we are live thank you good morning everyone my name is frank de chico i'm the chair of the zoning
board of adjustment i'll be participating in today's hearing along with our vice chair miss
carol tenere i'm sorry can we wait a couple minutes oh okay i thought i i apologize i was
just going to read it off and hold okay we'll wait yeah we just they just coming in the room
right now you're right all right i'm sorry
Sorry.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Brady, we should be good now.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good morning 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 Vice Chair, Ms. Carol Tenere,
Board Secretary, Confessor Plaza, and Board Members, Mr. Thomas Holloman and Mr. James Snell.
Board Administrator, Ms. Tanya Sunkett, and Board Attorney, Ms. Sharon Saletta, are also in attendance.
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.
Third, 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'll repeat. To enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
Before we begin, and before I ask Ms. Tenere to call our first case, I'm going to read off some continuance requests that we've received.
And I would ask anyone else who might be asking for a continuance or withdrawal for this morning's hearing to please raise your hand.
First case to be continued is number five on our sheet, MI 2020-001739, 2110 North 2nd Street, MI 2020-000282, 4625 Wayne Avenue.
That's number 10 on our list. MI 2020-001-725-5336 Wayne Avenue. And number 15 on our list, MI 2020-000-372-6220 King Sessing Avenue.
If the applicant and or an attorney has any dispute about the cases I just ran in to be continued, please raise your hand.
And again, if anyone else is requesting a continuance or withdrawal, please raise your hand at this time.
is requesting a continuance or withdrawal please raise your hand at this time
chair we have sloan folks
thank you good morning mr folks
he's been promoted mr folks you can speak good morning chairman de chico uh zba board
My name is Sloan Folks, S-L-O-A-N-E, F as in Fire, O-L-K-S, Office of Counseling Maria
Keyona Sanchez from 508 City Hall.
You swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Yes, I do, sir.
Thank you, sir.
Please proceed.
I'm requesting continuance on, I don't have the page number, but I have a meeting number
MI-2020-000208211E. They have yet to meet with an RCO, and after reaching out to them,
we have gotten a response. Thank you. That's number four on our list. MI-2020-000208211E.
Eleanor Street is continued. Excuse me, Chair, this is Sharon. We also we received no exhibits
for that case and it was previously continued on September 30th so if it could be a must be heard.
I'll read that back in MI 2020-000208-211 East Eleanor Street is continued. Must be heard. Thank you.
okay um next year we have rachel pritzker
good morning ms pritzker ms pritzker you've been unmuted you can speak
good morning morning ms pritzker please identify yourself for the record and i'll swear you in
Rachel Fritzker, R-A-C-H-A-E-L-P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R, 1635 Market Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA-19103.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
I'd just like to request a continuance for 441 East Washington Lane, just so that we can have some more time to work with the community on this project.
Okay, that would be number 10 on our list. MI 2020-001741, 441 East Washington Lane is
continued.
Thank you.
Thank you.
You're welcome. Any other requests?
Chair, we have someone, it says from the Taconi Association. They've been promoted to panelists.
you may speak now good morning call the association please unmute unmute yourself
there we go good morning uh my name is chris from the taconi civic association
chris please identify your last name for the stenographer l-a-b-o-v-i-t-z
Do you swear in the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
What case are we here for?
Zoning MI 2020-00712, and the address is 7110 Erdrich Street.
It's number one.
Number 16 on our list.
This is Sharon Saleta.
The attorney for that case is Corin Weiss.
Sir, you're requesting a continuance?
Yes, I had an email back and forth with the attorney yesterday.
I got, when we had the Zoom meeting for this property, no neighbors attended, which we have trouble with that anyway because of, you know, it's a difficult process.
I found out a couple days ago that no one received a mailing from an extra neighbor who said he did not receive a mailing, that the zoning sign did not go up.
So I had emailed with the attorney yesterday, and he said he'd be willing to put a continuance in, but he wanted to possibly have it heard today, but I don't know how that worked.
So I was just a little nervous about having it.
He said he wanted to have it heard, but the decision held off because he did want to have a community meeting, another one.
Excuse me.
This is Sharon Saleta again.
I also had an email exchange with the applicant's attorney yesterday.
the exhibits were not submitted until yesterday and I emailed him this morning I don't know that
he has replied because they did not include a deed which is required to go forward I think
I think Ms. Sunkit can tell you whether they were, the exhibits were submitted to the RCO's
Ms. Sunke can tell you whether they were
EBA mailbox.
So, no, we didn't get the exhibits.
I do see that Corrin Wise is on the line.
If he can be unmuted, he's saying no objection in the chat.
But also, he's been promoted to panelists.
yeah that's fine we can go ahead and do that just a continuance
yeah uh the good morning so excuse me identify yourself first and last name
corn wise uh council for applicant um your first name is spell your c-o-r-e-n
c-o-r-e-n-w-i-s-e all right thank you swearing for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
about the truth i do please proceed thank you mr chair um so we did have the rco meeting uh notices
were mailed 143 of them um and the property was was posted i have photos uh the um the rco did
contact me and say that many some neighbors did uh mention not receiving it not unheard of um but
if there's any problem it's it's it's uh it's it's fine there's no objection um no objection
to the continuance no objection to the continue okay thank you all right thank you both gentlemen
zero mi 2020 that's zero zero one seven one two seven one one zero erdrick erdrick street is
discontinued thank you both there are no more hands up chair no more hands are up okay uh
madam chair vice chair i guess you could begin with number one calendar number 0271 1814 titan
Street. This is Sharon Saleta again I do not have a record of having received exhibits
and this case was previously continued on September 30th. Is there anyone here for 1814 Titan Street?
I see no hands up chair. Okay MI 2020-000271 1814 Titan Street is continued must be heard.
Calendar number 01752 1800 West Glenwood Avenue.
Sharon Soledig and the attorney on this case is Alan Nockamson.
Thank you. Alan Nockamson has been promoted to panelists.
Good morning. Good morning, Mr. Nockamson. Can you put your name and address on the record and
spell your last name? Yes, Alan Ockamson of Ockamson, PC, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600,
Philadelphia, PA, 19109. Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but
the truth? I do. Do you also agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy? I do. And finally, have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership,
tax compliance refusal referral photos and plans of the property five days in advance of this
hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter yes in all respects but i do not
have a letter from the rco okay you may still proceed okay alan before we begin i just want
to make an announcement to anyone who's listening please do not attempt to testify in the chat
Any comments should be directed to the Board Administrator, Ms. Tanya Sunkit. Thank you.
Good morning. Again, my name is Alan Ockamson and Ockamson PC. And before you is our packet
of materials, which includes seven exhibits. Along with me today is David Waddell, the owner
of the property, as well as Chris Johnson, who is the architect on charge of this project.
So the first exhibit is the deed to the property, showing that Mr. Weidle is the owner of the property.
The second exhibit is the certificate of tax clearance.
So Mr. Weidle has entered into a payment plan for overdue taxes with the City of Philadelphia, so he is tax compliant in that respect.
The third exhibit is the notice of refusal.
So this is a CMX-1 property.
And what we're proposing to do is put a takeout restaurant, a pizza shop, on the first floor in a pre-existing building.
is put a takeout restaurant, a pizza shop on the first floor in a built in a pre-existing building
where there's a residential unit above on the second floor. This history of the property,
well the property has a history of having a similar type of use. In 1998 this property was
used as actually a pizza shop. So all we're trying to do is repurpose the previous use
the previous layout of the property, where Mr. Waddell, who's also the property owner,
will open up a pizza shop on the property. Again, this is a CMX1 property. The previous uses of the
property have all been commercial in nature on the first floor, including a grocery store.
If you look at the property, we're at the corner of Glenwood and North 18th Street.
It's actually shaped like a pizza slice, so it's appropriate that we're looking to make
into a pizza shop it's not uncommon with these type of properties especially these unique floor
plans to have some type of like takeout you know component on there because just you know the
difficulties of actually putting anything commercial are unique to these type of properties
if you look at the property this is a condition of the property right now but you see
the pizza shop sign is still up from from the previous use so again what we're trying to do
is merely repurpose this property my client intends to completely redo the facade of the property
and invest significant resources on the first floor as well you know in terms of the pizza shop
the venting of the property is right here we're planning to repurpose the venting of the property
of the pizza of the previous pizza shop with the layout will remain the same all we're going to do
is just clean it up, like do, you know, do just aesthetic renovations to the interior of the
property. You'll see over here, and we'll see on the floor plans, that there's a significant rear
yard where we'll put our trash storage, where there'll be commercial pickup three times a week.
And in addition, we're going to put like a garbage can out here, you know, so that's our garbage plan
in terms of if anyone decides to leave the shop and have a place to dispose of the trash,
it would be out front as well. This is the view from the left of the property
and the right of the property on Glenwood on North 18th Street to the left of the property
and the right of the property. And here are the architectural plans. Again, a very simple floor
plan. You walk in, we don't account for any seating here, just a customer area where there
be ordering of food. And you saw that trash area. This is significant trash area where we would have
a large dumpster hugging the rear of the property. And you'll see the kitchen is here. Everything's
laid out as it is currently. Now we did meet on multiple occasions with the North Central
Philadelphia Community Development Corporation. We actually met Friday night from 6 30 to 9 o'clock.
We were not the only presentation but we were probably the presentation from I would say at
least 7 30 to 9 o'clock and the previous meeting also took place over the course of two and a half
hours. So we've met with the community over the course of five hours about this project. Now the
first meeting there was some technical difficulties where we were trying to figure out where the
community was trying to allow us to share our screen but over the course of five hours we've
with the community. You know, I don't know what their position is. I do know that during the
second community, the reason why we had a second community meeting was to get more community input.
There is a, there should be as part of these presentation materials. We have a petition
and I'll have to pull that up. I thought it was in here.
There's a petition of 40 signatures. Let me stop sharing my screen for a second,
and let me find the, let me get the presentation materials for 1800 Glenwood.
Let me see.
All right, so these are the presentation materials. I think it's in here. Oops.
Let me just make sure that's in here.
All right, here they are.
All right, so I'm going to share my screen again.
And these were the same materials that were presented.
These are the same exact materials that we had in our packet
other than the petition.
So my client who's lived in this neighborhood, his family still actually lives on the nearby block, he personally went door-to-door to everyone on this block and in the surrounding area.
So my client who's lived in this neighborhood,
his family still actually.
And as you can see from the signatures, he's received substantial support.
Two individuals on that block actually attended the community meeting.
One was the person who rents upstairs, and another one was a woman who actually lived on that block, and they stated their support as well.
So you'll see, like, they're all North 18th Street.
Not as much traffic on Glenwood, but the people that would be most affected are North 18th Street.
So a little bit about the owner, David Waddell, who's on the line.
He does have a history in working in the pizza industry, and this would be his first attempt as a business owner, and he's looking forward to the opportunity.
I also, like I said, have Chris Johnson, who can discuss any particulars about venting and things like that as to the property.
But I leave it to the board to ask any questions.
Stockton, since twice you mentioned the exhaust, is that going to be a roof-mounted?
No. So we originally thought that that's what they wanted, the community, and they indicated that they wanted, you know, side venting.
Now, and I'm sure if there are people on board, one of the main concerns was where the venting would be.
Would it be on 18th Street or would it be on Glenwood?
So Chris Johnson would testify, and he's on here.
Chris, can you virtually raise your hand?
but you can just tell is it going to stay on that side on it's going to stay on the 18th street side
and we actually were in communication with the individuals on 18th street side and they had no
objection we originally were looking into potentially reventing through the roof and we
were told they didn't want venting through they meaning the community organizers they want not
want venting through the roof they wanted venting on the side of the property so we said if you're
going to do venting on the side of the property, then it would make sense to keep the venting
here, because if we would move it to Glenwood, it would actually cost my client potentially
in excess of $30,000 to move the venting.
And, you know, I don't, so that's our presentation.
But that was a major contention, Mr. Chair, about where it would be vented.
And ultimately, we came to the decision, we would just use the pre-existing position
of the former pizza shop.
You want to get your client on?
Mr. Waddle, can you virtually raise your hand?
Hello.
I'm here.
Good morning, Mr. Waddle.
Please identify yourself for the record.
Spell your last name.
Good morning.
My name is David Waddle.
Last name is spelled W-A-D-D-E-L-L.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Okay, Mr. Notkinson.
Yes, David, you heard everything I stated today.
And is it true and correct?
And would you adopt it as your own testimony?
Any questions from the board?
Would anyone else like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
I'm sorry. Yvette? Yes. Could you just open up their audio? Just unmute them. Not promote
them. Okay? Okay. We have a Tina Marie Russell. She's been unmuted. Good morning, ma'am. Please
identify yourself with a record spell your name and provide us with your address sure as tina
marie russell um north central philadelphia cdc rco 1631 west susquehanna avenue we're in a firm
to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do please proceed okay so first let me
apologize in saying that i don't have the letter um out to anyone i could not i'm having technical
difficulties with my computer is unbelievable. It's like, I don't understand what's happening.
So anyway, I couldn't PDF anything and I felt uncomfortable about that, but I did send a
summary that I'm hoping to be okay because that's not PDFed. So bottom line is we did have a meeting
like the attorney expressed on two occasions. And to summarize it in a nutshell is the fact
is the fact that there's three hardship issues that we feel that are going to be happening.
that there's three hardship issues that we feel that are going to be happening.
One is the time of the applicant's business is going to be, he wanted to, he indicated he wanted
to go from 10 a.m. to 2 o'clock in the morning. We did reduce it to 1 o'clock in the morning.
However, as anyone knows from our community, because he's one of the few, he's maybe one of
the only establishments open at that time at night in this area people are going to flock there
especially if the food is good which means that the community because they're not used to this
but they haven't been exposed to for a while they're going to be exposed they may not recognize
or may recognize which is one reason why we have rcos to show the big picture um the amount of
um oversaturation of community of people coming out to the establishment at one or two o'clock
in the morning as we know just because you close the doors don't mean people leave because once
they have their food if you look at the location of the of the site there's a a garden directly
across the street takes up a vast amount of area so there's always some place to pull over
for people to socialize while they're eating their food um so we look at that oversaturation of of
pedestrians at that point in time until wee hours of the morning and this is a working community so
So just therefore, we have that.
The second issue is that the lighting will be there.
The owner is considerate to be putting cameras as well as lighting around the building.
Well, it's great if you end your business at 9 o'clock or 10 o'clock in the evening.
But if you're going to 2 o'clock in the morning with those type of penetrating lights, now
your neighbors directly across the street on 18th Street will have a harder time getting
rest because the lighting will be, you know, to a community that's not used to having that
lighting on that area um thirdly we do have an issue with the vent first of all you said you
were going the advocate indicated that he would put he was thinking about he was he thought he
would have to put the venting on the roof which is going to cost substantially more money than
moving the vent from the 18th street side to the glenwood side and the rationale behind doing that
is just purely not just consideration not just consideration but it's a health issue as well um
And as well as a noise issue, venting after a while, especially if it's not maintained correctly.
And over time, we do get lags. If you look at most businesses, reality is reality.
They make a steady hum, and that hum will be invasive because it's not such a big street that people directly across the street and homeowners directly to the side of him will constantly be bombarded by from 10 o'clock in the morning to 2 o'clock in the morning by the noise level,
as well as by the smell as well as by the um as well as the lighting situation so that's a long
time so what is the recommendation of the rco and as we let me finish please what is the
recommendation of the rco as it relates to the time the time wise we ask we reduce this time
to 10 no longer than 10 8 10 p.m in the evening that's the latest that we recommend
and and the exhaust we had recommended that if he had the funds in his mind and his budget to
move it to the roof then he should have the same okay financial support support systems to move it
to the glenwood side as opposed to the um 18th street side i don't know what the cost would be
uh what the difference between roof mount and moving it to 18th street would be i i suspect
the roof mount would be less expensive because that's where it's it's it's exiting uh the that
you have the uh the wall mount right there and then you'll have to do is put up uh the uh the
flue or whatever to get to the roof i would think that would be less expensive and typically that's
what this board generally recommends that to be roof mounted exhaust as for the hours of operation
You're saying 10 a.m. to 10 p.m.?
That's the latest we think.
But we also have another RCO, one of the other affected RCOs, who like to give testimony as well.
Okay, we'll get to that next.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair, may I address her three points?
Yes, please.
Okay, hours of operation I have according to my notes.
We presented to the community Sunday through Thursday, 10 a.m. to 12 p.m.
And Friday and Saturday, we presented 10 a.m. to 1 a.m.
and again this is merely a takeout pizza shop yeah we're there there's no seats in there so
we're hoping people do not congregate um in terms of the the lighting and the security
again i would think that they would want security 24 7 so that wouldn't affect anyone
i would agree and in terms of the lighting typically neighborhoods we're not going to have
neighborhoods we're not going to have like lighting that you would see on the temple campus
like lighting that you would see on the temple.
but most people would prefer to have some type of lighting to like line up a block we we heard
a lot during our five hours of discussion with this community that this you know community has
some challenges in terms of safety uh and i would think that an appropriate amount of lighting would
help all involved um in terms of the venting that was our initial stance was like i know the position
the board they would want and i stated that clearly and tina marie would would hopefully
confirm this that the board wants to have the venting through the roof that's the appropriate
thing when they indicated they wanted to have side venting uh we indicated then we could repurpose
the venting that's that that's there to move it all the ways to glenwood would be a much more
significant costs and and that's what we still told them so uh that's our position as to those
three matters thank you anyone else would like to testify in this matter please raise your hand
and if you are testifying please give us something new and different chair we have a call-in user
they've been unmuted
i believe that's adrian fernandez is that adrian it has no name yes
Good morning, Ms. Fernandez.
Please identify yourself with a record by your last name.
Adrienne Fernandez, F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z, Swamp Little Neighborhood Parcels Association, RCO.
And we are effective.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes. So we did send our letter in to ZBA and had concerns which were stated at the meeting by ourselves and neighbors about crime and safety, parking and traffic congestion and parking on sidewalks and hours of operation.
As far as the parking, the owner suggested parking on a parcel that he does not own, and we said we were just totally against that.
So the parking problem and traffic congestion was never really resolved.
And also there's been an increasing problem of parking on sidewalks.
And neighbors also reported that there are some streets in this area with permanent parking and some without.
So it creates more congestion and just more people scrambling to figure out where to park when you have a business where people are pulling up, you know, parking temporarily and pulling off as a takeout business does.
As far as the we're asking for denial. However, if the board does not vote to deny, we're asking for provisos.
The main one that maybe spent a lot of time talking about because of safety and crime.
There was a pizza shop there years ago that was closed because it was a nuisance as reported by the neighbors, long term neighbors.
So we're asking for hours of operation from Sunday to Thursday, from 10 a.m. to 9 p.m., and Friday and Saturday, from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m.
And we're also asking that all grease containers be stored indoors.
We have a horrific problem with blackening of bricks and blackening of sidewalks because of takeout businesses that have grease containers, and they do not clean their areas.
They put them there, and they just don't clean, and it's disrespectful, not to mention it's a nuisance.
Also, we're asking that all trash, dumpsters, and recycling be stored on the property.
They said they have a large backyard that can be accessed from Glenwood, even from the street, as far as a dumpster pickup.
So we're asking for all trash, dumpsters, and recycling to be stored on the property in the backyard.
And the problem of the exterior plumbing being installed on the exterior wall on West Glenwood Avenue.
You know, on that wall, the grease cleanup is totally confined so that the owner, he can easier clean up the area.
And the grease is not going to be falling by gravity as with roof insulation of fans.
It won't be falling on other people's properties and on other homeowners' bricks, which we have a huge problem with because these takeout stores, it's like all they care about is their money.
They don't act like their corner family story that's part of the neighborhood.
And they just come in, make the money, and they drive back to the neighborhood.
Okay, thank you.
We're asking for installation on West Glenwood Avenue so it can be solely on his responsibility and any damages is restricted to his property.
Anyone else?
no chair that's all thank you planning commission good morning david effecto f e c t e a u with the
No, Chair, that's all.
Thank you.
philadelphia city planning commission morning david do you swear and affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth nothing but the truth yes sir i do thank you sir thank you sir mr chairman and
members of the board this property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the city's comprehensive
plan we have no objection to granting this variance but we ask that the applicant please
consider screening the dumpster from the public street uh thank you uh mi 2020-001752
1800 west glenwood avenue my vote is yes with the following provisos trash to be stored in your
rear yard and with commercial pickup roof mounted exhaust and hours of operation Sunday through
Thursday 10 a.m. to 11 p.m. Friday and Saturday 10 a.m. to 12 midnight. Thank you Mr. Chair.
My vote is yes with Proviso. Yes with Proviso. Yes with Proviso.
Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta.
Chair, can I just be sure that I have the provisos right?
Trash stored indoors, roof mounted exhaust.
In rear yard.
No, in rear yard.
They have space in the yard for trash.
Commercial pickup.
Commercial.
Roof mounted exhaust and hours of operation,
10 a.m. to 11 p.m. Sunday through Thursday,
10 a.m. to midnight, is it?
Friday and Saturday. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Have a great day.
Calendar number 0268, 1528 Porter Street.
Attorney's engine. Engine. He's been unmuted.
I just promoted him to panelists. Thank you. Good morning.
Good morning. Can you please state your name and address for the record and spell your last name?
Yes. Xenjin, Z-H-E-N-J-I-N, 1617 John F. Kennedy Boulevard,
Suite 1838 Philadelphia PA 19103 here on behalf of the applicant.
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I do. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
i do and also have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance
the refusal or referral photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing
and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter uh yes i believe we did submit everything
ahead of schedule as well as included the letter from the community okay thank you may proceed
Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and share the documentation with the board relating to this case.
So we have submitted to the board a copy of the refusal, the community letter, photos, plans, two rental licenses, which we will address as part of this request for legalization,
e-tax compliance, the property agreement, as well as the appeal application, project information
sheet, and hearing calendar. I want to point out directly that the community did vote in
opposition of this case. This is actually a legalization request for what is a RSA 5 zoning
district, but to legalize the use of the property as a three-family dwelling. I want to point out
that one of the reasons my client believed that he was purchasing a three-family dwelling is
because rental licenses have been available for this property as three units from 2018 when he
purchased it and then he as the owner was able to again acquire in 2020 three-unit rental license
but then after that someone must have called L&I and said there's work being done in the property
or people are renting it so they came out and issued a violation saying that no this is not a
three-family because it is zoned single family however my research into this property even from
the time my client purchased the property with the rental licenses in place everything to him
looked as if he's acquiring a triplex.
as if he's acquiring a triplex. The way the property is renovated, the way the licenses
The way the property is renovated...
were in place from the seller, as well as the way it was presented to him on the sales agreement.
Particularly, this property, actually, if you look into the city records, also has had prior,
and this is pre to my client's purchase in December of 2018, there was work done with
the Million Investors LLC, which went through the city, actually there were violations and then
finally compliance throughout regarding this multiple unit use issue as well as others,
which resulted in the end of them acquiring a rental license for three units. I would think
the city would not issue the seller or the buyer the rental licenses if everything in the city
records had once shown that this was completely done illegally. I'm going to separately share
information to the board of, for example, the electrical panel license that was acquired by
the prior seller. I'm going to go ahead and change real quick and reshare
that information. As you can see, sometime before they were doing work and they did acquire
permits eventually and throughout the years to have the three, replace three existing panels
only as it was wired, which is the triplex. And this was done back in 2013. So again,
this property has a lot of history here that shows that it was not a single family property
and was in fact a multifamily. All this was actually presented at the community.
their main position was look the zoning changed to RSA 5 we prefer if it was single family so
we're not going to support your request and I understand their position I respect that but
again there is a hardship here because this property is set up before purchase by someone
who made it into a triplex and was able to obtain rental license so for the most part it's my belief
based on my research that this was at one point legally a triplex or these rental licenses would
never been issued and they were issued twice once to the seller and once to my client before this
case was brought before the board today so again i would ask the board consideration for that
in that these the the property is a existing triplex that was renovated by the seller
and they did obtain permits throughout the process although they did some work initially
without it. They had to stop work order, but then in the city records, it was shown these violations
were complied and it was worked out and ultimately ended up in a rental license situation in 2018.
