This is a residential area that allows multifamily.
and i heard of other projects that were indicated on queen lane the difference between those
projects and this project is we're not on a flag-shaped lot we're not mixed zoning where
it's cmx two and a half where again two-thirds a lot is cmx two and a half um we we can't do
anything and we can't provide the parking that they're asking they're saying you know the
community's like we want the parking on the on the lot we wish we could we can't and i i want
also to be factual, my clients paid $295,000 for this lot. I thought I heard somewhere where they
said, oh, they're only paid $46,000 on this lot. My client worked hard with LNI to figure out
solutions about subdividing the law in half, as Mr. Master Poswell stated, about keeping the RSA
5 portion, RSA 5, and keeping the CMX 2.5 portion, CMX 2.5. It just couldn't work. This is the
textbook case for undue hardship. During the community meeting, it was indicated this is a
democracy and our community doesn't want it, where only one nearby neighbor was there while 14 was
signed a petition. But there's also a legal standard. And the legal standard here, I would
respectfully state that we have met. And I hope that the zoning board looks at this very carefully.
Thank you very much. Thank you. Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. And good evening, David Fecta with the City Planning Commission.
Chairman and board members, the comprehensive plan recommends a change in zoning at this location to residential single-family three.
This property was last rezoned in 1971.
The appellant seeks relief from the occupied area, re-rebuilding setback, parking, parking for persons with disabilities, building an attached structure, and
parking, parking for persons with disabilities, building an attached structure, and density
provisions in the zoning code. Given the unusual size and shape of the lot and the split zoning,
the appellant has shown that a hardship exists that will prevent them from using the lot as zoned.
Off-street accessory parking is not a common condition on this block face, so the two parking
variances are supportable, and building anything on this lot without attaching to a neighboring
property would be unrealistic. So the City Planning Commission recommends the board grant
the variances for parking, parking for persons with disabilities, and building an attack structure.
However, 16 dwelling units would be unusual on an RSA 3 block face. A lesser dwelling unit count
could also eliminate the variances for occupied area and rear building setback. So the City Planning
Commission recommends the board deny the use variance for 16 dwelling units and dimensional
variances for occupied area and rear building setback. Thank you. MI 2023, 004-620-308 West
Queen Lane, I vote no. Thomas Holloman, my vote is no. James Nell, my vote is no.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is no. Thank you, sir. Is there anyone in the audience
whose 2 o'clock case has not been called?
There are no hands, Chair.
We're going to take a five-minute break,
and then we're going to come back and finish the list.
Thank you, Chair.
Good evening, everyone.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this ZBA hearing.
With me is our Vice Chair, Isabel Shahid.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our Board Member, Thomas Holliman.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
And our Board Member, James Snell.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our Attorney, and our Executive Director, Tanya Sunken.
Here's our virtual format.
Be advised, the proceedings will be recorded.
a video will be available by contacting TanyaSunkett at phil.gov. For the benefit of our
stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone and you wish to testify, press star 9 to raise your hand and star
6 while mute. To enter and appear in the statement, call 267-270-5548. Leave your email and the
address of the property in question. And finally, the question and answer box on the screen is
not for comments or testimony. All comments should be directed to our Executive Director,
Tanya Sunken. Let's look at our schedule for tonight. Number two, MI 2023-006-304-5003
Woodland Avenue. That case is continued. And number seven, MI 2023-006-283-3401 Tampa
Street. That case is continued. Are there any other requests for continuances?
