Thank you.
okay chair we have 33 attendees and we can start as you wish thank you good morning everyone my
name is bill bergman and i will be chairing this morning's meeting before we begin let me read this
statement for you before hearings any documents or other information that parties wish to submit
to the ZBA for hearings must be submitted through the ZBA's new online upload tool, ZBA Case
Document Submission. Information on how to access and use the submission tool will be included
with the hearing notices and zoning posters. Please note that the applicant documents are due
five calendar days prior to the hearing. Documents submitted by any other party should be submitted
at least 48 hours prior to the hearing to allow sufficient time for processing.
In addition, the filing information should continue to be submitted through email only
and not through the upload system.
Requests for continuances, withdrawals, reconsiderations, and amended refusals,
as well as requests for attorneys to enter or withdraw appearances.
If you have any questions about the ZBA case document submission tool,
please contact RCOZBA at phil.gov. Thank you. With me today is Ismail Shahid, our Vice Chair.
President Chairman. Cheryl L. Gaston. Present Mr. Chairman. Our Board Member Kaneda Graham.
Chairman. Our Board Member Michael Johns. Present Mr. Chairman.
And our board member, Taya Nguyen.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also present is Hillary Emerson, our attorney, and Ian Haggerty, our executive director.
Here's our virtual format.
The proceedings are being recorded.
With your participation, you agree to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting zbaexecutivedirector at phillip.gov.
For a court stenography, ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and the address for the property in question.
answer box on the screen is not for test note. All issues should be directed to our executive
director. That's ZBA executive director at Philadelphia. Let's look at our schedule for
today. Number two, MI 2024, 000763, 2601 North 31st Street. Joseph Bernardino is the listed
applicant. This is the third listing. I understand there has not yet been a zoning board RCO meeting.
Strawberry Mansion Community Concern is also involved. Is anybody involved in this case online?
Yes. Good morning, Mr. Chair. This is Jason Hand. I will be your co-host for today.
I have a hand up from Strawberry Mansion Community Concerns.
I have allowed them to speak.
Good morning.
Good morning.
Can you hear me?
I can.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Good morning, Mr. Chairman.
My name is Bonita Cummings, B-O-N-I-T-A, B-U-M-M-I-N-G-S,
Strawberry Mansion Community Concerns.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Could you give us an update from the RCO's perspective on this case?
This case, with the adequate time, was sent to the attorney for a meeting that was held, which they did not attend.
And I did send all of that information back to the attorney, to board counsel, to say that we, as the RCO, held our responsibility of scheduling.
To say that we, as the RCO, held our responsibility of scheduling that meeting, and there was no attendance from the applicant.
Is Mr. Bernardino online?
Mr. Chair, I do not see him in the virtual audience this morning.
And Mr. Trey, I also don't see the owner, Arthur Casambos. Yeah, I do not see him in the audience either.
So we're going to continue this one more time. So MI 2024-000-763-2601 North 31st Street. Cases continue. The case will be heard. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Cummingson.
Number three, MI 2024-000820-1212 South 51st Street. That case is continued.
Number 13, MI 2024-004-292-122 South Peach Street.
We do not have listings, and the council person has requested it continues in this case.
Is Darvish Jones or Kenneth Johnson available?
I did not see any hands raised for that matter, Mr. Chair.
So MI 2024-004-292-122 South Peach Street.
Case is continued.
Mark must be heard.
And number eight, oh, pardon me, is there any other requests for continuances?
Yes, Mr. Chair, I have a hand up from Joseph Vaccaro. I have allowed him to speak.
Good morning, Mr. Vaccaro.
Good morning. How are you today?
I'm good. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Certainly. My name is Joseph Vaccaro, V-A-C-C-A-R-O, attorney for the applicant.
Mario Rodriguez.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
What's the address of your case?
5300 Haverford Avenue.
I have Daryl Williams as the listed owner.
Right.
He's the owner.
This is an application for a grocery store.
So this is the first listing.
We still don't have the exhibit, sir.
Yes. We also have a letter of opposition. So we'd like to work with the RCO to try to turn that
letter of opposition into a letter of opposition. Thank you. So MI 2024-004-244-5300-202 Haverford
Avenue. Cases continued. Mark must be heard. Thank you. All right. Number 10, MI 2024-004-284-5523
Bayton Street. David
Upton is the attorney. This is
the first listing and we do not have exhibits.
Sure. I have a hand up from
a number ending in 3552.
Do I want them to speak?
Please. I'll have them to speak
right now.
Could you please state your name and spell
for the sonographer?
Hello? Yes.
I'm sorry, I'm actually asking about another address
Alright, so let me handle this one and I'll get back to you, okay?
Alright, is David Uftah
in the audience?
Alright, so MI2024-004-284-5523
Bayton Street, this is the first listing, we don't have documents
Case should continue, but Mark must be heard
Number 14, MI 2024-004-294-1822 North Van Pelt Street.
Tiffany Massey is the listed owner.
Schaefer Investments is the listed applicant.
Schaefer Investments is the listed owner.
No exhibits, first listing.
Mr. Chair, I have a hand up from Naseba Ibra Gamova
Do I allow him to speak?
Understood
Good morning
Good morning
Hi, could you please, are you involved in this case at 1822 North Van Pelt?
18, no, I'm at 403 Renard Street.
18, no, I'm at 403 Renard Street
All right, so we'll have to get back to you later, okay?
All right.
So, well.
We're working on this right now, okay?
So 1822 North Van Pelt, Tiffany Massey or Schaefer Investments?
I do not see any hands for that, Madam Mr. Chair.
All right, so MI 2024-004-294-1822 North Van Pelt Street.
Case is continued. Mark must be heard. And then number nine, MI 2024-004-253-9995 East
Roosevelt Boulevard. That case has been withdrawn. We're going to go to our list and we're going to
start with number four.
Number four.
MI 2024.
Excuse me, Chair. Before we go into that,
can you see if there's any other requests for
continuance? I think two other people would like
to speak. Oh, sure. Sure.
Any other requests for continuances?
Yes, I have a hand up from the
number ending. Well, it was up,
but it went back down.
Okay, now it's back up. It's ending from
3552. They've been about to speak.
Thank you.
Whoever.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Oh, Adrian, right?
Adrian Fernandez.
Bonfaital Neighborhood Parts Association, RCO.
My last name is F-E-R.
I'm sorry.
F-E-R-N-A-N-D-E-Z.
You swear, Fern, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
What case, Adrian?
um i just have one question for clarification about 2601 north 31st street and i'm just
asking if you can clarify will that be a continued must be heard i said that yeah in fact what i said
was that case will be heard the next time okay i wasn't sure just to make sure that um yeah have
a must be heard on the record all right thank you oh it is it is thank you very much we have another
hand up. Jason, anyone else? No, sir. No further hands at this time. Okay. All right. We're
going to go to number four. Number four, MI 2024-002-427-403 Renard Street. Naseba
Igramava and
Zakir Mamavadova are the
listed owners. This is a pro se.
There's unanimous
opposition from
Somerton Civic Association,
29 members, and a letter of
opposition from Council Member O'Neill.
I'll be coming
back in as a panelist for me, sir.
Thank you. Sure.
Hello?
Hi. Could you please state your name?
Could you please state your name
is spelled for the sonographer uh nasiba it's uh first name n-a-s-i-b-a last name i-b-r-a-g-i-m-o-v-a
where affirm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth
yes could you please uh turn on your video video yes there we go uh allow
is it on okay there are you let me ask you this are you the owner uh yes and that's him good
morning good morning okay so who so you and him own the property yes all right so this application
is for the removal hold on one minute uh you're going to do the testimony right yeah it's just
doesn't really know much english that's why yeah but what i'm what i'm saying you only the owners
of the property can testify yes so but you don't own the property we're both on the we're both on
the there did who who testified at the rco who went to the rco meeting me and him were there
okay all right good all right this application is for for the removal of an existing interior
parking space resulting in no accessory off street parking for an existing single family
detached structure one accessory off-street parking space is required per dwelling unit
in the rco2 zoning district our vice chair has a few questions for you okay okay
hello yes
hello yes ishmael oh okay
have you sent in all your documents prior in with it prior to five days everything yeah right
yep everything's in if you guys want i think if i'm able to share i could share why don't you
start sharing your documents for us uh let me see i don't know how to use this so let me see if i'm
able to figure out share am i gonna be
says your bandwidth how am i supposed to share like
i don't know i'm trying to figure out how you have a computer do you have a computer
uh no i'm just on my phone am i like i have it on my phone
the host asked you to start it personal
uh yes what was that he was asking for me um so when you hit the share but do you see a share
button on your phone uh yes there's a share button okay and when you hit the share button
does it ask you what you want to share or what happens uh it's saying uh share screen photos
iCloud or website URL you should probably share your screen unless you have it stored in the
okay no okay uh yes yeah is it working okay there we go okay yeah so now switch to whatever
document you were going to oh okay so okay so everything is kind of mixed are you guys able
to see it oh no we we see now the calendar date go ahead all right so that was your zoning note
that's the zoning notice you put up am i correct uh no that's your application for appeal i see
this all right go ahead okay yeah so we see and i think this is the rest of the application
okay and that's for the uh city of there we go that's the first page of the application these
are like the mail out forms that was yep and that's the what it looks like i have the paper
right there that's the notice uh the continue hearing the violation i think that was the
second part of it these are the receipts for the um the mail out okay uh this is what it looks like
we did like the measuring of the garage door uh this is the license and inspection i think it was
yeah yeah and then this was mailed out this is front of the house and like right there that's
like the garage that was closed up with the walls up with the window right here yeah so that was
that used to be a garage but we closed it and put a window let me ask you this in your letter you
you listen to me in the letter that you had sent you identify this as a duplex is it a duplex
Yeah, there's a bottom and a top.
It's two floors.
There's two floors, but the first floor where this garage was is now an apartment?
No, it's just closed.
I just have used a garage.
Like you can see, I have a parking space additional to park the car.
do you have any more photos to show us
well it was just that i have just that from the other side and then this
like this is the full and after that line it's the neighbor's house
and this is the i guess the tax forms i did i sent them last night to the board counselor
uh this is the measuring again uh this is like the picture closer picture of the garage
and these are the deeds and what's behind that window what's behind that window it's just a
room like a storage room have a picture of that can we see that no I don't have a picture is there
uh no i don't have a picture is there is there is there a a kitchen on that level and a bathroom
is there
questions questions from the board
i have the same question what is behind the the window there you you say it's a storage room
are there pictures of that i don't have pictures um i can can i show you through the video
I'm sorry.
However you can show it.
I'd like to see what we're talking about.
Well, am I allowed to show it is what I'm saying.
If you guys want pictures, I can send you guys the pictures through, I guess,
like another email, or if I'm able to show it now, I can show it now.
You can show it now?
do you have pictures of the interior
wait how do I go back to the camera
let's see
can I stop sharing the screen is that okay
or yeah go ahead
okay so this is what it is
we just have like a
it's just like a storage
hold on
it's just like a storage
and that's the window
of there's nothing else on that level but that yeah this is just the garage this is the garage
area and there's just that closet yeah and that's like right there's the south side
so all so clearly all this work has already been done so yeah
any other questions on the board
just to to clarify i you had written in a couple places that this was a duplex and you said it was
two floors a duplex means two separate dwelling units or two apartments
is is this do you have two different apartments here or is this
just one house that has two different floors that are connected
it's a one house it's there like so if i um from the basement if i walk in i'm able to
enter the upstairs and downstairs from inside the house so wouldn't that be like a duplex yeah
yeah no duplex is having two separate dwelling units like two two kitchens um separate you know
separate entrances separate meters that sort of thing oh no no it's everything is the same so
like the downstairs there's a basement there's the laundry room and everything downstairs
the garage which we changed it up to you know just like a storage room because we don't use it
and then from the basement there's like an um entrance like a stairs to get to the upstairs
to the other floor and there's like three bedrooms upstairs a living room
Okay, thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any hands raised for this matter, Mr. Chair.
The Somerton Civic is not in the audience.
No, I do not see them in the virtual audience either, Mr. Chair.
Council office is not in the audience either see anyone from the council office representing this property and the virtual audience please raise their hand wait to be sworn in also is not there you know once again, no, I don't want to take this time planning commission.
thank you chair bergman sarah bond with the philadelphia city planning commission s-a-r-a-h
b-a-n-h you swear or affirm the tell the truth told truth nothing but the truth
yes sir please proceed the comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single-family zoning.
residential single-family zoning
I'm not sure what's happening.
The appellant's claimed hardship is self-created with the removal of the required accessory parking space.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board deny the variance.
MI 2024-002-427-403, Renard Street, I vote no.
Michael Johns, my vote is no.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is no.
iowan my vote is no
ram my vote is no
ishmael shaheed my vote is no
thank you
number 16
mi20240043132649
south 18th street
damien
kind of let you all is the owner applicant
there's not opposition
from the Gerada State area
residents
I have Joe Vaccaro's hand raised
do I promote him
Joseph Vaccaro
understood
I'll be coming up again as a panel shortly
good morning mr you have this case yes but mr kennelicchio he's in the audience and i also
do me a favor wait a minute wait a minute just state your name for the record please
good morning may it please the board joseph vicaro v-a-c-c-a-r-o on behalf of damian
kennelicchio the owner of the property our vice chair has a few questions sir
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate to
his accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with
this case five days in advance of this hearing?
It's my understanding that that was done by the client before he retained me.
Understood. Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you very much. I just let the record also reflect that I have Mark Georgette, the
client's consultant in on this call also. If I could start sharing my screen.
Can you see a house? Yes. Okay, fine. I want to make sure that we're in the right place. So
by way of background, this is a single family row home in South Philadelphia
that was purchased by Mr. Canelicchio in February of 2024.