The property initially was vacant when my client purchased it. He did put tenants in there
initially. When the violations came, he immediately removed the extra units so that some of the units
are now vacant. But again, I'm going to show pictures of the units. They were renovated.
They're in good shape, but they are set up as a triplex as it sits right now. This is some of the
interior photos. Again, he has already removed the tenants pending resolution of this case,
but he only put tenants in because he thought he had a legal triplex and that there would be no
issue. The rental license certainly also gave him that impression as well. I'm going to jump to the
plans to give the board kind of the quick layout of the property so it's better able to be seen.
So the basement is for utility only. You have a central entrance which kind of divides. The back
unit is a small unit. The front unit is also a small unit, one bedroom. And then the upper floor
unit actually is a bi-level with three total bedrooms. Now, the community did confirm that
this was like a setup that was there for some time. This is not new. It was renovated, but the
actual entrance set up and the layout was because at one point an owner lived here who had a
handicapped child. And then they built like a father's daughter setting for this property,
which is why this back unit exists and it's a small unit. So that is what we're working with
here. It is existing conditions. It's a pre-existing non-conforming situation, which
does give rise to a hardship to my client who purchased it as a triplex, obtained rental license
at one point, and then had everything kind of revoked and we have to bring forth this
to the board.
Even though the community has opposed it, I didn't get their actual letter of the rationale
has opposed it. I didn't get their actual letter of their rationale even though it says it was
Now, even though it says it was
attached, but I understood from the meeting the rationale is that they don't feel they want
multi-family properties when the zoning has changed to single-family and therefore
they don't see a hardship to my client to have to convert this back to a single-family.
So I would ask the board's consideration in this case, given the particulars of the case with regard to rental license being issued, the pre-existing nonconformant conditions, and ask for a favorable ruling in this case.
I'm happy to entertain any questions from the board or try to present other exhibits that may help clarify the presentation.
Could you go back, Mr. Jeng, could you go back to the floor plans?
i'll zoom in again to make it a little bit easier to see so the second and third floor
this is one unit second and third floor okay and then the the first floor is divided front and back
one bedroom kitchen okay yeah all right that's where the third okay and when do you know when
the zoning change occurred i'm not 100 sure on that i did go into the um the archives at one
point and i know that it was still like a mixed use in the 90s uh but it must have changed since
that point yeah probably more recent than that um the other question was your client did you make a
purchased through a realtor yes and um part of they did it was through a realtor uh it was sold
as i have the agreement sale here was sold as a triplex and as proof they provided my client
a 2018 rental license you see here that was the seller all right so there's three there are three
electric meters correct yes there are three three electric meters and uh what i shared earlier with
the board, and I'll re-share it again, is that goes back a ways. Even the city records show
permit details of replacing panels going back to 2013. Well, generally, you would have a meter for
each unit, and then there would be one, what they refer to as a public meter. That's why I was asking.
Yes, I understand that. All right. And I understand the situation on the west side abroad.
it's to say it's overly congested is certainly an understatement um but your client apparently
your client just got sold the bill of goods um all right any questions from the board no no no
anyone else would like to testify in this case please raise your hand
there are no hands up chair thank you planning commission
good morning david facto city planning commission mr chairman and members of the board this property
is indicated for residential single family use in the city's comprehensive plan we believe the
zoning changed in about 2018 we were going to oppose this but given the testimony that we've
heard, we have no opposition to this application. Thank you. MI 2020-0002681528. My vote is yes.
My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. My vote is yes. Thank you. Can we just stipulate
that my client would adopt my testimony.
Okay, so noted as an officer of court,
we'll stipulate that your client
would adopt your testimony.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Calendar number 1453-2215 Pine Street.
David Orphanides has been promoted to panelists thank you
Mr. Orphanides can you please state your name and address for the record
and spell your last name certainly my name is David Orphanides I'm with Orphanides and Turner
I'm at 2 Penn Center, Suite 800, which is also at 1500 John F. Kennedy Boulevard, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19102.
And do you swear?
Sorry.
Last name's spelled O-R-P-H-A-N-I-D-E-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you also agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I waive the reading, but I do not stipulate to its accuracy, of course.
I waive the reading, but I do not stipulate to its accuracy, of course.
Same old, same old.
Yeah, same old, same old.
Something's never changed, even in a pandemic.
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents,
which would be proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal or referral,
plans of the property, photos five days in advance of the hearing,
and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, yes, and yes.
Thank you.
I think there are three questions, but yes to all of your questions.
Thank you.
You may proceed.
May I share my screen?
Thank you.
Let's see.
Are you seeing my screen?
Yes, we do.
Fantastic.
So, again, my name is David Orfanides.
I am the attorney representing the owners of 2215 Pine Street, Michael Curlin and Mitha Prasad.
Husband and wife live there with their children.
And the property is zoned RM1.
As you know, RM1 allows for multifamily residential use.
The property is used by them as a single family.
And this proposal does not change that use.
It will remain a single-family use.
Proposal is for a very small one-story addition in the little niche or cutout that you see in many center city row homes where the front of the building is the full width of the property, touches the building to either side.
And then at the back, it narrows a little bit kind of off to one side.
there's a little opening alley, some people would call it, that allows windows to open up in the
side of the rear portion of the building. So that little side court is the area that you'll see
where we're proposing just a one-story addition to allow for clients to expand their kitchen area.
The refusals that were issued, here's a copy of the Notice of Refusal dated July 22nd.
As you can see, there are three dimensional refusals that were issued by the examiner.
The one that I have an issue with is the minimum period area refusal.
As you can see in the email that I forwarded on October 12th to the examiner, James Cunningham,
and as you'll see in the plans, we are not going any deeper than the existing building extends
presently. And as such, the rear yard, as you can see in my email, gets measured from the area that
is at the rearmost portion of the building and then to the closest portion of the rear property
line. Given that the addition doesn't extend any further than the existing structure, we are not
changing the rear yard area as it presently exists. So it's my position that that refusal
should not have been issued. We do not dispute the fact that we are reducing ever so slightly
the existing open area, and that, again, in terms of the rear yard depth, that's another refusal
that should be eliminated, and that we are not extending any further than the existing structure.
However, I can see that any addition should also comply with the rear yard depth requirements. And
again, given the fact that we're going to the same depth of the existing structure,
that is eight feet one inches from the rear property line as opposed to the required nine
that one could go either way but again um i would argue that that should go away as well but most
definitely the rear yard area refusal so what we're left with is one any way you slice it we're
left with whether they're all there one goes away two go away you're left with three de minimis
dimensional variances. And they're particularly de minimis as we get into what's going on in that
back area of the other properties on the north side of the 2200 block of Pine Street and on the
south side of the 2200 block of Panama Street that this property backs up to.
As has requested originally, we've shifted the order of our exhibit book. We've provided the
notice the refusal first here is the letter uh from the coordinating rco the center city
residents association dated october 28 2020 we did meet with them further on in my exhibit book
you will see um i think that's at exhibit 19 you can see the email from the planning commission
dated december 2nd designating or i'm sorry september 14th designating ccra as a coordinating rco
I'm sorry, my computer's
Sorry, my computer is spinning a little bit.
But further on in here, you can see the copy of our 14303 notice, there will be a certificate
of our mailing, the list of addresses to which the notice was sent, along with the notice
of refusal, instructions for filing the appeal as is required.
here's our certificate of service that complies with the uh the mailing the mailing requirements
of 14 303 12 of the uh the zoning code again back to the letter at exhibit two uh that letter is a
position of non-opposition we had a remote virtual hearing um there were questions that were asked
presentation that was made questions that were asked and um i don't recall hearing any any
concerns whatsoever you will also see as part of ccra's process they ask that you provide position
letters from the adjacent properties those that abut you to either side into the rear and those
which cross the street my clients did an absolutely fantastic job in securing a considerable number
of those letters of not only telling them their position but their position of support for what
is being proposed not just from the properties to either side and to the rear to the north but also
other properties on the block and you can see these as you scroll here you have 2218 panama
2221 panama 2218 pine street we did provide the plans and then notices of refusal
in most cases and had them sign them here's a summary of um of those letters 2218 panama street
2213 pine street 2217 pine street 2218 pine street 2220 pine street which are the adjacent
properties and then additional letters of support um from 2209 pine street 2219 pine street 2221
pine street 22 25 pine street and 22 12 pine street um so we have a letter of non-opposition
from the coordinating rco and a tremendous tremendous display of support for the proposition
from those property owners most affected by the proposal including those on the side of the
edition a copy of the zoning drawings and let me see if i can enlarge this a little bit
here you can see in the left hand side this is what i was talking about as you typically see
often see in center city row homes wider in the front full width of the property
narrowing in the rear this is the existing structure this is the area that's presently
open and you'll see in the photographs where we're proposing not a three-story this is a
three-story building not a two-story just a one-story again de minimis another example
of the de minimis variance, not only in the area and the dimensions of it, but in terms of the
length and the width of it, but also in terms of the height of it. As you can see from this site
plan, as well as you'll see from the photographs, the budding building to the west of us,
2217 Pine Street, actually extends further and deeper than ours. And the property,
a budding property to the east of us, 2213, extends, you'll see in the photographs,
about the same or a little bit deeper than our property in these plans in the
plans that were submitted to the city you can see a rear elevation again here
is the area of the one-story addition this is the rear portion that extends
for this to the rear property lines you can see we have three stories back here
and then the existing three-story that's the front and this is the notch or the
court area that will remain at the second and third floors and you can see the existing kitchen
that they have with the side court the door that goes out to the side court and then the slightly
wider kitchen that they will have when done and the door that goes directly into the rear yard
and open area here are some other tab five or other examples of the floor plan both existing
and proposed. Exhibit 6, the contractor who actually filed the application provided some
axiomatic renderings of the different portions of the first floor. Current photos, here you
can see the front of the building right off of Fittler Square, and that's the front. You
You can see the rest of the block, attached row homes.
This is the area to the rear.
this is the area to the rear this is page six of exhibit seven the court area that's going to be
This is page six of exhibit seven.
The court area.
filled in there is an existing cmu masonry fence wall between our property and the property abutting
to the east 2213 higher up of the existing existing court this existing rear portion
then you can see the port the building at the bottom of page nine the abutting building to
the west 2217 that extends way deeper than our existing structure basically to the rear property
line there's the structure to the west you can see at the top um this is the side cart a side
court of the budding property to the west that they have then as i scroll around 13 um this is
rear yard and then 16 these are the rear yards of the properties uh that front on the south side of
the 2200 block of panama when i get to exhibit 12 and 13 not to belabor this you'll see that i've
pulled the zoning archives for the 2200 block the south side of the 2200 block of panama and the
north side of the 2200 block of pine street if you look at the pictures you'll see it's all pretty
crowded back there more crowded than what we're proposing to do and you'll see from the zoning
archives that of the six properties that front on the south side of the 2200 block of panama
three of those were granted variances three of those appear to be pre-existing non-conforming
uses so none of them conform with the current dimensional requirements of the zoning code in
terms of 2200 block of Pine Street, we have seven of the 11 properties on that side of the block
that have been granted variances, dimensional variances. And I think that's all borne out by
the photographs that you're seeing here in exhibit seven that show the back area of the properties
on each of those sides of the respective 2200 blocks, kind of crowding the rear yard area.
And again, we're not going to be making this any worse.
This is a side court of the property and the rear yard of the property abutting us to the east, 2213, and that's at 19.
I set the camera right on our existing rear wall, which is the depth of the addition.
And this is, you can see the gray wall past that is the rear of the building abutting us to the east, 2213 Pine Street.
you'll recall when I was going through this site plan that I said that I think that building is
actually a little deeper than ours, and the photograph seems to depict that again. We will
not be going any deeper than our rear wall. Our building will be shallower or definitely no deeper
than either building to either side of us. And again, here's our little side court that we're
going to be filling in with the one story. Interior photos of the kitchen as it presently stands.
David, if you can summarize, that would be helpful.
sure um yeah so again uh if there are we have three dimensional variances that were cited
um i definitely think one of them should not been issued the other one uh regard that's regarding
rear yard area the uh even if it stands it's de minimis uh it's no change actually to the rear
yard area um the rear depth again no change or de minimis difference between what's required
and open area, de minimis change and open area. And again, very much in keeping and no different
and probably much less than what else exists in that back area between all those properties.
Tax clearance is a tab 16. Our posting photos are a tab 17, copy of the deed a tab 18,
demonstrating our clients as the owner of the property. Again, I went through our mailing at
have 19. With that, I would just ask my clients to be unmuted. Again, Michael Curlin and Prasad,
I'm assuming they're both on the same call. And then Kenny Grono, Kenneth Grono from Buckminster
Green, who's the contractor, also should be on the call. And I would just ask them to be unmuted
in case they want to add anything and then to adopt my statements.
what was the first person's name uh it's either michael it's michael curlin and or
mita prasad and i'll show you on the index if you assume there's a spelling okay michael curlin i
see yeah right here he's been he's been unmuted michael can you introduce yourself for the record
and if mita's there as well she could introduce herself yes hi i'm mike curlin um one of the
owners with my wife, Mitha Prasad
Kerlin, up
2215 Pine Street. Thank you, everyone.
Hi, Mike. Would you spell your last name, please?
sure it's k-e-r-l-i-n thank you you're swearing a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
Sure. It's K-E-R-L-I-N.
Thank you. You're swearing to
the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth.
but the truth yes thank you michael do you have anything to add to what i stated to the board
no nothing to add thank you david okay and did you hear everything i said to the board yes and
is it true and accurate to the best of your knowledge yes and would you adopt those statements
that i made to the board as your own yes okay thank you um and then kenneth grono kenny grono
Buckminster Green
He's been unmuted
Please identify yourself with the records
Spell your last name please
Kenny Grono
G-R-O-N-O
We're in a firm to tell the truth
Nothing but the truth
Thank you
Kenny do you have anything you'd like to add
To the statements I made to the board
Of the presentation I made
I do not thank you
And you heard everything I said to the board
i did and uh was the things that were the things that i said true and accurate to the best of your
knowledge they are and uh would you adopt those statements as as your own i would okay thank you
and with that uh so the board mr chairman members of the board i have nothing further to add and
unless there are any other statements um from anybody else on the call which i'd really be
right but i uh rest thank you any questions from the board for the record no no would anyone else
like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand there are no hands raised here thank
you planning commission good morning david fecto city planning commission mr chairman and members
of the board this property is indicated for residential multi-family use in the city's
comprehensive plan we have no objection to granting these variances thank you mi 2020 dash
zero zero one four five three two two one five pine street my vote is yes my vote is yes
my vote is yes
hopefully that was a double yes that's six votes six votes six to zero all right it's a dog biscuit
for me next time i see it calendar number 0808 3147 clifford street this is sharon salata i have
no record of having received exhibits and this was previously continued on september 30th
is there anyone here for 3147 cliff clifford street
there are no hands raised here thank you MI 2020-000808-3147
Clifford Street is continued must be heard
calendar number 0336-3128 West Montgomery Avenue
Sharon Saleta again. I have no exhibits and it was previously continued on September 30th.
UMI 2020-000336-3128 West Montgomery Avenue. Is there anyone here on this case?
We have a phone number ending in 7293.
Call or push star six to talk.
Yes, good morning.
Good morning.
Please identify yourself, name and address for the record.
Yes, my name is Wanda Lassiter.
I'm at Domain Real Estate Group, address 5300 Winfield Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19131.
My last name is spelled L-A-S as in Sam, S-S-S-S-S-M-I-T as in town, E-R.
And I'm actually here for the owner.
You swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth.
nothing but the truth i do are you an attorney no i'm not i'm a realtor in the state of pa
i don't believe she will no you can't represent you can't represent the
speak for him or herself okay we're going to continue this case must be heard
okay so will i automatically receive some type of date to give them yes
calendar number 01740 3100 spring garden street
jennifer bedzullo is the attorney he's been promoted to panelists
all right i'm just starting my video one second hi everyone hi jennifer can you
I'm just starting my video, one second. Hi, everyone. Hi, Jennifer. Can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name, please? Sure. Jennifer Bazidlo, B-A-Z-Y-D-L-O, 4500 Worth Street, W-O-R-T-H, Suite D202, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19124.
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you also agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
It's a referral, but I absolutely do agree.
Lastly, have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required documents, which would be proof of ownership, tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos under plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of those questions.
I would like to add that I did add one additional RCO letter to my packet since I mailed, but there
was two other previous RCO letters that were included. Okay, great. You may proceed. Great.
So my name is Jennifer Vaziblo. I'm here today with Sharla and Shireen Brown, who are local West
Philly residents and also the proposed owners of Arterial Coffee, which would be in the commercial
space at 3100 to Ochu Spring Garden Street. Allow me to share my screen.
Okay so I like I said I mailed in a packet that has the referral, lease, tax cert, RCO letters of
unanimous support from both Mantua Civic Association as well as Drexel Area Property
Association. There's also a personal letter of support from the president of the Powelton Village
Civic Association. Community notification letters, aerial view of the property,
this in the surrounding area, zoning map, photographs, and plans which I'm going to
incorporate into the record. If you give me a second I'm just going to switch my slide.
So 3100 Spring Garden Street is located at the corner of Spring Garden and 31st Street,
which is the very last intersection before Spring Garden crosses over the railroad tracks,
the Schuylkill Expressway, and the Schuylkill River, and over into the Art Museum area. This
property is about 2,300 square feet and is zoned CMX2. Our proposed use of this property is for
arterial coffee. It's a coffee shop, which is a local family-owned and operated community coffee
shop, which will be serving La Colombe coffees, artisan teas, specialty juices, panini sandwiches,
local bagels, and locally sourced baked goods, which will include some gluten-free options for
folks like myself. These products will be offered to consume on site as well as for takeout.
The hours of operation on Monday through Friday would be 6 a.m to 9 p.m and on Saturday and
Sunday from 6 a.m to 8 p.m. Before I proceed let me just switch my slide here. Sorry one second.
well I'll just scroll um so I just wanted to go to photos of the property
uh the property is currently this is our posting notice this is the front of the property you can
see is at the corner and it's this entire storefront right here uh the property is
currently vacant um so the photos aren't of much but i will show you them anyway
so this is the interior it's basically ready to be built out as soon as we have zoning approval
um so the plan would be to build out the space and i can show you the floor plan of how it would be
used. Basically, the space would contain seating for customers, bathrooms including an ADA bath,
front of house, back of house, storage, and a rear yard where the garbage would be stored.
So, notably, you're not seeing kitchen. There will be no commercial kitchen in this. This is
It's just basically coffee, panini presses, toaster oven, things you would find in a coffee
No fryers, no ovens, nothing that would require venting.
So that's of note.
So why are we here?
Because this is a commercially zoned property and we are looking to do a commercial use.
and we are looking to do a commercial use. In CMX2, which is where we are, all takeout restaurants,
in CMX 2, which is...
including a coffee shop that doesn't have a commercial kitchen, requires a special exception.
So let's just go to the zoning map right here. Jennifer, can I interrupt for a second? Sure.
Will you help me out here? The application says, and you're speaking to a takeout restaurant,
correct correct but if i see the floor plan it looks like there's seating there is seating as
well so if i don't um if we took out the language takeout restaurant then you probably wouldn't
even need to be here correct we were told by ellen i that there needed to be takeout as well
since people would be able to leave the property with um food and beverages i know but i'm not
not arguing with you i'm just saying you could do that with any restaurant all right we'll just
so this is why we're here about that it's um and it's a special exception so i'll just run through
why i i think that this is um not a big deal uh first of all uh so special exception basically
our burden would be that you know that this particular takeout restaurant coffee shop would
not be any more burdensome to the community in terms of special the specific detrimental impacts
than any other takeout restaurant would be. We firmly believe that this store will actually be
a positive addition to the neighborhood. Specifically, when it comes to congestion
in the public street, this is a small business serving mostly local residents who will likely
often walk to this coffee shop. However, we know not everyone walks. There is a loading zone
that's pre-existing along 31st street which will allow customers to um customers to pull up take
out their coffee without taking up permanent parking spots as well as provide for space for
deliveries um in far in terms of endangering public health or safety like i said there's
no commercial kitchen so the fire risk is even less and this is a community space in an otherwise
a vacant commercial space so we're activating a corner that was previously had no involvement
with the street. Impairing use of conforming properties again there's no smells that are
vented to the outside there's no late hours that are typically associated like we heard in previous
cases with issues the community might have with takeout and it's a commercially zoned property in
conformance with the city plan. This is exactly the type of small business we wanted in neighborhood
commercial premises. We did meet with virtually with Mantois Civic Association on November 9th
and I'm going to just scroll back to our community letters here. So they Mantois Civic did vote
unanimously to support our special exception. Drexel Area Property Association also sent a
letter of support. And this is a letter from the president of Powleton Village Civic Association
also in support of this project. I would just add that this is exactly the type of small
locally owned business that going forward as we recover from the pandemic that will be very
beneficial to the city to reinvigorate commerce reconnect communities and provide local residents
with employment their planned opening is uh april may so hopefully right around when things are
turning around and our community can go back to um enjoying things like coffee shops thank you
Do you have your client?
Yes, I would just ask that I think Sharla, I think it's Arterial Sharla and Charmaine Brown would be the folks.
If you could raise your hands at the bottom of the screen.
Hi, this is Sharla.
Hi, Sharla.
Can you put your name, your full name and address on the record?
sure it's charlotte last name brown b-r-o-w-n my home address is 139 north 50th street
philadelphia pa 19139 and did you hear my testimony here today yes do you believe it to
be fair and accurate yes and do you adopt it as your own yes any questions from the board
no i didn't swear in but we'll take your as an officer of court we'll understand that your client
agrees with your testimony any questions from the board no no anyone else like to
testify in this case if so please raise your hand
there's no hands raised here thank you planning commission good morning david effecto city planning
there's no hands raised here thank you
commission mr chairman and members of the board this property is indicated for commercial mixed
use in the city's comprehensive plan we have no objection to granting this special exception
thank you mi 2020-001740-3100 spring garden street my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote
is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes good luck to you thank you so much
calendar number 0264 2222 north 17th street
Sean Ward has been promoted to panelists.
I'm having a problem getting my video started. Bear with me.
good morning can you please put your name and address on the record and spell your last name
sean yes good morning mr chair members of the board sean ward on behalf of the applicant
let me go back to the other camera
here we go there you are
let me share my screen will name and address uh spell your name
Sean Ward, S-H-A-W-N, W-A-R-D, 331 East Street Road, Trevos, PA, 19053, attorney for the applicant.
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
I certainly do.
Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
And have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents,
including proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos, and or plans of the
property five days in advance of this hearing? And have you met with the RCO? And do you have
a letter? Yes, yes, and yes. Thank you. You may proceed. Thank you very much.
Let me start sharing my screen. Is my screen up? Yes, it is. Okay, very good. Present with me
today is Devis Juzy. I ask that he raise his hand virtually so Tanya and the administration can find
him when it comes time for him to verify and adopt. In any event, I've submitted my typical
exhibit packet. I represent G&Z Realty Investments, the current owner of the property
in the application. The owner at that time was ESD Investments, LLC, pursuant to the deed that
property was transferred to GNZ Realty Investments in December of 2019. We filed an application to
permit the erection of an attached three-family dwelling. There was one multifamily is not
permitted in the district accordingly we seek a use variance today a2 is the zba application of
appeal a3d project information form a4 is the current deed a5 proof of tax compliance a6 are
the site elevation and floor plans a7 are photographs the posting the subject property
and some aerial views a8 is the rco notice that was sent out we can go through that not in my
packet is the RCO letter, but I do have a copy of that today that was submitted by
Tina Marie Russell, I believe, this morning. I do have it
if the board does not. A10 is the district, would
be the district council letter, but it would be the Councilman Clark's office.
