505 now without the garage 505 needs no variances but it's part of the
same application but it needs no variances anymore it meets every
requirement the only variance originally was for the garage that we originally had for 503
it's a 36 foot deep lot it's by far the smallest lot around every lot is at least 40 feet deep
some are as much as 78 feet deep the lot on the corner at 542 lumbar that backs up into this has
no rear yard at 540 lumbar they have a five foot rear yard and those two lots are both 40 feet deep
Our lot is 36 feet deep.
Because of this lack of depth, we're requesting a variance, a two -foot variance.
It's a de minimis variance in our belief, to allow us to only have a five -foot rear yard so that the bedrooms are larger inside the house.
It's more livable, and it's only two feet, and we still have a rear yard that is still five feet deep that compares favorably to the one at 540 Lombard and at 542 where they have no rear yard.
And every other property in this area is at least 40 feet deep.
And like I said, some of them are as much as 78 feet deep.
We do have a truly unique situation, and we're down to one variance just for the rear yard.
And we have our revised plans and our revised plan form.
And also we have the full support, as I can show you, of QVNA after having met with them a couple of times.
You know, they did say specifically, we redesigned the project, eliminating the interior of parking
garages, eliminating the second floor balcony at the rear of 503 South 6th Street.
The applicant represented, demonstrating the changes that satisfied the objections of the
neighbors and the QVNA zoning committee, and they fully support the request.
We're seeking to build two single -family homes here.
This is an RM1 zoning district.
We could build four units here.
We're choosing not to.
We're choosing just to build two single -family homes because largely what surrounds it are single -family homes, despite the RM1 zoning.
We're definitely not doing an overbuild.
And, again, this is a truly unique situation.
Some of the properties don't even have rear yards.
We have a five -foot rear yard.
And if this property were 40 feet deep like the other ones that are near it, we would clearly have enough room to have a seven -foot rear yard.
But because it's the only property that's 36 feet, it's the smallest lot in the area.
It stands out. It does have a clear hardship to the land here, and the physical circumstances
make it possible to utilize it in strict conformity with the zoning code.
Everybody's going to benefit if we develop this property.
It will reduce likelihood of illegal dumping or crime because we have this vacant property
in the middle of 6th and Lombard.
It's definitely not an overbuild, no undue congestion, because we could build two duplexes here.
It's definitely not an overbill, no undue congestion, because we could build two due
And, you know, these are the minimum variances required.
So we believe that we meet the standard to be required for this one small, dimensional, de minimis variance that we're now seeking.
I do have Mr. Pridush, I believe, on the line to also be available if anybody has any questions.
let's have your client adopt your testimony then we'll move on to any questions
mayor is he available
yes i'm here hi hi please spell your full name yes uh mayor m -e -i -r last name badush b is boy a d
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I affirm.
Thank you, Mr. Mariani.
Thank you, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mayor, did you hear my statements?
I did.
And are they true incorrect?
They are correct.
And do you adopt them as your testimony?
Okay, thank you.
I have nothing further for the witness, Mr. Chairman.
Any questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
Anyone else like to testify in this case? Please raise your hand.
I see no hands, sir. Thank you. Planning Commission?
Good afternoon, Chair. Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
This property is indicated for multi -family residential in the comprehensive plan.
We feel the applicant has demonstrated sufficient hardship regarding the property depth and that
revised proposals refusal is to minimize accordingly we do not object to the granting of
the variance thank you mr martione other than the statement i made earlier concerning the exhibits
is there anything else i need to add any other language we do have revised plans mr chairman so
we we do have revised plans uh one page for each property z1 z1 and z1 .01 and a revised plans form
are in there because of the change since the original application so it'll be two pages
okay yes all right thank you mi 2021 -001 329 503 -05 south 6th street my vote is yes with the proviso
revised plan two pages approved today professor plaza my vote is yes with proviso
Thomas Holloman.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Thomas Holloman.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Thank you.
Thank you.
It looks like that concludes the two o 'clock list.
Is there anyone who believes that they have not been acknowledged?
Please raise your hand.
We'll hand it this time, sir.
Thank you.
With that, we'll see everyone back in 3 .30.
Thank you.
We are recording.
You and Tanya and Jason, we'll give you a few minutes.
No, Chair, we're ready to proceed.
Very much.
Good afternoon again, everyone.
My name is Frank DiCicco.