This is an application to permit a third floor on this property
to increase the current living space from 1,128 square feet to 1,956 square feet.
It would also raise the height of the building to approximately 38 feet. There's zero tax balance owed on the property. The refusal was issued on May 21st of 2024. Again, this was the application for the erection of the third-story addition over the attached two-story single-family structure.
I'm going to show you the plans. It's just basically no change to the footprint. No change to the footprint of the property. The structures, the first and second floors are going to remain unchanged. The additional third floor would have the same building footprint.
Again, it's 1,128 square feet of living space currently, with a proposal of 1,956 square feet.
GEAR had met with the client in mid-August, August 13th, no opposition, and there was also a petition by the near neighbors showing support of the project.
Scrolling down, the zoning poster was put up onto the building, if I could zoom out a bit.
Here's the front of the building.
Here's another view of the front of the building, the arrows pointing on there, onto the building.
It's still currently two stories.
And here's a picture of the rear of the building.
I'd like to promote Damien Canelicchio, the owner of the property, so that he could adopt my presentation.
I'm going to promote Damien Canelicchio, the owner of the property, so that he could adopt my presentation.
Mr. Baccaro, let me ask you, should he have a rendering of what it will look like?
The only rendering at this point is the footprint showing the third floor, which is this page over here.
but there the client has not made the investment of um of showing the height but it's our
understanding that that the height would be 38 feet high approximately
but it's not set back for eight feet am i correct that's my understanding yes
if i could promote amian sure bring them on they've been allowed to speak
Damien
Sir, could you please state your name
It's spelled for the stenographer
Damien Canelicchio
D-A-M-I-O-N
Last name is Canelicchio
C-A-N-A-L-I-C-H-I-O
You swear or affirm to tell the truth
The whole truth, nothing but the truth
Yes, sir
Damien, have you heard my presentation?
Yes, I have
Is it accurate?
Yes, sir
And truthful?
Yes, sir
Would you adopt it as your own
as if you were testifying on your own.
Yes, sir.
I also have...
Mr. Vaccaro, wait a minute.
Before I open this up,
are there any other houses on the block
that have a third floor?
Damien, are there any other houses on the block
that have a third floor?
Well, of course, the street,
they have three stories
that they just built over there.
And then on the other side of the street,
maybe about two other homes
have a third floor.
so that's what actually gave me the idea
my brother lives next door and it gave me the idea
because I have my daughter having a baby
and I figured there'd be more room for
let me ask you this
are the other homes on the block
are they set back
they're not
do you have another client you want to bring
testify
yes the board has some other
technical questions I could call the consultant
Mark Georgette
so why don't you hold on to him
And if the board has technical issues, they'll talk to them.
Right.
Questions or comments from the board?
Yes, I'm trying to understand what it is that they want to do.
So this and I'm looking at this plan.
It looks confusing, so I don't kind of know what's going on.
Is the area where it says rear area, 88 square feet addition to all proposed floors.
Is this the three story addition that you're trying to do?
so it's a basic i'm sorry but it's a it's a basic third floor like just stairway going up
maybe two or three bedrooms i'm trying to get as much living space as possible like i said
i have a big family and i don't want to leave the neighborhood so i'm just it's just like
basic as far as that okay um for me this is insufficient information to even review quite
frankly but we need i think i need more information as far as as far as some plans
something that shows an elevation something that shows in context with the rest of the block
um this just it's not enough to show if you if you're about to spend a lot of money to do a third
floor three-story edition i think it makes sense to sort of put together so you know some documents
that are, you know, are sufficient enough for us to consider, you know, so that we get a real
sense of what it is that you're trying to do. And this doesn't do it for me. I'm sorry.
Yeah. So, Hillary, can we make this, bring this back?
hillary sorry mr sure um yes if the if the board would like to have a resumption hearing
yeah so why don't we do this let's see if any other boards board members have questions so
that we can add to the list of things that need to be done or any of the other yes comments or
questions from the board yes chair can you make sure you include pictures of the block where
there are other three-story
buildings on the block
just showing that there's no setbacks.
Well, I think in the picture,
it does show the houses across the street
with the third floors there.
I mean, I would hate to
schedule another meeting because it's only setting me
back. I mean, it took me a while to get this meeting.
And I mean, if we go
through the picture.
So let's see.
Your attorney can call the office
and we'll figure out when that next date will be.
But, you know, it gets kind of hard to see this flat drawing you have.
But, you know, it gets kind of hard to see this flat drawing you have.
I mean, look, I think what the issue is you need to hire somebody to draw plans for you.
And I think counsel made reference to you had this because you want to get it approved first.
But the fact of the matter is you can't approve it unless you can see it.
That's why I said there's no rendering.
There's no way to look at this thing.
So what we're going to do with this, this will come back for a resumptive hearing.
Mr. Vicario, do you understand?
Understood.
And you'll work with your client and tell him what he needs to do.
Are there any other requests from the board so I could?
Any other body else on the board have an issue?
Can I just clarify for the record?
So basically the board would like to see an elevation of what this would look like, which normally is part of the site plan, I believe.
But I guess in this case it was not.
So I think an elevation would be helpful, as well as photos of the block showing what the rest of the block looks like.
And then I assume that the board at this point would like to take public testimony and the recommendation of the Planning Commission at that resumption hearing.
Yeah, we would do that.
And some kind of plan to show us some kind of floor plan that shows us what it kind of looks like.
I mean, that'd have to be real, real detail, but something that we can kind of see what it is that he's trying to do.
Okay, so clarification for how the space will be used.
Correct.
Thank you, Mr. Vaccaro.
Thank you.
Okay, number 17, MI 2024, 004-319-2922 South Juniper Street.
Denise McGee is the owner applicant.
There's a letter of support from the South Philadelphia Community's Civic Association,
along with a petition of support submitted by the applicant with 21 signatures
from the residents on the 2900 block of South Broad and South Juniper Street.
They're coming back in as a panelist, Mr. Chair.
Hi there.
Good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer?
Sure. My name is Denise McGee, D-E-N-I-S-E-N, McGee, M-C-G-E-E.
You're referring to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
Good morning.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
i have the but the only thing that i am waiting for is a certificate of tax which i requested a
few times and they um and they gave me log on information which i'm not able to log on
um that's the only thing that i have outstanding and i know but hillary we believe she's compliant
am i right hillary yes mr chair she is you are you are compliant you're compliant but okay
You can proceed and share your screen.
So, Ms. McGee, let me read this first.
This application is for the erection of a deck at the rear of an existing structure, whereas the proposed deck lacks the required three-foot setback from the common driveway.
Okay, so why don't you start your presentation?
Share your screen.
I am sharing.
Can you see my screen?
Not yet.
We see you.
Oh, you don't see my screen?
So open your documents and then put shared screen, okay?
Yeah, everything's open.
We don't see it.
Open system security privacy.
I have to grant access.
I don't know where I do the grant access at.
Meeting.
It says I have a privacy issue to grant access settings.
I'm sorry so so it's asked you to grant access can you grant access so that it
can access you yeah I'm saying to to share screen share it says open system
settings system open system settings I never had this problem before I'm so
I'm sorry. What kind of computer are you on? I'm on a Mac.
Okay. My, yeah, my knowledge of Mac is extremely limited.
And I just did a Zoom meeting. I didn't have an issue before, so I'm not sure
what could be. Why don't we do this? Why don't you, you know, we're going to have hearings all
this morning. Let me go past you and I'll come back to you. I'll give you about a half hour or
go past you and I'll come back to you. I'll give you about a half hour or so to try to get this
to try to get this straight, okay?
straight. Okay. All right. Thank you. All right. We're going to go to our, start our list.
So you'll come back. I'll come back to you. Yep. Okay. Number one, MI 2023-002-992-2201
of Frankfort Avenue. Meredith Verliger
is the attorney.
There's a letter of support
from Fishtown Neighbors Association
and a letter of unanimous support
from Fishtown Kentian Area Business
and a letter of non-opposition
from Council Member Squall's office.
They're coming back in as a panelist, Mr. Chair.
Right.
Chairman, members of the board.
Good morning, counsel. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Meredith Ferliger, F-E-R-L-E-G-E-R.
Where are firm to tell the truth, told truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client in a relationship to the property?
Yes, certainly. My client this morning is Leo Figgs, LLC, which is the prospective tenant of the property.
Here, it has a few questions.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree?
The reading of the reviews were stipulated to its accuracy.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case?
Five days in advance of this hearing?
I did.
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and change screen.
Wonderful. You can see the first page of my exhibits at this point, I hope?
We can.
Wonderful. So again, good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Again, my name is Meredith Ferliger of Yilworth-Paxson.
This morning, I have the pleasure of representing Leo Figgs, LLC, the prospective tenant of the property at 2201 Frankfurt Avenue.
My client is represented today by Justice Figueres.
The request before the board today concerns 2201 Frankfurt Avenue, specifically the ground floor commercial space.
Before I move into my standard presentation, I wanted to take a moment to address some of the administrative history of this application.
which is just a bit unusual and lengthy. On behalf of the property owner, not the tenant,
I originally filed an application with L&I back in April of 2023. That application was refused
and referred to the board, and we initially filed an appeal in May of 2023. At that point,
the property owner had not yet identified a tenant for any of the spaces or for the commercial space
as a whole. Still seeking to identify a tenant that would not require relief, we continued the
December 2023 hearing attorney moving party. In summer of 2024, the owner was able to identify
a fantastic tenant. That tenant retained me directly to modify and resume this particular
application. In September, we asked this board for leave to amend the original application
to more carefully tailor it to this newly identified tenant.
That request was granted, and an amended refusal was issued shortly thereafter,
and that is ultimately what brings us in front of you today,
a year and a half after the application was first filed.
So just to summarize, originally this was on behalf of the property owner,
now this application is being pursued on behalf of the newly identified tenant.
As always, you have an exhibit packet in front of you that contains 15 exhibits, which we do request be moved into evidence at the conclusion of the presentation.
To summarize the basis for today's request, my client is looking to open a new business in approximately 4,000 square feet of commercial space that is best summarized as an urban winery, boutique grocery, and restaurant, and neighborhood educational space.
Let me first orient you to the location of the property.
The lease and tax clearance are included at both Exhibits 2 and 3.
As you can see on the aerials at Exhibit 10, the property sits at the corner of Frankfort Avenue on the Frankfort Avenue commercial corridor at the intersection of East Susquehanna Avenue.
You will notice that this is a newly constructed building.
From the northeast view here on the next page, you'll see the rear of the building and its
relationship to the dominant commercial corridor that is surrounded by a mix of multifamily and
other single-family uses. At the zoning map at Exhibit 9, you'll see that this property is owned CMX.
At the zoning map at Exhibit 9, you'll see that this property is zoned CMX 2.
The property also sits in the NCA North Delaware Avenue overlay, which is relevant to one of the referrals.
Turning to, let me zoom out a little bit, turning to the photographs at Exhibit 15,
the first photograph shows Justice highlighting the interior of the now vacant commercial space.
This left photograph here is oriented looking towards Frankfurt Avenue, while this right photograph here is oriented looking towards East Susquehanna frontage.
And you can see the four doors to access this commercial space in these photographs.
The space benefits from incredibly high ceilings, as you can see, large windows, and dual access from both of the street frontages.
Moving into additional interior, exterior photographs, the first photograph here is
right at the corner. I'll scroll through the photographs, and then I'll address the history
of the building itself. This next photograph here is looking along Frankfurt Avenue,
looking towards East Dolphin Street. And again, you'll see the four entrances to the commercial
space that are shown in the photograph, two of which will be utilized by Leo Figgs, and two will
be reserved for a future tenant in the soon-to-be-separated space. A closer view of these
four entryways are shown here in the next photograph. Moving on, the next, the, oh, I wanted
to point out one other thing. The entrance to the residential units in this photograph
are just slightly out of view here on this photograph.
The next photograph here shows a general view of the Frankfurt Avenue East Susquehanna
East Susquehanna Avenue intersection facing just diagonal from the building.
Moving on to East Susquehanna Avenue, this view faces towards Tulip Street.
And what you'll notice is that this entrance, this frontage has multiple entrances here towards the rear, which you can see a little bit better in this photograph here.
There are also these doors here.
You can see our entrances to a reserve trash storage area and other utility areas for the building.
There's also an electronic garage here that provides access to parking spaces in the rear.
And as always, we did include photographs of the zoning posters, which were posted on October 22nd.
As I mentioned, this is a newly constructed building that was first permitted in 2019 by an original owner and developer.
The zoning permit, the original zoning permit is shown up on your screen at Exhibit 5 with the original zoning plans.
This building was originally approved for the construction of 26 dwelling units with a first floor fresh food market that provided the then owner with a height bonus to construct the building to 55 feet high.
My original client for this application purchased the building in March of 2023, long after it was first permitted.
By that time, no commercial tenant had yet been identified for the nearly 5,000 square foot commercial space that would meet the definition of a fresh food grocer.
As I mentioned earlier, my original client submitted a zoning application the month after his purchase to convert the commercial space into three separate tenant spaces, seeking to provide maximum flexibility towards finally identifying a tenant for the space.
The original refusal and referral are shown in your exhibit packet here at Exhibit 4, and I have that up on the screen here.
So you can see here where it was originally proposed to have three commercial spaces.
In addition, that request also included seeking approvals for a variety of restaurant type of uses, which would require special exception relief from the board.
Again, the goal here was to ensure that when and if a tenant was identified, that it could
move into the space quickly.
However, that application was indefinitely held as the owner at that point continued
his efforts to find a tenant, one ideally that would actually meet the definition of
a fresh food grocer.