So I defer to Mary Jones on that. A11 is relevant
zoning history. None was found with this particular property, but
A12 is the other multifamily dwellings on the block. A13
is the zoning map, and finally A14 is an aerial photograph.
So what we have here is the refusal.
As you can see, there's only one refusal for the multifamily household living.
as you can see there's only one refusal for the multi-family household living
then we have my appeal transmittal to the board which includes the application of appeal
page two a copy of the notice of refusal copy of the project information form
then we have the deed as you can see it's the stated dated december 19th 2019 transferring
the property from the then applicant esd investments to gnz realty investments llc
and that was simply because lni requires that the name of the applicant be the name of the owner
as reflected in the opa property detail so at the time of application esd was still listed
as the property owner uh and we have proof of tax clearance
that takes you through 2013 and then page two
takes you through 2020. Then we have the site plan
so as you can see the construction proposes a four-story structure not to exceed 38 feet
as evidenced by no refusal for the height. It would consist of a front stoop and then there
would be three units inside. As it is an attached structure, there are no windows on the side
elevation. However, we do propose a brick veneer facade as evidenced in the plan.
And then of course you just have the simple site dimension plan here. There will be steps
in the front steps in the back to the rear yard with regard to the floor plans
starting at the basement plan the first floor would be the living kitchen and a bedroom in the
rear with two bedrooms in the lower unit with egress wells as complied with by the
Philadelphia building code each would have its own bathroom the middle unit at the second floor
would be a one-bedroom apartment with a full bath, a kitchenette, and a living area.
And then the third floor would be, third and fourth floor would be a bi-level unit.
The third floor plan would include the bedrooms and a living room at the rear,
along with two bedrooms at the third floor, each with their own three-piece bath, closets, etc.
this is a copy of the posting of the notice
again the posting
here's a google street view of the property as you can see it's a vacant property uh along with
what appears to be i think four other uh vacant lots on that on that side of the block
an aerial view again you can see there's multiple vacant lots on the block
And again, the aerial view, you can see numerous vacant lots along this side of North 17th
Street, as well as the opposite side of the street.
We sent out our RCO meeting notice on November 19th, included the date and time of the hearing,
the calendar number, the information for the virtual public meeting
hosted by North Central Philadelphia CDC as well as the public hearing ZBA hearing webinar login
information. That notice also included a copy of the refusal as well as a copy of the actual zoning
notice again containing all the login information. That notice went out to 243 different addresses.
As you can see the lengthy list
and our certificate of mailing you'll see 243 identical pieces were mailed out postmark on
November 20th in compliance with the notification requirements of the zoning code.
The property, again, is zoned RSA5. I would submit that this block was zoned RM1 in the past, and as a result of the rezoning, the new code has rendered at least 17 properties on this block as existing nonconformities, as they are currently permitted and documented as multifamily dwellings.
I have a list of those properties here. As you can see, I conducted a search just on the even side of 2200 block, and there's at least 17 multifamily dwellings, two and three, and possibly one or two four-family dwellings on the even side of North 17th Street.
I have a list of those properties.
I would strongly suggest to the board that had I performed the search on the odd side,
we would obtain a similar result. And then these are the identified vacant lots on that side of
the street, 2216, 18, 20, 22, that's our plot, 24, 26, 28, 54, 56, 64, and 2266 North 17th Street.
Again, I have copies of the permits for all those properties showing that their history
has been two, three, and four family dwellings on that side of the block.
Now, and Tim Murray Russell is here, obviously going to address the case, but I would point
out most notably is the attendance at the meeting despite 243 notices going out there was one
affected community household in attendance at that virtual meeting two immediately surrounding
community households at that meeting nine non-affected community members and there was a
total of 14 in attendance. You will see that in their summary, there was no support. However,
again, I think it's very important to see that the immediately affected neighbors did not attend
and possibly could not care less as to what was transpiring with this application.
So based on that, I believe this property is negatively impacted by the code here because of the fact that the majority of the block is currently used as multifamily dwelling.
And the likelihood that somebody would want to erect a single family dwelling in a multifamily block is remote at best.
the big discussion at the virtual community meeting dealt with trash we have indicated
the trash would be stored indoors in the structure or we could provide a
a trash corral of some sort under the front stoop where the residents could put the trash
I would also point out that this property is managed by a professional management company
ed mcdonald of correct me if i'm wrong devis
leesville properties i'm sorry we lost you there for a minute you said correct me if i'm wrong and
then we lost you uh correct me if i'm wrong i was i was trying to confirm that the property is
managed by ed mcdonald of harley'sville property management and real estate uh ed is a manages all
of my clients properties and so they would be responsible for ensuring that you know trash is
put out either by you know for for municipal pickup or for private trash collection
uh it could be stored in the rear yard or it could be again stored under the front stoop
or we can erect designated vented trash storage rooms in each unit.
We do believe we have the room and a small modification to the plan could address that.
The other items brought up in the RCO letter, it talks about the system being overtaxed
and requiring additional volunteer organizations, as referenced above, but that's not a zoning issue.
A request about a four-story structure, you know, claiming that it's a decisive alteration in the neighborhood, but it is permitted as a matter of right, and we do not exceed the permitted height of 38 feet.
Again, the bump outs at the front facade, not in alignment with the character of the existing homes.
It's not related to the refusal.
the single family layout of the units do not support existing family focused housing stock
but again this block is predominantly multifamily in nature and a single family dwelling in a block
of multifamily would prove problematic we believe and therefore that's why we want to match the
existing uses on the block and when she indicated that there's no clear plan as to who or what the
And when she indicated that there's no clear plan as to who or what the rooms would be utilized for, I think the floor plans are contrary to that assertion and clearly indicate that the properties can be used for small families as their multi-bedroom units, two of them, and could obviously house a family and would be considered affordable housing.
rooms.
So based upon that, we would submit that the property is unique and that to require this to be a single family home and a block full of multifamily dwellings creates a hardship to the property.
I would also point out that when they remap properties and adopted the new code, I'm not sure when this was remapped, but at minimum, it would have been 2012 when the adoption of the new code came in.
But they paint with a broad brush when they remap this, you created at least 17 non-conforming uses on an existing block.
And it creates a hardship not only for those units, but for our property as well.
So I would ask Devis to raise his virtual hand so the administration can identify him.
he's been unmuted he can speak mr davis please identify yourself with the record
and i swear you in my name is uh davis juzzi uh d-e-v-i-s last name g-j-u-z-i
5-1-1-2 woodmont circle sewell new jersey 08080 the owner of jnz realty do you swear or affirm
to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Sean.
Davis, you heard my representations to the board?
Are they true and correct, to the best of your knowledge,
information, and belief?
And would you adopt them as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Sean, you mentioned at the meeting
there were two affected neighbors are they residents on north 17th street
we don't need their address but i'm just curious effect that i don't know
that i don't know mr chair um i'm going by what was uh you know contained in the summary and the
letters from the rco they indicate that you know that that's that's that's who was there okay all
All right, questions from the board?
Yes, Mr. Chairman, is there a letter from a councilman?
Well, yeah, I'm gonna ask that next.
Again, I would say, I don't have the letter.
I'm gonna ask Mr. Chairman.
If there is a letter, yeah, but if there is a letter,
I would just ask that it be marked
as indicated in my exhibit packet.
any other questions from the board
no no anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
is a mary jones she's been unmuted good morning miss jones please identify yourself with a record
good morning um my my name is mary jones i'm representing council president daryl clark
um yes we're in a firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do please proceed yes um please if there if please let me know if you can't hear me i'm
sort of not in my normal place.
At any rate,
the council office has received
the communication from the RCO
with concerns about density
and lack of hardship.
And so we support them in their opposition
and oppose the granting of this variance.
Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else would like to testify in this case? Please raise your hand.
There's a Tina Marie Russell. You've been unmuted. Good morning, Ms. Russell. Please
identify yourself with the record. You're still under oath from earlier this morning.
Tina Marie Russell, North Central Philadelphia CDC and RSCO. And again, I apologize. I'm having
the technical difficulties with this computer situation so I would like to read my
technical difficulties with this computer situation. So I would like to read my letter for the record.
Please proceed. Okay, in reference to appeal to this applicant here,
I'm sorry, give me one minute. For the attachment of a structure and size
of a multi-family home with three units, but also it's the four stories there. So
I'm sorry, give me one minute. So while I'm doing that, let me just address this before I get through
the letter. I have to bring it up again. It's not the right letter attached here. The applicant
noted that there were more multi-family homes used on this block, and we indicated in our
letter that these are illegal notice. These are illegally rented as apartments. So for example,
it's 2204 North 17th Street is not listed as a rental unit, but they're renting it out with
three apartments. So I think the council might not understand that these are not legal residences
to be utilized in that way. The same thing with 2236 North 17th Street. The other rental properties,
the reason why a lot of the people may not have shown up is because, A, that's indicative of the
communities we are in. And the other thing is the CBA is hard to, excuse me, it's also hard for
people to address the Zoom issues. A lot of people are older and they do not have those capabilities,
nor do they are comfortable utilizing Zoom or calling in that process. And that's a hardship
this from being a low-income community. The other issue is that the one person was in the community
who denied was on that block, and the other one was around a corner from that block. So
they were affected. There were two who were affected, immediately affected.
The other piece is that if you say there's a number of vacant lots on that block, and the
owner indicated that he was in possession of two of those lots. So we set this precedent with doing
four-story units with the trash underneath. It wasn't really clear-cut as to how he wanted to
handle the trash. He actually indicated having trash out the window. So we appreciate the fact
that he has a better plan, but if there is a better plan, I think that this is something the
community needs to be apprised of in a community meeting as opposed to on this particular platform.
So as far as the size, and we have an overlay. An overlay indicates what the community is expecting when they purchase these homes.
And this is what the RCO's job is to do, to try to adhere to what people's expectations are and their rights.
So even though the community may or may not be here, it doesn't mean they're not concerned.
It means that they know that we are here to represent them as well.
Some people still work, right?
So we have to take that into consideration.
I'm trying to make sure I hit all the parts that he targeted.
So if you look at the consistency of the block, it's three stories.
It's not four stories.
Those previous properties that look in that manner are on the other side of Diamond Street.
And they are ridiculously used for temple housing.
And we see how that trash is taken care of.
And we do have a problem with trash.
It's indicated by the fact that we have five different organizations, including two of them
being part of the city, that actually clean the neighborhood. And we can barely keep up with the
with the illegal apartments trash as opposed to any additional trash. So trash is a major issue.
It's a health concern. We live in the era of COVID. It's not going to go away just because
we finally get inoculated. You know, there's ongoing health risk. We don't need additional
movement in that direction um so basically and i wish i could read the letter but i can't
do two things at once and i'm all over the place right now as i can't bring it up
was the letter submitted to the board yes you do have it you have um but we do have
to protect us and we really would like the board to understand to adhere to the community's decision
and that is that the um the applicant should redesign the property there are there's no
hardship because there are single family homes that are all in that community that have been
rented out. If you look on the OPA BRT, it substantiates that. And so there's no reason
to put apartments in an area that's already saturated and is existing ownership single
family usage. Thank you. Sean, did you want to say something? Yeah, Mr. Chairman, Tina Marie
claims that 2204 North 17th Street is an illegal apartment.
claims that 2204 North 17th Street is an illegal
I have a copy of the zoning permit I'm sharing the screen now.
You'll see it's 2204 North 17th Street.
Date issued March 28th, 2008.
It was changed from a five unit to a three unit.
And then she also mentioned 2236 North 17th Street, again in 2008.
that was registered as a three-family dwelling.
So, and quite frankly, for all 17 of these properties on my list,
I have the zoning history showing each and every permit documenting
that these are, you know, documented legal multifamily dwellings.
And some of them go back to, you know, before we were on this God-given earth.
So, again, the block has a long history of multifamily use.
You know, concerns about COVID and health are not zoning issues.
And, you know, we can't address, you know, safe storage of residential trash and safe disposal of residential trash.
just like just like the 17 other uh apartment uh you know or multi-families on on the block
so can i ask a question yep um i i i hear that um tina marie said they sent something to the
board and i was curious to know when and what i don't see anything unless it's an oversight on my
part? That was emailed this morning by Tia Marie, and it's understandable. We had our
meeting on Friday night at 6.30, and as you can see, Tia Marie's there on four different
cases today. So, you know, I mean, I would note my objection to the late submission of
the letter, but, you know, in the wide scheme of things, I understand why it didn't reach
the board until this morning any other questions
anyone else would like to testify please raise your hand
there are no other hands up chair thank you planning commission good morning david effecto
city planning commission mr chairman and members of the board this property is indicated for
residential single-family use in the city's comprehensive plan the adoption of the new
2012 zoning code did not change the zoning maps the zoning in this part of north central changed
to single-family in 2014. this block has a fair number of two-unit homes but few three-unit homes
accordingly we do not oppose multi-family use if the property is limited to two units
thank you you must be reading my notes
MI 2020 that's 000264 2222 north 17th street my vote is yes with the following proviso
maximum two units
no living
quarters in basement
and trash to be stored
in ventilated
a ventilated
trash unit
excuse me
a ventilated unit of trash
in each unit I know I'm saying that wrong
my vote is yes with provisos
yes with proviso
yes with proviso
yes with proviso
So, excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta, just so I get the proviso in a way that Ellen and I will understand.
Would it be okay to say a ventilated trash closet in each unit?
Would that work?
A ventilated room in each unit for trash.
Okay, thank you.
And a maximum two units, right?
Got it.
Got it.
Oh, and no living.
No living.
No living area.
Quarters and basement.
Thank you.
Thank you.
calendar number 1754 no strike that no that's correct um calendar number 1754 5525 larchwood
avenue the attorney is rachel pritzker good morning good morning rachel can you put your
name and address on the record, please and spell your last name.
Yep. Rachel, R-A-C-H-A-E-L, Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R, 1635 Market Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19103.
Yep, Rachel, R-A-C-H-A-E-L, Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-L.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And finally, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, including proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal, or referral, photos, and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
You may proceed.
This is 5512 Larchwood Avenue.
I'm going to share my screen.
Um, you said 5512 Larchwood, I apologize. 5525. Sorry, thank you.
So this is 5525 Larchwood Avenue. We were refused for two dwelling units in RSA and
5. However, as I will show, this property is an existing structure. It's an intermediate lot
on the 5500 block and has been an existing duplex for almost all of its history. The owner,
Eddie, is here with me today. It's actually his great aunt's house. She passed away. His family
has lived in it for a long time, and he's looking to just rehab it back to its former glory in honor
of his aunt, Ray. So I'm going to just provide the packet and show the plans as well.
Really slow internet, I apologize.
The deed for the property, you can see the LLC is called Aunt Rea's house in honor of
her as well.
As you can see, this property is here on the zoning map.
It's again RSA 5, however, I believe these properties were remapped in 2019, so they
were formerly RM1, allowing for this multifamily use by Wright. And as I mentioned, the existing
structure has already been built out as a duplex. We're going to be renovating it. Here's a
front view of the home. There's going to be no structural work done to it. So we're not making
any interior alterations insofar as the structure. We're not going to be excavating or digging down
just some cosmetic updates to the property to bring it back into a more habitable use.
We met with the community which was the
I believe the West Philadelphia Economic Development Council on
December 2nd and we have a letter of support. As I mentioned, this is an existing structure as a
two-family dwelling. We presented the project and provided notice to 179 neighbors. There was
a vote to approve this project as far as the community is concerned and there's a letter
evidencing it as well and Andrew Goodman from Councilman Gauthier's office was also
in attendance for that meeting. Just want to provide the plans really quickly.
It's not that project. So that the board can see kind of what we plan to do. This is just a
elevation of the exterior. And this, these floor plans are as it exists now with just some slight
updates, just to open up the living space a little bit more on these units, make it a little bit
more of a cohesive flow, but no structural alterations. As I have mentioned, the property
is sort of exists as a duplex. I'd like to bring Eddie. Eddie, if you could raise your hand
just to provide testimony and then happy to take any questions that the board may have.
Edward Howell has been unmuted.
Hi, my name is Edward Howell V.
Hi, my name is Edward Howell V, sole member of Heinrich House LLC, 1515 Market Street, Suite 1200, number 622, Philadelphia PA, 19102.
I'm a sole member of Henri's House LLC.
I'd just like to state that...
Excuse me, sorry, excuse me, excuse me, excuse me.
Would you spell your last name, please?
H-O-W-E-L-L, just like Gilligan's Island.
Okay, thank you.
And do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
I just wanted to state that, like I said, it's always been a duplex.
It's my great aunt's house.
I believe originally her daughter lived upstairs after she passed.
There had been various times where my mother or my grandmother had resided upstairs.
It's kind of where we stayed when we were in the city in Philadelphia.
So I'm just trying to bring it back to our former glory.
My company's name is really in honor of my Aunt Marie.
It's literally Aunt Marie's house.
Sorry, I'm kind of nervous today.
it's my first time doing one of these things but that that's pretty much all I have to say
you're fine thank you thank you Eddie and have you heard the testimony I gave today Eddie
yes and you adopt it as your own I do thank you I'm happy to take any questions that the
board may have thank you any questions from the board no no no like to would anyone else
like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
there are no hands raised here thank you planning commission good morning david effecto city planning
commission mr chairman and members of the board this property is indicated for single family
residential use on the city's comprehensive plan since this is a pre-existing duplex we have no
objection to granting this variance thank you very much uh oh god i got ahead of myself here
mi 2020 that's zero zero one seven five four five five two five larchwood avenue my vote is yes
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes thank you i think we have a
resumption hearing is that correct yes mi 2020-001092 1931 south broad street
and if i'm not mistaken i don't remember if i was
involved in that case was i was i in attendance on this case i know about it but i just don't
remember if I was a party to the test to the original hearing I don't know research it here
in the meantime are the participants here
the hearing was held on
on November 17th were you here that day the original hearing
there are no hands raised at this time chair
I remember the case I just don't remember if I participated in it because I
I think I may have gone offline for a while I could be could be wrong
no one no hands are up
there's one hand up now Michael
his name is Peter Zetter
South Broad Street folks yeah
I believe the attorney's name is Michael Malloy
and chair I did check on 1117 I know that you did vote
all of the other cases for that morning session
i don't know whether you were out i would think you were here chair because typically you would
be the only one who would do the resumption hearings yeah okay i again i remember part
of the hearing and maybe once we get into it refresh my memory a little bit more thank you
um i don't think it's an attorney present have he been in contact with you sharon
no he is not okay
we do have mr zutter uh from south broad maybe he can shed some light on it maybe we can get
peter we can swear him in sure uh chairman de chico can you hear me yes okay my name is peter
mr i'm sorry to interrupt you but nothing on the merits without the attorney here please
i'm sorry could we could we at least could i ask him if he's had a follow-up meeting
I don't think it's appropriate to do that without Mr. Malloy here.
If you give me five minutes, I'll try to contact him.
All right, hang in there, Peter.
All right, hang in there, Peter.
Okay, well, it's been, what, two hours?
Okay, well, it's been, what, two hours, so another few minutes is no big deal.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
This is Sharon Saleta, I was able to contact Mr. Molloy, there was some misunderstanding
about the date he was coming back, he is signing on right now.
And were you able to hear me just now?
Oh, okay, thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Chair, I've promoted Michael Malloy to panelists.
He can speak now.
Good morning, Mr. Malloy.
Please identify yourself with the records by your last name.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Sharon, the name is Michael Malloy, M-A-L-L-O-Y, with the firm Obermeyer Reb and Maxwell Hipple, and many, many apologies to the board.
Are you swearing to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
We do. Thanks, I do.
Thank you.
Sharon, do we just go forward with this?
We don't have to.
unless mr molloy is requesting that it be continued further since he was not expecting
to be here today oh all right good point thank you mr molloy thank you very much and i i was
confused and i apologize i saw that it had been continued to a january meeting and so i uh was
going to contact the board because i had i had thought the board had said december 8th but then
we checked online and it had been moved. And I apologize very, very much. We would like to
request a continuance. We're still not, we did meet with the East Pass Yonk RCO. The meeting
was not positive. The RCO, you know, I'm sure they will or are here to testify that they
will oppose the fence at that height and did not want the fence. So we need some time to
regroup with my client to determine the next steps because they really really do want to be
a good neighbor to the community. We certainly don't want you know the gateway into East Pass
Yonk Avenue we certainly don't want to have any empty buildings over in that location it's
too important so you're asking for a continuance correct? Yes sir thank you. It'll be a resumption
hearing uh tanya do we have a date um we can probably stick to the date that it was um posted
online what was that what was that date you said you saw january i don't recall offhand i'm sorry
i just jumped online uh i i can find it but um we can take whatever whatever earliest date you can
we will be there and prepared
to continue.
Let me just see if I can pull it up.
Counselor?
Yes, sir.
I'd like to make a recommendation
to research
landscaping. If you
look across the street at the
medical center, they have a
big open space and is well
landscape and they don't have a problem with uh bagging uh thank you and we did hear that
during the last hearing and are taking that uh into consideration and and the the bank has
examined landscaping before but um is going to take another look at that in deference to that
comment the landscaping they did before was very minimum they have to expand it okay
uh we hear you loud and clear and we will take a a very good look at that thank you it appears that
it was um was put on for january the 20th at two we can keep it that way okay does that work mr
thank you very much sir yes okay so mi 2020-001092 1931 south broad the hearing will be resumed on
january the 20th at what time tanya 9 30 no 2 p.m chair 2 p.m on january the 20th at which time the
board will consider any feedback related to the position of the rco and the applicant and if i
could just interject Mr. Malloy that there's no need for further posting um this is just a
resumption hearing and then with the community the expectation is not for a new hearing just
feedback thank you chair thank you all this concludes the 9 30 session any unfinished business
that's all I have chair okay see everyone back at two o'clock all right okay
Have a good one.
you're live thank you good afternoon tanya we'll wait to hear from you before we begin the hearings
You're live.
Okay, Chair Runney-Woom, you are.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, 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 Vice Chair, Ms. Carol Tenere, board
members, Board Secretary, Confessor Plaza, and Board Members, Mr. Thomas Holloman, and Mr. James Snell.
Board Administrator, Ms. Tanya Sunkett, and Board Attorney, Ms. Sharon Saleta, are also in attendance.
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 like to advise everyone that this proceeding is
being recorded and that by participating you acknowledge your agreement to be recorded
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'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'll repeat that as well.
To enter an appearance statement, call Google 267-270-5548 and leave your email address and the address of the property at issue.
Before Vice Chair Tenere calls our first case, we'd like to ask if anyone is requesting a continuance or withdrawal for this 2 o'clock session hearing.
If so, please raise your hand.
While we're waiting for that, a couple of announcements. We have a continuance request for the following cases.
MI 2020-002336, 2222 North Front Street, MI 2020-001262, 321 East Worcester Street,
mi 2020 that's zero zero two three three five two three three two east thompson street is withdrawn
that's number six on our case
number 10 on our sheet uh mi 2020 that's zero zero two one eight zero
1837 South 10th Street
that's the only other
those are the only ones I have so far
if they're the applicant
and or his or her attorney
disputes
the request for continuance
on these cases I just read out
please raise your hand
and again if anyone
would like to have a case continued
or withdrawn please raise your hand as well here we have tina marie russell
good afternoon miss russell please identify yourself with the record
you're already under oath from earlier today
can you unmute her i can't unmute her tanya yeah me either
i don't know dpc zoom could you unmute tina marie russell hold on one second
for some reason it's preventing both of us from doing it
i don't see that i didn't see that as an option either now i don't see her she may have she
yeah and now it looks like somebody promoted her let me just see i don't know what's going
let me just see i don't know what's going on with that we can move forward chair we're going
on with that we can move forward chair
to try oleg sokolov allow him to speak mr sokolov won't allow me to unmute him either uh can you
hear me we can hear you okay so i i apologize for that good afternoon mr chairman members of the
board oleg would you please identify yourself with a record spell your last first and last name sure
Oleg Sokolov, O-L-E-G, last name S-O-K-O-L-O-V, Rabinovich Sokolov Law Group, 1700 Market
Street, Philadelphia, PA, 19103.