There are no hands to hear. Thank you. We're going to go to number six, MI 2023-006-277-4233.
teen chester avenue stephanie magna um letter of non-opposition from the spruce hill community
association stephanie magania has been promoted hi could you please state your name and spell
for the court sonata stephanie magania last name is m-a-g-a-g-n-a right do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do could you identify your
client the relationship to this property for my client is 4213 living lp they're the owner of the
property and our vice chair has just a few questions for you good afternoon counsel do you
agree to win the reading of the refusal or stipulate truth accuracy yes i do have you
emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed to proceed with
correspondence in advance of this hearing yes i have thank you please proceed thank you
um so briefly this property is 4213 chester avenue it's an existing three-story building
that includes 24 units within the building um it's located two blocks north of what's now
st joe's university center city campus formerly the university of the sciences and this project
was developed back in 2014 um originally oriented towards student housing when the university of
the sciences was here and there was a significant demand for that use in this location.
and there was a significant demand for that use in this location um as i mentioned there are 24
units within the existing building which is approved by right at the time um 55 bedrooms
are included within that building this is our original zoning permit um 24 units and 55 bedrooms
um again again when this building was constructed it was specifically oriented towards a student
housing population, not entirely, but primarily that was his orientation. But since the University
of the Sciences has moved out and St. Joe's has moved in, programming has changed significantly
in the neighborhood for student housing has changed. So the owner of the property has taken
many efforts over the last couple of months and years when this change happened to re-market the
units to the new demographic that's looking for units within the neighborhood. But they've had
trouble leasing particularly the larger units that are located in this building because they
were really intended more for a student audience so to address the changing market conditions
they've already begun um by right improvements to the site which includes an addition to add
amenity space to the project but with this application they are looking to change the
internal layout of the building ultimately to reduce the bedroom count here by nine bedrooms
will be taken out to create several smaller units within the building for a total of 28 units within
the building instead of the 24 that currently exist. So the total unit count, although there
is a bedroom reduction, Ellen is looking at the total unit count here, 28 units is not permitted
in the RM1 district on this lot given the size of the lot. So we are seeking variance really
for that condition. We did have an opportunity to present this to the Spruce Hill Civic Association
on February 20th. They have some familiarity with this project, although the original building was
constructed pursuant to the zoning code and by right. The owner worked very closely with the
community towards the architectural details that are here to be respectful of the neighborhood and
the design that's around the property. So Spruce Hill has some familiarity with the project.
their primary concern was that the bedroom
count here would not increase. And as I mentioned
the total bedroom count is going to be reduced by 9 bedrooms from
55 bedrooms to 46. So they were happy with that change
and ultimately submitted a letter of non-opposition
and that is included within our packet. And here you can see
the architectural details for reference of the building. With that
i'll ask um peter spain who's with core development on behalf of the owner
to speak very briefly and adopt my testimony um peter if you haven't already can you please raise
your hand peter spain has been allowed to speak sir could you please state your name and spell
for the court stenographer sure my name is peter spain uh spain is spelled just like the country
s-p-a-i-n all right do you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the
truth i do sir please proceed counsel hi peter did you hear the statements i made to the board
this evening yes i heard i heard the statement it is it is correct and i adopt it thank you um
quickly i know the board's short on time um but if you could briefly explain um the project as
it stands and what the purpose of this application is i i will uh you did a great job explaining
this, Stephanie. So I'm going to truncate my statements as best as possible. So this building
was built in 2014. I'm particularly proud of this building for a couple of reasons. First is,
it was the first one done with my partner and as core development. And secondly, more importantly,
it was a result of a collaborative effort between core development and the Spruce Hill Civic
Organization. We voluntarily appeared before them with our plans before we began construction.
in order to get community feedback they they told us that they wanted a less modern facade
and they asked that we consider um pushing the building back 20 feet further than we were
permitted to build um we again voluntarily built a building that was 20 we set it back 20 feet so
that to make it um uh even with with the twin that we were formerly attached to and still attached to
And we, you know, we built a facade that took into consideration the spirit of the architecture around us and the community.
So that's how the building became to be. Like all our assets, we treated this building well and it treated us well.
What's changed recently is the market. This building, as Stephanie mentioned, was designed for and has been used primarily for student housing for the students at the University of Sciences.
About two years ago, the University of Silences announced a merger with St. Joseph's University.
About two years ago, the University of Salaces announced a merger with St. Joseph's University.
We took no action at that time.
But then shortly thereafter, St. Joe's announced that they would be closing the entire West Philadelphia campus and relocating both the facilities and the students to their Hawk Hill campus.