In fact, as you'll notice in the letter from Fishtown Neighbors Association, they even
assisted us in making some connections to area grocers who might have interest in expanding,
but ultimately none of these efforts panned out. And again,
But ultimately, none of these efforts panned out.
And again, as I mentioned, you'll see that reference in Fishtown's letter at Exhibit 14,
actually opining that the lack of parking for this particular site and the relatively small space were not conducive to locating a fresh food market type of tenant.
Eventually, Leo Figs was identified, which quite frankly could not be a more serendipitous use, not only because the use so closely aligns with the intent of the fresh food market, but also because it is being pursued by a member of the Fishtown community.
Although we submit and expect that the board will see today that LeoFigs meets the spirit and intent of what the fresh food grocer bonus was seeking to achieve in terms of use, which is a position shared by the coordinating RCO, the LeoFigs use ultimately more closely meets the definition of alternative zoning code use categories that do require today's relief.
Justice is here and can answer any specific questions you have about the use, but I'll give you a basic overview.
At Exhibit 7 up on your screen, I've provided floor plans of the full commercial space.
This first page here shows the layout of the existing basement level, which includes a portion of the commercial space which connects to the first floor.
The rest of the basement is for the residential use.
The next page, which I'll bring up here, shows the existing open commercial space at the first
floor, measuring a total of 4,815 square feet. I'll move into the floor plans that show the
proposal. In the basement space, Justice will primarily be operating his urban winery and
brewing space where he will make wine, cider, kombucha, and wine coolers for sale on and off
premises. I'll note that this aspect of his use is already permitted and approved and I have
included that zoning permit at exhibit six showing the zoning authorizing the artisan industrial use
of this basement space and you can see the walk-in cooler here as well. Leo Figgs has already been
approved for a winery license with the PLCB. Justice himself is currently pursuing his Masters
of Wine, and once completed, this will be one of only three wineries across the entire country
that is curated by an operator with a Masters of Wine. On the first floor, on this next page here,
you'll see the combination restaurant, retail, and education space. In this first floor view,
you will see that the revised proposal before the board reduced the number of commercial spaces
from three to two, with a small vacant commercial space still being left in the building for a
future tenant. And you can see that small space here at the northern end of this orientation
here on Frankfurt. Leo Figgs will occupy a vast majority of this commercial space.
We did also, for reference, include the first floor life safety plan.
Now, when I show you the next rendering, I want you to keep in mind that the space is most certainly not going to be all white.
We did, for the board's reference, include the design inspiration for the space on the next page,
so you'll have to use your imagination and combine these colors and materials into this space.
we did also include a very detailed packet of information at exhibit eight here
describing leofigs the inspiration the people and the goals but just to summarize for you
this space is going to have a boutique grocery selling cheese charcuterie and other pennsylvania
agricultural products additionally there'll be a tasting bar because you certainly could not have
a wine brewery without the ability to have customers taste the product. Food will also be
sold with both dine-in and take-out options, but will mostly be small plates that do not require
industrial kitchen equipment or exhaust. Leo Figgs also plans to have educational classes
where community members can come and learn about wine and other culinary topics, including cooking
classes. In Leo Figg's words, they aspire to be the cherished home away from home for a community
of passionate food and drink enthusiasts. To start, they will operate Wednesday through Saturday from
4 to 11 p.m. They'll have commercial trash pickup three to four times a week, which can be
facilitated from East Susquehanna Avenue. There is also currently a loading zone in front of the
There is also currently a loading zone in front of the building on Frankfurt Avenue, so that will facilitate impact-free deliveries.
building on Frankfurt Avenue.
Now, regarding the refusal and the referral at Exhibit 1, this proposal received two referrals and one refusal.
Starting first with the refusal.
As I mentioned, the original owner and developer of the building took advantage of the now defunct fresh food grocer bonus for additional height.
Although Leo Figgs encompasses aspects that would align with the fresh food grocer use,
it does require a more carefully curated use palette that ultimately eliminates the actual
fresh food grocer category. Instead, the use described to the board today is captured as an
eating and drinking establishment, including both eat-in and take-out, as well as a prepared food
shop. Because the proposed use eliminates the fresh food grocer bonus, a refusal is issued
because the building itself is now taller than the code would allow without the benefit of the
bonus. Unfortunately, the River Words Market at 2200 East Norris Street likely foreclosed any
possibility of this building being able to attract a tenant that would have a competitive use to an
already established grocer. And it's situations like this that ultimately led to this bonus being
removed from the code. The applicant submits to a hardship given that unambiguously, it would be a
considerable, unreasonable, and unachievable hardship to reduce the height of the already
constructed building. Alternatively, absent relief from this board today, the space would have to
remain entirely vacant until a user appeared that would precisely constitute a fresh food grocer,
which doesn't have a definition in the current code anymore. As the board has seen, the additional
15 feet of height of the building, particularly within the commercial space itself, has attracted
a tenant, the caliber of which is Leofigs, that is going to create a community-centered and highly
beneficial use for the local Fishtown community. As a reminder, my original client purchased the
property while it was already under construction, and my current client is the tenant. So neither
of my clients in this case should bear any blame for the failure of this bonus, and this is
unequivocally not a self-created hardship on their part. Furthermore, as we've established,
this use is truly the least minimum deviation from the code to provide relief,
given that this use likely does constitute at least a portion of what the fresh food market was seeking to achieve.
Even if the fresh food use remained and was expanded to include the alternative categories before the board today,
the refusal still would have resulted.
In terms of the referrals, this application received two referrals, as eating and drinking establishments of all kinds require special exception in the NCA North Delaware Avenue overlay.
Additionally, takeout restaurants require special exception in the CMX2 zoning district.
Here, we've included the takeout restaurant use, as Leo Figs will likely operate in such a way that the takeout use is an independent use from the sit-down restaurant itself.
Of course, with a sit-down restaurant, you can eat in and take food home.
That would not require the separate use.
However, as Leo Figgs expands and grows, it's conceivable that there will be an independent takeout aspect of the use that is not permitted just by having a sit-down restaurant.
Furthermore, the prepared food shop use, which also requires a special exception, will ensure that the fresh food and retail aspect of the use is also independently permitted, separate from the restaurant itself.
As described throughout the presentation, we submit that all of the aforementioned uses
constitute uses permitted under the zoning code by special exception.
We submit the proposal will not increase congestion, harm neighbors' properties, or impair
light and air. Since a commercial use was already contemplated here, this proposal merely seeks
to expand the list of permitted uses. As described, the operator has a defined plan to manage
deliveries, trash, and customer traffic, and this is the exact type of use that is ideal
to invigorate the commercial corridor. This is a pedestrian-oriented commercial corridor and is
consistent with the type of use one would expect to find in this location. Certainly,
Certainly, Leo Figgs will cause no more impact than one might expect to find from a similar type of eating and drinking establishment.
leofigs will cause no more impact than one might expect.
This property is surrounded by other commercial and residential uses that will benefit from this use.
In terms of the height, the height of this building would have been appropriate regardless of the bonus.
In fact, the building just diagonal to this one at 2042 Frankfurt Avenue was granted a variance in 2014 to accommodate a higher building than the code would allow.
More detailed analysis on each of the legal standards establishing this applicant's entitlement to both variance relief and the grant of the special exception is provided in the memo of law submitted to the board at Exhibit 11.
At this point, I would ask for the administrator to locate Justice Figueres in the audience to adopt my testimony.
They have been allowed to speak.
Good morning, sir. Could you please state your name as spelled for the sonographer?
Hello, my name is Justice Figueres, F-I-G-U-E-R-A-S.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you. Justice, you are authorized to speak on behalf of Leo Figgs, LLC. Is that correct?
Correct.
And have you heard all of the testimony and evidence that was offered in front of the board today?
Would you agree that that testimony was true and accurate and would you adopt it as if you had given it yourself?
Is there anything else you'd like to add?
Not at this moment.
We're happy to answer any questions.
Questions from the board.
okay uh meredith i'm trying to get an idea of timing so uh i do know that the what is that
that fresh what is it a fresh food bonus right well that was eliminated at some point so are you
saying that you got approval of right to have this project with the additional height
when that bonus was in effect that is correct the the original owner of the property got the
approval so this zoning permit's dated 2020 but it was actually 2019 that the original permit was
issued they converted it once eclipse came into place so that is absolutely correct in 2019 the
original owner filed the application sought approval for the building bonus ultimately went
and built the building and then sold it and that's kind of where i got involved okay at that and i'm
not sure when that fresh food bonus was um eliminated but presumably it was between the
time sometime after this property was built i think that's correct i don't recall i may have
actually included it in here let me see um i don't i don't recall i believe it was eliminated
in 2021 i and i'm sure that planning could correct me if i'm wrong but i believe it was 2021 so i
think it was probably you know about a year after the zoning permits were issued in for this building
okay yeah but when this was being constructed
we're not sure whether this bonus had been eliminated or what the story was or was it
built while the bonus was in effect and then once i moved with the new owner you're being asked to
basically get a variance for the additional height is that am i so i believe and i'm just trying to
confirm i i believe that the building was so the building was still under construction when my
when my original client for this application purchased it he purchased it I included the deed
he purchased it in March of 2023 the property had not even received a CO at that point
so the bonus would have been eliminated you know probably the beginning of construction or at some
point during construction but I mean by the time my original client purchased it it had long since
been eliminated okay all right just just try to get an idea of time and whether there might have
been some adjustments made while uh yeah i i think that construction had likely long since started
by the time that bonus was eliminated okay all right thank you other questions for the board
all right thank you other questions for the board the only the only question i has is uh
if is the um proposed uses do they um take up the uh square footage that would have been
the fresh grocery they don't they do not uh mr johns and that's actually that's actually part
of the reason why i mentioned that even if we had left the definition of fresh food grocer
on the permit and just added these uses, the refusal still would have been eliminated.
So if you look here, the open commercial space, the entire commercial space was 4,815 square feet.
So once you subdivide that, you can see here that Justice's space is in total about 4,000 square feet,
but that also includes the basement. So I believe, and Justice could correct me if I'm wrong,
I believe that the first floor portion of that, which is the only portion relevant to the bonus
itself, is about $3,000 and change. So that's a long-winded way to say, no, the new use would not
have encompassed enough space for the bonus. But with the additional space in the basement,
it kind of makes up for, I would think. Okay. Again, I mean, the fresh food grocer was
somewhat vague in terms of what would actually constitute a fresh food grocer. So, you know,
again, you kind of envision a use like this really does meet the intent. Would it have actually met
that definition right you know it's why it was eliminated i understand yeah thanks the questions
from the board well just an editorial comment the idea was to try and fight food deserts you know
in these areas but the uh in practice it didn't really work very well because most people would
not go to these little places when they have supermarkets which are available so that they
could actually get uh their food you know in a way that was more um economical uh
so well that's why that's why we submitted that this is kind of the best of both worlds in terms
of a use you know this does really encompass a lot of different aspects that exactly that meet
that intent so yes questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson not at this time
mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience yes chair i have a hand up by the name
of strawberry mansion concern they have been allowed to speak that's not them strawberry
mansion this is definitely not strawberry mansion any other anyone else in the virtual audience
yes i have a name up by the name of robert everett they have been allowed to speak
sure good morning mr everett could you please state your name as spelled for the sonographer
yes good morning everyone my first name is robert last name everett e-v-e-r-e-t-t
you swear or affirm to tell the truth told truth nothing but the truth
i love to swear yes all right good please proceed just here to acknowledge our community meeting
outlined in the rco letter and our hearty support of the proposed plan
thank you very much mr effort for taking the time to call us is there anyone else in the virtual
audience i see no more hands at this time any commission
thank you chair bergman sarah bomb with the philadelphia city planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends a zoning map change to cmx 2.5 the proposed use of eating and
drinking establishment sit down as well as take out will not cause detrimental impacts to the
neighborhood beyond what might normally be expected although the building height of 55
feet is no longer in compliance due to the fresh food bonus no longer being available
The height is permitted in the recommended zoning of CMX 2.5.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variances and special exception.
MI 2023, 002-992-22 on Frankfurt Avenue, I vote yes with proviso per amended refusal dated 9-9-24.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.
Tynetta Graham, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Iowan, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with Proviso.
Thank you, counsel. You have your votes.
Number five, MI 2024-004-194-2130 Catherine Street.
Henry Clinton is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from South of South Neighborhood Association
and a letter of opposition from North of Washington Coalition.
Applicant also has a petition signed by 29 people,
mostly from the 2100 block of Catherine N. Webster Streets.
Henry Clinton will be rejoining us as a panelist.
Morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board.
Morning, Mr. Clinton.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Henry Clinton, H-E-N-R-Y Clinton, C-L-I-N-T-O-N.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
And with me in the background, they're my client, Mr. Webb, and some of the supporting neighbors of his petition.
Thank you very much.
Our vice chair has a few questions, sir.
Morning, counsel.
Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
I do, Mr. Shahid.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case,
five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Mr. Chairman, is that visible?
It is now. Yes, sir.
Good. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, again, and members of the board.
Henry Clinton, on behalf of Mr. Webb, who is to my right and your left.
This is a request for an accessory dwelling unit above an existing garage, a garage that has been there at least seven to eight decades, on a rather large lot, which is adjacent to a single-family home that Mr. Webb has lived in all of his entire life.
And I will walk through the presentation step by step.
This is my table of contents, which contains Exhibits A1 through A10.
This is the refusal.
So it's one refusal for use, indicating that an accessory dwelling unit are only allowed on single-family lots, which we have.
It can be detached, which the garage is.
And it's within the interior of a principal building, which could be a detached garage, which we have.