Do you swear to the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I'm counsel on this matter.
Okay, please proceed.
Ms. Sunkett, this is a clarification.
I believe I sent you an email about a calendar number MI2020-001528.
Is it listed for today?
what's the address no idea 1806 west ontario street
and what was it supposed to be listed you you and i were communicating about listing it on this day
but i realized that it it may have never actually been listed for this date with another property
that we have which is fine because we would be requesting a continuance anyway and it may be a
moot point i just wanted to make sure it's not listed for today i don't see it on either the
two o'clock or 3 30 list if anyone sees it differently please um this is sharon saletta
i'm sorry i know that i've seen this i'm checking tomorrow's list to see if it is listed there
um no worries if it's going to be continued just send me an email and i promise that i will put
them together my apologies well it's no no absolutely no problem we would like to have the
3319 North 17th heard today, obviously. I just wanted to clarify about Ontario so there were
no issues in case it was listed for today, but we can do that offline. Excuse me, this is Sharon
Saleta. Since you have brought up 17th Street, I think I should note that the exhibits, I didn't
receive the exhibits until yesterday. Did you previously submit them to the RCO mailbox? I
attempted to but i did it again yesterday just just to double to ensure okay my apologies for
that miss aleta that's fine as long as they um miss sunk it if you could confirm that you've
received them then i'm fine with that i could number four on our list i can check oleg i don't
think we received them either timely. DBA staff, could you
confirm please? So typically, if they're not received within five
days, it's a continuance prior to the hearing.
I believe I attempted to send them and if I if I didn't, my
apologies and if there's any way the the board would allow us to be heard today it would be very
much appreciated. Frank that's you all's call. Yeah but we don't have we we don't know if the RCO
received it is that we're saying? No um we were to have received it within five days. I did receive
it yesterday there was an RCO meeting um I at this point have all the documents we need
the board's call all right well we'll hear it it's number four on our list correct
thank you mr chairman all right is there are there any other cases uh requesting continuance
or withdrawals we have a matthew bailey he's been unmuted thank you mr bailey please identify
yourself with the record spell your name
Mr. Bailey please unmute your mic to speak to a continuance
Okay we'll move forward with Matthew Bailey
Mr. Bailey please spell your last name
B-A-I-L-E-Y
and you are i am uh asking in front of mi 2020 00 1262 that's 321 east worcester street
and you're you're i'm a neighbor a resident a neighbor excuse me one second i need to swear
you in you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do excuse
me i believe that this was on the list of continued we already continued it right
i understand that what i'm asking is this is the second
I understand that. What I'm asking is this is the second continuance.
And I'm wondering how many more continuance is this gentleman is going to take.
This is kind of difficult to get involved with this to take off from work to
Okay, just just excuse me just one minute. Tanya, is this correct that it's already been continued?
Yes, it has already been continued. But if I can recall, I could do the research,
I believe the request, Ms. Saleta, was both the RCO and the attorney?
I believe that's correct.
Yeah, so that's the purpose of the continuance.
Well, do it must be heard?
It's not necessarily required because the application just came in in July, so it's up to you, Sherry.
All right, I just want to make sure it's not one of those cases where...
No, it's not.
Mr. Clinton is the attorney of record, and he made a case as to why the continuance was being requested.
it. Typically, if they don't make a case, I will not encourage them to continue. I'll have them
come before the board and discuss the continuing. Very good. Okay, Mr. Bailey, this will be
continued. And we suspect based on Mr. Clinton, who's a reputable attorney, we'll have the hearing
at the next date. Thank you very much. Thank you. I'm sorry, but just for purposes for Mr. Bailey,
We have this continued to February the 24th at 2 p.m.
If that works for you, okay?
Tanya.
Sorry, I was writing that down.
Yeah, I guess that'll work 2 p.m., 24th of February.
All right.
Thank you so kindly.
Thank you.
Anyone else?
We have a Matthew Monroe.
He's been unmuted.
Mr. Munro, good afternoon.
Hey, good afternoon.
Can you identify yourself for the record, and I'll swear you in.
Good afternoon, Chairman DiCicco, members of the board.
Matthew Munro with Monroe Law on behalf of 2332 East Thompson Street.
Let's give us a second.
I thought we already, did we, are you...
Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta.
I believe that was included on the list to the board.
It's announced as withdrawn.
Is that correct?
We'd sent in a letter yesterday.
I was having a hard time, technical issues locking on,
and I just wanted to make sure that the case was marked withdrawn.
Okay, so noted.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Anyone else?
Continuance or withdrawal. Tina Marie Russell you're unmuted you can speak now.
Good afternoon again Ms. Russell please identify yourself with a record and just
remind you you're still under oath. Ms. Russell you can unmute. I'm sorry I thought
I was unmuted thank you. In reference to 2200 North Lambert Street do you
with the number is 39818. We were just checking to see if they have put in a continuance because
we still haven't heard anything from the applicant. That case we continued correct? No excuse me this
is Sharon Saleta that is on the 330 list. 330 list yep 330 list. Oh that's 330 okay thanks. All right
Thank you.
Anyone else?
We have no other hands up, Chair.
Thank you.
Before we begin, I'd just like to remind everyone, do not attempt to testify in the chat.
Any comments should be directed to the Board Administrator, Ms. Tanya Sunkett.
With that, we can begin.
Thank you.
um excuse me sharon slay again i did want to say on the record that um we had a request for
continuance from councilwoman gothier's office for number 13 on your list that is mi 2020 002181
1322 south 53rd street the attorney on that case is rachel pritzker she is requesting that she be
permitted to go forward um i don't know whether you would like to address that now yeah uh as
Miss Pritzker there? Yes. Apparently the councilwoman's office is asking obviously for a
continuance. Why don't we do this? Let's swear you were we had you on this morning didn't we
or no? Yes. You're still on the oath so just identify yourself with the record. Yep Rachel Pritzker
You're still on the oath.
So just identify yourself with the record.
Rachel Pritzker, R-A-C-H-A-E-L, Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R, 1635 Market Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19103.
Rachel, I understand, and correct me if I'm wrong, maybe you want to get some of your testimony on the record of what you've tried to do.
Well, Chairman, I spoke with Sharon about this, and we, this appeal was filed September 8th.
We received acknowledgement of a receipt of our appeal 1022 by the ZBA.
RCO notification was sent to us on the 2nd, although we do have emails that were provided to the board's attorney showing that they did not get a response from the council office until about, as they had reached out, 1020.
And then we emailed the RCO, the zoning board and council staff anywhere between four to six times asking for a meeting or asking that this be reassigned.
It's now obviously December 8th and the councilwoman's office has just responded with a continuance that was not sent to me or my clients.
So at this point, you know, I think, you know, we try to do our job of following all the rules and making sure that we meet the requirements.
And I just would like to ask that we be able to go forward with this as we did do all the necessary outreach, you know, that's that's required by the code and then some to try to get a meeting together and notify all parties.
Okay, we'll go forward with the case and then we'll make a decision as to whether resume it for feedback from the RCO.
Let's go forward with the case, okay?
Yeah, thank you.
We'll call you up a moment ago.
Thank you.
anyone else anything else going on before we uh miss tenary calls the first case we're ready to
start thank you carol please miss vice chair please proceed calendar number 2204104 pollard
street is that correct no no you got a good number two fifth street calendar number yeah
calendar number 2176-5048-50 North 5th Street. And the attorney on this case is Alan Nockamson.
Mr. Nockamson, you've been promoted to panelists. You may speak now.
mr knockamson can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name
yes alan knockamson n as in nancy o ch u m as in mary s o n as in nancy one two three south
broad street suite 1600 philadelphia pa 19109 do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth
and nothing but the truth i do do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate
to its accuracy i do and you have you also emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents
including proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the refusal or referral photos and or
plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco
and do you have a letter yes in all respects other than not having a letter i did speak to
Tina Marie Russell, who is online,
who indicated that her organization
and the community supporting this project,
but I don't have a letter.
Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta.
We did receive an email from Charles Richardson,
who included, he forwarded an email from the RCO
indicating that they support the project.
You may proceed.
All right, thank you.
May I share my screen?
All right, so I'm handing you, or you're seeing a packet of materials, which include
eight exhibits. The first one's the deed to the property. Oh, the first one is the deed
to the property. Yes, I'm sorry, would it be possible to enlarge it a bit? Oh, yeah,
that's of course. Thank you. Is that good? A little bit? A little more. Okay. For purpose
of the attendees. Yes. Is that good? Yes. Hi. Hi. Yeah. So the first is the deed to the property
showing that Omar Lopez owns the property. The second exhibit is the certificate of tax
clearance showing that he's in good standing with the city of Philadelphia with respect to his real
estate taxes due on account of the property. The third exhibit is a notice of referral. So this is
a special exception. So currently he has a bar restaurant at the premises.
So currently, he has a bar restaurant at the premises.
It's been open since 2011.
And essentially, all he's looking to put is a DJ and karaoke capabilities there.
And as part of that request, it's considered assembly and entertainment of not more than 50 people.
And we are seeking a special exception to allow for that use.
and here's our application for a special exception
and you know here is just our floor plans just in general actually let's show photographs
so this is to find the property this is to the right of the property this is to the left of
property and again we're in a commercial corridor uh so it's not common to have businesses of
dislike his use as a restaurant bar restaurant is allowed as of right just seeking to add karaoke
and uh dj services as part of this special exception application and he's been in existence
for almost a decade here's the interior of the property and then here are the floor plans
i think i'm just gonna let me see if it's too large
I think that's just the site plan, but here's the floor plan.
So basically it's a one-story structure.
Upstairs, they have residences, but you basically just walk in, you see seating capacity of
44, this is where the DJ would be, here are some pool tables, here's the kitchen, here
are two existing bathrooms, and this is where they store the trash out there.
And then we met with the Logan Community Enterprise Center Inc. on November 30th, as Ms.
So let us state it, the community, based on our presentation, is in support of this project.
And then we just got some signatures of nearby neighbors who are also in support of our project.
And, you know, that's basically our presentation in a nutshell.
If you want, I can also discuss hours of operation, things like that.
I don't know if it pertains to this particular project, just because it's a pre-existing business,
and all we're trying to do is add capabilities for the actual business.
But I would, you know, hours of operation was not raised as an issue with the RCO.
Is that correct? No, not at all, actually. OK. All right.
Do you have a client? Yes, I do. Mr. Lopez, can you virtually raise your hand?
No one by that name has raised their hand.
how about this as an officer of the court mr chair i will say that your client would adopt
your testimony thank you that's correct what questions from the board no
no would anyone else like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
chair we have charles richardson good afternoon mr richardson
please identify yourself for the record i'll swear you in good afternoon mr chair and board
members charles richardson from the office of councilwoman cindy bass room 312 city hall
you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
i do please proceed councilwoman has no objection to the granting of the special exception
thank you planning commission
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission good afternoon peter please identify
I'm sorry, will you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do, Chair.
Please proceed.
This property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan.
We do not feel the proposal will have a negative impact on the surrounding community.
Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the special exemption.
Thank you.
MI 2020-002-176-5048-50, North 5th Street.
My vote is yes.
my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes my vote is yes
thank you calendar number zero eight two eight thirty three nineteen north 17th street
This is Ole Sokolov's case, and there's a letter of support from Tayoga United.
Mr. Sokolov, you've been promoted to panelists, you can speak now.
good afternoon once again members of the board mr chairman thank you very much for your time
oleg sokolov on behalf of 3319 north 17th street that's o-l-e-g s-o-k-o-l-o-v
1700 market street sorry i'm just so used to running through it it's okay me too i understand
Suite 1005, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1003.
You were sworn in earlier.
You're still under oath.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Do you agree to wait the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
Thank you very much.
Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, including proof of ownership,
tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO?
And do you have a letter?
Yes, as to everything other than tax compliance, this property was purchased at Sheriff's Sale.
We have been working since the actual sale date of January of this year to attempt to get the actual tax clearance certificate.
We've been notified that as a result of the Sheriff's Sale itself, all taxes have been paid and satisfied.
However, we're unable to obtain an actual certificate at this point.
All right, we'll proceed.
Thank you members of the board, may I share my screen please?
We are here seeking a variance for the construction of a multi-family dwelling at this parcel
which is currently vacant land.
As you can see from the refusal, we're requesting a six-unit building and are asking for a variance to allow for no parking as well as a deviation from the code in terms of rear yard setback and open space.
I have here the sheriff's sale deed to the property.
In the name of my client, Let's Talk Trash LP, a copy of our application.
And I'd like to start with just a picture of the property in its current form.
This vacant space here is where the building is intending to go.
The property is currently zoned RSA 3.
This is a rendering of the building that we intend to put there.
As you can see here, this is the additional square footage we're asking for in the rear yard.
And that also is the impact of the open space.
and here are the schematics of the first through third floors there will be a roof with access to
it however it's it's not a roof deck of any kind it's just a maintenance access roof as you can see
from the blueprints here here's I'm sorry Mr. Sokoloff would it be possible to enlarge it just
Just a bit.
That might be a little too big.
okay so that's good okay so just once again through it here's the rendering of the of the
building as we intend to build it uh as you can see we we've tried to design it in a way that
it keeps the character of the neighborhood both with the the the front covered porch as well as
bump out window on the second floor. This is we try to do everything we can to make it
in line with the neighborhood using modern building materials.
in line with the neighborhood using modern building materials.
And here is once again a layout of the inside of the building.
I also have Mr. Abraham Silber here, who is the applicant.
Could he raise his hand, please?
Mr. Silver, Abraham, if you're on, could you please raise your hand?
Mr. Sokolov, while we're waiting, will all the tenants have access to the rear yard?
All the tenants will not have access to the rear yard.
um only the only the bottom back of the building tenant will have that what are we doing about
trash um trash is stored as you can see here the first floor has a little uh like closet or or
hallway area that will be enclosed with keys given only to two tenants of the building for
trash bin storage. We do request that our tenants keep their trash in their property and also write
that into our leases further. And Mr. Silberg could testify to the fact that he's often called
by tenants to pick up any excess trash. So we've tried to create a few different systems for any
trash overflow, both the storage for the building in general, and then a system by which they can
contact the landlord of the building to pick up any excess trash. Is that trash bin storage area
that's enclosed i assume correct correct and it's it's only on the first floor um as you can see
it's not on every it's not in the stairwell hallway of every floor just on the first floor
i know that i mean but i'm asking you is it ventilated uh mr silver i can answer that i
to be honest i'm not sure let's get mr silver on and we'll test uh swear him in please um can
can i be heard yes please identify yourself first and last name and i'll swear you in
my name is abraham silver um you're swearing a firm to tell the truth the whole truth
and nothing but the truth i do i do uh mr silver did you hear my question about storage of trash
i did um because we have not begun the construction documentation or me and p portion of this of this
uh you know project i can't tell you that there exists now a plan to do it but i know for a fact
that we will be doing it um ventilating that trash space is obviously to my and everyone's benefit it
needs to be done so that trash space will be ventilated in the construction documentation
portion of this project all right um mr sokolov did you want to ask your client if he adopts
your testimony mr silver will you adopt the the statements that i've made here is your testimony
as well i will and is there anything you'd like to add mr silver um i'd like to add that um i
purchased and designed this property in this manner uh to provide affordable housing in this
neighborhood i'm a member of the bia subcommittee on affordable housing um and you know i designed
this building kind of with uh small studio apartments uh to try to serve the need for
new um small apartments in this neighborhood it's i've become aware that in this neighborhood as in
many neighborhoods in the city there are many illegal boarding houses that are being run and
people with you know who are on a tight budget are frequently pushed into those types of buildings
and this is my attempt to alleviate that issue thank you uh questions from the board no
um excuse me this is sharon slidik could i just um say that i checked the department
of revenue website and confirm that all property taxes are current
thank you very much and and just further we did meet uh twice with the tayoga united rco the
final meeting being yesterday where we were able to garner the support of the community
and i believe that letter was mentioned earlier and received
Thank you. Any questions from the board? I think I asked already. Anyone else would like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
Chair, we have Charles Richardson.
Good afternoon again, Mr. Richardson. Please identify yourself with a record and remind me you're still on the road.
Sir, Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, Room 312 City Hall.
Sir, Charles Richardson from the Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 323.
The Councilwoman has no objection to granting this variance.
Thank you.
Anyone else?
There are no other hands raised here.
Thank you.
Planning Commission?
Good afternoon, Board.
Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
this property is indicated for multi-family residential and the comprehensive plan and
has not yet been remapped the proposals largely meets the requirements of the recommended district
with the exception of the proposed open space accordingly we have no objection to the granting
of the variance on use but do ask the applicant provide a minimum open space of 25 percent
dr love you heard the recommendation of the board uh mr silver i did if if i may just respond i
believe that this open space calculation also doesn't take into account the the rear alley
portion of the property which my understanding of the of the zoning code allows for that calculation
so we are actually much closer to 25 than the refusal has been granted than has been granted
in the in the refusal um and would just like the board to take note of that i believe it's an
additional 64 square feet or so okay thank you all right uh mi2020-000828 3319 north 17th street
my vote is yes with the proviso trash bin storage area to be ventilated
my vote is yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso
calendar number 2448 342 west gerard avenue the attorney is the attorney is you're welcome
the attorney is michael phillips
mr phillips you've been promoted to panelists you may speak now
good afternoon name and address for the record please and please spell your last name
michael phillips p-h-i-l-l-i-p-s 1500 market street suite 3400 philadelphia p-a-1-9-1-0-2
do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I do. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
I do agree to waive the reading of the refusal. In terms of the accuracy, it was accurate when
issued, but we do have revised plans that do eliminate some of the refusals. Okay. And have
you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, the refusal or referrals,
photos or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing? And have you met with
the RCO and do you have a letter? Yes and that was the only exception for the getting the exhibit
packet in. I didn't get the letter until just today but I have sent over the Northern Liberty
Neighbors Association's letter of support this morning and do have it in my packet that I'm
going to share with the board. Okay you're good to go. And may I share my screen? Sure.
Okay. So good afternoon, members of the board. I'm here on behalf of High Top Real Estate and
Development, the equitable owner of 342 West Girard Avenue, which is an 8,160 square foot
parcel located on the southeast corner of 4th and Girard. You'll note the refusal does mention
a number of matters, some of which have been eliminated that I'll go through, but really
we are here for height, density, parking, and a de minimis variance for open area.
We've met with Northern Liberty Neighbors Association on three occasions, and I will
take you through the plans, but first just want to orient you to the surrounding area.
So this is the current configuration of the lot.
You notice there's Trio's Restaurant and then a parking lot that is accessed off of Girard Avenue.
Directly behind the property, this is the Cigar Factory Lofts, which goes to 100 feet to its peak.
And right here to the top of this fire stair is 83 feet.
Here are some other images showing Girard Avenue. This is viewing east. This is looking west.
Here are some other images showing.
Fourth Street, again, looking south and north. Here's an aerial shot. It's easier if I show it
this way. So here's the property. Again, we have Cigar Factory right here that goes about 100 feet.
Here's Girard Ave. This is a vacant parcel that was approved for multifamily use, I believe,
60 feet of height. Over here is senior housing that is 80 feet. And the zoning
map of the surrounding area really is a bit all over the place. So this is the parcel right here.
it's zoned CMX2. But you'll see all of this right here, as you get from Germantown East, is all CMX3.
And caddy corner to us, this parcel here is CMX3. Behind us, that cigar factory lofts is IRMX.
That vacant parcel here is split zoned ICMX and IRMX. And then Gerard Abbe goes to CMX2 until you
get to about 8th Street and then we go back up to CMX3. We initially reached out and met with
Northern Liberties Neighbors Association in August to discuss development plans for this parcel.
And NLNA was receptive to our proposed height and density along the quickly emerging
Girard Ave Commercial Corridor. At the time, what we presented were 50 units with no parking.
The response from the community was that they really wanted us to incorporate parking and
looked more to the CMX3 or IRMX elements of a 3 to 10 parking ratio. So we went back to NLNA
in September with a plan that showed 45 units and nine parking spaces. And at that meeting,
we also began conversations with Cigar Factory Lofts, their HOA, regarding the configuration
of our building and the parking situation. Now, in terms of parking at the time, actually,
pull up the original refusal, we had parking along the property line, and we were proposing
an attached building that would go right up next to the cigar factory. In our conversations with
cigar factory HOA, and I do believe there will be a representative from cigar factory on the line
as well as their council, certain requests were made to add to their open space and lighten air.
And also we entered into an agreement, which would be a phase two with the cigar factory
that actually would incorporate additional parking.
So now right now what we did is we agreed to shift.
we had the nine spaces going up against the uh the property line we created a nine foot setback
and shifted i know it shows seven here but it nine spaces are shown on our plan phase two uh if we uh
you know get past today and as i mentioned my client is the equitable owner so if he becomes
the owner of the property is an agreement with cigar factory to create a total of 19 parking
spaces so it would be uh 10 more than than what we're proposing today and there would be a share
the parking would then be accessed through an easement so we would have seven still on site
and then another 10 right here with egress off of uh north oriana street so uh i know that those
plans aren't before you today but ultimately we're looking at 50 units with uh 19 parking spaces
well in excess of a of a three to one ratio we went back to nlna just last week and presented
our revised plans that now show 50 units nine parking spaces because as of right now we can't
change the configuration of those parking spaces until we get under contract and then would i would
expect to come before the board again for administrative approval on reducing this to
seven with a shared parking agreement and a unity of use with Cigar Factory.
We pushed the building off the property line to create a nine-foot setback, and that resulted
and that resulted in a reconfiguration of the upper floors, which is how we went back from 45
in a reconfiguration of the upper floors, which is how we went back from
to 50 units. Now, just the floor template, which Sergio Acosia moves on the line who can answer
any questions, but originally this was a larger two-bedroom unit. We split it up,
and so now this just goes straight up. This is the template from floors two to six. In terms of height,
uh we are proposing uh 68 and a half feet uh top of the roof here you see cigar factory which goes
to 100 feet to its peak but it's about 83 feet right here um and uh we also have approximately
2100 square feet of commercial space that'll be fronting gerard avenue the parking would be
accessed off of 4th Street, we would be closing the existing curb cut that is on Girard Ave
right now. And so we'd be creating additional parking right there.
And so that eliminates a number of refusals. We had a refusal for the roof deck setback
and at the sixth floor we had this lower deck. I'm trying to pull that up on the plans right here
that has been eliminated. We had a refusal because we the parking at the time was located
in the required rear yard as a result of shifting that parking up along the building
that eliminates that refusal. We do have a refusal for parking in the first place since
in CMX2, parking is prohibited unless accessed from a rear street shared driveway, and we cannot
meet that. However, the parking was essential to NLNA and the near neighbors, so we have that
refusal. Density, as I mentioned, again, this is CMX2, but it's been designed to the CMX3 standard,
which we have support from NLNA. That also triggered height. We're at 68.5 feet. However,
if you look from a floor area ratio requirement where either an IRMX or CMX3, we'd have to be
at 500%, and we are, I believe, just a bit below that. We're at about 470%.
And lastly, was the occupied area. The revised plans did, we were at 87%. We've gotten that down to 82% occupied area. 80% is the threshold. I think if you look, technically, we're like 81.5%. So we're only 1.5% off. So I believe that that's a de minimis change.
