postmark date on the envelope. Furthermore, Chairman Bergman, Samaya then sent me an email
with a scheduled hearing for August 19th for this case.
So everything on the city's end was accepted.
Mr. I'm going to continue, please.
So Mr. Sklaroff objected to such and asked that, you know,
he have some window of time to put forth issues based on timeliness,
which he elaborated on and went further than that today,
but issues of timeliness.
and he was given the deadline of close of business Friday, June 13th.
Mr. Skloroff, who's an attorney with Dilworth Paxson,
I am a regular citizen of Philadelphia,
but Mr. Skloroff, an attorney with Dilworth Paxson,
with numerous lawyers at his disposal and paralegals and secretaries and clerks,
did not get these issues in by close of business.
He sent them over at 510.
furthermore not only i don't know what's funny mr sklar i'm just stating facts so so here here
mr mcdermott this is not really about when he applied this whole hearing this morning is nothing
on board when you applied and you i think you've testified to that you said when you applied
you said how it happened and things like that so i would say mr sklaroff do you have any questions
Mr. Chairman Bergman, I also emailed everything over as well on time. And I sent over a copy of that email as my packet, as instructed before 12 o'clock yesterday.
Okay. Thank you. Mr. Sklar, if you have any questions.
I have a question. Mr. McDermott, is there any statute or instruction that allows an appeal to be filed electronically? Doesn't it say you can either bring it in person or mail it? Is that correct?
Mr. Sklar, if I mailed it and.
I asked a question as to what your authority was to email.
I mailed it.
I mailed it.
Let him ask that.
Go ahead.
I mailed it, Mr. Sklaroff.
And you mailed it on the 7th, the May 7th?
And got postmarked, made a photocopy of it.
You know what day it was received?
I don't know that.
I don't work for the mail department.
That's right.
Therefore, you can testify that your appeal was timely filed within 30 days of April the 7th.
appeal was timely filed within 30 days of april the 7th is that correct but mr scar if you don't
work there either so you can't testify so so so i think what he said was he mailed it on the 7th
and that's what paulie said okay and and mr bergman members of the board it's very important
that we keep that 30-day window you understand that if there's a gap i understand there are
are people that will uh be committed to do certain things our permit is perfected it whether it's a
day or a year can you imagine if this was a deed and there was a gap and people could come in and
file against the property because the deed was recorded a week or two later as far as i know
what mr haggard he told me on the phone and i i'm sorry that he's not here to testify would have
expect that Mr. McDermott would go first and that he would have the people who handled this.
But I was told that the zoning board received it on June 9th. If that was true, the zoning board,
the administrators can't on their own create new law. They can't not follow your requirement in
your rules that it be on the form that says application for appeal the code says 30 days
and i've proved to you that we perfected this and the 30-day window ended on may 7th if it wasn't
received by you folks physically there's no okay there's no law that allows any administrator to
expand that okay thank you very much chairman bergman i just want to hold on one minute and
get to you mr mcdermott yeah actually i just had one or two quick questions for mr mcdermott that
hopefully at least will clarify the record uh mr mcdermott um you testified that you uh
sent your uh appeal form uh on the 7th uh is that correct on their postmark the 7th postmark the
7th right um you are not claiming here that the that the uh zoning permit was not properly posted
are you i i didn't i didn't take a notice of when it went up it is up it is up but i didn't take
notice of when it went okay so all right so there so we're not disputing that the the permit was
properly posted and you don't know when it was posted so you're not challenging the timeliness
of the posting of the permit right right correct okay so that takes that issue off the table
i don't have any further questions all right um mr mcdermy you had one more thing you want to raise
Yeah, Chairman Bergman. There's there's not just the issue of the permit holder. OK, this this issue, based on the fact which we're going to we're going to discuss later on, on August 19th.
This issue was this permit was erroneously issued and the neighborhood and the neighbors.
So we're not in the community. Mr. McDermott, listen to me.
We're not, that will be at a later hearing. We're not talking about that. The only thing today is, is timeliness.
No, no, I'm, I'm, I'm contesting. Mr. Sklaroff's telling me that the permit holder, you know, imagine if this was a deed. Well, guess what? This is my neighborhood. This is not Mr. Sklaroff's neighborhood. This is my neighborhood.
All right. All right. Thank you, Mr. McDermott. Hillary, we'll do the normal questions from the board for this premier hearing.
Questions from the board.
Questions or comments from our attorney?
Not at this time. We don't take this to the public, do we? No, we do not. OK.
We're going to hold the vote on this. We're going to vote next Wednesday at 930 a.m.
We're going to take to executive session and we'll vote on this next Wednesday at 930.
And we're only going to vote on this preliminary issue about timeliness. OK, very well.
And and I've heard everything you've said. I understand a decision in our favor, which I hope the ZBA will issue,
will make
unnecessary and nullify any
other further proceeding. Absolutely.
Thank you very much. Thank you. Chairman Bergman.
Hello?
He's gone. Okay. Thank you
all. Thank you. That concludes
my business. All right. Thank you, sir.
Or maybe
not. Hold on. Wait one minute.