So we have a refusal, and I think we're on the cusp of getting this by right, but the
examiner didn't really say what aspect of the ADU requirements were not met, but I'm
going to have to assume it was the lot size, because if you look at the regulations for
an accessory dwelling unit, typically the minimum lot size is about 1,600, and we're
at about 1,100 square feet.
but I don't want to read into it, but just trying to have candor with the board as to my
interpretation of what has happened here. Because accessory dwelling units, the code has been
loosened a little bit to permit them. And when you look at the reasons why for the legislation,
it's because accessory dwelling units provide a secondary living space. It's typically going to
own a property with a primary home and the primary resident has to live there.
It's usually on a, the entrance has to be one entrance facing the street, which we have.
It has to contribute to the housing zoning stock, which we do and which SASA has recognized
at the meeting because the Graduate Hospital neighborhood is becoming more and more exclusive
in terms of pricing, and having an accessory dwelling unit will allow for a long-time resident
in this instance to again meet one of the reasons why ADUs have been proposed, which is to provide
supplemental income for seniors as Mr. Webb eases his way into retirement. It also is another
issue as to why ADUs were implemented and the rules relaxed is to continue with the diverse
characterization of the neighborhood, which this property will do. And these used to be called
granny flats or, you know, mother-in-law suites, but ADU is the more common jargon right now.
So this is a letter of support from SOSNA, and this request is for a three-story addition above
an existing garage, a garage that has been there, as I said, at least 64 years, which is Mr. Webb's
age. And based on aerial photographs, we believe this property actually
And based on aerial photographs, we believe this property actually predates the code and the original zoning code, as the board knows, was implemented in 1933.
So at the meeting, I think it's worth looking through this letter.
Some people didn't like the fact it was four stories, although I'll show the board there are four story homes directly across the street on Webster Street.
uh some members questioned whether the bearing walls could could support three stories again
that that's a building permit issue and we'll have a structure on engineer on board for that
uh but in general it was well received a nine four three against and then as you mentioned at
the air outset mr chairman we do have a a plethora of signature from surrounding neighbors again
Mr. Webb has lived in a property for all of his adult life.
So he has strong relationships with neighbors, both on Webster Street and on Catherine Street.
So these are all the signatures.
And then I have an aerial photograph and then mark X where all the signatures came from.
As you can see, we have signatures on both sides of the property.
In fact, Mr. and Mrs. Rousseau are here today.
They've owned 21-28 for many decades.
and they asked to be in my office during this presentation.
So this is the front of the property to give everyone some perspective here.
This is Catherine Street where my cursor is.
This is the garage existing in the rear.
It looks like it's attached, but when I show you a top-down view,
you'll see there's separation between the primary residence
and the hopeful accessory dwelling unit.
This is Webster Street, which is the back end of Catherine Street.
We're looking south.
and then you can see there's four-story houses, a mixture of four-story houses
and three-story houses on the block, some of which have garages on both sides of our property.
Just some more photographs. This is looking now north. We're looking from Webster Street where my
cursor is. Catherine Street is at the top of the photograph, and this is the existing garage.
From this photograph, you can see that there are other garages on the block with what appears to be living units above.
There's one here, and I'll show you a close-up photograph of both these garages.
And there's also parking.
Most people who live on Catherine Street, instead of having a rear yard, they use it for parking because parking is at a premium.
Just another view.
And here's the top-down view.
This is 2130 Catherine Street.
it is a detached garage as are some others on the block and again you can see there's
parking on one side of the street and then there's parking at the rear of most of the
properties on catherine street this is a close-up view of the one-story garage
now we're looking uh eastbound on webster street four-story houses across the street
a zigzag garage just a closer view of the garage you can see here this is not really
a good view of the space that's there, but you can walk along the garage and get into
the rear yard if you need it.
This is now a view looking westbound, and the garage is in the distance.
I included this photograph to show you that there are other existing garages on the block.
Excuse me, on both sides of the street, actually.
And then this is 2142 Catherine Street.
This is the back end of 2142 Catherine Street, which fronts on Webster Street.
That was one of the two or three existing garages with what appear to be residences above.
This is 2115 Webster Street.
This has a separate address, believe it or not.
It actually backs on a property on Catherine Street.
These are pictures of the notices that we posted for the hearing.
And here are the plans.
I'm just trying to blow these up a little bit.
So I'll start with the frontside.
So we went in front of the Architectural Review Committee of SASNA, as well as the community group meeting, and we were able to tweak the front facade of the building to really give it a rich look.
It's nicely appointed.
This is a garage door with windows at the above to bring some light into the garage.
limestone, brick, veneer on the second and third floor,
and then a mansert roof with a touch of a setback
so it doesn't appear to give that Grand Canyon look
as you look down Webster Street.
This is the rear of the building.
This is a party board siding,
and then will be stucco at the base.
The floor plans, basically straightforward.
basically straightforward. The first floor will remain a garage. There will be a set of steps
The first floor will remain a garage
leading up to the living room and kitchen. The steps continue on up to a bedroom on the second
floor, excuse me, a bedroom on the third floor, and then a bedroom on the fourth floor. There is
no rooftop deck. We're trying to keep the property in context with the homes directly across the street.
This is our other pro forma documents you usually see in this application, our application for appeal, project information form, tax clearance, the zoning map, again, Catherine Street is all RSA 5, and that's also another requirement of having an ADU.
It has to be either RSA-5 or CMX-1.
Obviously, we conform to the RSA-5 zoning district.
This is the D, indicating Mr. Webb's ownership.
Our notice letter to everyone within 250 feet of the property and our certificate of mailing.
So that is the presentation.
So we're basically requesting that this ADU be approved for all the reasons I outlined at the very beginning, long-time resident of the neighborhood and of this property.
And as the board knows, if this is approved, Mr. Webb will have to have an affidavit and a deed restriction file indicating that he lives on the parcel of land.
He could either live in the single-family home that he lives in now, or he could move into this ADU, and he would comply with the requirements of the code.
And as I said, that has to be recorded with a Philadelphia recorder of deeds.
We are not altering the essential character of the neighborhood.
There's homes across the street that are four stories.
There's existing residences on Webster Street on the north side of the block, which this ADU hopefully will be erected on.
We're not impairing the development or latent error of either property on either side.
It is not detrimental to the public welfare.
We are in harmony with the code because, as I said, the code was relaxed to allow structures like this.
And we are in harmony with the desires of the community group that we appeared before.
So with that, Mr. Chairman and members of the board, I rest my case and I have my client adopt the testimony.
Sure. Why don't you bring Mr. Webb on?
Sure. Mr. Webb is to my right, your left. Mr. Webb, could you please state your name and spell it for the stenographer?
Okay. Mr. Webb, can you spell your name for the stenographer first?
H-E-R-B-E-R-T. First name, last name, W-E-B-B.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Webb, you sat here while I presented your project to the board, correct?
And if you had any chance to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct?
Same as your, yes.
Do you have any changes to what I said?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And Henry, I guess the first question, there's four stories right behind here.
Am I correct?
On Webster Street.
Absolutely.
All right.
All right.
All right.
Questions from the board.
Question.
What was the what was your maximum height still at 38? Yes, sir. That's Mr. Johns.
Thank you. I have a question. So one of the RCO's concerns was that the address was inaccurate.
So what would the address be of the new addition to ADU? Would it be a Webster Street address or it still would be Catherine Street?
We're going to we're going to still keep the same address because we're not subdividing this off.
Ms. Graham.
Okay, and I think, was that explained at the meeting?
Carefully at the meeting?
Because that's one of the RCO's concerns
were that it was labeled with the wrong address.
There should be a website.
I think that was Ms. Sucumba who maybe raised that issue.
We're going to keep the same address.
If I show you some of the other photographs
on that block of the existing garages,
This one kept the same address, 2142.
The one down the street has 2115.
Now, we're not intending to subdivide this
because if you subdivided it,
then he'd be able to sell it
and the deed restrictions want to prevent that,
as you know.
Okay, thank you.
Other questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney?
Hillary Emerson.
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Yes, Mr. Chair, I have a hand.
I have a hand up from Ms. Madeline Shacombo.
She has been allowed to speak.
Good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
My name is Madeline Shacombo.
S like in Sam, H-R-K-O-M like in Mary, B like in boy, A.
you swear or affirm to tell the truth
the whole truth and nothing but the truth
I swear or affirm
why don't you please
proceed and testify
okay we are
we're not opposed to
Mr. to the
gentleman building there
we just have our concerns
and I am a
co-coordinating RCO along
with Sassner
and I want to
I wasn't quite sure how I should write my letter in terms of asking that certain things be added.
So that's why I wrote a letter of non-support.
Like I said, we're not opposed to him doing it.
What we have very serious concerns about is the structure he wished to build it on.
I asked serious questions about him.
had he had a structural engineer
look at that
60-year-old garage that he
wishes to put a three-story
building on top.
So just so you know, if he's
successful with this, before
there's a permit, L and I will
handle that. L and I
will make sure that's done before
there's permits issued. Okay, well that was
not made clear at the meeting.
And Henry, you
agree with that, am I correct? Absolutely,
Mr. Chairman. Absolutely. Okay. That was not made clear. And therefore, I wanted to make sure about
that because students want them to be collapsing and taking other buildings with it. Okay. I agree.
And so that was why I wrote the letter in that way. But we have no objections to them building it.
All right. Thank you very much for taking the time to call us. We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, we have Ms. Brianna Wakefield. I've allowed them to speak at this time, sir.
Good morning.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
No further hands at this time, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I have a near neighbor here with me if they could be permitted to testify.
Which one?
Mrs. Rousseau, R-O-U-S-S-E-A-U.
Ms. Rousseau, could you please state your name?
Harriet Rousseau, H-A-R-R-I-E-T, R-O-U-S-S-E-A-U.
Do you swear or affirm or tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, Mr. Clinton.
Ms. Rousseau, where do you reside?
2128 Catherine Street.
And this is adjacent to Mr. Webb's property, correct?
And what is your position about the project you just heard presented?
I'm in agreement with the plans that are presented.
And how long have you lived at your property?
35 years.
Nothing further, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you very much. Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Sarah Bond with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single-family zoning.
The proposed dimensions conflict with the characteristics of the rear street, which is occupied by garages on one side and single-family homes on the other.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board deny the variance.
MI 2024-004-194-2130, Catherine Street, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Senator Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowan, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you, Mr. Clinton.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.
Right.
Number six, MI 2024-004-196, 5158 Leppert Street.
Zen Jin is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from the Frankfurt Neighborhood Advisory Committee with unenforceable provisors.
They'll be back in as a panel shortly, sir.
good morning good morning good morning counsel could you please state your name and spell for
the stenographer sure my name is zen jen z-h-e-n last name is j-i-n you swear or affirm to tell
the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth i do could you identify your client the
relationship to the property? Yes, my client is the owner of the property,
Leon Leandro del Rosario.
Our vice chair has a few questions, sir. Good morning,
counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate to his accuracy?
I do. Have you emailed in all the required documents
and exhibits as needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have. Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you. I'm going to share with the board the documentation we previously submitted.
Can the board see my presentation on their screen?
We can, sir.
Great. Thank you.
So we have submitted a copy of the refusal, the letter from the Frankfurt NAC RCO, photos, plans, and related documentation.
This is an application for use of this property as a two-family dwelling.
A little bit of history for this particular property. It was sold to my client some years
ago through the, let me pull up the deed, it actually makes it clear. So it was sold to my
client through the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. The property was privately owned
before that, but at some point it became dilapidated and was vacant for quite some time.
My client actually acquired the property from the Housing and Urban Development, and then
because of financial reasons, it took him some time before he was able to finally renovate
the property and get it back into operating status.
This property is actually abutted right next door by another duplex.
The way the property is structured, my client thought that it was, in fact, likely to be
a duplex.
at some point in the past. It had some separations. The basement is completely separate from the rest
of the property. This is the photo of the front of the property, and this is the photo of the
next door's two mailboxes. Across the street also is another multifamily duplex, along with
the child daycare a few houses down. Because of the way this property is set up, it does have
parking in the rear. It has a separate entrance to the basement, which is separate from the other
portion of the building. And the way the exits and entrance were set up, when he renovated back,
he renovated it as a duplex. And subsequently, it was rented out as a duplex. When he finally
decided to rent the second unit, one unit was rented first and the second unit came after,
The rental license application kicked back saying this is a single family house.
You need to legalize what you're trying to do here.
That eventually led to this application before the board.
As you can see, the property is renovated.
There was some substantial effort put into making the property livable again.
When we met with the Frankfort NAC, they did not have any objections to the use because
some of the neighbors reflected that their understanding is that this kind of duplex
has existed in the neighborhood for quite some time, and it's quite likely this property
was at some point possibly a duplex.
Regardless, their main concern with any duplex applications in this neighborhood is that
there's enough fire safety so that building permits, when acquired, would make sure that
the upper floor has proper safety. They did make a proviso, which again, I understand the board
cannot enforce. We will still follow through and do what was asked by the community. Again,
we did notify the community that the building permit process would also check for fire
extinguishers, fire rated walls, and those are items that would be part of the certification
of the property if it was approved for the use. So with that, the community gave us
non-opposition to the plans. The plans itself is very straightforward. It's a mutually accessible
basement section that would be used for utilities. And I'm going to zoom in for the board to see
more clearly. For utility storage, there is parking in the back. Trash can't be stored
inside the basement until it's needed to be brought out.
This property is only two houses down from the corner,
so it's actually not very difficult for the occupants to park in the back.
so it's actually not very difficult for the occupants to park in the back and then walk around
to enter the property and of course the first floor tenant would be able to enter from the back
the layout is that the entrance would be based on the front cover porch and then first unit
will come straight in while the second unit goes upstairs and would have occupied only the second
floor. And that's essentially the design of the property. It's a two-story structure.