Again, these are the renderings. I will briefly have Sergio Cauchy from Cauchy Moos can
walk you through the proposed elevations and plan. Again, this shows the parking and now the
separation. I think we can put that aside unless there's any questions from the board.
No. And or unless you need it for future reference or
No, I don't. I'm just pulling up. This is our letter of support for NLM.
We appreciate that. Thank you.
And I would just like to ask my client, David Lance-Groener,
if he could just hop on the line and adopt my testimony.
Mr. Lance-Groener, you've been unmuted. You can speak now.
Good afternoon, sir. Please identify yourself for the record name.
Hi, good afternoon. David Langstoner. L-A-N-D-S-K-R-O-N-E-R.
Thank you. Can you swear?
I think you might be muted.
Can you swear in the frame to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Thank you. Mr. Phillips?
David, you heard everything I mentioned a moment ago?
You've heard all of my testimony?
I have.
Do you agree that everything that I stated is true and accurate?
Yes, I do.
Do you agree to adopt my testimony as your own?
I have no further questions.
Any questions from the board?
Would anyone else like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand.
Thank you.
Ms. Carson yes hi my name is Elizabeth Carson I am a near neighbor and resident of the cigar
factory and I'm speaking on behalf of the 23 unit owners that voted to support the project
in accordance with our private agreement with the developer okay thank you I was going to
swear you in but I assume I'm sorry I I assume everything you told me you swear is the truth
correct yes sir thank you very much thank you anyone else would like to testify in this case
there are no other hands up at this time chair you planning commission
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission
this property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan
the proposal is significantly taller and higher density than adjacent properties however the
proposal is largely consistent with the size and scale of new development along gerard avenue
accordingly we have no objection to the granting of the variances thank you mr phillips did you
have revised plans yes we have uh revised plans that were submitted and again those show um how
Any pages?
In the setback.
How many?
Two pages.
Two pages.
Thank you.
MI 2020-002448342 West Gerrard Avenue.
My vote is yes with the proviso revised plan.
Two pages approved today.
My vote is yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
Yes with proviso.
no thank you mr phillips thank you very much members of the board have a great day
you like you too calendar number 2178 2843 johnny street
mr kern you've been unmuted and promoted to panelists you may speak now
Excuse me, this is Sharon Sletta.
We have a letter in non-opposition from Councilman Squilla.
Thank you.
Oh, I'm sorry.
I was muted.
Can you hear me now?
Yes, we can.
Okay, I did not realize I was muted. I'm sorry. William Kerr, on behalf of the applicant.
Can you put your name and address on the record, sir?
Yes, yes.
And spell your last name?
Sure. William Kerr, K-E-R-R, 40 East Airy, A-I-R-Y Street, Norristown, 19401.
Do you swear for him to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you also waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
And have you emailed the exhibit packet with required documents, including proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
We met with the RCA Thursday. I sent the packet Friday because we had the letter as of Friday.
So I sent it in four days early. And the only other issue is this property is owned by the RCA or the RDA.
So we do not have a tax compliance certificate because it's city owned.
OK, you may proceed. Thank you. Good afternoon again.
I'm here representing the applicant Human Good East, which is formerly known as Presby's Inspired Life.
Human Good is proposing to develop a 47-unit affordable housing building for seniors that are 62 and over, including some disabled residents.
There is a well-recognized need for affordable housing in the city, and we're hopeful that this can help address that need.
Presby Inspired Life was the former name of Human Good East.
They've been in the city providing this type of housing for many years.
And currently, Human Good, including the Presby entity, is involved with 95 senior apartment buildings,
totaling 7,200 units and about 8,000 senior residents.
Again, I mentioned that this property is owned by the RDA.
So now I will share my screen.
Can everyone see that?
Not yet.
Not yet.
How's that?
We have it now. Thank you.
Okay. So this is my exhibit packet, which was submitted.
I have three witnesses available today.
Biddy Anderson, who's a development director at Human Good Presby, Peter Tantella from Tantella
Engineers, and Martina Editnemi from Kremer Marks. I just need to find my scroll bar here. It's
hidden. There we go. This is our exhibit packet. We do have 13 exhibits. We'll get to the first one.
This is what we're looking to do.
Again, it's 47 units of senior housing, four stories.
Second exhibit, this is a courtyard, an exterior courtyard.
It's part of the plan.
It gives the seniors some outdoor seating space.
Tab two is our refusal.
We have refusal for the multifamily use,
which is not permitted in RSA 5 the maximum height in RSA 5 is 38 feet we're proposing a 48 foot
because we need a fourth floor to make the project viable as a senior housing affordable
senior housing complex we also do not meet the minimum open area requirement of 20 percent
we're proposing 13.7 percent now the fourth refusal we've actually done away with we're
This related to the required bicycle spaces initially.
We're not proposing those because it's a senior building, but we have, in fact, provided for that function at the building.
So that refusal is no longer applicable.
We met with the RCO on two occasions, once on November the 11th and then again last week.
So there were two RCO letters that went out to see the addresses we sent them to.
Here's the second one.
And the next document is actually our RCO report,
which basically indicates that the South Port Richmond Civic supports the project.
and the vote was there were 11 attendees or I guess 13 attendees 11 supported two were opposed.
Okay so this is the project area um this is the 2028
43 Janney Street I can't read that I apologize uh has frontage the main frontage is on Janney Street
Auburn street across Auburn street is a city park which we think will be a nice amenity for the
for the residents and then it also fronts on Weichel to the rear there are five
existing townhomes which will abut our property.
This is a sorry about that a more close-up direct overhead view you see there's just some existing
trees there were some encroachments that the that the surrounding neighbors had had um placed on our
property those have now been removed so the this is a slightly dated aerial photo
tab five these are some photos of the property this is from the corner of weichel um and
there's another view of the property
This is a view of Weichel looking across at Janney Street, showing our posters.
This is looking across Weichel from Janney Street.
This is looking up Weichel towards the rear of the residences that abut on that side of
the property.
And then this is looking again from almost on Janney Street looking across Weichel.
So just to give you a sense for what the neighborhood is.
And this is actually looking back across Weichel to the the park that we had referenced.
This is the site plan.
Just scroll down a little bit. It's a single building. It's a C-shaped building.
The courtyard is in this area, the courtyard that we have showed the rendering.
The main entrance is on Janney Street. The city streets department has approved a
a lay-by lane, which is where folks would come in and be dropped off, move in, move out.
Again, four stories. This is an open area to the rear.
again four stories this is a open area to the rear which is where the bicycle parking would be
located now we'll see in a minute the trash excuse me this excuse me mr car this is sharon solita
is this a revised plan you said that you eliminated the refusal for bicycle parking
oh right right this is a i'm sorry this is a revised plan because we've added this bicycle
parking correct okay have you submitted a revised proviso plans form
No, because it was so minimal, I didn't realize that we needed that, but I can submit that.
It otherwise won't be approved.
So if you could, if it is approved, if you could then save me.
Yeah, I'll get that in to you.
I'll get that in tomorrow.
Thank you.
So, oh, and then the other point is you'll see in a minute on the floor plans that there are trash rooms on some of the floors.
The trash will be stored inside and we'll have one of the employees of the facility who will actually go and trash to bring the trash dumpster out, have it collected, and then take the dumpster back into the building.
I think it would be appropriate at this time if you would summarize.
Summarized, we have 47 one-bedroom units for seniors.
We have our RCO letter.
We have support from the councilman's office.
and I have all three witnesses available
who can answer any questions that the board may have.
Thank you.
I think if you just want to get your client,
if you have your client there,
we can get your client to adopt their testimony.
If not, we'll move on.
Yeah, she's here.
Vidhi Anderson, can you raise your hand?
Ms. Anderson, you are unmuted.
You can speak now.
That's not her.
Think of that.
Vidi, are you there?
Hi, can you guys hear me now?
Yes, please.
Identify yourself, ma'am.
First and last name.
Hi, my name is Vidi Anderson.
It's V-I-D-H-I-A-N-D-E-R-S-O-N.
And do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
And your affiliation with this project?
I work at Human Good, who is the developer and sponsor for the project.
Thank you.
Mr. Kerr?
Yes, Ms. Anderson, have you been online here today for my entire presentation?
Yes, I have.
Do you agree with everything that I've stated?
And do you adopt my statements as your testimony?
Okay, that's all I have?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
Would anyone else like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand.
We have Dominic Chacon. You have been unmuted. You can speak now.
Good afternoon, sir. Please identify yourself with a record name and address by your last name.
My full name is Jose Antonio Chacon, C-H-A-C-O-N.
And my address is 2305 East Cambria Street.
and do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do your please proceed um i'm just i have two objections to the site uh first off it is too
i feel it's too high uh and secondly the rezoning from a single family limit to multi-family unit
uh there's a lot going on in our neighborhood right now a lot of developers are coming and
trying to do this and there are a bunch of us who are against this and unfortunately most of us were
not at NRCF. I will say this, I do understand the good it can do.
But those are my only objections. Appreciate your testimony. Thank you. Anyone else
would like to testify in this case, please raise your hand.
We have no other hands at this time, Chair. Thank you. Planning Commission?
Peter Bernard for the planning commission this property is indicated for single-family residential
in the comprehensive plan however the applicant has worked closely with the city staff in this
project and we do not feel it will have a negative impact on the surrounding community
accordingly we have no objection to the granting of the variance thank you Sharon uh since we have
revised plans but we don't have them physically what do we do we could we vote it with um we have
the plans the only thing that we don't have is the proviso plans form and assuming that mr kerr
is going to submit it and it will show the only change to be the addition of the bicycle parking
i i think that you can vote it and he will provide me with that form that would be one page
can I just I would just like to
Can I just, I would just like to double check with my engineer to make sure that that bicycle parking was the only change.
double check with my engineer to make sure that
that bicycle
I think that it was, but let me, can we just have Pete Tantella raise his hand?
Peter?
Mr. Tantella, you're unmuted. You can talk now.
Good afternoon, sir. Please identify yourself with the record, first and last name.
Yes, Mr. Chair and members of the board.
My name is Peter Tantella, T-A-N-T-A-L-A, and I'm the civil engineer on this project.
And do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Thank you, Mr. Kerr.
Okay, Peter, you've heard the discussion here this afternoon.
Could you just confirm for the board whether the addition of the bicycle parking is the only change to the plan made over the original plan submitted to L&I?
Yes, I have heard the entire testimony, and it is my testimony that the only change to my zoning site plan is the inclusion of the bicycle parking.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Kerr, if you could get that to me as soon as possible, because it will otherwise delay my submission of the vote sheets.
Right. I'll get that to you tomorrow morning.
Thank you.
So, Sharon, for the purpose of voting this out, when I say revised plan, do I say it's not going to be approved today or does it matter?
I think that it's fine since we do have the plan, actually.
All right. Good enough.
We'll give you the plan information.
That's okay. We'll go for it. Thank you.
MI 2020-0021782843 Jani Street.
my vote is yes with the proviso revised plan my vote is just one page
consisting of proviso yes with proviso yes with proviso
thank you
next one is master are we hearing both together
i believe we should yeah yes you are and again this is a hearing on reconsideration
um could we confirm that ms jones is in the that she is able to present at this point
i know that she had to leave briefly for a meeting him ms jones are you available
she's still showing as an attendee yeah she's available i just promoted her
and verna anastasia will be promoted as well thank you okay calendar number 2923
1722 master street and calendar number 2921 1720 master street
good afternoon
um mary jones from council president daryl clark's office good afternoon mary is still
under oath from this morning okay so it feels like so long ago um
Today, our office requested this reconsideration because this was an oversight where the council
president's opposition to the case should have been on, should have been presented to
the board and it was not.
Um, it, the community, um, voted unanimously to oppose this project, um, due to concerns
about, um, increased density and lack of parking and just an overall, um, detriment to the
neighborhood, um, with adding more and more multifamily, uh, units.
and um so they reached out to our office to emphasize their opposition so we want to just
make that clear on the record that uh the community does not um does not support these
projects as as proposed and thank you uh mr anastasio thank you mr chairman uh should i put
my name on the record name and address please yep it's verne anastasio a-n-a-s-t-a s-i-o 1315
walnut street philadelphia pennsylvania 19107 that's suite uh 106 1006 and do you swear
our firm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do okay i don't think we've
wave and step on this, did we, Sharon?
I'm not sure we have to.
okay uh i'm i'm going to share my documents again you know the board uh acted correct correctly on
I'm going to share my documents again.
this uh at least that's my opinion and i will uh share with you why i think that
if i can hold on please for one minute excuse me this is sharon saletta if we could also put
on the record that all testimony and exhibits from the original hearing are incorporated
Thank you Sharon. Thank you Ms. Solita. I'm going to share this again if I can. Hold on please.
Okay. I'm guessing everyone sees what I'm about to share.
yes yes we do thank you and i'll be very brief uh 1720 and 1722 master street
uh the application was for the construction of two five family dwellings uh which we've gone
through with uh with our plans and again because they've been uh they've been uh uh you know
folded into the last hearing and they that still survives i don't think there's necessarily a reason
to go into that but i do want to say again that i think the board uh and the planning commission
ruled correctly in that these are lots on a block that is mostly vacant
And as you can see, there are large chunks of empty land that is just completely empty.
And that what we've had in the last, and here it is, we're talking about these two spots
right here if you could see where my cursor is and then you could see that we still have large
chunks of vacant fallow land not only adjacent to the subject property but all around the subject
property just fallow land where in fact there is no development and no construction. I also want to
make a point of saying that we do have, in fact, someone here who will testify as an expert
witness. Before I get into the rest of the case, I would like, in fact, for Ilya to raise his hand
and be acknowledged as a panelist so that we can have an expert witness who will testify
that a single family home on this particular block
just is not sustainable.
So Ilya, if you could please do that.
So Ms. Sunkit or whomever is handling recognition today
can do that.
He needs to be a panelist or just audio?
Audio's fine, Ms. Sunkit.
Audio's fine.
But Ilya should be in the...
Mr. Zamorin?
Ilya Zamorin, that's correct.
Correct.
Mr. Zamorin, are you available?
Yes, I am.
Please place your name and address on for the record.
Ilya Zamorin, 1801, Creekview Lane, Jamison, Pennsylvania, 18929.
Mr. Zamorin, what's your profession?
I am real estate agent in the city of Pennsylvania.
And how many years have you been doing that?
Over 14.
And over the 14 years, are you familiar with the subject property and this particular census tract and neighborhood?
Yes, I am.
Okay. In your expert opinion, would a new construction single-family home development be marketable, economically viable option for sale at these particular two sites?
No, it is not going to be viable at all.
Okay. And I've already submitted as evidence your analysis as new evidence to the Zoning Board.
Did you produce that analysis that's been submitted?
And here it is right here.
Excuse me. I just want to identify it so you see it.
This comparative market analysis, did you create this, sir?
This comparative mark.
And you've done this relatively recently for the client?
That's correct.
And in your analysis, did you conclude that a new construction single-family residence would not be a viable option for sale in this community, on this block?
That is correct.
that's not going to be viable okay um excuse me counselor yeah would less than five units be viable
yes okay thank you but more than one for certain um
do you believe ilia that multi-family dwellings would be the highest and best use and most
marketable for these particular sites yes mr anastasio i believe that's the best possible
use for that particular location thank you very much i have no more questions for you thank you
thank you i uh mr mr chairman and members of the board i i would like to un share this
for a moment and if i can i'm going to try and share something else
and i hope you can see this let's take a look at what the 1700 block of master street looks like
if you don't mind. Same side as our street on 1720 and 1722. We have 1724, a legal five-family
dwelling. 1726, a legal four-family dwelling that was just approved by this board a year ago.
We have a legal 1728 three-family dwelling, 1730 three-family dwelling, 1714 another three-family
dwelling that was just approved by this very board less than two weeks ago. Now let's go
across the street because the rest of our street is nothing but a prairie. Across the street we
have 1731, a three-family dwelling since 1942. 1729 is a three-family dwelling for the last two
decades. 1727, a four-family dwelling since 2014. 1725 is a six-family dwelling since 1955.
five. 1723, directly across the street, a five-family dwelling since 2011. 1721, again,
directly across the street, four-family dwelling since 1973, and it was a five-family dwelling
prior to 1973. 1719 and 1717, both a six-family dwelling since 83 and a five-family dwelling
since 1977. There isn't a single, single family dwelling built not only recently, but in the last
100 years on this block that still stands. So with that, I do believe that our proposal
is completely consistent with the, you know, the, you know, with the conditions on the block,
with the market realities. It's consistent with offering quality new construction
at affordable prices for local buyers. And might I say, and this is just an aside,
We all follow legislation that comes in and out with respect to construction.
Just recently, as a city, we proposed a new construction tax to create new affordable housing.
Here is affordable housing.
Here are smaller units that are approachable price points for folks who live in the community.
And there were no necessarily taxes that needed to be levied to do it.
So I respectfully request that this board stand by its original decision, which was, this makes sense for this block.
And thank you.
Hey, thank you.
Any questions, Mr. Anastasio?
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Are you selling these units or renting them?
These will be for sale.
These will be for sale.
Yeah, we've said that.
We've said that from the get-go.
These are going to be for sale.
You know, they're nice, ample-sized units that can be for sale.
Talk about affordable housing.
This is it.
Because if we built two single-family homes, they'd be anything but affordable.
I submit to you that the evidence that I've already submitted that we didn't really go over too much
was that for the cost that it took for them to acquire these lots
and then to build on these lots,
we'd be talking about homes that would be in the high fours.
And that's not just something that they can observe.
How's the purchase price of these lots?
Over $200,000 per lot.
And by the way, I would like to call, Mr. Chairman, if you don't mind,
just for the record, Mr. Shapiro, if he wouldn't mind raising his hand so he could be acknowledged
to accept and affirm my presentation. Mr. Shapiro, you've been unmuted. You can speak now.
Please identify yourself, Mr. Shapiro, and I'll swear you in.
yes this is richard shapiro can you hear me thank you richard richard can you put your name and
address on for the record please sure richard shapiro address 15059 sunflower drive philadelphia
pa 19116 richard is it fair and affirm to tell the truth the whole truth is nothing but the truth
I do. Thank you. Richard, did you hear my presentation to the board today? I did.
Okay. And I know it's not that different from the last time we've met at the end of October,
but is it accurate and true to the best of your knowledge? Yes, absolutely. Okay. And do you
accept it as your own testimony if need be? I do. Thank you very much. And did you purchase
these properties for in excess of $200,000? Yes, I did. Approximately $215,000. Okay. And to build
out single-family homes, would it not be in excess of another $200,000? It would easily be closer
to $250,000 just to build out each home. And the $450,000 is just a break-even, probably.
And based on all professional advice and inclination, including Mr. Zemmerin, would that not be a net loss for you on this?
It would absolutely be a net loss.
And not only that, but I would not even attempt it.
And knowing this, I would not have ever bought the loss, to be honest with you.
And when you purchased them, did you believe they were multifamily dwelling?
okay can you speak a little just briefly on that uh yes we had originally purchased the lots
from the previous owners uh who i believe had a uh a permit to do three units and considering the
size of the lots uh we expected and what the board previously approved um considering the size of the
lots five units would even be not only advisable uh allowable considering the size of the lots that
fit it within the proper dimensions but also uh a home run basically for the community
um so at the very least uh we were looking at multi-units and again uh and even though this
is an aside mr shapiro did you not offer to fund a a street sweeping and litter removal program for
the community on that block since there's so many multi-family dwellings yes we did that was in the
RCO, they had brought up the fact that trash was a problem on the block. And that was one of the
reasons that they also brought up that they preferred to have ownership on the block to
help with that. And right away, we told them these are for sale. The intention is not to have rentals
and that we would also include trash removal, private trash removal, if need be, if that's
we'll get this project going.
And of the 18 multifamily dwellings on the block currently,
you would only be two, is that correct?
That's right.
Thank you.
I have nothing else, Mr. Chair.
Thank you again.
Any questions from the board?
Why are five units the best use?
Well, the lots are large, and just adjacent right next door, this board, this particular
board approved a five-family dwelling right next door, and basically we're just mirroring
what was presented several months ago
what was presented uh several months ago uh with that particular uh uh development it's it's it's
with that particular
a large lot and we can get um five six seven hundred square foot units at an approachable
price point and i'm gonna and i i know i beat this drum a lot uh and i i don't mean to be a broken
record, but we talk so much about wanting to have affordable housing in neighborhoods,
but we are so reticent on approving multifamily dwellings.
And here are one and two bedroom condos that can be gotten by folks in the neighborhood
at approachable price points.
But in order to do that, we need to embrace the multifamily unit.
Mr. Anastasio, I know you're a client.
What is the projected price point for each of these units?
Thank you.
Mr. Shapiro?
Approximately.
That's a good question.
That's above my pay grade, but I'll ask.
But Mr. Shapiro, if he's there, what, you know, where are we in the low ones?
Let me, so it really just depends what we're talking about.
And that's really what's going to happen.
Hypothetically, if the board were to continue to approve the five-family dwelling based on your architectural plans
and how these things will lay out, what are we talking about?
And I'm not going to hold you to the exact dollar.
I'm just trying to get a sense of what each unit will be affordable.
And I believe we would be talking about the $250,000 range for a two-bedroom, a very nice-sized two-bedroom unit in the condo building.
What is the square footage of a two-bedroom?
Of a two-bedroom.
I believe I don't have the plans.
I believe, Vern, you have the plans.
they're on up there well they're they're definitely on here so hold on for one second
if memory serves me we've gone back and forth so many times between three units and five units i
believe that the five units would probably be around a thousand square feet if i remember
correctly yeah because the hope the whole thing is is that uh if we do five units the footprint
of the building can be much larger which gives us an advantage we can maximize the land use there
if we're doing three in the construction costs and acquisition costs we're gonna have to reduce
the footprint of the building which creates smaller units to keep not only the purchase
price down but also our construction costs down to make this a feasible project so that's what
we're talking about here is that you know the margins are pretty much the same it's just a
matter of whether we can give people a better value for what they're getting that's really
what it comes down to we're able to spread construction costs and acquisition costs
across five units versus three, which is larger units.
Okay, thank you.
Any other questions for the board?
Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Is it $1,000 per unit?
Is that what you're selling them for?
I'm sorry.
Five units would be a half a million?
I'm sorry.
I didn't hear the question.
You're broken there.
you're selling a unit for a thousand dollars no sir no thousand square feet okay a thousand
square foot unit i've correct me if i'm wrong it's somewhere in the twos i believe low twos
is that correct that is right low twos and two hundred dollars a square foot roughly
that's correct and he purchased it for 215 000 there or thereabouts okay thank you that's right
And construction would be another 200-some-odd thousand, which puts us well above what I submitted today for comparables on this, which is mostly in the threes.
I actually think you're underestimating.
You say 200,000 for construction?
I think it would be a lot more than that.
We are lowballing it.
We're lowballing it.
just to clarify it and i think you're speaking about a single family home is that correct
that's correct that's what i was talking about yeah so the acquisition cost would be 250 000
plus another 250 000 so you're talking just to break even you're talking at 475 000 with
closing costs you're really talking 500 almost just to break even you know with a as an investor
obviously you want to make something you're talking really like 600 000 to be honest with you
obviously you want to make something you're talking really like 600 000 to be honest with you
I apologize.
i apologize i i was picking up on tom's question and i forgot you did mention that earlier what
what the sale price would have to be that's fine okay and you know you know uh you know again it's
um you know this is uh we have an opportunity to to create uh you know units that are completely
livable look at this i mean it's completely livable uh but at the same time you know
approachable and i thought this is what we want to sort of get to right so that's what i'm asking
i think the board made the right decision the first time and i'd hate to see it uh i hate to
see this board uh reverse itself today understood thank you any other questions is there anyone else
who would like to testify please raise your hand we have tina marie russell chair
miss russell you've been unmuted
miss russell you've been unmuted
hear me yes miss russell good afternoon identify yourself for the record
you're still under earth from earlier today under earth from earlier today
It's okay.