And that process has begun and is not complete.
The effect on our leasing at this property was dramatic and immediate.
We took a couple actions right away.
The first thing that we did and what we're trying to do is to simply repurpose this building to to appeal to market rate housing as opposed to a student housing audience.
First thing we did is we are we we we created plans and have permits for and are and are in the process of constructing new amenity space in the rear of this in the rear of the building.
There was a portion of the building that cantilevered out over a back area, and we were hoping to connect with an easement to this large property behind us, which languished for nine years.
That project is almost done, and unfortunately, we're unable to get vehicles back there because there's a dramatic change in elevation, so we're landlocked.
So what we're doing is we are enclosing that space and creating new amenity spaces, a small gym and a club room slash co-working space.
Those projects are under under construction. We hope to have them completed by the end of this year.
And we've been marketing this property with new amenities coming soon.
We've had actually some success with remarketing to market rate housing in the first leasing cycle, and we've leased most of the smaller units, the smaller units being one bedrooms, two bedrooms, and studios.
What we have not been able to lease and we've had very limited success with is some of our larger format units, which were designed, as Stephanie mentioned, again, for a student housing audience.
We are now in our second leasing season. A couple of those remain unleashed.
We have tried a number of different marketing tax. We've incrementally lowered rent in those spaces.
We have marketed three bedrooms as two bedroom dens. We've marketed four bedrooms as two bedroom, two dens.
We have what we're finding is is in a not for a non-student audience in an urban environment.
There's just there's just not a lot of demand for units of this size.
What we're asking for this board to allow us to do is to take four of these units and to break them into, eliminate bedrooms in those units and break them into smaller units.
So in other words, one large four-bedroom, we would convert into two one-bedrooms, for instance.
That would result in increasing our unit count density from 24 units to 28.
But practically, it would reduce the density of the bedrooms in the building by nine bedrooms.
We would go from a total of 55 bedrooms to a total of 46 bedrooms.
I'd like to introduce you to our architect, Jeff Watson, at this point, who could answer any questions, if you wish, about the layout and mechanics of the proposed change.
I think Stephanie did well, and I think you expanded on it, and I think we understand what you're doing.
That's super. I appreciate that.
Okay. Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions from the virtual audience?
There are no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission?
Ron Bednar, City Planning.
first name Ron, R-O-N, last name Bednar, B-E-D-N-A-R.
Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, sir.
This property is indicated for residential use on the city plan or adopted district plan
recommends no change in existing zoning at this location with a documented history of
operating multifamily apartment building.
There's no evidence of unique physical circumstances or hardship that would force
the applicant to increase the amount of units at this building. Therefore, we recommend
the aggressive variance not be granted. Thank you. MI 2023-006-277-4213 Chester Avenue. I vote yes.
Thomas Holloman, my vote is yes. James Snell, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes. Thank you, counsel. Thank you.
okay number one mi 2023 006
Number one, MI 2023, 006-300-1623 Rittner Street.
To pro se, Stephen McCarriter is the appellant.
There's a letter of opposition from Broad Street West Civic Association and a letter of opposition from Council President Johnson.
Stephen McCarraher has been promoted
Hi sir, could you state your name and spell it for the court stenography
Hello, my name is Stephen McCarraher, S-T-E-V-E, last name M-C-C-A-R-R-A-H-E-R
Right, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes sir
Could you put your video on?
Our Vice Chair has a few questions for you and first of all, this application is for use as a visitor accommodation in an existing structure. The proposed use visitor accommodation is prohibited in the RSA 5 zoning district. Our Vice Chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, sir. Have you have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that is needed and required to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, sir.
Thank you. Please proceed.
Do you have your documents you could share with us?
Yes, sir. Let me pull that up.
Where are the...
Is there a green, the C says share screen, the green button?
I don't have a green button.
Where do you come and come?
On your phone?
Are you on your phone?
I'm on a phone, yes, sir.
Tanya, do you have any suggestions?