There's no dimensional changes of any sort. So the building's footprint, light air impacts are
identical to what it was before. Again, with the neighboring property also being a duplex use,
and it's from the records of legal use, the community had no objections to our proposed
use in this case. My client is here to verify my testimony, and I'm happy to answer any questions
or redirect. Why don't you bring your client on? Sure. Leandro, can you please raise your hand
virtually to be identified?
They have been allowed to speak. Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
leandro del rosario please unmute wait to be sworn in morning sir
i don't know if he's having some technical issues with unmuting himself so so council
you're an officer of the court we will take your testimony questions from the board
um uh we go back to the plan for a second sure
there's an elevation here on the side as well yeah yeah i see it uh so this is proposed as
two two-bedroom units yes and the only the first floor has access of no no there's no access to
the basement only from the from the rear from the rear yes both actually have access to the basement
but it's only from the rear this is not a two-bedroom unit based on the layout there's no
living space that you can put a chair sofa anything in boat on both plans uh doesn't work
as a two two-bedroom units for me.
I mean, I understand the living space issues
that oftentimes is looked at.
I'm pretty sure if the board would want
to have it reduced by a bedroom,
we would not have an issue with that.
I can have my client also verify that as well.
So that would be your agreeable to two one-bedroom units?
yes we we would not be uh we would be agreeable to that yes
other questions from the board then do you know how big bedroom to like by square footage is
in each of these play on each of these plans um let me see if there's a
i didn't see it yeah i didn't see a chart listing the dimensions here some some architectural
plans would have that unfortunately this one does not um yeah i'm not unfortunately i'm not sure
of the it's eight by eleven so that this one's very small speed about it is so yeah 99 99 square
feet yeah my concern is that it looks like it's it's barely to code it also does not include a
closet or a window which are two of the legal requirements obviously it's not lni and you'll
have to go through l and i approval but there is a window uh well i understand the closet is
missing but there is actually window um for that room it's right here oh yeah yeah that is okay
yeah the questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
Yes, Mr. Chair, I have a hand up again from Strawberry Mansion Community Concerns. I have allowed them to speak.
It's not their area.
This is not their area.
This is in Frankfurt.
We'll have to get back to them later.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
No further hands at this time.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Sarah Baum with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman.
and Sarah Baum with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
In 2012, the zoning map was amended to RSA 5 at this location in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan.
The proposed use is consistent with documented prior use of this property.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board grant the variance.
In my 2024-004-196-5158 Leppert Street, I vote yes with proviso, one bedroom per floor of the first and second floor.
Michael Johnson, my vote is yes with proviso.
Excuse me, Mr. Chair, can I just clarify that proviso?
Can we just say one bedroom?
I didn't want to say like one, you know, one bedroom per floor because I want to make sure the basement's not involved.
So what do you recommend? One bedroom per dwelling unit.
OK, so I vote yes. One bedroom per dwelling unit.
Do we need to I'm sorry, do we need to add a no basement living onto that or no?
We can add no household living in the basement as well.
OK, so one bedroom per livable unit. Say it again, Hillary, one more time.
it's okay one bedroom per dwelling unit no household living in the basement
bedroom per dwelling unit no household living in basement i vote yes
michael johns my vote is yes with provisals
cheryl gaston my vote is yes with provisals
and i agree my vote is yes with provisals i went my vote is yes with provisals
thank you
thank you counsel
number 7
MI 2024
004-230-709
South Tevin 17th Street
Roger Perry is the attorney
there's a letter of support from
South of South Neighborhood Association
coming back in as a panelist
Mr. Chair
Mr. Chair
Good morning, Mr. Perry.
Oh, here I am.
Thank you very much.
I can share my screen.
Perry, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
My name is Roger Perry.
You may adjust my camera a little bit here.
R-O-G-E-R-P-E-R-R-Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you identify your client and their relationship to the property?
My clients are Jennifer Blaine and Michael Sussman, who are the owner-occupants of 709 South 17th Street through to Chadwick Street, and I'm representing them with regard to this application for a carport.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Morning, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you, counsel.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Okay, I'm trying to, oops, Zoom, where am I?
Ah, it disappeared.
Okay, I have it, but you don't have it, right?
It has a zoom screen as post attendee, but I don't have the video. Can you hear me?
We hear you.
Okay. Well, I don't know why the...
Our tech person, please, William.
Yes, you don't see share at the bottom of your screen?
where's the center green button and what it came up is post attendee zoom and i just have a big
screen that says zoom i need to get to that back to my video and share screen i'm sorry say that
again you just see what i have a screen that just says zoom post attendee zoom close that
um if are you on windows or mac uh this is probably windows all right so along the bottom
do you see another along the taskbar do you see another zoom icon or do you see two zoom like
like if you hover over the zoom icon on the bottom do you see the the two zoom screen zoom
screens okay i have zoom support that doesn't do me any good now apparently on the zoom screen
let me close that okay i'm back to uh my exhibits and
And do you see your Zoom icon on the taskbar?
Do you see your Zoom icon on the taskbar?
All right.
So, Mr. Perry, you have two cases with us right in a row.
So what I'm going to do is I'm going to go past you and come back.
So see if you can get that straight.
No, that's fine.
I'll reopen.
I'll restart the Zoom.
Thank you.
All right.
I'm going to call you back because you've got two cases right in a row.
Number 12, MI 2024, 004-288-2848 South 12th Street.
Pascual Calavita is the attorney.
There's a letter of support and opposition from the South Philadelphia Community Civic Association.
Mr. Perry, we'll be back to you.
You're going to have to go out, okay?
Thank you very much.
Mr. Colavito.
Mr. Colavito.
Jason, do we see him?
yes he's coming back in as a panelist now chair oh thank you lakisha
good morning good morning mr calavito could you please state your name and spell for the
personographer. Sure. Pasquale Colavita, P-A-S-Q-U-A-L-E, C-O-L-A-V-I-T-A, attorney for 2848S 12th Street, LLC.
Are you referring to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. Our vice chair has a few questions, sir.
Good morning, counsel. Do you agree to read the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
I do. Have you emailed in all the required documents or exhibits that's
needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing i have with the exception
of uh a document that i sent last night which were interior of plans we we had a um
understood i'm hearing about your screen thank you
As indicated, I'm the applicant for 2848 S 12th Street LLC regarding the property with the same address attached.
And what I will mark and move into evidence are exhibits A through K, starting with the deed, as well as the notice of refusal.
these have all been submitted uh with the exception again as um of exhibit f and i had
conversations with board counsel hillary emerson prior to this so this was initially a
application as you can see the d this was purchased in 2016 by my client
and the refusal it initially had two refusal had a dimensional as well as a use refusal
It's going to still have the same two refusals, but what we have done is in the proviso, what I can show is the architectural renderings.
And let's see, Exhibit G. After meeting with the local RCO, we had agreed to no longer do any construction on the property itself in terms of the previously proposed third story.
And the only thing that we're asking for at this point would be a two-family dwelling in a CMX1 zone, which is not permitted.
Also, the dimensional variance requested is due to a pre-existing non-conforming use.
as you can see this this is the actual property itself and it and it encompasses the entire
plot of the the deed
and we filed a so i guess the the hardship here is that we would have to tear down what it is as well
as if you look at what i'm going to do is i'm going to stop sharing this for one second i want
to go and share a different screen which would be the google view same exact thing but then
if you look at atlas this entire area is rsa 5 with the exception of the the two uh there's
three properties on i'll call it uh three blocks you got 13th street 12th street and 11th street
I'll call it three blocks. You've got 13th Street, 12th Street, and 11th Street. Between those two
between those two.
blocks, you have all CMX1. Across the street is, I forget what they have referred to, but
we used to call it Southern's Field. So, this is South Philadelphia High School,
their field right under here. And then you have Marconi Plaza to the west of it.
so what what uh mr bonforte the sole member of the llc is proposing is a two-family dwelling
right now presently on the previously on the first floor that used to be a a bar and that has
not been a bar for ages what mr bonforte also owns all of the green eggs cafes and he utilizes it
for storage of some of the equipment and like there right now to keep it in with the required use.
So I'm going to stop sharing this again, go back to our PDFs, and so this, again, is the proposed use.
This is what the second floor presently looks like, and the first floor is going to be proposed to be a single-family dwelling with the basement as existing for storage and utility and mechanical use only.
We did meet with the community group.
We did post, as required, on both sides of the property, being a corner property.
within the requisite time. We received a letter of support from the community group,
and as indicated, it keeps in character with the neighborhood. The entire neighborhood is,
in essence, their single-family homes, as well as if you go a couple blocks down,
there are some multifamily dwellings on corner properties and the like, but it is a residential
area to change it to to require it to be cmx and go back to say a bar was not a desire of the
neighborhood or the neighbors in in the area and it will the the i guess the bigger thing here is
that with this he'll be doing construction we'll be upgrading its look cleaning it up obviously
And again, just ask that this board approve this for it again to to one of the hardships here would with respect to the dimensional aspect of it would be that it would have to cut into the rear yard.
It's been there. I lived in the neighborhood for ages. Mr. Bufforte lived in the neighborhood for for quite some time.
I think it may be his whole life. As far as I recall, that property covered the 100%. This is
nothing that had occurred that was caused by Mr. Bonforte. He did not do any construction on the
property, nor did the previous client, I'm sorry, the previous owner. And the reason I state that
is because one of my other clients sold this property to him. So this property has been
in that condition and built in that way for multiple decades. Again, as far as I can remember,
I'll go back to the age of 10. So we're talking about at least 46 years that it was in that
condition. I used to play at the park right across the street. But again, just ask that this board
take that into consideration when making their ruling.
Can you bring your client on, please? Sure. He may be, it's either under William
Bonforte or it may actually be under my name also, because my secretary assisted in registering him.
Do we see his hand? I've been about to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, good morning, Board. My name is William Bonforte, W-I-L-L-I-A-M, Bonforte, B-O-N-F, as in Frank, O-R-T-E.
Do you swear or affirm that tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, Counsel.
Good morning, Mr. Bonforte. Did you have the opportunity to hear my testimony this morning?
I did.
okay do you agree to its accuracy and truthfulness yes and you if you were to testify would you have
Yes. And you if you were to testify, would you have adopted it as your own?
adopted it
I would. OK.
Questions from the board.
Just just a comment aside from the bit of a conflict between the entrance door to I believe it's the first floor unit.
Nicely laid out unit. Thanks for putting in furniture. Looks good in terms of a layout for two one-bedroom units.
Other questions or comments from the board?
I have a question about the basement access. I know you said it's retained that both the units are going to have access to the basement.
And how are they accessing the basement?
i i did not state that but mr um because i i honestly i don't know the answer to that question
mr bonforte can can discuss that portion of it thank you pat um there are existing
is an existing entranceway from the outside into the building that we will make available
to the tenants, individual secured space for storing some personal belongings, along with
a segregated area for the fire alarm and mechanical systems and heating systems, and also some
common space for some, like, bicycles and or some trash storage area.
It currently has a set of bulkhead doors with entrance.
And just to be clear, because I'm looking at your plan, those are that bulkhead entrances off Bigler Street through the Bilco doors?
That is correct.
Okay. And then the first of the confirming the first floor unit has two separate entrances.
The second floor unit only has the one entrance with the stair.
Yes, the second floor entrance is existing.
We are going to add, as I believe co-chair had expressed, a wider, unencumbered entrance for furniture, leaving the corner unit door there, so there could be a little bit of use of that front area as a bit of open space for the first floor.
Thank you.
Other questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Just briefly, Mr. Chair, in terms of the changes that have been made to the project since it was originally proposed, I do not think we actually need to stamp revised plans.
I think the changes can be addressed via proviso, indicating that the maximum number of units is two and that there are no changes to the existing structure.
Thank you. Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair. Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Sarah Bond with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
In 2019, the zoning map was amended to CMX1 at this location in accord with recommendations from the comprehensive plan.
The proposed use of dimensions will not cause detrimental impacts to the neighborhood beyond what normally be expected.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the variance.
MI 2024-004-288-2848 South 12th Street, I vote yes with proviso.
Maximum two dwelling units, no change to existing structure.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with proviso.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.
Teneda Graham, my vote is yes with proviso.
Iowa, my vote is yes with proviso.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with proviso.
Number 15.
Thank you.
Thank you, counsel.
MI 2024-004-297-4807-61 Westminster Avenue.
William Kerr is the attorney.
They're coming back in as a panelist, sir.
There is a letter of opposition from Mill Creek Advisory,
But Councilmember Gauthier has taken a position of support.
Mr. Kerr.
Yes, good morning, Mr. Chair.
Can you hear me okay?
I can.
Could you please state your name?
Why don't you move your screen?
That's great.
Could you state your name as spelt for the court stenographer?
Could you state your name and spell it for the court stenographer?
Yes, good morning, Mr. Chair.
Good morning, Mr. Chair.
William Kerr, K-E-R-R.
William Kerr.
I'm going to swear or affirm.
Yeah, go ahead.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
My client is HELP.
it's an acronym all capitals help h-e-l-p p-a roman numeral one and roman numeral two lp
our vice chair has a few questions for you sir okay
good morning counsel do you agree to read another refusal or stipulate to his accuracy
yes i do have you emailed them all the required documents that's needed to proceed with this case
five days in advance of this hearing i have except for i did not have the council uh the council
woman's um positioned so i believe but it sounds like you did receive that by email
from mr ambrose yes council please proceed and share this name
okay thank you um i am the attorney for again for help pa1 and 2 i have a representative of my
client. On today, Ms. Emma Colley, C-O-L-L-E-Y, so she's here, can answer any questions that come
up. Help PA1 and 2, my client, is an affiliate of a larger entity, and a larger entity's
business really is developing owning and managing affordable apartment units and those affordable
apartment units are typically financed under the federal low-income housing tax credit program
so on this site currently actually let me step back the client is actually a tenant
under a 99-year lease with an entity, a non-profit. Actually, HELP is a non-profit.