Tina Marie Russell, North Central Philadelphia, CDC.
I'm just asking a question.
This was, at some point in time, this was a predominantly low-income community,
and you're indicating that these units are going to run for about $200 and something thousand dollars,
and you're saying it's affordable for the community.
I'd just like to get an understanding of how do you think that's affordable for a community that is a low-income community.
But that $200, I believe, is for the two-bedroom, the larger unit.
Right.
That's correct.
Right.
An average income in that community can't sustain it.
So we actually are not really building it for the people in that community or people really Philadelphia, period.
Most Philadelphia are not making that kind of an income.
Mr. Chairman, if we were, if we, with respect, Mr. Chairman, and I respect the witness's testimony, of course.
but if we were to build a single family home it would be far in excess of that kind of cost
understood understood thank you
okay thank you thank you any other questions excuse me this is mary jones again um
uh so each unit is how many um you said one and two bedroom units how many one bedrooms how many
two bedrooms. Let's go to the map, as they say. We have a proposed basement unit with
two bedrooms a proposed uh first floor unit with another two bedrooms so these are all
two bedroom units what's your you know so first second basement first second third floor
that's correct you know where's the fifth unit
you got one unit in the basement
can you guys hear me yes okay and we have we have a fourth we have a fourth floor as well
mr chairman okay that's right mr chairman these are bi-level units so it would basically be
two units you know divided on two floors so a basement and floor split between two units the
second and third floor one two and three and four correct and then the very top floor as planned
would be a uh a penthouse suite essentially with the entire floor um taking up the top floor so
the basement unit correct me if i'm wrong is a bi-level unit correct uh it's the basement and
first floor create two bi-level units the front and the back and then you know same thing for the
third and fourth floor right there vern third and fourth floor two bi-level units split between
version fourth floor and then the top floor would be a flat essentially not a bi-level but uh just
take up the entire floor like the entire floor right here okay got it thank you chair um also i
i appreciate um the testimony given and the understanding of you know costs not sure if
costs alone constitute a hardship but we do have the community the community's input should matter
as well and in in and uh so i have i do have someone on the line from the community who'd like
And so I have, I do have someone on the line from the community who'd like to speak.
to speak
They, if they raised their hand and I think they're me. So if someone could unmute them.
What is their name?
It's going to be under my name, Mary.
Ms. Vansori?
Yes, if you have two devices on, you're going to need to shut one device.
We're getting feedback.
is she uh is she on hello yes please identify yourself with the record hi good good afternoon
my name is vivian van story i'm president of community land trust corporation we're a housing
development organization we're certified chodo for the city of philadelphia you swear to firm
to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do please proceed ma'am hi i've been
living in this area since 1955. I can tell you the pros and cons. Now, when they showed
some of the video about how the open space is there, the upper part, 1700s all the way
down, we denied the variance for multi-purpose units there. And then the next month, they
presented this to us and we denied that. The problem is now they're saying that they're
building five units. They're putting in a basement. They can say that they're doing a condominium
and then they don't have to do condominiums once we approve it. They're going over 38 feet.
We're not going up high rise, up and down. We want all of the land, the scape for that area to be
equal. Now they're building, they didn't show you the new houses that are being built right on
Cybert Street. There are five of them and they're going for 350,200 stories with 200,
they're two stories with garages. They're small units. The problem is with these huge houses here,
We have inundated, we just denied the other units not to do it. And then they're coming and they're showing things that are not true. And whoever did the analyst survey, he couldn't have told you all that wasn't true.
Because in the back of that, if you look at it now and they give you the update pictures, all of those houses on Cybert Street and Ingersoll Street in the 1700s are mostly multifamily units there.
And then we have about three or four houses that are still two-story units there.
But we have allowed them to do multifamily at the other end.
And what they did, as soon as we gave the variance for multifamily, if you drive past now, you see so much trash out in front of the buildings.
They put trash, not caring about the quality of life, not trying to put a tree there to enhance the quality of life for the community.
And that block has always been a mixed use.
One side would be a multifamily housing.
The other side there.
we had a few single family homes there in that block and that's not true what he said that it
has never been there but if they gave you the update pictures of what's going on in the area
we're uh we're right in back of the jesus school the saint joseph prep school there right there
at 17th and Thompson and uh so we are only want single family housing now if he bought the land
there is value sorry I'm sorry chair I apologize I really apologize for the interjection however
I wanted to make sure everybody was clear this is a request for reconsideration right not a new
hearing i understand that because i was at the first no ma'am ma'am i'm speaking to the chair
please thank you this is a request there's a request for reconsideration and there's all
new testimony coming forward i just wanted to make sure we were clear
that everybody knew what this was thank you for reminding me i got i got caught up
that everybody knew what this was. Thank you for reminding me. I got caught up in it myself.
I know, but thank you so kindly. I just want to make sure we understand what's going on here.
And this is Sharon Saleta. If I could add to that, that when you announced that you were
granting reconsideration and rehearing, it was to be limited for the councilman to have input
and any response thereto from Mr. Anastasio. All right, we're going to wrap this up. I have one
question is there any of is there is the objection coming from and i may be contradicting what we
just said is the objection to any multi-family or is it has something more to do with the number of
units mr chairman if i may just briefly uh my client will be more for the council president's
office okay sir thank you uh the well we we are deferring to the community the community would
prefer single family but less density is always better okay okay very good thank you thank you
very much mary uh and mr chairman if i just may just very belief briefly uh i spoke miss van
story and i we i've known each other we've known each other for years we've worked together
wonderfully uh she's a wonderful person and a very good advocate we offered on behalf of my client
uh a fund to deal with daily litter removal they were not interested in those
we heard that we heard that yeah we did hear that thank you verne all right uh
so we don't need the planning commission already weighed in on this i correct this if i'm wrong
maybe maybe we should hear from the planning commission anyway planning commission
i just don't remember what your uh well there's there's not a single family home that's newly
built on this block in a hundred years planning commission i just want to refresh my memory
when they weighed in last time what was thank you sir yep
i'm not sure they're available
all right i'm going to recommend that this record be closed the board will render a decision at next
wednesday's executive session which is wednesday the 19th i believe or 16th 16 16 16th at 9 30 a.m
thank you mr chairman that concludes my business may i be excused yes you may thank you thank you
thank you sir thank you mr chico vivian van story thank you thank you
thank you calendar number 0868 2054 north 2nd street
is this burns case no bye okay hi
2054 north 2nd street yes
i see alan knockamson with his hand up he has been promoted to panelists
Good afternoon, Alan. You're still under oath from earlier. Carol will give you the lowdown.
Here's the lowdown. Name and address. Please spell your last name.
Alan Nockmson of Nockmson, PC. Nockmson, N-O-C-H-U-M-S-O-N, 123 South Broad Street, Suite 1600, Philadelphia, PA, 19109.
I'm going to give you a lowdown. You may not know about this about me, but I was born and raised in Brooklyn, New York.
We won't hold that against you.
My God. Do you agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
So you have friends in low places.
I take offense.
I'm only joking. That song came into my head.
Okay, you may proceed.
uh yes um may i share my screen sure
i'm going to make this quick um so because i know the other ones have been a little bit long
um so i'm here to present 2054 um north second street and i'm just going to go straight to the
refusal. So this is a mix between RSA 5 and CMX 2 zoning. We go street to street. It's
It's a significantly sized property. I'm just trying to get my notes here. It's over 4,000 square feet. It's 50 feet wide, well over 80 feet deep, and what we're proposing, what the refusal proposes to do is to have 14 residential units and a vacant commercial space on the ground floor.
significantly sized property and it's
We met with the community. We agreed after meeting with them to have a proviso where we would eliminate one of the dwelling units.
It's not uncommon on North 2nd Street to have multifamily structures.
There's a 100-unit apartment building on the same block called the Gotham that's opening up for business, if it hasn't already.
So we met with the North Square Community Alliance, and they were very supportive of this project.
As you can see, they voted 40 in favor and zero opposed.
I can walk you through the floor plans and things like that.
Whatever you think is necessary for your...
I think it's a pretty straightforward project.
I mean, I'll show you the rendering so you can see.
That would be helpful.
Yeah, it's a very pretty structure.
It's a very thoughtful structure.
One of the things my client is actually thinking of doing is putting their offices here.
You know, they do a lot of business in the North Square section of Philadelphia.
They are general contractors by trade, so they're looking to put their corporate offices here and then have residential of 13 units.
So the only thing we would ask for is proviso not to exceed 13 units.
But, you know, you can see from the floor plan, you know, more of the renderings.
We're having a green roof on here, even though we're not required to.
And there's no benefit to have it because we wanted to put something sustainable for the residents.
And, you know, thinking about stormwater issues, the basement, each of the units have their own storage locker.
There's no basement living.
because we go street to street there's no issue in terms of garbage it will all be in the rear
and each and this is the first floor has an ADA accessible unit as well
and again that's just you know it's a basic you know basic floor plan a very thoughtful project
I have Dennis Toda on the line who's the owner's representative Dennis can you raise your hand
virtually raise your hands the last name total total yes t-o-t-a okay
he's been unmuted and he's allowed to speak good afternoon mr tota please
good afternoon uh i got lost i don't know i couldn't hear you
you spell your last spell your first and last name please yes my first name is b e s n i k
and my last name is T-O-T-A.
Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth,
the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, Mr. Knockinson.
Yeah, Mr. Toto, you heard everything I stated today.
Yes, I did.
And is it true and correct?
And would you adopt it as your own testimony?
Okay, no further questions.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
would anyone else like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
chair we have sloan folks he has been unmuted folks please please identify yourself for the
record you're still under oath good afternoon chairman de chico and members of the board
my name is sloan folks uh sloane fs on fire olks room 508 city hall office of uh councilman maria
Keyona Sanchez. And I was sworn in earlier this morning. Yes. The applicant having met with
the coordinating RCO and receiving a letter of support, the councilman's office has no
opposition to this various request. Thank you. Thank you. Planning Commission.
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission
this property is indicated for commercial mixed use in the comprehensive plan
we do not feel the proposal will have negative impact on the surrounding community
We do not feel the proposal will have negative impact on the surrounding community.
accordingly we have no objection
Accordingly, we have no objection to the granting of the variance.
Thank you. MI2020-0008682054 North 2nd Street. My vote is yes with Proviso. Maximum 13 units.
13 residential units. 13 residential units. Thank you.
My vote is yes with Proviso. Yes with Proviso.
yes with proviso yes with proviso thank you good luck thank you
calendar number 2204 104 pollard street
the attorney is leo mulvihill excuse me this is sharon saleta we have a letter of non-opposition
from Councilman Squilla. Mr. Mulvihill has been promoted to panelists you may speak now.
Members of the board good afternoon Leo Mulvihill turning on my camera. Name and address and spell
your last name please. Sure Leo Mulvihill m-u-l-v-i-h-i-l-l address is 2424 East York
street suite 111 philadelphia 19125 here today for the applicant k v as in victor k bright future
llc also on the line is my architect michelle uh whom i may call as a witness at some point later
members of the board i do one second do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but
the truth yes do you also waive the reading of refusal and stipulate to its accuracy no i waive
the reading but i don't stick to the accuracy okay at the outset members of the board you'll
see there's multiple parcel addresses 104 to 108 a lot consolidation for this project should have
occurred i have to ask you something else have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required
documents including proof of ownership tax compliance refusal referral photos and plans
the property five days before this hearing and have you met with the rco and do you have a letter
I have met with the RCO. I don't have a letter from them yet, although I spoke with Mr. Friedman.
They indicated they're sent, and then perhaps they'd have the letter by today.
So I'm going to ask for a hear and hold, irrespective of regarding that.
My packet was sent. It was sent on Sunday because I was waiting for that letter from Mr. Friedman, which I haven't received yet.
So it was late, but it has been submitted.
Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta.
I believe that Councilman Squilla's letter does refer to the approval by FNA, so I'm not sure if
it would be necessary in that case to hold the vote. It would have been Northern Liberties
Neighbors Association, not FNA. So that may have been a typo. I'm sorry. Okay, we'll accept that.
Thank you. And irrespective, I'm asking for a hear and hold because we have 104 to 108 East
Pollard. As part of the initial application, there should have been a lot consolidation request
submitted it was missed for some reason i've been in contact with the plans examiner to try to get
that added in for months um to no avail but our projects it doesn't change the underlying proposal
for a single family home which we're presenting today the only difference would be an additional
refusal would be uh issued for lot size being well maybe not even in this case but if this
for RSA 5 would be an under 1440 square foot lot. And that's really it. May I continue with
my presentation, members of the board, and ask that you hold your vote? Yes, please. Thank you.
So members of the board, I have on the screen right now a table of contents, including everything
that you guys need. I'll just go through it as required rather than saying it all seriatim to
begin. We are here for one reason. And that reason is this. My client wishes to build a single family
home on a block that's single family this lot is located next to the l and the 95 overpass
in northern off of front street if you've ever gone southbound on front street from gerrard avenue
toward spring garden you'll know that you have to make a sort of left hand turn dog leg to go down
pollard street which was not a street i knew existed until this application and then make a
left go through a weird intersection then go southbound that's what we're talking about mr
mobile are you going to show us the exhibits because we're it's all we have is the refusal
in front of us currently so that's our only refusal this it's owned okay it's owned icmx
and you want to put a single family on a single family block um we're also asking for a curb cut
there's no legal parking on the side of the street we're asking for the curb cut
so i will get to my sidebar and we'll get to the good stuff i have everything else here
members of the board here's a screenshot showing the overhead zoning map explaining just what I
was discussing this is the front street here's the dog leg this is our lot there's a billboard
Here's the dogleg. This is our lot. There's a billboard right behind it. This is all zoned,
right behind it this is all zoned as you can see here
as you can see here. Industrial, commercial, mixed use. Everything else on the block is
residential. I'm going to skip all the deed and all that because we do have that. Client's
commercial activity license and tax clearance are present. Here's the proof of mailing for the
meeting. We did hold that meeting last week with Northern Liberty's Neighbors Association. It was
well attended. Going to my photos now so you see that I did post the property. Just for the record
this is page 22041. This is looking eastbound on Pollard Street towards 95 and the L. Looking to
the right this is our lot. You'll see there's no legal on-street parking so we're actually adding
to parking on the block with this proposal. Rotating looking southbound and now westbound
on Pollard Street. You can see this is a residential block. There's garages to the
north which were previously existing. New construction to the south or the left of this
photo with all street parking. And this is directly across the street. It's an old converted
school building if I recall correctly which is now multi-family. Getting to our plans.
Here's the lot consolidation plan that for whatever reason was not included as part of the
refusal it's three lots we're asking to make it one that lot is approximately 760 square feet
so if this were RSA 5 that would be under the minimum lot size but really there's nothing we
can do about that because we're actually taking three lots and adding them rather than trying to
subdivide them the lot itself as you can see is kind of weird it's very shallow only 20 feet
and pretty wide 38 feet wide so that changes the design of our house we get some different
refusals again if this were RSA 5 due to the design. Here's the floor plan members of the board
rendering I'm going to zoom in upper left hand side there's a rendering four stories 38 feet tall
ground floor curb cut all street parking rear yard of 120 square feet that's kind of sideways
like I said due to the shape of the lot sitting room on that ground story stairs in the middle
there is a basement so it will be excavated there's a rec room storage area
half bath mechanics water hvac second floor kitchen dining living space we have a nice
little balcony area to extend the outdoor space right out the kitchen third floor two bedrooms
bath larger bath fourth story two bedrooms bath larger bath potential wet bar for use for the
roof deck which is set back from the street as required under the code members of the board
that's it we're this if this were if this were an rsa5 property we'd get dimensional variances my
argument would be this lot's shaped strangely so we required to have these variances to even build
a house um because it's not zoned residential we're asking that this suggestion that this lot
perhaps should have been zoned residential rather than commercial an excuse and that we be allowed
to build this project once we have the essential issue regarding the potential refusal sorted out
and the final letter from northern liberties neighbors association the hardship does
has to do with the underlying zoning it has nothing to do with the design of the structure
which to the best of my knowledge was approved by northern liberties neighbors association last week
Michelle, are you on the line?
If you are, would you please unmute?
Ms. Kleschek, you've been unmuted.
You can speak now.
Good afternoon, ma'am.
Please identify yourself with a record.
Spell your name, and I'll swear you in.
Michelle Kleschek, M-I-C-H-E-L-L-E, Kleschek, K-L-E-S-C-H-I-C-K,
from Parallel Architecture Studios.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Mr. Mobley?
Okay, Michelle, you've heard my testimony in this matter?
Were the architect that designed the structure in this case?
You've heard my testimony regarding the size and dimensions of the lot, presenting some peculiarity when designing this home?
You've heard my testimony regarding the underlying zoning, which creates an issue when designing a single-family home for this lot?
yes that's it okay you accept otherwise accept my testimony as your own i do thank you i have
nothing else to add members of the board i just ask you hold the vote pending my resolution of
the issue of potential additional refusal with licenses and inspections and nlna's letter
thank you questions from the board no no
uh anyone else would like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
there are no hands raised at this time chair thank you planning commission
good afternoon board peter bernard for the planning commission
this property is indicated for industrial and commercial mixed use in the city's comprehensive
plan the other three properties on this block are existing residential structures accordingly
we have no objection to the granting of the variance. Thank you. Tanya, Sharon,
since Mr. Mulvihill, we still need some documentation, I believe you said from L&I,
we don't hear and hold. Do we want to give a specific resumption date? Actually,
Chair, this is Sharon Soletta. This is Sharon Soletta. I'm actually a bit confused by this one.
If possible, could we hold it for one week to seek some clarification from L&I on what the issues are, and then if you could next week announce what, if any, additional steps are required, whether it's to hold a supplemental hearing or simply to vote it.
but that decision can be discussed in executive session
and announced next Wednesday.
My only concern with that is why I was, you know,
suggesting maybe a resumptive hearing
just to get that information you just described.
He may not have an answer by next week.
I was actually going to contact LNI directly
to seek some clarification,
if that's acceptable to you, Mr. Mulvihill.
Yeah, I would appreciate any help
who I can get in resolving the issue. Okay. All right. Then we'll close the record and the board
will render a decision at next Wednesday, December the 16th at 9 30 a.m. We're rendering this.
Well, render a decision or make an announcement that an additional supplemental hearing is
required, one or the other. Good noted. Thank you. Thank you. Before I sign off, I do have a case
that's listed for 330 for which i'd previously scheduled a continuance i would stay on the line
but i have other rco meetings this evening i only wish to address that now so we don't have to
necessarily address it later for a continuance yes and it's due to an issue with the rco
wishing to see an updated lock consolidation plan what's the number in a q a okay thank you i will
do that yes okay calendar number thank you calendar number zero one eight six one five zero west
Wyoming Avenue. What happened to number 13? I think there was a request for continuance from
Councilwoman Gauthier. Yeah, but I thought I said we would hear that case. Okay. Yes, you did. Okay.
Okay. Calendar number 2181, 1322 South 53rd Street. And the attorney is Rachel Pritzker.
Ms. Pritzker, you've been promoted to panelists. You can speak now.
good afternoon good afternoon good afternoon rachel can you put your name and address on
the record and spell your last name yep rachel r-a-c-h-a-e-l pritzker p-r-i-t-z-k-e-r 1635
market street suite 1600 philadelphia pa 19103 do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth
and nothing about the truth yes do you also agree to wait to reading the refusal and stipulate to
its accuracy yes and have you emailed your exhibit packet with proof of ownership tax compliance a
copy of the refusal and refer and or referral photos and plans of the property five days in
advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and you have a letter uh yes we've not met
with the RCO, as I explained a little bit earlier, we had reached out a significant amount of time.
I have provided the board in the packet with that outreach and did not hear back from the
council office until today when they requested a continuance. So I believe the board decided
I can move forward with the matter. So that's why I don't have an RCO letter.
Okay. You may proceed.
Thank you. Okay. I'm going to share
um my screen um is there a chris class on as well he's our architect
My screen. Is there a Chris Klaas on as well? He's our architect, so I would like him to go through the plans, but I will go through the project.
so this is 1322-32 south 53rd street as the board can see here is the refusal
we have one refusal which is for multi-family for six buildings total of 24 units this property
was actually purchased when the property was still RM1. It was subsequently remapped while
we were in the process of getting the plans drawn up by the architects and then was able
to submit this to the city. So not only as I'll show the board as the block, sort of
not a lot of single family homes, but this was in the process of when this was RM1.
Additionally, for the board's information, we're providing all units at a rental price at 80% of area median income or lower.
This developer in particular has documented development experience to make that determination and to make sure that we can meet that more affordable price point.
Additionally, each of the four buildings, as Chris can show, will contain four two-bedrooms,
approximately 850 square feet, and two one-bedroom units with 650 square feet, so
pretty generous size to keep the price point at or below the 80% of AMI referenced on the 2020
HUD chart for Philadelphia County. Additionally, the increased density we believe that will bring
to this immediate neighborhood will help support the viability of the commercial corridor which
is Chester Avenue which begins a block from the property at 54th and Chester and extends all the
way to 58th and Chester. Additionally I have listed here an extensive list of multifamily uses on the
same block as this property to show that the proposed use is reasonable. It's a reasonable
density we believe of 420 square feet per surface area per dwelling unit which is not out of
character. As you can see, 1303 is two units, 1304 is five units, 1305 is two units, and the list goes
on. Several properties also have five and six units. Again, this is 1322-32. The lots have
been already consolidated when we're providing 24 units. So these are all just sort of single
lots, but again, we're providing multiple lots here. Additionally, I would like to have Chris
class from Design Blends Architecture kind of go through the plans for the project and then happy
to take any questions. Again, the goal here is to provide more affordable units again at or below
80% of area median income, which this developer has done. In addition to the fact that this
property and this block has been zoned for multifamily up until 2019 when the former
Councilwoman rezoned a lot of these areas to RSA 5. An RSA 5 property would result in quite large
single-family homes that are extremely out of context for what's in this area. And two, the
other arguments I've heard today obviously do not provide the most affordable solution in a growing
affordable housing crisis in our city. So I'm going to stop my screen share. The last thing I
want to do again just for the board to show sort of the RCO, I sort of make it my business to make
sure that we follow all the procedures required and that we give notice. Again, our appeal was
filed on September 8th. The ZBA acknowledged receipt of it on 10-22. I know they reached out
on 10-20 to the council office. The notification was finally sent 11-2. The first email that we
sent was on the same day to the RCO, 11-2. We sent another email on the 9th. We then emailed
without any response. We emailed the zoning board and the council office requesting help
on the 11-10, 11-13, and 11-18, and still had not heard anything back again until today, which
is now December the 8th. So I have provided these emails in our exhibit packet for the board.
And again, just want to make clear that we did on our part, you know, follow the requirements
and make sure that we made ourselves available and provided multiple outreach, not only to
the community, but to the zoning board, the RCO notification email, the RCO ZBA email,
and also the council office on several occasions.
So I wanted to, if we can bring Chris Klass to go through the project, you know, and then
take any questions the board may have.
I'm sorry if I can't ask you've been unmuted and you can speak thank you
Mr. Class, you've been unmuted, and you can speak.
Thank you. This is Chris Class representing Design Blends Architecture, 4001 Main Street,
Suite 310, Philadelphia PA 19127. Do I have the ability? Mr. Class, Mr. Class, do you swear and
affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? Yes. Class is spelled C-L-A-S-S,
correct correct rachel please yep uh chris are you able to share screen or uh event
are you able to make it so that um chris can share his screen
tanya i'm not sure how to do that i submitted him to be a panelist thanks tanya
and Chris before you get started you heard the statements I made to the board that these plans
were on their way when the property was zoned RM1 were you the architect at the time when the
clients engaged you to begin sort of the plans for this project yes that's correct is it accurate to
say that the properties were zoned RM1 at the time you guys began you know creating the plans for
this project yes okay so i'll start with the site plans here uh you can see the four proposed
buildings uh each of three story containing a minute sorry it's a little bit uh difficult
thank you is that is that better is the board able to see that or do you want us to zoom
in a little bit more i need a bit more if you could sure well i don't know
It's hard to read anyway.