See what he...
is he coming back in yes chair yeah go ahead mr mcdermott chairman bergman i just want to make
sure it's on the record that uh delworth paxton's neil skaroff didn't send his package in till
after the close of business um thank you raise these preliminary issues
after the close of business to raise these preliminary issues.
Most of them.
Yeah, thank you. We will vote on this next week.
I'm just saying the Center City office, as well as the Jenkinson office, close at 5 p.m.
All right. Thank you, sir. Thank you. We appreciate it. Thank you all.
Number five, MI 2025, 000473, 4838 Hawthorne Street.
Sherma Gambrill is the owner applicant.
Good morning.
Sorry, Mr. Sherry, can we just actually go to the next case because we're pulling up the exhibits for you now.
So we just need a few minutes to do that.
So we're just going to take the next case and then we'll take you next.
All right. Thank you for your patience.
We'll be right back.
Number six, MI-2025-000-474-1515 Packer Avenue.
Robin Novelli is the owner applicant to pro se.
There's a recommendation of non-opposition from the 26th Republican Ward RCO.
No explanation or vote count.
This application is for use as a two-family household living in an existing structure.
The proposed use to family household living is prohibited in the RSA-5 zoning district.
Good morning, Board. Joseph Consul here for the applicant, Robin Novelli.
So it's not a pro se?
I was just hired this morning.
Okay, thank you. Thank you.
Mr. Consul, could you please state your name as felt for the stenographer?
Yes, it's J-O-S-E-P-H, last name Consul, C-O-N-S-O-L-E.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, board.
Do you identify your client and relationship to the property?
Yes, I have, I believe his name is Anthony Matea, the property manager and expediter, working with Ms. Novelli on this property.
There was a fire that has led to the knowledge and need for the application for this.
Do you waive the reading of the refusal and agree with its accuracy?
Why don't you start your presentation?
Good morning, board.
Joseph Consul for 1515 Packer.
1515 Packer is a 1,650 square foot property at the corner of 15th and Packer.
All of the corner properties, this is a picture of ours.
All of the corner properties around this property are either a one-family and a professional office or a two-family unit.
I'm showing you all of the surrounding properties that are corner properties.
They all appear to be built the same and are almost exactly identical in size.
um my client will testify that 1515 has been a two-family dwelling for as far back as uh prior
to the purchase in 2012 by the current owner um the owner had been renting the property out um
prior to that obviously without licensure that i was told to family though my client can attest to
However, they're at a position where they need to legalize the property, and they've got a refusal for two-family household living in this zoning district.
There's the deed to Ms. Novelli from 2012.
There is the zero-dollar tax balance.
Showing some photos.
it's property being cleaned up see the U-Haul back there that's another two
family property there's a corner property here's the interior
Here we have the non-opposition from the 26 Republican RCO.
That meeting was held in June.
um my client can attest to the contents of that meeting i was not in attendance and there is our
proof of mailing um showing the appropriate number of mailers sent out regarding this property
um i'll call mr matea to testify regarding this property as he can fill in some of the gaps
regarding the property layout the history of the property and the rco meeting
Mr. Mateo.
Mr. Mateo?
Anthony Mateos
has been promoted to panelists.
Could you please state your name as
Bill for the stenographer?
Anthony Mateo, A-N-T-H-O-N-Y
M-A-T-T-I-A.
Could you please turn on your
video so we can see you, sir?
My video?
it doesn't work
okay proceed with your testimony
okay so the owner
purchased this in 2012
are you the owner or who are you
no I'm the manager for all his properties
and Robin
he can be called as a witness
right all right joe go through all right please proceed sir okay joe why don't you lead him in
the questions yes uh mr matea um so uh so far has my description of the property been accurate
correct could you describe the history of the property and the layout of the property
to the board please we have interior photos but not a layout to show the board
the layout it was when he bought it it was exactly the same way
no work was done in here he bought it as a duplex figure and he could rent it out
at a later date then he had a little fire in here and they told him to legalize it
he couldn't make a commercial space like the others have done on the block because it would
be a mute point it's a dead-end street there's no traffic and he decided to make it a one
bedroom legalization up until that point out of each of the two units anthony yes i i'm uh i'm
sorry i have a head called bed so excuse me if i'm yes that's the one bedroom downstairs and
one bedroom upstairs okay with two floors yes and is it is it accurate to say that the downstairs
stairs is a above grade unit yes way above for the neighborhood he also owns 1731 um packer avenue
down the street restaurant he owns multiple properties on the block and it would be feasible
for him to do the corner property as a duplex as others have done on the block because you have
two entrances parking's easy right on the park right in front because it's a legal parking space
So it would be feasible for him to turn this into a legalization of a duplex.
Okay. And could you describe the RCO meeting, please?
RCO meeting, no opposition at all. It went pretty smooth.
So, Joe, that door that's going down, that goes to the apartment in the basement?
Is that what it is?
Correct.
And then the second and third floor, or what I'm going to call the second and third floor, is one apartment?
Joe, anything else?
I have nothing further for Anthony.
Question from the board.
Yes, so I have two questions.
One, when did the fire occur?
Anthony?
About two years ago, if I'm not mistaken.
And what caused the fire?
It was electrical