The entity that owns the property is Citizens Acting for Community Concerns. That's another
non-profit. HELP has had a 99-year lease in place with Citizens Acting since the late 90s,
97 or 98 and in that back when that at least was initially entered into help constructed 90
affordable rental units on the property there are 43 bedroom townhomes and then there's an
apartment building that that contains 51 bedroom units and those have been in operation since
the late 90s. Citizens Acting has its facilities on the other portions of the property,
and they actually have a health care community center with some associated uses that they do
there. Again, it's a health care-related community center is how they describe it.
There's also a lot of accessory parking.
Citizens acting use of the property dates back to a 1973 lease that they had with the school district.
It used to be a school district property.
And then in 1984, they obtained a zoning permit for their community health center.
Because HELP units now are 25 years old, they're in the process of refinancing so that they can renovate to upgrade.
and create moderate units for their tenants.
So this is really just a technical variance
because back in 1997 and 98, the lease was created.
And that's, again, it's a 99-year lease,
which is the equivalent of ownership.
But there was never a subdivision done.
The current financing team that's providing the financing
is looking for help to have a separate parcel of real estate.
So that's why we're here today to basically obtain subdivision approval so that we have a separate parcel of real estate so that the financing team is satisfied.
Now, I can start sharing my screen at this point if I'm authorized.
i'm not seeing that i'm authorized yet you've been promoted to panelist sir so that the greens
the green button should be at the bottom okay i've got it i just have to figure out which one this is
yeah i think that's it
okay are you seeing a screen it shows that we do we do see it sir yeah these this is my list
This is my list of hearing exhibits. I'm not going to read every one of them, but these are the exhibits that we've submitted.
of hearing exhibits, I'm not going to read every one of them, but the
I'm going to take you to, first of all, to the subdivision plan, which is tab five, and that's page 29 in this packet, because I think this will give you a better sense for what we're proposing.
Okay, so this is the – what I'm outlining here is the citizens' acting parcel, the real estate parcel pursuant to their deed.
This upper right-hand corner is a regular parcel in the upper right-hand corner.
That's the citizens' acting parcel.
You can see some parking.
There's some buildings on the site, some large – again, a large parking area.
back here. This irregular shaped parcel to the lower left is the parcel that HELP has under the
99-year lease. It's all, again, it's all currently part of the overall parcel. And what we're looking
to do is just create this irregularly shaped parcel as a separate parcel of real estate
so that the townhomes, the apartment building is in this area, and the townhomes sort of border
that are located along the perimeter.
The entranceway to the help parcel is through Wyalusing.
So we need the parcel to extend all the way to Wyalusing.
And if that's all we needed to do, this is all permitted as a right.
The problem is, is up in this upper left-hand corner along Wyalusing Avenue
is an existing two-story brick garage building that is used by Citizens Acting.
and there was no way to make that part of their parcel and still allow us to have the access that
we need so what we're what we proposed to do after looking at a number of options was basically just
to create a separate parcel for that garage building so that citizens acting could keep that
it's not subject to the lease it's still owned by citizens acting but when we do that um the lines
were drawn as tight as possible to maximize the efficiency of help getting its tenants in and out
of the property. So we basically just created the parcel line at the building. So doing that,
it created the four variances that are needed, including for lot coverage,
rear yard setback, and the other two variances which are listed.
So that's really why we're here. We're looking for variances for variances related to this, this parcel. It's an older building. It's a brick building. So it probably has some historic commission issues. If it were to be demoed, we don't want to demo it. And again, it help has no use for it. So it's going to be part of the citizens acting piece.
So that's essentially the gist of what we're looking for.
We're looking for the variances for parcel C so that we can create parcel A as a separate part of parcel of real estate for help.
That's the gist of the.
Show us some photos.
Would that be impossible?
Yeah, I do have some photos.
I'll scroll down a little bit.
So this is our first photo.
This is actually the street, Wyalusi Street.
This is the garage building that I mentioned, okay?
So you can see it's a two-bay garage.
It's an older building.
It's architecturally very interesting.
It's been underutilized by Citizens Acting.
But again, we don't want to tear it down.
They don't want to tear it down.
So that basically becomes Parcel C, that garage building.
And then this is the entrance into the help.
And you can see some into the help portion. You can see some of the townhomes. Again, they were constructed back in the late 90s, so they're relatively new, and we want to update them.
This is another citizens acting building that's on the site. And again, you can see the townhomes off to the left here.
another
view of the side of that same
building again then the townhouse is to the rear
this is a view looking along the
internal front of the townhouse units
this is the apartment building the 50 unit apartment building that I had referred to
You can see there's parking throughout the site.
Again, a view further down.
Again, a view further down.
This is the side of the apartment building.
This is the side of the apartment building.
And again, the townhouse has come to the end of this block here,
and then it turns to the right, going back towards Wyalusik.
This is a picture of another facade of the apartment building.
And then we have some posting photos, just confirming that we did do the posting.
Although I'm not seeing the posters, but these are also posting photos.
So that's, oh, here we go.
Here are the posting photos.
That's the entrance.
And we just have, we posted various sites because there are the two street frontages.
We posted a very, this is the list we got from the Planning Commission as far as who was notified.
We had two RCO meetings.
um one was virtual on october 14th and then there were some questions and concerns raised
so then we met in person on last week on november 4th um and the questions that came up from the
from the neighbors and the concerns that were raised related primarily to the fact that we're
going to be renovating the apartments and there were concerns about what will happen to the existing
tenants. And our position is, and what we're planning, what help is planning is that any of
the existing tenants that want to stay, they're going to work with them to either get them back
into the same unit when the renovations are done, or they will relocate them to another unit
on the site as long as they still meet the criteria that the affordable housing program
is administered by Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency. So as long as those tenants still
comply with the affordability requirements, then our intention is to get them back in.
But I think that was, we were having a hard time getting that across to the neighbors. And I think
that was the basis for their opposition. And again, Mr. Ambrose from the Councilwoman's office
was at the in-person hearing. He heard everything that went on. And we have a letter of support from
the Councilwoman here today. So that's the gist of the appeal. And we're happy to answer any
questions again miss collie's here and actually can we promote miss collie right now i'll just
have her adopt my my statements and if the board has any questions she can
they have been allowed to speak could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
hello my name is emma collie e-m-m-a last name collie c-o-l-l-e-y
fair or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do please proceed counsel
yeah good morning miss collie uh have you been uh on this hearing um since i started making my
presentation yes i have and you've heard what i've stated yes and everything was everything
accurate yes and do you adopt my statements as your own yes okay that's all i have again if there
Are there any other questions for Ms. Kali?
Questions from the board.
Yeah, I have a couple of questions.
I'm actually very familiar with this site.
And I know that there's been a number of issues and concerns that neighbors have had around security and things like that.
And this is a larger complex.
I know you showed some photos.
But it's really a large campus, right, with a number of buildings, including the townhouses and this building and the old, this was an orphanage.
So it has the old rectory and everything building that's been renovated.
So it's kind of hard just in the piecemeal to kind of talk about one aspect of this site without talking about the overall aspects of the complex and what that means to the surrounding community.
So I'm really kind of concerned that things that I'm hearing, that there hasn't been enough sort of engagement with the community. And I think that's the pushback that you're probably getting is because ownership issues and just a matter of understanding how this whole complex is going to work comprehensively, because there are a number of things that are going on and its uses.
so those those yeah mr mr johnson if i can respond to that uh we were we were actually
that was that was uh sort of one of the the threads that went through the two rco meetings
um and we were we were actually somewhat surprised by that that perspective because
um before i even got i was involved in this project um help met with
Before I even got, I was involved in this project, help met with various neighbors back, going back to 2022, or excuse me, back to 2020, I believe, Emma, and 2023.
Thank you.
So there were a number of meetings even before I got involved and before we had a, before we had a formal application and a process going.
And then we did have the two RCO meetings.
So we believe we've, you know, we've been more than accommodating to the community.
Even at the last meeting, there might have been 15 neighbors, including, and then Mr. Ambrose was there.
It wasn't a huge group, and there wasn't really significant opposition.
It was just really more of a misunderstanding.
And our perspective is we're not changing anything.
Everything is going to be staying the same.
There's nothing on the site which will be affected.
The site improvements are all the same. The only changes will be internal upgrades to the units.
And we explained that at both of the RCO meetings that I attended.
So we're not quite sure what else we could give the community that would make them more comfortable.
And as far as some of the issues that exist, as we listen to those, what those issues really, those did not appear to be issues emanating from the site.
They just appear to be neighborhood issues that internal renovations really are not relevant to the internal renovations that we're proposing.
Again, we're hopeful that the internal renovations will – one of the reasons that PHFA encourages projects to be rehabilitated after 20 or 25 years is this program, the Low Income House of Tax Credit Program, has been very successful because the units are very nice and it gives the residents, even though they don't own, it gives them a real sense of pride and commitment to the
complex and also to the
neighborhood. So that's why
PHFA wants us to update these.
So we think just having
that tenants in there that are really
happy because they have really nice
modern units benefits
the neighborhood, even though those
renovations are internal.
Thank you. I'm very happy with the
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit. I've worked with
the Housing Authority for $20,000.
So what's the
I mean, the other concern is what is the population that this development is going to focus around?
I know I believe that the townhouses are traditional family housing.
So what's sort of the plan?
And that's the concern, too.
Yeah, I can answer that.
And then Emma can clarify anything that you may want clarified.
The townhouses are actually three bedrooms.
So those are long-term, those are not transitional.
Those are long-term tenancy even today and dating back to the late 90s.
So those are long-term tenants.
They're three-bedroom.
So typically what we see in there are families, more than one person.
It's typically a unit that is suitable for a larger family-type unit.
the apartments on the other hand they were originally constructed under a city in addition
to the phfa programs a city program that did provide transitional housing who from folks who
were coming out of situations that just needed not permanent housing but just needed some
transitional housing so those are one bedroom units they're typically one maybe two two occupants
Um, and again, those were never since 98, those haven't been, um, occupied by long-term tenants. They, they come in, they, they get their, their feet under them. And as they work out those issues that, that caused them to be transitional, then, uh, there, there's assistance. Um, I don't know the details of the assistance, but there's assistance that gets them to more permanent housing.
now that's yeah that city are just women or is it is it mixed gender or
oh okay that's a that's a good point it was it was um traditionally it's been women single women
uh that have children okay that needed some transitional housing that city program
has gone away so this building we're not going to physically convert anything because they'll
all still be one bedroom but that city program doesn't exist so this will become
you know, basically one-bedroom apartments for whoever qualifies under the affordability
you know basically one bedroom apartments for
requirements. It's not targeted to transitional. It will essentially become long-term permanent
housing rather than transitional housing. And under the PHFA guidelines, we can't direct
that it be either women or men. It's whoever comes and meets the criteria that we have to
rent to them under all the various requirements and regulations. So that was something that the
neighbors did raise. But again, it's going from transitional for women
because that program went away. And now we're going to rent it to
folks that we can get into a one-bedroom unit. We can't put families in one-bedroom units. It's
Usually, again, one or two-person households.
Is there any commitment around from the city, from the homes?
From the what?
For the formerly homeless, are there any set-aside units for formerly homeless?
Emma, can you answer that?
Yes, hello.
I'd like to reiterate everything Mr. Kerr said.
And, yeah, just clarify and confirm for the mid-rise building with the 51-bedroom apartments, as he mentioned, those will be permanent housing with affordability restrictions, and they will all be under a HAP contract.
so they will receive referrals from the city of philadelphia um from from the clearing house
um you know for for folks to be referred um in those units and they'll have um section
eight vouchers via the hat all right thank you one of the other concerns that i'm sorry i'm
taking too much time probably on this but one of the other concerns that that i'm hearing and that
I understand is that there is a lot of prostitution that goes on between 48th and West while losing
and 52nd and while losing.
Gordensia just built a new facility on 51st and while losing, essentially.
Now we've got this sort of facility here.
Across from this facility is a graveyard that stretches from 48th Street to essentially 52nd
and Gerrard, 52nd and while losing.
So there's a stretch of sort of vacant land where all these sort of sort of tort things happen.
So that's one of the bigger issues, too, that the community has.
If this project moves forward, how is the owner and leasee going to address any concerns or issues that happen along that swath of street?
And this facility actually takes up a big chunk of it from 48th down to, what is that, 50th.
May I answer that one? Is that okay?
No. Yeah, go ahead. Go ahead.
Okay, great. Just a few points overarching and then we can follow in more detail.
Help is definitely aware of the safety and security concerns that you've raised and the community has raised.
Um, you know, as, as Mr. Kerr mentioned, we've, um, been working on at this property since the 90s. Um, we definitely want to help to address those safety and security concerns. So, um, as a part of this renovation project, there's a few things we're doing. Um, first, there will be, um, new, um, cameras and lighting installed, um, around the property.
Again, we may have to follow up with a specific plan that shows those locations, but that will enhance security on the site between the health property and the health center property.
Secondly, we'll be installing a gate into the help property.
Again, just to work on some of the security concerns in terms of entering the property for those folks who don't live there.
And then third, we are working with a great property management company, Arco Management, who is relatively new to the property.
as of about a year ago we've noticed that they have great relationships with the current tenants
there who will continue to reside there lots of eyes on the ground and we've seen improvements
Lots of eyes on the ground and we've seen improvements through that. It's an, in general, it's an ongoing issue that we're, you know, like I mentioned, definitely working to solve.
through that.
Thank you.