I'm the Chair of the Zoning Board of Adjustment.
I'll be participating in today's hearing along with our board secretary, Confessor Plaza, and board members, Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James Snell.
Board Administrator, Mr. Jason Hand, and our board attorney, Ms. Melissa Freeman, are also in attendance, as is our zoning board administrator, Ms. Tanya Sunkett.
For those of you who haven't yet participated in one of our virtual hearings, I'll go through some of the basics of what you can expect.
First, we will be administering oaths to individual participants prior to their testimony.
Second, we would like to advise everyone that this proceeding is being recorded and that by participating, you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded and that the recording will be made available to the public on the web or otherwise.
Third, for anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
I will repeat that.
For anyone participating by phone, if you wish to testify, you must raise your hand by hitting star nine and then star six to unmute yourself.
Finally, to enter an appearance statement, call Google 267 -270 -5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue. I'll repeat that also.
and the address of the property at issue. I'll repeat that also. To enter an appearance statement,
call Google 267 -270 -5548. Leave your email address and the address of the property at
issue. And I'd like to remind everyone, please do not attempt to testify in the chat. Any comments,
questions, or concerns must be, should be directed to Mr. Jason Hand, our board administrator.
With that, I will read off on the 230, I'm sorry, the 330 list. Case number three, MI 2020 -001562,
279 Grape Street. At the request of Rachel Pritzker, the attorney of record, this case is
being continued. Number four, MI 2020 -003 -139 -3214 West York Street. At the request of Jared Klein,
the attorney of record, that case is being withdrawn. If anyone objects to the continuance
or withdrawal of the cases I just read into the record, please raise your hand.
i see no hands mr chair thank you would anyone else at this time
i would like to request a continuance or withdrawal raise your hand if you're requesting
a continuance or withdrawal at this time please raise your hand
mr anastasio has his hand raised i will allow him to speak at this time so
thank you mr anastasio please identify yourself spell your name you're still on the oath from
earlier today good afternoon mr chairman members of the board verne anastasio a -n -a -s -t -a -s -i -o
1315 walnut street philadelphia suite 100619107
please proceed thank you sir uh i'm here on behalf of the owner of 2109 gillingham
a hearing was scheduled for today at 3 30
my client have not met with the rco still getting necessary materials together i was
just retained about a week ago to sort of get everything put in place so okay this is the
second listing uh so what we'll do is uh i'm sorry to interrupt you okay uh mi 2020 -00
303 -118 -2109 -Gillingham Street.
This case will be continued and it must be heard.
Understood. Thank you very much.
That's because they obviously hired you at the last minute.
I appreciate it. Thank you.
Thank you.
Any other requests for continuances or withdrawals?
No further hand at this time, sir.
Thank you.
We'll now go to case number one on our 330 list, MI 2021 -002577, 1115 69th Street.
And Ms. Elizabeth Graves, she's a pro se, she's representing herself.
Ms. Graves, please raise your virtual hands so that you may be sworn in.
thank you miss graves please spell your full name and i'll swear you in
you need to unmute yourself ma 'am
okay miss graves yes please spell your name
E -L -E -Z -A -B -E -T -H -G -R -A -V -E -S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Mr. Plaza has some questions for you.
Yes, ma 'am.
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance,
copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
Yes, I have.
And have you met with the RCO and have a letter?
Yes, I do.
Yes, I have.
Ms. Graves, do you have another device on?
We're getting some feedback.
No, I'm just trying to share.
I was inside trying to share.
It's only just you guys.
Nothing else.
Nothing else.
That's better.
That's better.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I'm only trying to share.
Are you guys there?
I don't see anyone.
We're here.
We're here.
All right.
I'm not familiar with sharing.
I'm trying to share the screen, but I can tell you I've shared all the photos.
Ms. Shunkett will walk you through that.
Do you have your documents up? You should open your documents first. So un -share and try to re -share, but have your documents up.
Thank you.
Sorry.
Okay, I am.
You have your document?
