automobile to to park in between the curb cuts.
Miss Wilson, you you made a statement slightly different than one that your counsel had made.
I just want to make sure that that the board heard that I heard you correctly, and that the board makes its own determination based on these statements.
Did you recognize the existence of a curb cut as legal at 209 East Wilsey Street?
are you okay so there was there's existing and there's a decision not conforming the it was
existing for based on my knowledge it was existing non-conforming thank you and um
if council would be kind enough to pull up your exhibit g that you just showed
previously sure thank you so much
Any part of the document of the whole thing, I believe exhibit G was was a plans that had been submitted. Did I get that exhibit wrong?
The exhibit I showed after exhibit G, perhaps that would be D.
Can you go up towards the top of the page, please?
Perfect. Thank you.
um we see some photographs here um ms wilson
actually showing parking it appears uh very similar to what's being proposed wouldn't you say
no there's only two cars there
i see two cars per lot you don't see that ma'am
I see I see two lots with two cars next to one another, because that's a double wide lot. The other parcels around there are or half as wide as what's the end parcel is that's showing the red area.
Okay, so thank you. No, no, no, that's okay. If you could please allow me to screen share a council.
I guess I'll stop my share then. Okay.
Yes, please. Thank you.
Ms Wilson, I'm sharing one of the photographs that we put into the record. Have you observed conditions like this along East Wildey Street?
Yes. Thank you. I'd like to move now to the 1987 approval from your department. And I'm presuming that that was not you individually, but others that predated you. But I just want to pull that up onto the screen.
Yes, thank you. I'd like to move now to
I'm trying to do this very quickly.
Here we are.
Ms. Wilson, would you agree that this 1987 plan was properly approved by the streets department?
Objection. My client has not reviewed this in her professional capacity.
this is an official record uh of of of the department showing official stamps i i believe
madam chairman that the uh the plane is not clear she wasn't around neither too so
so i'll state for the board that we have here a record that shows uh parking two car parking per
per single-family residence approved from Shackamaxon to Day Street.
Bear with me for just a moment. I'm trying to be as economical as possible.
When was that approval again? 1987. Yes, August of 1987.
So, out of respect for Ms. Wilson and and trying to be as brief as possible, I just like to speak to a fundamental issue that's before the board today.
Free refusals. A prerequisite streets department review is separate. And in fact, if the streets department has a issue with what has been submitted, even if the board grants variance relief, we may have difficulty obtaining the final permit in this matter until issues are worked out with the streets department.
as an officer of the court i can assure you that this has happened many times in my career
additionally madam chair and members of the board as this board knows appeals of street
department determinations do not go before the zoning board of adjustment there is a process
which is what makes this so unusual i've showed many different examples and i can pull up the
photographs if desired uh unfortunately of disparate treatment and we can delve more into
that if desired but for some reason that we are not quite able to figure out this location i'm
sure the intentions are good but it's not being treated like all the other photographs that we
shared all right is there any uh redirect did you have any redirect for your witness or are we
um i do have a brief redirect yes okay
mrs wilson was it ever streets position that there was not one existing curb cut
at the property the okay so the street's position is that yes there is one is this in curb cut
but we do not allow all the photos that mr labor showed um was not it's not determined to be legal
all street parking that is how people just choose to park their car and basing a parking approval
or legalized parking approval based on illegally parking your car on your lawn does not constitute
of allowing two all street parking spaces i'm sure at some point during that 1987 approval that it
was agreed to a certain amount of grass area and lawn area adjacent to each of these all street
parking spaces and the homeowners just decided to park on top of the grass because there was no
on street parking and they owned two vehicles um we at the street department we believe that
if you're if you're going to off have an all street parking space and it's not and the parking
space is not deep enough to handle per code and it's a compact parking space then we we we will
We will really be willing to work with you, but as long as you can determine that the off street, that the that you can back out safely without hitting any utility poles, without impacting your neighbors across the street, without without all of these other instances and stuff.
Without all of these other per instances and stuff. So it's just kind of, I mean, that's up to the, that is, but based on my review and based on the plans reviewed, the plans that are currently reviewed, the conditions, we put those conditions and those conditional approval for zoning in good faith that the applicant and their representative will, will, they were agreeable at the time.