And it's really a neighborhood issue. And we're doing what we can to sort of protect and make sure none of those problems emanate from this complex. But it's a bigger neighborhood issue that we can do the best with those proposals that Emma just outlined. That's really what we can do.
And then we we protect our tenants and we also make sure that they're not bad actors.
We could always if we learned that someone was a bad actor, at some point you you have the opportunity not to renew that lease and get them out of the neighborhood.
So it's it's it just seems to me that there's it's a good idea to at least have another conversation with the community, because a lot of things that you raised with me are I think I'm still hearing those.
So and so I think it would be a good idea for you to meet with the community at least one more time.
That's my opinion. The question, I just have one quick question just in terms of impact.
So if this is granted, when you do the renovations, will the all the tenants have to move out and they'll be done like at different intervals?
You want to answer that? Sure.
So, just to step back and clarify, the renovations on the property have actually already begun. We closed on our construction loan financing and financing with PHFA and other entities in April of this year.
and then the renovations began shortly thereafter. As Bill mentioned, these are primarily interior
renovations and, you know, some brick repointing on the exterior of the buildings, things of that
nature. We are almost about halfway complete with those renovations and it is being done in a phased
approach. There's four different townhouse buildings. So those townhomes are being
renovated in a checkerboard effect where, for example, a batch of units will be renovated while
folks are temporarily moved elsewhere on the property, you know, a few doors down, for example,
and then they move back into their unit once it's complete. Similarly, in the
mid-rise building. Folks are moved to one floor of the building while another floor is being
renovated. So they do all, existing tenants all remain on the property during the renovation.
Thank you. Other questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
um just briefly mr chair um mr kerr i think i excuse me i'd emailed you earlier because the
applicant is the tenant in this case and it's a lot line um adjustment the board would just like
um a letter of authorization from the the owner because normally these cases are coming from the
owner not a tenant seeking to i understand they have a great i understand they have a ground lease
But if we could just have a letter of authorization confirming that they can they can subdivide, that would be appreciated.
OK, we can get that. And I will submit that, Ms. Emerson. Can you see I just flipped to a different document?
It's some provisions out of the lease that hopefully will address some of the concern to rate.
So Article three, the basic lease terms, this this is from the current effective lease. Land board leases to tenant.
the lease premises for the term, all right?
And it says, agree to provide exclusive possession
of the lease premises.
So we have exclusive possession.
We have all the rights to that.
And the term is through April 18th of 2023.
So basically, this is the equivalent of ownership.
And we're just doing what we need to do
address this.
It's really a post-closing issue now for the lender.
They want us to get this so that there is a separate parcel of real estate.
And then I have one other provision here.
Section 5.4
relates to approvals, permits, and licenses.
So tenant shall apply or cause to be applied for prosecute all necessary approvals related to, among other things, the use and occupants of the loose premises at our.
related to, among other things, the use and occupants of the loose premises at our total cost.
Mr. Kerr, Mr. Kerr, Mr. Kerr, Mr. Kerr.
Yeah, no, just go ahead.
Listen to me a minute.
Could you not just get a letter?
I can't, I can't.
I just want to try to.
Don't try to make your case now.
Just get the letter.
Okay, we'll get your letter.
Thank you.
All right.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
yes i have a hand up from travian travian ambrose i've allowed them to speak
yes thank you um travian ambrose could you state your name and spell for the court scenario
no problem travian ambrose spelled t-r-e-v-i-a-n ambrose a-m-b-r-o-i-s-e
you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Please proceed.
Thank you.
This is Shraven Ambrose, representing the Office of Councilmember Jamie Gaudier, City Hall, Room 316.
As the Councilmember for the 3rd District, Councilmember Gaudier supports the requested variance at 4807 to 61 Westminster,
which will allow the applicant to subdivide the existing lot into three separate parcels.
The office views this as a largely technical matter and marks a rare opportunity for the preservation and renovation of existing affordable units. Thank you.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call us. Is there anyone else in the first audience?
There are no further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Sarah Baum with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single-family zoning.
The appellant has supported their hardship claim with evidence of unique physical circumstances and conditions of the property.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Kerr, I'm going to hold a vote on this, and the case is closed,
other than a recommendation that you and your client attempt to meet with the neighbors one more time.
It'll be closed other than what we may receive from the RCO, and you will have a chance to respond, but everything else is closed in this case, okay?
Okay, except for the letter from the landlord also, correct?
The letter from the landlord, yeah, that's the administrative issue.
All right, thank you very much, sir.
Okay, very good.
Thank you for your time, everyone.
Thank you to your client.
Thank you.
Okay, thanks very much.
Take care, everyone.
All right, number 17.
I'm going to go back. 2024-004-319-2922 South Juniper, Denise McGee.
They will be rejoining as a panelist, Mr. Chair.
Okay, you can hear me?
I can most certainly please turn your screen on how are we making out with that computer
I share I switch to my work computer so I'm hoping this is the window right you're just
just for the record state your name one more time it's um Denise McGee uh and start your
presentation sorry that's fine start your presentation okay I can share um okay so
I'm interested in getting a deck put on to the back of my home. And there is, I want the deck
the exact same size as my neighbor's. And because there was a change in the walls, I guess that
there's a three foot now, you have to go back three foot. And I'm asking for an exception to
that and just have the deck the same size as everybody else's on my block. So this is the
back of my block so you can see everybody else's deck i know these two neighbors just got the
three foot exception so that's what um this uh it's just what i'm requesting and um how many
decks are back there do you know um i mean i'm at the top of the street so there's only one other
deck um besides these ones present here all right um and you went to the rco i'm sorry
you went to the rco meeting i did and i got a uh they're in favor of you right yes
okay um you also have a petition of 21 signatures yep i have the petition right here
you have you have possible drawings what it's going to look like is that it there show us that
so this is my neighbors this is the deck and then um this is uh let me see this is kind of
what it's going to look like um this is just an example um but yeah i have the architect and these
But, yeah, I have an architect and these are the drawings.
are the
Questions from the board?
Can we go back to the pictures?
This is back in my home.
yeah that one is that yeah to the to the right this the one with the uh garage there
that's yours right this is mine right here yeah right here the one there in the middle okay so
is that what to the side and I can't it's dark so are those
garages or what what is that under the deck that there right here yeah but the the um
it's no yeah another yeah yes that is a garage door yes okay
so no not your garage door where where the deck is right here yes
Yes. What are those openings there? Right here is our driveway. I mean, our back door. Is that
where you're asking? Yes. Again, that's how we get out. That's our, yeah. And then there are the
openings that are next to that. What is that? Is that a car parked like under the deck? Yes.
oh okay but they're not but it's not doors there or anything it's no there's no garage doors here
no all right okay thank you it looked like it looked like there were like doors there or
something that would be yeah no i'm trying to see if i have a better view but no okay all right
thank you other questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emerson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes i have a hand up from brianna wakefield i have got them to speak
hi could you please stay oh you just state your name for the record yes mr chair brianna wakefield
you've already been sworn yes and council president johnson does support this project
Thank you very much. We appreciate your time. Anyone else in the first audience?
No further hands, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Sarah Baum with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential multifamily zoning.
The proposed use and dimensions of the proposed deck, excuse me, single family zoning.
The proposed use and dimensions of the proposed deck are consistent with nearby properties.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Zoning Board grant the variance.
Thank you.
MI 2024-004-319-2922 South Juniper Street, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Carol Gaston, my vote is yes.
Sonata Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowan, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Thank you.
you have your votes thank you so much all right um let's go back to number seven mi 2024 004
230 709 south 17th street roger burry
okay let's see i've got master street up i got screen up all right i i i i need seven 17th right
Okay, here we go.
Can you see that?
We don't.
Just trying to figure out how to...
Okay, it says shared. Can you see that?
We do not, sir.
I'm sorry?
we do not we do not okay uh
let me see share screen
not you not whiteboard not
William, is there anything we can offer?
William, is there anything we can offer?
No, once he says
Once he says shit, he...
he selects share screen, he has to select
what's needed to be shared.
on my screen?
I just need to share it.
I'm just trying to find
share screen button here
the share screen button should be at the bottom
in the middle
my whole screen takes that up
I'm just trying to
Okay, it's on mine, it's not on yours. I'm trying to find the share screen button.
Harry, did you say you had the other case that you had up?
Yeah, I'm just trying to find the share screen button on my case.
So you're looking at the Zoom window, correct?
Yeah, I'm on Zoom.
At the Zoom window, and then at the bottom you see something like, you know, chat, raise
hand, share.
I'm on the button.
Click that.
There you go.
Okay, thank you very much. Okay, it was over to the right. Thank you. I need to expand this somehow. Okay. Okay, there we are. Are we good?
yep all right south 17th street roger perry representing uh the owners uh jennifer blaine
and mike sussman jennifer's here with me um the deed and so forth uh this is let me give
you an example of the down to okay so if i can find the uh okay so this is what it looked like
before it was destroyed
after it was destroyed by a fire
why don't you
let us see the fire
so two years ago this
parking area was
destroyed by a fire and that triggered
an application
this was a
a property that went from 709
South 7th Street Street through to Chadwick
Street. And
Chadwick Street had
an RM1
and 709 South 17th Street
is RSA 5.
So the bottom line here is that
it's applied
under the
let me get this off
the refusal
was because in an RSA 5
you can't have this particularly
their uh parking area so we had to apply for zoning to get the parking uh approved
and so uh the refusal was based on that as the deed
mr perry why don't you show us what you want to do yeah what we want to do
is destroy the parking there's a notice let me come down to the plans
here we are okay so this is what we want to do
uh this is going to be a uh carport area that's going to uh access out to
Chadwick Street and so forth uh here it is explain to me you want a carport that will
access a garage no it's a carport instead of the former garage it's going to have a garage door
but because it's going to have a different topic and not be completely enclosed the LNI calls it
a carport but it will have a traditional garage door facing Chadwick Street and so here's the
house and here's the carport area this was the area that was destroyed by the fire in 2022
too. So I was just
trying to come back and show
and just trying to see.
This is Chadwick Street.
There's other parking areas on Chadwick
Street, garages and so forth
and so on. I was just
trying to hear where the fire was and so
forth, the postings
and whatnot. So essentially what
my clients, Jennifer and Mike,
want to do is restore the parking area
that accesses onto Chadwick
Street. And in order to do that,
they need a variant. This is indicated that we posted both of it. We have a letter, as Mr. Bergman notes,
that we posted both of it uh we have a letters as mr bergman notes uh from uh sasma street
um from sasta i'm sorry uh that is in support of this uh restoration of the carport area
this will be a new garage door here very similar it's not going to be this this is the neighbors
and they have a roll-up we're going to have a roll-up full panel garage door here
um and that's essentially uh the presentation i have jennifer here uh to adopt the testimony
all the postings all the meetings took place and pursuant to that there was you know mr perry
let me ask you a question is there any other carports is there any other carports on that
block yeah there are garages uh they're not called as i said i know there's garages but
are there carports on that block yeah i'm not sure because i didn't go down and look
particularly. Let me look and see what the
I want to bring your client on. I'm sure she knows.
Yeah, sure. Jennifer knows. Jennifer, are they there? Can you raise your hand?
They have been allowed to speak.
Hello. Yes. Hi. Jennifer, could you please state your name and spell for this
stenographer? Yes. Jennifer Blaine.
And that's J-E-N-N-I-F-E-R.
B-L-A-I-N-E.
Or do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Hi, thank you.
Jennifer, did you hear my presentation in brief?
Yeah, was it true and correct as presented, and you could adopt it as your testimony if you testified?
Okay, what kind of parking exists on Chadwick Street?
And I have a couple photographs up here.
When you finish your construction, it's going to look like a garage door facing Chadwick Street and essentially will look like a sealed off area. Is that correct?
That's right. From Chadwick Street, it would look like it's sealed off.
Okay. And it's open off to the back of your house at 709 South 7th Street. And Chadwick Street has other similar off-street parking in a couple of garages?
yes to if if we're standing uh at the back of my property to the right which is 7-11
they have a roll-up door right here um but on the other side of the roll-up door it's just an
open space that would be similar for us but we wouldn't be getting a roll-up door we would just
be getting a uh what looks like a garage door but on the other side it's it's open space it's just
the overhang for the and it will have essentially a a roll-up multi-panel uh okay let me see if i can
okay and it's going to have a roll-up
it's going to have this
roll-up garage door facing Chadwick Street. That's right.
Okay. And this is the same location that the parking was
located before the 2022 fire? Correct.
In fact, you're using the same cement pad and some of the bracing
and construction of the carport? Yes. Okay. And you have an
architect who's working with L&I on this. That's right.
you can see um the architect there it's black dog architects okay thank you any questions from the
board questions from the board so is this it's a garage door but there's no garage is that what
you're saying right yes so um you could see from the plan there would be um you know on either side
of that door it would be wood i'm not great at describing it but that's so that you could then
put the garage door uh there so that that then uh lifts up for us coming and going and then it
could seal off the back of our um property which right now is not sealed off ever since the fire
and this is owner occupied and you can just access this from walking out the back of your house
so behind the garage door is the yard
right oh well in front of that cement pad would be the yard yeah
so you have the garage door which faces Chadwick Street you have the parking space
and then you have the yard here right
the questions from the board
Is the concrete pad existing?
is the concrete pad existing yes and even with the fire there's no changes that you have to make
to the existing concrete pad right um it's i'm not sure if it's anywhere in the documents but
when the fire happened ellen i came out and said it was an unsafe structure because everything was
charred so um of course we removed everything but they um agreed that the the pad the cement pad
good and the posts are still good so we took off everything that was unsafe and we're hoping for
approval so we could just add this back on and you submitted that to ellen i to your architect
that this was yes yes and they approved it yes
comments from our attorney hillary emerson not at this time mr chair so comments from the virtual
audience i do not see any further answers the chair planning commission
thank you chair bergman sarah bomb with the philadelphia city planning commission
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single-family zoning.