You have your document?
yes i'm opening the photos okay now you click on the share button at the bottom
did you click share i don't see the share at the bottom on your are you in your zoom
no i'm in the folder where the pictures are no you just open up the documents and have
them sitting there okay then you go back to your zoom and click on a share button
okay here i come that allows them to display within the zoom
you hit the share
and then you should go no i'm coming
okay I'm back here we go okay we don't have anything yet okay it asked me to
hear the entire screen and it's texting me to share or cancel I push share but
the screen is showing me a screen inside of a screen do I touch that yes it
should be the documents that you want to it's coming okay okay great oh and large
it so that it's easy to read and see by all okay you say good and maximize your
actual window okay yeah okay do i do it yep it looks how was the chair can you guys see yeah
yeah we can see the front of the house okay you can proceed miss graves all right um we've lived
in the east oak lane area we purchased our first home at 805 69th avenue in 2000 and we love the
area we we've been um participants in our um neighborhood since we've been here and we moved
down the street which is 1111 -1115 69th avenue which is on the same block just two blocks from
our original home we chose this home because when we purchased it we were told it was five units
and they were tenants when we purchased it and we insured it for that and we've been residing
there and we started to do all the formalities for certifying the five units the lead checks
and doing everything to turn into a realtor and take over for the realtor company that
as a realtor and takeover for the realtor company that was in place when we purchased the home.
that was in place when we purchased it.
And when we did the unit search, we found that even though our paperwork said it was a five unit,
that the license and inspection and zoning had asked the prior owners to downgrade it in 1982.
The blueprints that we have and the blueprints that I submitted, I got it from license and inspection.
and on those papers it did also say five units and then the small print it says asked owner to
downgrade to four units are you able to share that any of those documents with us um I did I
emailed it um I mean on the screen let me see let's try it okay um here and when we um basically
Michael, you're asking for us to legalize a five unit?
Yes, we were requesting a variance for the five units because that is what we were told.
I mean, I understand if it doesn't, I feel also we would have a legal suit against the person who sold us the home
because they sold us the home as a five unit.
And to see the license inspection was requesting them to take out a unit.
It's impossible to take out of a unit, but it is possible to actually file for just four.
But it's impossible because when we purchased it, it was already divided into five units, five separate apartments, bathrooms, two bathrooms, and the two large ones, and the other bathroom, each other unit has one restroom.
so um we're we're asking for a variance just because it is what it was zoned for for us what
we were told and it was our first time purchasing a multi -unit our other home had seven bedrooms but
it was one whole home so we didn't know at the time that was something um that was to
observe it will become a issue you have you have a letter from the rco
yes uh -huh could you bring that up on the screen sure
okay well here we go okay and pick you
um miss graves your screen is still up so we had you had brought up the document
oh you see it not now but you have to bring it back up we did see it
oh i'm sorry because you're still hearing there we go oh good okay
all right scroll down that would be helpful slow
community takes a neutral position okay
and some things that i did do prior i went to the chief um of the fire department which is the
local ladder which is two blocks from us and i went to them and asked the chief if he could come to
check out you just muted yourself miss graves
Ms. Graves, we lost your audio.
Ms. Graves?
We lost your video.
You started speaking about the fire department chief and then we lost you.
Oh, sorry.
I went to the fire department chief, which is two blocks from me, to the ladder, that's the local ladder, and I told him that we had to, I had an issue after, you know, kind of painting the apartments.
I wanted him to come and look them over and see if the fire smoke detectors were in place, were they in good locations.
So he came with a whole team of firemen, and they installed all the smoke detectors throughout the whole building.
you have
Do you have that document that shows the past history?
Yes, I can get that.
You can do that.
I'll hold that up now.
yes i got it tell me once you guys see it do you guys see that uh we see something
that says house number yep okay so this is the atlas which is from license and inspection
i got this um when we first purchased the home so stop it right there for a second sure
all right scroll down a little bit
two three family four family keep going
and this these blueprints here are showing over the years as they added additions and
continue to go back to get updated from the um zone
let me let me do this any questions from the board
no um anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
And I'd like to skip to the most recent.
Here's the.
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
any hands
and this was after then this was the updated after then okay just hold off ma 'am oh okay
jason i don't know if you heard me is there any any other hands up
Here we have Hillary Emerson who has been allowed to speak and is available to be sworn
Emerson, please identify yourself and I'll swear you in.
Councilwoman Sherelle Parker.
Hillary, start again, please.
We broke up.
I'm sorry.
Hillary Emerson on behalf of Councilwoman Sherelle Parker.
Is that better?
Yeah, and just spell your name for the court reporter.
I'm sorry.
Can I just interject for one moment, please?
Hillary, it seems like it might be an issue maybe with maybe where you're located.
Can you move a little?
I don't know.
I'm in my car right now.