And that's why it was documented. I'm not sure whether or not that appeal should have been vetted through the zoning board prior to writing it down or not, but that's what the street department was under the impression when we issue conditional approvals is done in good faith.
Mrs. Wilson, as part of the review that you and your team undertook, did you review historical permit documents and approval documents?
What we, no, we only review the items that were submitted to us on behalf of the applicant. We do not review a license and inspections document. We do not review deeds. We review only the items that were prevented in front of us. And I'm sure if we had a copy of this plan or had a copy of the finalized subdivision plan, our judgment might have been altered and it might have been different.
But unfortunately, we only reviewed it based on the documentation that we had and based on what our inspectors found in the field.
Mrs. Wilson, if there is no historical curb cut in an area, does that show rights to having that curb cut?
I will defer to the board to make that judgment, but in regards of rights, because the streets
department do not review things based on existing or pre-existing rights. We review based on what's
submitted to us. But pre-existing curb cuts are part of your inquiry, right? And whether or not
they existed physically so based on the plan submission there was one pre-existing curb cut
and that was in front of um 209 east wildy street and you consulted many materials old photographs
old documents to determine whether there is or was at one point did exist a curb cut yes we
we did and usually in cases like this we do send we um we have a third highway district
um engineer that we send out to look at these sites and this is this may not be something that
we go in front we do for every single development but for especially for corner properties that we
want to have all street parking and so a low resolution scan of a 1987 zba document does not
establish the existence of a curb cut over the intervening decade chapter the uh the decades as
they were on this is this is an approved zba uh document stamped by lni stamped by the streets
department yep i wasn't saying it wasn't genuine i was saying that it wasn't high resolution enough
for my client to really analyze gotcha but it was already in approved 1987 send books so okay are we
are we done or yes commissioner okay just a couple three across okay uh ian you want to do a check
we okay with time still two to three minutes madam yes chair we can uh proceed and finish this up
thank you all right thank you okay go ahead um ms wilson i believe that you had said that you don't
review uh old documents but then i heard you say that your team did review some old photos and
things we review wait a minute wait a minute i'm gonna ask the question so could you could you
clarify please did what was reviewed and what was not reviewed and particularly why uh it wouldn't
be standard practice to actually look at the documents that your department had previously
approved. Okay. Repeat the question for it. Please repeat. Forgive me. I got lost in that one, but go
ahead. Why would the Streets Department right-of-way unit not look at prior approvals for the same
property before it? The Streets Department right-of-way unit only have records to access
to certain records we due to the time and restraints that we have for plan review
meaning that a project of this type will take a 10-day plan review period
uh for building and a three-day plan review period for zoning within that three days we do not have
uh for building and a three-day plan review beer period for zoning within that three
the time or the resources to look through do a deep dive and look through zoning records
unfortunately that is reasonable so we if an applicant uploads the plan into eclipse we
reviewed all those documents that the applicant uploads we do not we seldomly do independent
that reviews based on previously approved documents from the 80s. We only review what is
handed to us that's in front of us. So it sounds like in this case, because you and your team
don't review your prior approvals, it may be that you weren't even aware that the department had
once sort of the lights going off in my head here you weren't even aware that the department had
previously approved the very same conditions which is interesting a question for you um you had
spoken about concerns regarding safety uh in um ingress and egress uh at these locations uh do you
have can safety concerns regarding a car backing out uh onto uh wilde street
yes okay okay i i would submit that that's a pretty standard uh throughout the city but okay
i'm going to pause because i know that the board has a long day ahead of it i want to memorialize
that I have redirect questions okay go ahead you want to hurry go ahead this is Wilson
if there is zoning approval for a curb cut that never actually comes into physical existence
does that curb cut count as pre-existing in your as an actual part of the environment in your view
It depends on how long ago the plans were reviewed.
There's a statute of limitations on approvals, and there's a statute of limitation on building.
The building, if we approve something for a bill for zoning, we allow up to 3 years for the resubmission for zoning.
If it's for building, we allow up to 5 years for the resubmission.
I feel like we're going in circles. We have a plan that shows the curb cut.
Mrs. Wilson, in your review or in this proceeding, have you seen any permit authorizing, not ZVA approval, but permit authorizing a curb cut or any evidence of a physically existing curb cut?