I should be able to explain it.
I'll be able to flip to clear plans in a second.
Each structure contains six units.
The two units on the ground floor will be an accessible entry point
and meet the requirements for accessibility
with two bedroom units above.
The site itself, the buildings are set back to match the
neighboring structures and are set to heights that are also close to the neighbors of 31 feet.
There's recessed areas in both the front and the rear for trash enclosures
and the the wells that are being proposed in the front are not for basements they're
simply for access to the crawl space.
Looking to the plans, you can see the ground floor plan with two one-bedroom units with
a through corridor to access to the front and rear.
And the second and third floor are duplicates with a single stair and two units, each about
850 square feet, two bedrooms above.
there's no uh there's no roof access currently being proposed and that's it
okay does the board have any questions with the plans or any questions from the board no
no are you concluding with your testimony rachel i just want to bring um the client on
and then I'm happy to conclude
do you see Alan
or Natalie
Borovic
he's been unmuted he's allowed to speak
good afternoon sir
please identify yourself with the record
spell your first and last name and then I'll square you in
Alan Borovic
A-L-L-E-N
V-O-R-O-V-I-C-H
we're firm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do thank you rachel thanks uh alan have you heard my testimony today yes and do you adopt
it as your own yes and lastly just to kind of uh reiterate when you purchased these properties
and began the planning on them uh they were rm1 correct yes they were rm1 all the way uh
We didn't even know it changed.
We already submitted.
So, yes.
And you plan to provide these units at or below,
or at or around 80% of area median income, correct?
Thank you.
I don't have any additional information
unless the board would like us to dive into something in particular.
Not that I'm aware of.
Questions from the board?
no anyone else like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
no anyone else like to testify in this case if so please raise your hand
there are no hands raised at this time chair 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 and was
remapped in 2019 as part of a community-led remapping. Even if this property was considered
under the previous zoning, it would still be denied based on its density. We feel it represents
an overuse of the property. Accordingly, we object to the granting of the variances.
Just to speak to the density, we're obviously clear on the use. In order to get brand new
new construction at a price point at at or 80 percent area median income um at without having
unit sizes be you know studios um you know the extra density is needed and not out of character
given i provided multiple examples where there was five and six units on this block i can repeat
sort of where those are if if the board would like me to reiterate that i don't know but i do
want to get something on the record regarding an email we received from Andy Goodman from
the Councilwoman Gauthier's office. And this was sent to me from Sharon, who got it from
Mr. Goodman. Having the ZBA scheduled hearings less than 45 days after the RCO assignment
is made continues to cause problems like this. It was barely a month that we were still asking
for a continuance and will commit to helping contacting the RCO in the interim. With all
due respect, I don't know how anybody could ask this case when we don't have any idea
as even who the rco is unless somebody could shed some light on this for me we're still not clear
on who the rco is it is we were we did obtain um about over a month ago the rco notification from
the planning commission um in addition we received correspondence from the rco notification email and
the uh zoning board saying that they had requested back in uh october october the 10th specifically
um sharon has these emails that they were still waiting on the council office so um until today
we have not heard anything from the council office and i don't know that i think that it would be
fair to put that that onerous on the board when not only we reached out planning commission reached
out um and many other you know many other cases have had less than the time that was provided
and less outreach to be able to organize something so you know we've sent not only we sent not only
the board but three emails to the council office alone trying to get their support to get a meeting
together so I don't know that it you know it's just my opinion but I don't know that it's really
the boards in this particular instant I don't know that anything the board could have done
differently here well that's why I want to get that on the record so we know what we're talking
about here um having said that uh we we have nothing anything nothing's in the file correct
from the councilwoman's office whether support or not support no it just was a continuance request
sent to sharon i think today or yesterday so if i could also put on record nothing at all that i get
from this office goes into the file because they don't correctly submit to the zoning board just
so that's on record.
Okay, thank you.
All right, I will just like to suggest
we do a resumption hearing,
but it's just to get feedback
from the councilwoman's office.
So this hearing will be resumed on.
Do I have a date, Tanya?
So do we have any issues with January, Rachel?
Whatever you give me, I'll make work.
okay um so we can try for january the 6th and we can do at um 2 p.m if you want to do 9 30 it's
your call um with the expectation that it would be brief because we're going to be really yeah
only feedback from the councilwoman's office perfect thank you kindly thank you so much
All right, hold on. MI 2020-002181, 1322 South 53rd Street. This hearing will be resumed on January the 6th at 2 p.m., at which time the board will consider any feedback from Councilwoman Gautier's office.
at which time the board will consider any feedback from Councilwoman Gauthier's office.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Calendar number 0186, 150 West Wyoming Avenue.
There are no hands raised here?
um excuse me this is sharon saletta the attorney on this case is michael lambert
i see him now he just put his hand up
mr larabidge you've been promoted to panelists
did a court reporter this is our last case and before our 3 30 session so we'll take they'll
taking a break as soon as this case is over.
This is Sharon Saleta while you're waiting
for Mr. Lambert to sign on.
We have a letter in support from the RCO.
Thank you.
i'm not sure where he went i don't see all right now what we'll do if we lost him uh
we'll end this session and if he comes back on we'll start him off on the on the 330 list
sounds good so it is now 25 after uh what do you guys want 15 20 minutes 15 20 15 would be
wonderful 15 minute break see you all back here at uh let's see it's at 4 40. sounds good thank you
we're still live
it's recording is i just restarted i just restarted recording
did you hear me i'm sorry what was that oh i was saying i just restarted recording when
you asked i'll be live okay thank you um tanya we'll give you a few minutes
no chair we're ready all ready that's great thank you uh good afternoon everyone my name
is frank de chico i'm the chair of the zoning board of adjustment i'll be participating in
today's hearing along with our vice chair ms carol tenere board secretary confessor plaza
and board members mr thomas hollowman and mr james snell board administrator ms tanya
Senate and Board Attorney Ms. Sharon Saleta are also in attendance. 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. Third, 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 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'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 with that being said before our vice
chair calls our first case we'd like to ask if anyone is requesting a continuance or withdrawal
for this afternoon's hearing in the meantime i will read off a list of continuances that
have already been requested mi 2020-001824 128 north 53rd street mi 2020-000328 4609 hedge
MI 2020-001923-4916 Warrington Avenue.
If the applicant or an attorney is present and you disagree,
If the applicant or an attorney is present and you disagree with the cases that have just been
continued, please raise your hand. And again, I'll repeat, if you're asking for a continuance or
withdrawal, please raise your hand at this time also. Excuse me, Chair. This is Sharon Saleta.
Warrington was actually withdrawn.
oh you're right i got it sorry to mi 2020 does zero zero one nine two three four nine one six
warrington avenue is withdrawn thank you any other requests here we have tina marie russell
she's been unmuted
Ms. Russell, please identify
yourself with a record
you're under oath from earlier today
Ms. Russell, are you here?
I'm sorry, can you hear me now?
Yes, ma'am
Okay, thank you
Tina Marie Russell, North Central Philadelphia
CDC, in reference to
2200 North Lambert Street. Number is 39818 and it's 1037-017. We're asking for a dismissal.
The applicant did not show on the first hearing and she has not been heard from either we reached
out to her than hear from her nor has she reached out to us since um the community meeting that was
held in um august um excuse me this is sharon saletta we have no exhibits for this it was
previously continued on september 30th um and we have an opposition letter from councilman clark
that references the rco opposition um if this is continued we would perhaps make it um must be heard
Yes. MI-2020-0002482200 North Lambert Street is continued must be heard.
Any other requests?
There are no other hands up at this time chair.
Excuse me chair this is Sharon Saleta if you would like at this time to read out
ask if anyone is present here for number eight or number nine i have no exhibits for either of
those cases and they have both previously been continued okay is anyone here for 5419 stewart
street or 5732 catherine we have anyone for either of those cases if so please raise your hand
no hands raised at this time chair thank you mi 2020 that's 000281 5419 stewart street
is continued MI 2020 that's 000251 5732 Catherine Street is also continued. Chair this is Sharon
Saleta again both of those were previously scheduled for 9 30 for rather September 30th
okay so if they could be must be heard yep thank you both of those cases are continued and must be
heard. Any other questions? Okay, before we begin, did we find the gentleman for 150
West Wyoming? Yes. All right, we'll hear that case first. Mr. Lambert, you ready? Yes.
Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Can you put your name and address on the record, please,
and spell your last name yes good afternoon my name is michael lambert last name is spelled l-a-m-v-e-r-t
i'm here with regards to 150 west wyoming avenue
yeah do you swear for all the whole truth and nothing but the truth
absolutely i do do you also agree to wave the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its
accuracy yes i do thank you and have you emailed the exhibit packet with the required documents
including proof of ownership tax compliance a copy of the refusal or referral photos and plans
of the property five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and do
you have a letter yes we have all of that and we have emailed it to your office i think my
Yes, we have all of that and we have emailed it to your office. I think my, yes, we've emailed it at least once at once.
Okay, thank you. You may proceed.
Thank you so much.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairperson, Mr. Chairman, and ladies and gentlemen of the board.
I am here with regards to 150 West Wyoming Avenue.
We're asking the board to allow my client to put a barbershop in this particular facility or this particular property.
This building was created initially as a C2 when the district was designated as C2, built as a commercial in the 1930s.
And it's maintained that commercial status for the most part, specifically 41.
It was a tailor shop, 1967 a retail store, 70 a candy, 75 a retail store.
Again, all having two families.
Lambert, hard to interrupt.
Do you have anything to show us?
Yes, I'd like to share my screen now, if I may.
Yeah, and if I can interrupt also, I'm reading where it says this permit is for the erection of an awning sign.
signed accessory to a barbershop on the entire first floor yes yes that is part of that is
part of the request yes but we we really want to make this a there's two of them really the
main thing is really to allow uh the um the client to run this facility as a barbershop
and to put up the awning yes sir okay is there anything wrong with the way this is being uh
described Sharon?
I'm sorry, Chair, I need a minute to go back and check the refusal.
Sure, sure.
If you'd like, Mr. Lambert could continue while I do that.
Please proceed, Mr. Lambert.
Thank you, sir.
I'd like to continue sharing my screen everything. So I wanted to briefly to provide the panel
with my document specifically the RCO that was that was approved. I also have a copy of the
site plan that i just provided um i don't want to go too fast let me know this is the history of the
zoning to show that it was uh it's actually vacant right now and since it was zoned as commercial
before we're trying to ask the panel to just allow it to continue to be zoned as commercial
on the first floor um that's the history keep going
you have seen also the letter of support that's the site plan and we also have
photographs bear with me so that's a photograph of the first floor keep going
that's inside keep going more inside photos keep going all the way through that's the front again
that's the windows and that's a picture of the whole building so those are the photographs keep
going those are all the photographs that we're providing to the board and um essentially at the
end of the day from when we're looking at this we um the community has no issues with uh the um
the barbershop one and two we want to uh keep it in the spirit of the community
because as we said earlier it's for the last 60 70 years has been a commercial district
for the most part and um you know my client has been active in the community for years
um many many years he's owned a barbershop across the street he now wants to buy this property
make the repairs
and take it from there
and be able to open this barbershop
in the near future.
Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta.
I did check the application.
It was, the use was applied for.
So the barbershop use is before you.
I'm sorry, I didn't hear that.
Barbershop is part of the application.
Yes, it is.
Yeah, because on our sheet,
Sharon, it doesn't show that.
I know, the wording is very strange.
You should suggest it's on the sign.
No problem.
No problem. All right, Mr. Lambert, if you could tell, I'm sorry, you can summarize. That would be helpful.
All right, Mr. Lambert, if you could...
I'm going to tell him.
Yes. In summary, the bottom line at the end of the day, from our perspective, is we're asking the board to allow us to make this a barbershop in continuance with what the history of this property has been zoned as commercial.
So it does not go against the values of the community.
As we see, the RCO has provided a letter in support.
We have provided a copy of the proposed plans, and we've also provided a photograph.
Do you want to ask your client if they adopt your testimony?
Of course, indulgence.
They're actually on the Zoom.
I don't know if we have to allow them to come in.
I'm not the best technologically advanced person.
So I would ask our clients to check in.
They would have to put their hands up.
Is that Alvarez?
Yes, ma'am.
They've been unmuted and they can speak.
Ma'am, if you can identify yourself for the record, spell your last name.
Yes, I am.
Alvarez.
Please spell your name.
He's A-O-B-A-R-E-V.
And do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
Thank you.
You've heard the testimony that I've provided today, correct?
Do you adopt everything that I've said, and do you agree with it?
Thank you.
any questions from the board no anyone else like to testify in this case if so please raise your
hand chair we have sloan folks he's been unmuted thank you good afternoon mr folks
you're still under please identify yourself with a record good afternoon once again chairman
de Chica. My name is Sloan Foulkes, Office of Councilwoman Maria Quiñones-Sanchez, room 508.
Our office originally submitted a letter of non-opposition based on the community meeting
back in July 16th of this year when we expect the payments to be heard on July 22nd.
I am testifying on the record to reaffirm our non-opposition. Also, that there was a request for a proviso in the letter of support that was sent to the ZBA, and the letter of support, and the proviso at the bottom of the letter requested that the applicant return to the ZBA after two years to ensure that they would maintain the hours of operation
a Sunday 9 a.m to 9 Sunday I'm sorry Monday through Sunday 9 a.m to 9 p.m
with a total of five chairs. Excuse me this is Sharon Saleta but if the board were to add those
provisos would there be a need to return in two years since they would be enforceable?
and he owns it right it's not a lease
yeah mr folks we're going to do the hours of operation i don't know could we limit the number
of chairs um you could probably do that yes limit five chairs and you know they would remain
enforceable for the duration of the variance you understand that mr folks i understood and thank
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Any, anyone else would like to testify in this case?
No hands.
Thank you, Planning Commission.
Good evening, Board.
Peter Bernard for the Planning Commission.
this property is indicated for multi-family residential in the comprehensive plan
and has not yet been remapped it is clear from the materials presented that the property has
a long history of being used for commercial mixed use accordingly we have no objection
to the granting of the variance thank you mi 2020-000186 150 west wyoming avenue my vote is yes
with the following provisos. Hours of operation Monday through Sunday 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. Maximum
Monday through Sunday, 9 a.m. to 9 p.m., maximum five chairs.
five chairs.
Yes, with proviso.
Yes, with proviso.
Yes, with proviso.
Thank you.
Are we going to Lambert Street?
Or was that continued?
We're going to Watt Street, correct?
Number three?
Okay, calendar number 0222, 305 South Watt Street.
This is Sharon Saleta, Councilman Squilla, and the RFCO oppose.
We have Ryan Boland. He's been promoted to panelists.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon. Can you put your name and address on the record, please?
Yes. Ryan Boland, B as in boy, O-L-A-N-D, 1801 Market Street, Suite 2300, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19103.
Thank you. Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Do you also agree to waive the reading of the refusal and stipulate to its accuracy?
We agree to waive the reading of the refusal, but will not stipulate as to its accuracy as we dispute that the one-year rule applies.
Okay. Have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, including proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal referral, photos and plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing, and have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter?
Yes, as to everything except we never received the copy of the letter from the RCO.
okay you may proceed um excuse me mr if you could um specifically address the one-year rule because
the board will have to both separately on that yes certainly um so the one-year rule does not
apply here because there were some substantial changes made first off the height was reduced
And secondly, the rear setback was also reduced, and we have changed the use here.
This was a single-family home, and it has been changed to a duplex.
So the plans now show that there's a small efficiency unit on the first floor.
I'm happy to go into that in more detail, but that's the gist of why the one-year rule does not apply.
And so I'm here today. I represent Max Richardson. He is also on the line. We are here seeking dimensional variances.
And I think it's important before I go into the presentation to understand what we're dealing with here.
This is what my client sees when he steps out his front door.
So the lot here, the 300 block of Watt Street, it's a small street that's located just south of Spruce Street, just north of Pine, just west of Juniper, just east of Broad Street.
And as you can see, this is what he sees, which is a new building that's going up that's only 20 feet shorter than City Hall.
His building is, in essence, going to be just perpetually dwarfed by this.
If you can look at the zoning maps here, you will see that the property is primarily surrounded by CMX 4 and CMX 5.
We also have a 30-story apartment building here, which is RMX 3.
You'll see Watt Street as I zoom in.
Part of the uniqueness of the property here is we have a 27 by 28-foot property.
It's one of three that do not go all the way back to Juniper.
It's just a small subdivided lot.
it's an old carriage house. Here's just some more images here. Here's the subject property
305 to 307 Watt Street and here here's just a another image of it showing the 28 by 27
showing the homes behind it. Here's an overhead view right here showing the property
And I'll go back through this later, but as you can see, there's a number, this is a lower
height block in general. However, there's a bunch of 44, 45 foot buildings along here. I'll take
you through that. But with the CMX zonings, we have some very large buildings here to the east,
to the north, as well as this is an old image, but now we have the 550 foot tower that is going in.
550 foot tower that is going in. Just so that you can visualize what we have here. So this is
Thank you.
these are the elevations here. This is the front view. So this shows the 45 foot building here.
You see the side view and here are the floor plans just to see. We're not trying to,
there isn't a lot of space to work with due to the fact that there's no rear yard.
So here's the first floor.
There's just an efficiency unit with a garage.
Right now, this property, it's just down to the studs.
There's nothing here.
Second floor, we'd have a living room, dining room.
Third floor, we'd have one bedroom.
Fourth floor, we'd have one bedroom.
And then there'd be a small roof deck.
I'll just briefly take you through why this property is so unique.
So this is a 24-foot tall carriage house right now.
and um it's so it's as i already said 28 feet wide 28 feet deep it has a one foot um rear yard
and actually the neighbors to the east built a wall um a solid wall at the boundary so if you
go inside there's in essence no light at all from the east because you have a wall up against it
and then you have this 550 foot tower to the west so the first floor is basically you're living in
a dungeon. And because there's no rear yard, we have to set back the upper floors here. We can't
just build on the existing foundation. We have to build back seven feet. We proposed to have a six
foot setback instead of the seven. And as the building stands, it is 24 feet tall. So in order
to try and have this so that our client can, he wants this to be his principal residence. He's
to move there from where he already is in the neighborhood. In order to do so, with the 38-foot
limit, if he were to only put on one floor, all you would really have here is a one-bedroom
apartment or a one-bedroom house, which is just too small for the work that needs to be done.
And as I showed you the location on Watts Street, this is quite unique as it's different than every
other property on the block. There's only three that don't go from block to block.
I also want to share with you one more thing.
I'm showing you here, this is a live camera right now to show you
where we are today as far as construction is on the art house.
So that's the tower, and I'm zooming in to show you where my client's property is, and it's this square one right here.
So as you can see, there is a platform that's built up here that's about 50 feet tall.
It's just totally dwarfed.
and I'm going to take you back here to this image and just walk you through some of some of the
issues here so as far as the refusal is concerned we have a height refusal we're trying to build 45
feet an inch and a half whereas it's only allowed to be 38 feet in this rm1 district the rear yard
we are seeking to have it only be six feet where it's required to be seven feet and we're also
seeking relief from the requirement that the roof deck be set back five feet. If there was a five
foot setback there's just nowhere to fit in the roof deck with that. So as you look here at the
map I already showed you we're surrounded on the north east and west by CMX4, RMX3, RMX3.
if you look at the art house here so this has a 50 foot 56 foot base which has 100 percent lot
coverage which is already depriving my client of of light and air here to the north we have
the center city one apartment building that's 30 stories tall you have the university arts dorms
here also very big property and then you have numerous these are cmx4 but there's numerous big
properties just west of it on Broad Street. But what's important is there's a number of RM1
properties within a block that are as tall or if not taller. Down here on Pine Street, we have
1335 Pine, which is at 52 feet tall, and we also have 1333 Pine, which is at 43 feet tall.
We also have on Juniper, which is just the east side of the block, we also have four properties
that are between 44 and 45 feet tall. Those addresses are 324 South Juniper, 326 South
Juniper, 330 to 32 South Juniper, and 334 South Juniper.
and 334 South Juniper. We believe that we meet the five elements necessary to grant a variance.
Again, the hardship relates to the unique physical conditions of the property. The property just
isn't usable right now in its current form as a carriage house. No one would want to live on the
first floor right now because it's in total darkness. The only way to go is up and we're
only allowed to go up one floor which given the unique fact that we don't have the rear yard
we have to have an even smaller footprint. Again the physical conditions of the property
are what caused this. It isn't any act of the applicant. Granting this variance is not going
alter the essential character of the neighborhood. There's already plenty of other properties that
are just as big and this variance is the least minimum variance required to afford relief.
In order to do the fourth floor, we just could not have the building any shorter. And I would
like to just briefly, if Max Richardson can raise his hand, that is the owner and I'd like to have
sworn in. Is there anyone else? Let me just, while we're waiting for him, I'll just walk you through.
I had a few more pictures I was going to show just very quickly, just so you understand
what you're dealing with here. This picture here shows the front. This is the front of the property.
Here's what it used to look like. Again, here's the subject property.
This is showing you what the backyard looks like, the one foot. This is
looking out at the property to the rear.
um again just some more photos this is the property this is the one um looking at it to
the right um here's what it looked like when there was a beer garden before they started putting in
the art house here's what it was once construction started as far as views from the second floor
completely obstructed um here to the right is a view just looking down watt street very
very narrow. And here are some more views as construction is ongoing. The top here is what
you see when you look at the second floor windows because Watts is a very narrow street. It's only
20 feet wide. And then this is what you see from the first floor. And then here's just some
renderings as to what the art house will look like when it's done. And if you look here in
the bottom, here's my client's property, Mr. Richardson in the corner. Again, as far as light
and air is concerned this is a an image that my client took here showing that there's already a
lot of um there's already very minimal amount of light before the tower went up because we have a
the symphony house which is at broad and pine and this is just uh an image here showing um
him being cast in darkness from shadows from the symphony house and um again just with how big it
is this is a picture taken from broad junk looking north and you can see that the art house is just
as tall as city hall is. And is Mr. Richardson, has he been unmuted? Yes.
Here's just a few more images just from the roof looking south, just showing you what some of the
other, what we're being surrounded with here, that's looking south. This is the 30-story building
to the north, 30-story building to the north. This is a large one to the rear. Again, the rear yard.
These are the houses that back up to it, just showing what is directly behind the subject
property. And then these are the other two units that, the other two properties on the block that
are smaller. And then here's a one. So Mr. Richardson? Yes, I'm here. Can you hear me? Mr. Richardson,
do you swear can you put your name on the record please and spell it sure max richardson m-a-x
r-i-c-h-a-r-d-s-o-n and your address uh 305 to 307 south watt street thank you do you swear
or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes ma'am okay you may continue
mr richardson did you hear the statements i made today yes i did and were they true correct
inaccurate? Yes, sir. And do you adopt them as your own?
Mr. Richardson, do you adopt my statements as your own?
Mr. Richardson, do you adopt my statements as your own?
I wonder if he muted himself.
Yes, I do. Yes, I do.
And if the board has any questions for Mr. Richardson, who's on this property for a while, he can answer absolutely anything about this.
and his efforts to try and reduce the height of the property in order to reach a compromise here.
Are there any other witnesses?
And does the board have any questions?
No other witnesses.
Okay, Planning Commission?
Sorry, Madam Vice Chair.
We do have someone who wishes to comment, I believe.
Hi, is Richard Ryan?
Mr. Ryan, you can unmute.
Thank you very much.