Okay, that's why.
Okay, now we can hear you well.
We can hear you well.
Oh, okay.
Just spell your name, Hillary, for the court reporter, please.
Hillary is H -I -L -A -R -Y, last name Emerson, E -M -E -R -S -O -N.
Do you swear for him to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
The councilwoman does not oppose the variance request in this case.
We did review the hit.
street um and the the property was um changed to a five unit dwelling um i don't remember the exact
time frame but several decades ago and then in the 80s when an addition was put on for some reason
it was downgraded to four units um which doesn't totally make sense okay i think we're losing you
but we don't know councilwoman is not opposed all right uh anyone else to testify can you hear me
still mr chair now i can yep all right we're going to move on anyone else to testify in this case
planning commission i thought there was a another hand
Planning Commission I thought there was another hand up for Miss Miss Freda Williams but she
seems to have put it down I'm having a hard time hearing you Jason I thought I miss Freda Williams
put her hand up but might have been by mistake so other than that there's no further hands at
this time thank you we'll go to the Planning Commission thank you good afternoon chair
peter bernard for the planning commission this property is indicated for single family residential
in the comprehensive plan the property has a long history of being used for multi -family and
we feel the applicant has demonstrated sufficient hardship accordingly we have no objection to the
granting of the variance thank you very much mi 2021 -002577 1115 69th street my vote is yes
confessor plaza my vote is yes thomas halliman jane snell my vote is yes thomas halliman my vote
is yes thank you we go to item number five mi 2021 -001112 3422 collins street
this is a second listing is medallia lopez available
it doesn't seem to be available sir i don't see you in a virtual audience
thank you mi 2021 -001112 -3422 collins avenue collins street my vote is to dismiss
confessor plaza dismiss jane snell dismiss thomas harloman dismiss you item number six
mi 2020 dash 000 328 4609 hedge street h -e -d -g -e leo mobile is a attorney of record
Mr. Mulvihill has been promoted to panelists thank you Mr. Mulvihill please
identify yourself with the record I believe you were on earlier this morning
and good afternoon chairman members of the board
please identify yourself spell your name and I'll swear you in
Leo, L -E -O, last name Mulvihill, M as in Michael, U -L, V as in Victor, I -H -I -L -L.
Address.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Mr. Plies has some questions for you.
Mr. Mulvihill, you agree to waive the reading of its refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required document, proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance,
copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans five days prior to this hearing?
I have with the exception of tax compliance. There's still an outstanding tax balance on the
property. Okay. Have you met with the RCO and have a letter? We have met with the RCO. I have
not received a letter. Okay. Please proceed. Good afternoon, members of the board. We're here today
for the legalization of an existing structure. An addition was put on the rear of my client's
house at 4609 and 4611 Head Street. That was done without permits, so we just need to make sure we
get everything legalized now. It's just a single -family dwelling. There was a larger addition
was added. Our only refusal is for a side yard. Because we continue the existing footprint of the
house, we have a 3 .25 side yard between the side of the house and the side of the property line,
whereas we're required to have five feet under the zoning code.
Just for purposes of the record,
I have refusal, appeal, and project information form at page one,
area zoning maps at page six, deed at page seven,
zoning notification letters at 15,
photos of my client's property at 17,
and plans for the property at page 40.
So just going to page two of my presentation packet,
again, this is the refusal that we received.
we did receive it quite some time ago um it is just for a small deviation for a side yard
we are located in the rsa5 district referencing page six of my zoning packet
page seven this is the deed of consolidation as this was part of a consolidation as well
at page 15 this is my notice of community meeting that was sent out
We did hold a community meeting back in October of 2020.
of 2020. Here's the information for the reverse of that meeting. Notification that was sent out.
Beginning at page 17, this is that side yard that we were talking about, members of the board,
off to the right of this photograph. You can see that the existing structure is only 3 .25 feet away
from the other existing structure. This is the property line. And the addition just went back,
and i'll show that to you in the plans once we get to those this is a side porch this is looking
from the rear of the property down through to the front of the property on hedge street
it's another shot from the rear showing that rear one story edition
it's the posting and we have several postings in here as this has been continued several times
all right so members of the board here's what i'm talking about so this is the existing house
to the middle of page 40. i'm indicating here this is the rear addition that was added
and this is what the property looks like from the rear we haven't added
or changed the side yard whatsoever we just kind of went with the property line of the existing
structure and here you can see members of the board exactly what i'm talking about
this is that side yard that we were discussing we just continued the property pardon me the
line of the building straight back and that resulted in this slightly smaller than allowed
side yard i'll note for purpose of the record that the side yard at the front
is actually also not code compliant it's only three feet um 11 and three eighths inches
So it's an existing non -conforming use and an extension thereof.