And I'm referring to the one closer to the intersection.
Not closer to the intersection.
The approval shown is only for the one for that parcel before it was subdivided.
And Mrs. Wilson, does the fact that there might be legal parking of two accessory spaces for a given building, does that affect your fact specific determination about what's actually going on at at this at this site?
No, the only fact determination is based on the plans that we received that was submitted at the time of our review. That's the only thing that we can review based on. We cannot be based on our reviews on speculation or what's out there already or somebody parking on grass or somebody parking on the sidewalk.
um we cannot make that determination to show that it's legalized because everyone else around there
has done it we need you to prove that it's safe on our plans and that's it okay no further
questions thank you all right thank you okay we have a lot here um we're gonna yeah so we'll
we'll schedule a resumption hearing which will start with questions from the board okay um and
And then we'll also take public testimony and the recommendation of the planning commission
on these two matters.
So that resumption hearing date is 6-9-2026.
This will pose a true hardship on the families that are trying to move forward with their
All right.
I guess you can contact our office and see what we can work out.
please contact the office if there's any any earlier availability but we'll
we'll put it on the record as 6-9 for now can we uh note who's here from the public who wants to
testify do we have anyone in the uh virtual audience or anybody here present for this case
yes I do see a hand it's by Robert Bob Everett
i do see a hand is by robert bob every you want to hold that to the resumption hearing yes okay
all right okay so um if you can hear us uh i think it was mr robert we're gonna um hold your
testimony until the resumption hearing which is six nine 2026 at this time um if it changes um
you could just stay in contact with our office okay all right thank you everybody thank you
madam chair members of the board very unusual situation yes thank you thank you commissioners
all right thank you thank you um so we have a spanish interpreter that we need to do but it's
for uh one of the cases at our 3 30 p.m calendar so we have to move with that sorry you guys um
Let's see, that case is Wayne Avenue, yep, after this interpreter, okay, yep, hello your
honor.
Okay, so the interpreter is here, and everyone this is a case that we are drawing
from our 3 30 list because we have the interpreter available now so um thank you for your patience as
we move to this um may not be long all right so it's mi 2025 006108 4562-64 wayne avenue um
uni and han gwen kim is our list our listed owners
so um let me swear in the interpreter um so interpreter could you state your name and spell
it for the record yes your honor my name is leonel spelled as an l-e-o-n-e-l last name gillen
spelled as in g-u-i-l-l-e-n okay and do you swear or affirm that you will interpret accurately
completely and impartially from English to Spanish and from Spanish to English to the
best of your ability? I swear. Okay. All right. So can you call case 4562-64 Wayne Avenue,
Juni and Han
Kan Kim.
Yes. Muy bien.
Estamos con el caso
Avenida Wayne.
Estamos buscando a Juni
y Han.
A Juni
Kun Kim.
¿Están presentes?
Repito, caso
4562-64
Avenida
Wayne. Buscamos a
Uni y Han
Kun Kim. ¿Están
presentes?
No responde.
I'm looking for them. I don't see them.
All right.
We're going to
continue this case.
Hillary, what's the, give them the 3.30. Okay. All right. So we're going to continue the case. MI 2025-0061084562-64 Wayne Avenue. This is a no exhibits first list. In this case, it's going to be continued to 85-2026 at 3.30. So interpreter, can you make that announcement?
And I'm sorry, before that, this is Ms. Sandy, the ZBA Administrator.
Can we put it for a 9.30 hearing, please?
All right.
So I'll repeat that for your interpreter.
So the case is going to be continued MI 2025-006108, 4562-64 Wayne Avenue.
This case is continued to wait.
Hold up.
I'm sorry.
so eight five twenty six is that the date you want eight five twenty six at nine thirty
thank you your honor muy bien entonces el caso m y dos cero dos cinco cero cero seis uno cero ocho
4562-64
Avenida Wayne
El caso se le va a dar continuidad
Y se pasa para la fecha
8-5 del 2026
A las 9 y 30 de la mañana
a las 9 y 30 de la mañana
okay all right thank you interpreter have a beautiful day all right have a good day
all right yeah so we're gonna take a five minute break uh we'll be back in five so sit tight
thank you so much for your patience
all right thank you everyone we're back and we're still on we're back on the two o'clock list