Hi, sir. Can you put your name on the record and can you spell your last name, please?
Sure. Richard Common Spelling, Ryan, R-Y-A-N, address 310 South Juniper Street, Philadelphia, PA 19107.
okay and do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
i do i do thank you okay um well i'd like to begin by saying that on july 17th 2019
uh this same board uh denied the uh same exact project or essentially the same project
and that previous year 2019 um the wash west civic organization and three neighbors who live
next door all uh agreed that this was not a project that was uh proper for our neighborhood
and uh this essentially the project is the same it might be six inches or 12 inches lower but
it's essentially the same so the applicant is seeking an additional floor an additional height
which on our block, meaning between juniper and Watts, between cypress and pine, not one property
has ever been granted additional height in a variance or an additional floor in variance.
So all the problems that are being presented as hardships with the size of 305, 307 Watts
were already evident when the place was purchased the other buildings around the 45 footers that
45 foot on juniper street comes from a doghouse dormer it's just a tiny little window that lets
light into the attic and the many of the high rises that applicant is saying are a problem
were already there. There are some new ones, of course, especially the Arthas. But if this indeed
is a hardship, then everyone on the block must share the same hardship. Now, previously,
applicants attorney at the Wash West Civic Organization declared that later in 2019,
they met privately with the city planning. And although they never gave us a name or any paperwork,
they said that city planning supported this 45 foot height and four stories they supported that
kind of density well i applaud city planning for supporting that kind of density the way you do it
is by changing the zoning so that everyone can have that kind of density and don't do spot zoning
for one um property in the middle of the block when you're going to leave everyone else thinking
you know what I want to do that too so the Wash West Civic Organization feels and do as do the
neighbors that for our block it's not an appropriate project this will be the tallest building along
with I mean with the addition of the um pilot house would be the tallest building on the block
and so you'll get this situation where everyone wants a pilot house they want four stories they
want 54 and a half feet um that's that's it for now okay are there any more witnesses tanya
there are no hands raised as of now madam chair okay planning commission
good evening my name is ariel de liberto that's a r i e l d as in dog i l i b as in boy e r t o
and i'm here okay do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I do. Okay. This property is owned for, sorry, residential multifamily. And sorry, I just
This property...
lost my notes. Hold on one moment, please. Based on the surrounding context, we have
no concern with the rear addition. We do have concerns about the proposed roof deck structure
without the required setback and the height accordingly we support the granting of the
variance for the rear addition and oppose the granting of the variance for the height
and for the roof deck structure setback okay calendar number 0222 305 south watt street my
vote is no. My vote is no. I need Jim and Tom or Frank. My vote is no. Okay, thank you. We have
four votes. Frank has recused himself from this. Okay, thank you. We have four votes.
Okay, calendar number is 0977 301 St. Vincent Street.
We have a Maria Dietry, she's been promoted to panelists.
It would be possible also to promote Mr. Dietry, her son, who will be, she will be presenting
this herself, but he will be helping her with technical issues.
can he raise his hand sharon
i'm unmuted i believe okay can you hear me yes all right maria maria dietry and dino dietry are
together at her house on the same lab okay so that's your name and what is the address
11-32, Harriet Grove, Huntington Valley, PA, 19-0-0-6.
Thank you.
My name is Maria Dietrich, D-I-T-R-I, the last name.
Thank you.
Do you, do you strike that?
Do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Okay, you may proceed.
I'm sorry.
It should be both of them, I believe.
My name is Dino Dietri, D-I-T-R-I. I live at 11, I mean, I live at 1215 Mynell Road, Huntington Valley, PA, 19006.
And do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, the refusal referral, photos and or plans of the property five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO? And do you have a letter?
Yes, to all of that.
Okay, you may proceed.
I guess, do I need to show you my screen and pictures that I have?
Yes, you do.
Okay. Let me pop them up.
Do I have to give you, like, access to my screen?
Are you able to put it up, or can you see what I'm looking at?
No, not yet, Mr. Thiestry.
On the bottom, are you using a computer?
Yes, I am. I'm on a laptop.
Okay, so on the bottom, you should see something in green called share screen.
if you press on that, and then go to your actual documents that you want us to view,
click on those, it should come up on our screens. So it should be on my screen?
I mean, there's all these boxes and I have them already up like in like Windows Explorer. I just
don't see that here. Right, so you have them up on your computer, right? Yes. So in order for us to
see them at the bottom of this here zoom presentation you should see a button that
says share screen i did that and a window opened up okay and then click on the actual documents
that you want us to view there we go you see that okay so this was the email i sent to you guys this
is all the documents so here is the plot plan i believe yes so let me make that smaller so the
property is 301 St. Vincent. So Mr. Thietry? Yes. I'm sorry it's me again. So we only see the email.
We need for you to open up the documents within the screen so we can see it. I did. Let's try
I did. Let's try that again.
that again. Do you see it but do you which which screen?
Do you see, but do you, which screen has the red box around it? Do you see a red box around your screen? That's the one that we will be able to view. So right now, it's only the email.
So do you have these documents already open? Because that would be best.
so unshare your screen hit the green button again and then when you hit the green button
to share your screen only click on the documents not the email so this that still didn't work
so let's get all righty we see your exhibit okay you see that yes we see that okay so the property
is 301 St. Vincent. It is the building kind of like in a center there outline with a bunch of
chairs and seats. We've had this property vacant for a while. We've had a few churches and community
centers interested. A church has applied and the gentleman Carlos Banabi will speak, I guess,
after I'm done presenting what he would like to put in there. We proposed that we were going to
install off-street parking. So at the bottom of the property where you see the two handicaps,
followed by regular parking on the right
and additional parking on the side down here.
Crispy fried chicken.
Plus they can park down the driveway also.
Let me see if I can show you pictures of the property.
This is an aerial view of the property.
Are you able to see that?
Did that come up?
Good, this is working.
St. Vincent Street is a two-way street
and it ends at Shelbourne where it's one way you can only go left. This is an overview of the
property. We had a meeting with the RCO and the RCO gave us their support. Some of the neighbors
were concerned maybe about street parking and noise and we agreed to make sure that there was
enough off-street parking at the bottom of the property. Along this wall where you see that
backhoe park, that's a supermarket. So there would be all the parking would be along the back of this
wall here and where you see these white trucks parked on the side that will be designated
specifically for it for the street property um this is all like below level down here where the
parking is it's not street level and when i show you like a front picture of the property you'll
be able to see that uh let's see if i have that here so here's a picture of the property from
down the driveway. Like I said, it's below the street. Where I'm standing is actually
where some of the parking would be. So if we scroll down, this is a picture of the back
of the building. There are to the left some row homes and to the right of the picture.
Those are mostly twins. Where those trucks are parked along the fence line, and there's
a railroad track back there behind that tree line. Those are railroads. Where those trucks
are is where parking will be assigned for the church inside is basically a couple offices in
the front and restrooms and then in the back is strictly just an open warehouse space where
the church is looking to have their gatherings and this is what the street looks like out the
front door. This is St. Vincent. It's a two-way street. This is looking up Shelbourne. It's a
one-way street. That's us having the sign on the door. This is where the cars are parked there.
That's where I was talking. Behind the supermarket is going to be designated strictly for the church.
That's another unit on the property that's currently rented by Gene's Hospital. I mean,
any parking except one spot and again that's the aerial view let me go up to the front picture of
the street level uh i think i skipped that where it was opened on another page let's see this is
so that's the street level um there's a front entrance for the offices and a double entrance
there for the warehouse portion so basically we're just looking for a variance for a uh
for a church to rent the place.
And if Carlos can raise his hand,
he can tell you about what he would like.
Oh, there's going to be no construction.
There's no renovations.
He's taken it as is,
utilizing the space as it currently is.
So Carlos, if you want to raise your hand,
you can tell them about what you would like to do
at the property.
Mr. Benavine has been unmuted.
can you hear me yes yes sir please identify yourself for the right
Can you hear me?
Yes, sir.
Please identify yourself for the record.
My name, first name is Carlos.
Last name is Benabe, B-E-N-A-B-E.
We're going to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, sir.
Yes, sir.
And if you can give us a summary of what it is you're doing, we would appreciate that.
So our religious services actually will be on a Sunday's CDA ministry.
That's the name of the church, actually, has been in ministry for 15 years.
We work with the community.
We have different programs for the community, like for children and youth.
Of course, the main service, which is Sunday, and then the next two days of the week, one
for the children and youth ministry and the other for family gathering.
um again we we come out with a big plan to work with the community we come out with ideas
um uh as as we always has in the past we are not a new church or a new uh religion uh organization
we've been as a religion organization for 15 years um we just moved to this community but um
we've been in, you know, active as a religion organization.
Thank you. Any questions from the board? No. No. Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
If so, please raise your hand. Here we have Hillary Emerson. She's been unmuted.
it. Thank you. Good evening, Ms. Emerson. Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
Hillary Emerson, E-M-E-R-S-O-N, on behalf of Councilwoman Sherelle Parker. Do you swear
and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth? I do. Thank you. Please
proceed. Yes, the councilman is not opposed to the request in this case for the use as religious
assembly for the building on this property. This is kind of some odd industrial buildings
in the middle of a residential block, and they've had commercial or industrial uses in their history.
We believe the church impact will be relatively low impact as long as the church is mindful of
community impacts such as parking and noise and hours of operation, which I believe the RCO also
noted in their letter. We did attend the site visit, but we're not able to attend the RCO meeting,
but we have not received any other feedback from the community aside from the letter from the RCO.
We do support the RCO's request for a temporary variance, and we would ask that a certificate of occupancy be required because as best as we can tell in consulting with L&I, this would be a different occupancy classification, so a CO would be required.
thank you do you uh miss miss emerson did you happen to know what the uh and this may already
been spoken to i'm not sure what the terms of the temporary temporary uses um you mean the with the
lease the terms of the lease no no it is is this a purchase or is it a lease this is a lease i'm
sorry it's my understanding that this is this is a lease so there was a request for um by the rco
for temporary because this is a new use at um this this uh structure um and we would support
that request for a temporary variance do we know what excuse me this is sharon saletta just to be
clear the um applicant who is before you is the property owner the um the the occupant the lessee
will be um that they'll be responsible for the use and as far as um a certificate of occupancy
um miss emerson i believe in this case it will be required in any case because it is a change
of use and it is not residential okay so do we know the terms of the lease am i still unmuted
yeah as it relates to the length of the lease am i still unmuted
no you're not we can hear you okay um the the church signed a two-year lease with mrs detry
um effectively it was october for a two-year lease and the rco did recommend a one-year
temporary variance um to just make sure everybody gets along in the neighborhood and everybody's
okay i'm not really sure what that means a temporary variance do we have to come back a
a year from now and do this all over again?
and do this all over again or how does that work uh yes
Or how does that work?
uh so basically a year from now we we would come back and ask for another variance but
permanent because um there's no complaints i guess i don't know yeah more or less that's that's
that's part of it yes okay all right does that work so i guess i guess i'll adjust yes i mean
that'll work for us i'll just his two-year lease to say one year based on the renewal of the
variance after the first year when does the when did the lease when does the lease go into effect
well he signed it october to reserve the property i mean he actually signed in the beginning of the
year but i couldn't charge him because of covid and he right so so it'll begin this october this
past october to begin yes so we'll give you actually we'll start it in january for a year
So it will be this January to the end of December of 2021.
That will give you a couple extra months, okay?
All right.
Any other questions?
Anyone else would like to testify in this case?
There's no hands raised as of now, Chair.
Thank you.
Planning Commission?
Good evening.
Ariel DiLiberto with the City Planning Commission.
this property is owned for residential single family it is recommended for commercial mixed
use in the comprehensive plan we believe the applicant has demonstrated this use will not
cause detriment beyond what would normally be expected from this use accordingly we do not
oppose the granting of the variance thank you mi 2020-000977 301 st vincent street my vote is yes
with the proviso. Temporary variance to expire December 31, 2021. And the CO, Hillary, as
Sharon described, will be taken care of by all night. My vote is no.
Yes, with proviso. Yes, with proviso.
so. Okay. MI 2020-001823 4501 Woodhaven Road. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Mr. Bertel.
please identify yourself with a record
spell your last name
Steve Bertil
B-E-R-T-I-L
Claire Harrison Harvey and Bransburg
Market Street
14 Philadelphia PA
and do you swear and affirm
you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth
yes I do
sir please proceed
Bertil you agree to waive the reading of its refusal
and stipulate to its accuracy?
Also, 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 to all of the above,
except that our exhibit packet did not include any letter.
Oh, did you ask that?
Not yet.
Have you met with Garcia and have a letter?
Yes to the meeting with the RCO and the community group as a whole and no to the letter being included in the exhibit packet because the meeting didn't take place until last night.
I do believe that they sent something to a councilman's office, and I believe the representative
Alice may have sent it over to the VBA, but I'm not 100% sure.
No problem.
Please proceed.
So let me just clear my screen here.
Okay, so as I stated before, my name is Steve Bertil. I'm here representing the owners of 4501 Woodhaven Avenue. As you can see here, the property is zoned as CA1, commercial auto-oriented.
We are actually here for a specific unit. This property itself has been divvied up into
individual units and we're here for unit four specifically, which I will outline in a second.
We're here requesting for a special exception approval for the ability to bring on in part
for the ability to bring on and park 10 food trucks onto the specific unit in question
during lunchtime hours for use as a takeout restaurant. Before I get into the specific unit,
I want to just give a brief background on the history of this property as it relates to the
the applicants. The applicants acquired this property in 2018 at that time, and this is the
entire 4501 Woodhaven, and then the area in question is here. Again, I'll designate that
more specifically in a second. Upon acquisition of the property in 2018, the main structure of
the property was fairly dilapidated, trash here, high vacancy, graffiti, no real upkeep.
Since then, the applicants have spent over a million and a half dollars in sort of rehabbing
the property, refacing it, putting new facades, retaining anchor tenants, and bringing in
new tenants to the property, and also just sort of getting rid of all the problem issues
there and hiring and maintaining the property to a good standard. Since the acquisition,
they've been bringing in a CVS. They were here a few weeks ago for approval for a car wash,
a valet car wash. They've brought in a boxing school, a kickboxing school coming next. They've
done a lot on the property to change from what historically has been basically an outdoor in
Franklin Mills area that has been known for sort of a high vacancy.
As I stated, the area in question is this area circled here, which is designated as unit four on this property.
Essentially, it's a vacant blacktop area that's not utilized for parking as the parking demands of the structure rarely, if ever, overflow into this area.
So as such, it's basically unused, uncapitalized area.
um the main frontage of the although the address is 4501 woodhaven which is here you can see
woodhaven the main frontage of this section uh is franklin mills boulevard which is this road here
and then also liberty bale boulevard which is road here
now um the intent so this property as i said with this section with that um in question for
this application, this isn't the first time that the owners, since acquisition, tried to make a
productive use of this property. Initially, they attempted to maybe utilize the space for some sort
of car sales use. That was something that the community didn't want and didn't support, so that
didn't happen. After that, they attempted to try to use this property as some sort of large truck
parking site that is not uncommon in the northeast area of Philadelphia. The community also didn't
support that project or that use as well. So they went back to the drawing table and
sort of thought about what's going on in terms of the vacancies and kind of fill this structure here
and also sort of the current climate when it comes to people sort of going out and trying to get food
and social distancing, and frankly, just being able to bring some excitement and livelihood to
this area of the property. People are intimately familiar with Franklin, excuse me, Philadelphia
Mills Mall. It was Franklin Mills when I was growing up, but Philadelphia Mills Mall here,
but this has been long for a neglected area of this site as a whole.
So what are we proposing? Essentially, we want to turn this section here into a site where food trucks can come and park during the day and provide takeout options for patrons of the physical brick and mortar tenants and just people sort of driving past,
bringing sort of an alternative and unique options in terms of food options to the area
that's distinct from the typical sort of national chain that you would typically see in a brick
and mortar shop. Right here, right next to the lot is a Burger King. Up across the road,
there's a few sort of standalone brick and mortar shops, things such as Wendy's or Wine and Spirit
store, Boston Market, Taco Bell, etc. And so, this is not, we're not attempting to compete.
And so this is not, we're not attempting to compete with these national chains or franchises.
We're seeking out local small business food trucks that have unique sort of food options,
something not dissimilar that you would see on a university's campus or downtown or anywhere where food trucks are typically allowed.
Now, we did, in terms of the refuel, or not refuel, referral, because this is zoned as commercial CA1, actually we're probably going to that, let me just give you a closer sense of how large this, this is the sort of culture aerial view of the lot that we're referring to, or the area of the property that we're referring to.
So it's over three acres.
OPA has about 250,000 square feet.
We're only seeking 10 food trucks.
And basically, so we can have the flexibility
depending on what works for the areas of placement.
As you can see, it's over four times the size of the lot
that the Burger King is getting on.
So in terms of like congestion or anything like that,
there's just more than enough space to accommodate
the amount of trust we're talking about here. Now, the reason that we received the referral
is because the use of the takeout restaurant requires a special exception. As the board
knows, there isn't a hardship requirement with special exception referral, but it does
require us coming before the board and making our proposal. By right, we could do, if we
wanted to do a sit-down restaurant, we can do that. By right, a grocery store or a prepared
food shop. Basically, every other food-based youth in the commercial district is allowable
by right, except takeout restaurants require a special exception.
Now, we did have a community meeting last night, as I stated earlier. There, we attempted to have a community meeting earlier. We received notice of the assigned community group in October, early October, and we make good faith, you know, constant efforts to try to meet with the group earlier to get feedback about what we were trying to do.
um i believe he sent over 10 emails it wasn't able to happen thankfully councilman o'neill's
office um alex was able to um at the last minute get us in front of some community members uh last
night and there were some concerns that were expressed that i want to briefly discuss um
the first concern that was pretty prevalent among the individuals there was just sanitation concerns
And so I want to be clear to the community and to the board that the intention of the owners here is to, one, hire additional designated maintenance workers for the specific unit.
But also, which was explained to the community members that attended last night, that the food truck leases that we intend to engage in will require physical maintenance of the area, but also require monetary contribution to keeping maintenance staff on site.
In addition to that, the leases that we are engaging in with the food truck small businesses are month-to-month leases, which gives us the opportunity, if there's a problem, sort of food truck that's not sort of like cleaning up properly and, you know, when they're closing up for the day and driving off or anything like that, to, you know, to remove them from the property and not to continue to engage with them.
And as such, it's not an issue where we're signing like a year lease, you have a problem
tenant, and it'll take a long time to either get them out or resolve the issue.
The second matter that was discussed was restrooms for patrons.
Our intention here for this site is for it to be transient.
We want it to be a food truck site to use as takeout, not as a sit down restaurant or
not as for people to eat on site.
We don't want to encourage people to stay and eat, and we believe that adding restaurant
facilities of any kind will be a net negative for the area because it will encourage people
to stay, eat, dispose of the trash, subsequent to eating on site.
And that's not something that we want to encourage.
And we also believe, frankly, when it comes to just things like quarter potties and things
of that nature, this community never wants that anyway.
So the type of facilities that would be required is not really tentable, but it's also not something that we want to do because we want this to be a takeout use.
SO THE TYPE OF FACILITIES THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED IS NOT REALLY TENIBLE, BUT IT'S ALSO
If we wanted to do a sit-down restaurant, we would just do that by right and we wouldn't be here.
And lastly, the third concern that we heard was a net negative effect on the mall's food court or surrounding brick-and-mortar businesses.
So just to touch on the food court, we're just frankly not targeting the same demographic there.
The food court's targeting mall foot traffic, and that's not who we're looking to sort of target with this.
As you can see from the aerial here, anyone that's going to be utilizing the mall for foot traffic and utilizing their other services will not be parking over here or driving through this lot.
We're really targeting people who are using the tenants that we have on our parcel and anyone who's driving, you know, after our parcel who may be aware that there's food trucks there.
We really aren't competing with the interior of them all.
And as I stated earlier, when it comes to these sort of standalone sort of restaurants or commercial businesses here, most of these are national chains or franchises.
That's just not what we are looking to put here.
We are looking to put, again, local small business food trucks that are transient and that can bring something different.
and basically serve the patrons that would be coming to utilize the tenants that we have
on site already. And, you know, if you're walking out to your car, you see a food truck,
you may walk up there and get a snack, get a quick lunch and take it to your car and keep it
moving. Mr. Bertil, excuse the interruption. You may have testified to this. I may have missed it.
is there any seating or we'll just you just go up order and get your food and either get in your
car or leave that's the intention the latter we're not we don't intend to have those seating
outside at all right okay right we don't intend to have seating uh now some of the some of the
food trucks of you may be aware of the ones downtown or anything like that they have like
the little kilners when you walk up and things like that and they may have like a a standing
store where people are waiting but we're not providing seating or anything okay thank you
all right if you can uh uh yeah so i the so in terms of um and again so that's that's the
concerns that we heard we feel like they're we've either addressed them or the concerns are ones that
um we don't intend to do anyway um and so as such we believe that this is a something that
will be a vibrant use for the area won't have a negative effect on the community itself i had um
a representative from the owners of two brothers um on the call he may not be on anymore because
i think he had a commitment he was on at 330 but if robbie uh if you're on if you could raise your
hand and if not as an officer the court will stipulate that your client would be adopting
your testimony. Okay. Thank you. Any questions from the board? No. Is there anyone that would
like to testify in this case? If so, please raise your hand. We have Alice Udovich. You've been
unmuted. Good evening, Alice. Please identify yourself with a record. Spell your last name.
Good evening, Chair and members of the board. Alice Udovich, U-D-O-V-I-C-H,
from councilman brian o'neill's office do you swear and affirm to tell the truth the whole
truth and nothing but the truth i do thank you i wanted to mention because i'm i'm sure you're
not in receipt yet of the letter from the millbrook civic and the franklin mills advisory
council that the 14 members uh did vote to oppose this project and the councilman does as well
as were as was mentioned on those two roadways you do have folks that are in brick and mortar
establishments most of them have takeout windows where they've had to provide safe means of ingress
and egress as well as they're probably paying either hefty lease uh rents and um what have you
I just feel like this really hurts those establishments, as well as is not a good fit for the community.
This isn't University City. These won't be parked at a curb.
It will simply not be safe to have cars pulling up to these food trucks that are parked in the middle of a big parking lot.
these food trucks that are parked in the middle of a big parking lot.
Thank you. Thank you for your testimony.
One thing. So our intention is not to have cars pull up to the food truck. So the reason,
and it's partly as gratuitous the way that this lot is, or this unit is shaped, that we can
um literally sort of cut off this section of the parking lot and have people walk up and like have
a designated entrance not dissimilar to if you go to any sort of um um street festival or anything
like that that has a bunch of food trucks where this section would not be open for cars to be
driving it would be you would be parking and walking into the food truck section of of the
site so in terms of safety there will be no active vehicle movement in this in this area here.
Thank you and but I do have concern and I think Alice she raised a good point especially with
this pandemic brick and mortar facilities restaurants retail are suffering tremendously
and the competition in some cases is good I think in this case the competition could be
the final blow to some of those establishments uh having said that there are any other
individuals who like to testify in this case
there are no other hands at this time chair thank you planning commission
good evening ariel de liberto with the city planning commission this property is owned for
commercial auto oriented the applicant has demonstrated the proposed use will not cause
detriment beyond what would normally be expected from this use accordingly we do not oppose the
granting of the variance thank you mi 2020-001823 4501 woodhaven road my vote is no my vote is no
my vote is no my vote is no my vote is no thank you i believe that concludes the uh 3 30 session
yes chair that's it for today that's it any unfinished business
not that i have okay all right folks i'll see you tomorrow morning nine o'clock executive
session stay safe thank you thank you everyone thank you ariel it was good to see you good to
see you too tanya all right bye-bye thanks all right bye-bye thanks have a good night
have a good night all right once i get out of here