So essentially, this is a single -family home.
My clients simply sought to put an addition in there.
Before, we had a living room, dining room, and kitchen on the first floor.
Rack space in the basement.
Two bedrooms on the second floor and a bedroom on the third floor.
with the addition of the addition we now have significantly more space so we had
deck that was added dining kitchen living space office larger bedrooms a master bath
and then the original remaining stories above second story and third story
uh remained the same and for purpose of the record this was the proposed subdivision plan
uh pardon me a proposed consolidation plan that was put together uh now that this property has
been uh built so members of the board without any um i don't have anything else at this time but i'm
happy to entertain any questions the board may have have a client to adopt your testimony i don't
believe my client's on the line today chairman we'll stipulate you being an officer court your
client would have adopted your testimony you said at the onset mr mobile hill that you do not have
tax clearance yes i don't have a tax clearance there's an outstanding tax balance due that we
need to address unfortunately and uh we don't still don't have a letter from fna right
oh this was not fna this was frankfurt nac oh sorry it's okay yeah i don't know whether
you ever received one but i never did um melissa would you happen to know if there's a letter from
the rco in that file i have on here that there's no rco a letter that's the most recent information
i have let me do this let me ask the board if there are any questions no no no mr chairman
anyone else would like to testify in this case please raise your hand
Mr. Sloan, folks, has his hand raised.
I will allow him to speak at his time with permission.
Thank you.
Mr. Folks, please identify yourself, and I'll swear you in.
Good morning.
Good afternoon, ZBA.
Can you hear me?
Yes, we can.
Thank you.
Oh, okay.
I apologize.
I was in a good spot.
Again, good afternoon, Chairman DiCicco, ZBA board.
my name is sloan folks i'm representing the office of councilman maria cuñones sanchez
room 508 city hall my spelling is your full name yes sir my spelling of my name is s -l -o -a -n -e
last name is folks f as in fire o -l -k -s you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth
nothing but the truth i so do thank you please proceed
Thank you.
Mr. Fulks, we lost you.
I believe he's muted, Chairman.
Can you hear me now?
Yes, we can.
Thank you.
Yes, I apologize.
Technology.
There was a meeting with the RCO.
The RCO failed to submit a letter or withheld a letter because there were some questions regarding a survey and lot lines.
um our office would request that if the cba so chooses to uh support or uh support this uh
various requests that a proviso be included that ensures uh or make ensures that the lot lines are
accurate okay thank you uh we don't have a tax clearance so we can't complete this uh and vote
on this as of yet um and we also would like to have the letter from the rco so we're going to
do a resumption hearing, Mr. Mulvihill,
specifically.
Tanya, do you have a date?
Let's try September 8th at
3 .30.
All right. Hold on.
MI 2020 -000328
4609 Head
Street.
We will have a resumption
hearing on september the 8th at 3 30 p .m at which time we will consider any feedback from the rco
and we need a tax clearance certificate yes i'm sorry chair yes um this is tanya um would we
only request just a letter from the rco to be read into the record
it's a good question i was only going by mr falks because that seems that they only wanted
no we'll we'll have feedback from the community and but a tax clearance is necessary all right
all right okay anyone uh that completes our list uh so is there any unfinished business
there's anyone not been recognized that has been believes they should have been recognized
no sir there are no hands thank you um melissa i don't know if it's you but i think we broke
a record today so it's either your appearance or the lack of an appearance by our vice chair
and Ms. Tenere, one of the two.
I was going to say that too, Mr. Chair.
Good luck.
Mr. Chair,
I'm sorry about that,
but Ms. Elizabeth Graves has her hand
raised. Okay.
She can ask,
I'm sorry, Chair, she can ask questions
of us by contacting the RCO box.
Thank you very much. Okay.
Having said that, this completes.
Any unfinished business?
thank you and thank you again everyone folks behind the scenes for all your hard work
have a safe week talk to you next wednesday likewise bye -bye have a good week
thank you melissa thank you have a good evening good night all
Good night.