Multi-family zoning.
The proposed use and dimensions of the proposed carport are consistent with nearby properties.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the zoning board grant the special exception or variance.
Excuse me.
That is a variance.
Thank you.
MI 2024-004-230-709-South 17th Street, I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowyn, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
Curry, please stay on.
So MI 2024-004-287-5530 Master Street.
mr perry is the attorney there's a recommendation of opposition no explanation from hmc squared
mr perry you've already been sworn just for the record state your name
roger perry p-e-r-r-y i'm representing uh the owner of 5530 master street
could you identify the owner please yeah the owner is actually the llc called heavy remodeling
Construction LLC and the owner is a sole owner and that is Hervé Anoué who is also here today
available as a witness. Our Vice Chair has a few questions. Yes. Good afternoon, Counselor. Do you
agree to waive the reason of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy? Yes, we do. Have you
emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to proceed for this case five days in
of Anthony's hearing? Yes, we have. Thank you, counsel. Please proceed. You've already shared
your screen. Okay, thank you. I'm going to borrow a reference to Mr. Jinn's presentation. This is
almost an identical presentation to Mr. Jinn. This is a property that Hervey bought.
Let's see, the deed was, let me scroll down to the deed, the refusal. He bought this property in 2022
in September. He believed
as Heavy Remodeling LLC,
he believed the history
of the property when he was told that it was
a duplex. This was originally
built as a duplex
back in, I'm going to
scroll down here,
in the 60s.
he shows the photos of it as you're talking.
Yeah, let me go back to, well, let me, it's clockwise, I guess.
Okay, so you bought this property, and the neighboring property was also a two-family and so forth,
and this was set up as a beginning renovation of the property.
This is the property across the street.
This is the property at 5538, we're at 5530.
is his two family. So 5530, he believed was appropriate as a duplex, but it was not. He
started the renovation, this is the rear yard, and this is the front. So he started the renovation
and the family was moved in. He went to get the rental license for two units. They said, no, no,
this is still an RSA 5, a single. So he had to get a zoning variance to put in a second unit here
and so forth. So right now it's essentially been both constructed as to one unit and under construction.
uh both constructed as to one unit and under construction to be finished as the second unit
but that being said uh let me see if i can
okay blow this up
so what he's doing here and he initially uh this is a basement and two-story property he wants
the and he's begun and i had some photographs of the interior
All of this construction and so forth in the basement is just set out of storage and so forth. No living quarters to be in the basement. Now, I talked to Herve after Mr. Jinn's presentation, and I said, look, these bedrooms are small.
Would you agree to make a larger one bedroom than Hervé has agreed that if the board accepts this, that they would have a proviso of making each floor only one bedroom?
Because right now they're 112 square feet up to 177.
They do have closets and they do have exterior windows, but it's still, as the board member has noted, they're going to be smaller bedrooms and so forth.
So this is what it looks like in terms of the architectural plans.
I do have some.
Let me put those up and see if I have those.
This is the interior photos that we were asked.
They each have, I don't know what that is, and some of it has not been completed and
so forth.
This is the basement area, which is not going to be a living area.
That's where the storage is.
That's where the utilities are and so forth.
This is a unit that's been completed. It has a completed kitchen and bathroom and so forth. But he's asking that this be approved as a duplex. We sent out all the notices to everybody. I'm thinking we sent out 154 notices.
The only people who appeared at the hearing were members of the community board and so forth.
They said that they preferred to have this as an RSA 5 single family.
That would be problematical in terms of, you know, having to reconfigure it now, have separate entrances off of the porch and so forth.
The bottom line is, is that.
Could you show the front porch?
Yeah, sure.
let me uh oh i am front porch is on let me get the
uh let me get
okay let me see what we got here
can you go right to the photos please those are the notices you sent on 154
and we did that you know i'm coming down with photographs here
are there two separate entrances on the front porch i don't see that yeah entrances are
split after you come in. This is the front porch. Oh yeah, but I thought you said there was two
entrances on the front porch. No, off of the front porch, I'm sorry. The entrances as per the plan
show that there's an immediate entrance into the first floor as you come in, this entrance right,
and then there's a stairs going up with a separate entrance for the second unit. That's
shown on the plans that were here before. This is a rear yard. How many duplexes on that block,
mr perry uh only two that i could find the 5538 and while i was in this block i was on the same
side of the street and then 5530 was originally set up as a duplex this is across uh from 5530
this is a multi-family uh this is also this block but there's a street you know a small street in
between i got it why don't you bring your client on please yeah sure hervey are you there can you
raise your hand this was 55 34 so that was a duplex so 55 30 has been built 55 34 55 38 were
duplexes uh tax clearance you there herve yes i'm here okay could you please state your name
is spelled for the sonographer? My name is H-E-R-V-E, last name O-N-U-O-H-A.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do. And Hervé, did you hear my presentation about the
existing units and the construction that's underway? Yes, I do. Okay, and was it true
and correct as far as I presented it? That's true, yes. Okay, and would you adopt it as your
And would you adopt it as your own testimony if you testified under oath?
own testimony if you testified under oath? Yes, I would have.
Yes, I would have.
Okay. Is it true that you heard Mr. Jinn's presentation about making sure there's no living quarters in the basement and making each unit one bedroom as opposed to two bedrooms?
Yes, we discussed that. Yes, I heard him.
Would you agree to a proviso to modify your plans accordingly?
Yeah, I would. Yes, I would definitely do.
And all the bedrooms have closets and windows as well, correct?
That's correct.
And the units have separate entranceways after you come in off the porch?
Yes, that is correct.
That's the presentation.
I can answer questions.
You too?
Questions from the board.
Yes, I have a couple of comments, actually.
This is a great photo because it shows an entrance to the basement that doesn't have a window next to it.
But then there's a later photo that shows the entrance to the basement with a window clearly right next to it.
In addition to that, the floor plans that you presented show the basement with a full bathroom.
So I'm getting, it doesn't seem genuine that there's no intention that there would not be a living space in the basement.
Yeah, we definitely want to restrict that.
This property was bought as already under renovations by Herve in 2022.
And so a lot of the plumbing and everything was already in, but he intends.
So this photo, I don't mean to cut you off, sorry.
So this photo is from when?
No, we just took the photos.
The board asked us to present the photos.
So some of these photos were from before, and some of them were just from the last week.
You say before.
What does that mean?
Herve, do you know these photos old?
May I ask?
When I purchased the property, the original owner already done majority of the work.
I'm a licensed contractor in Philadelphia for about 13 years.
So it's when I came in, I purchased the prize and I purchased the building.
And when I was going to LNI to get the curb, that's when I realized that this was changed in 2009 from two units to single units.
The bathroom in the basement and everything was already existing there.
So what we did is just do the cleanup and painting and knowing very well that once we go through this running, we will be able to get the permit.
No, there is no intention of using the basement. It's for the storage, you know, such as bicycle equipment, snow equipment and all that.
So you put the window in next to the door?
No, that's existed.
So that's my question. So when was this picture taken?
this picture is a window next to the door that then you show a picture later on that shows
i'm not sure if it's the same building because for the existing forever is always have the
window and you can you slide down to the to the other photos please oh that's a separate photo
let me put those up there that's not my that's not the building this is example of other one
that one street is not okay okay this is it here this is what they uh space the basement you see
a window here no that's that's not a window in the basement that's a no no the pictures you have
pictures of the front of the building that's all i'm trying to mr perry he wants the picture from
the view outside yes this is not no that's not the house this is not the house mr perry sure
55 30 master street yes that's what i'm saying this is not sure this is not the same picture
that we just saw before there's nothing this thing been existing even that window is part is broken
that's how it existed okay i have done work i have no more questions any other questions from
the board yeah i have a question so when you when you purchased a property you had a kitchen in the
on the second floor and the first floor yes ma'am but unfinished and even when we went when i called
the people they was able to put only the first floor or electricity yes man that's that's true
or electricity yes ma'am that's that's true that's they have that already
that's
other questions from the board
questions from our attorney hillary emberson
not at this time mr chair questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any further answer mr chair planning commission
thank you chair bergman
uh in 2021 the zoning map was amended to rsa 5 at this location in accord with recommendations
from the comprehensive plan the proposed use with documented excuse me the proposed use is
consistent with documented prior use of this property the city planning commission recommends
that the zoning board grant the variance uh mr perry i'm going to hold a vote on this till
next wednesday at 9 30 a.m okay we're going to have a chance to talk to the other board members
but we will vote next wednesday at 9 30 a.m thank you very much okay thank you um sure all right
is there anyone in the virtual audience whose 9 30 case has not been called
i do not see any hands mr chair okay see everybody at 2 p.m thank you thank you
Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Bill Berger, and I will be chairing this afternoon's meetings.
Before we start, beginning with the December 4th hearings, any documents or other information that parties wish to submit to the ZBA for hearings must be submitted through the ZBA's new online upload tool, ZBA Case Documents Submission.
Information about how to access and use the submission tool will be included with hearing notices and zoning posters.
Please note that the applicant's documents are due five calendar days prior to the hearing.
Documents submitted by any other party should be in at least 48 hours prior to allow sufficient time for processing.
In addition, the following information should continue to be submitted through email only.
and not through the Upload Tool, requests for continuances, withdrawals, reconsiderations,
and amended refusals, as well as requests by attorneys to enter or withdraw appearances.
If you have any questions about the ZBA Case Document Submission Tool, please contact
RCOZBA at phil.gov. Thank you. With me today is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid.
President, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, Cheryl L. Gaston.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, Tanetta Graham.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member, Michael Johns.
Chairman.
And our board member, Taya Nguyen.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you.
Also present is our attorney, Hillary Emerson, and our executive director, Ian Haggerty.
Here's our virtual format.
The proceedings are being recorded. With your participation, you agree to be recorded.
A video will be available by contacting ZBA Executive Director at phil.gov.
For our court stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating via phone, press star 9 to raise your hand and star 6 to unmute.
and mute. To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548. Leave your email address
and the address to the profiting question. Finally, the question and answer box on the
screen is not for testimony. All questions should be directed to our ZBA Executive Director at
phil.phil. Let's look at the days this afternoon's schedule. Number seven.
7. MI 2024-004-765, 1624 North 26th Street. That case is continued.
Number 13.
I 2024 005 526 that case 406 to 08 Jefferson Street that case is continued attorney moving party.
Are there any other requests for continuances?
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. This is Jason Hand. Once again, I will be the co-host for the day.
This is Jason Hand once again.
I have a hand up from Ms. Lisa Clark. I have allowed them to speak.
Why could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Hello, can you hear me?
Yes, I can. Please state your name and spell for the stenographer.
Lisa Clark, L-I-S-A-C-L-A-R-K.
Hey, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
What case are you interested in?
This is the case from the House on 5222 West Columbia Avenue in Philadelphia.
That's number 15 on the list, Mr. Chair.
Could you tell me what's your issue with the case?
are you ready to go on lisa i'm i'm trying to get to my um i can't get to it my um
my presentation all right do you need a continuance i beg your pardon you need a continuance
what's a continuance in other words we'll hear your case on a different day
No, Mr. Chair, I think, Ms. Clark, when we call your case, you'll be promoted to a panelist and then you'll be able to share your presentation. You cannot do that right now.
Okay, no problem. Okay.
Is there any other requests for continuance?
Yes, I have a hand up for my Charbonne Anderson. I will allow them to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Charbonne Anderson, C-H-A-R, B as in Boyd, O-N-E, A-N-D-E-R-S-O-N.
Where or from to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Yes, Chairman.
What case are you interested in?
The case is 5558 Croson Street.
Is that your particular case?
Yes, that's my particular case.
That's number two on the list, Mr. Chair.
Well, we have no exhibits. This is the sixth listing.
So that's why I wanted to get a continuance. I was having like a debate basically with an attorney.
So I want to hire counsel and probably revisit some other provisional issues and everything as well.
Look, this is the sixth time we've had this case. If you're going to have to hire another attorney, you're going to have to start over.
We just can't go on any further with this one, okay?
So if you get an attorney, he'll tell you what to do.
But, you know, this case is just too many times, and we're going to dismiss the case today, okay?
MI 2023-003-244-5558, Crossin Street, I vote to dismiss.
My vote is to dismiss.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is to dismiss.
my vote is to dismiss
thank you
okay we're going to go to our add-on list
number one
MI 2024-004-290-21
wall street the board will vote on this matter upon receipt of the signed lease requested at the
hearing number two mi 2024 004 130 3700 to 40 kensington avenue i vote no michael johns
my vote is no
tennetta graham my vote is no
ishmael shaheed my vote is no
number number three mi 2024 005 487 34 to 40 south 11th street i vote yes
michael johns my vote is yes
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes.
We're going to go to our regular list.
It's going to start with number 10, MI 2024, 005, 511, 1128 O'Neill Street.
Leanna Fon is the listed owner.
This is a pro se case.
Thank you.
Ms. Fahn?
Leigh Ann Fahn has been promoted to penalist.
Good morning.
Good afternoon.
I'm sorry.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Hello.
Could you turn your video on, please?
Good afternoon.
Could you please state your name?
It's spelled for the court stenographer.
Leanna Fahn.
L-E-A-N-N-A.
Last name is Fahn.
P-H-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Our vice chair has a few questions for you.
good afternoon ma'am have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's
needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing yes i did thank
you you can proceed and share your screen okay give me a second please with the green
button on the bottom. Can you see my? It said you're starting to share. Yep, it's up. Yep.
Okay. And this is my exhibit.
Give me a second.
So I'm a little bit nervous.
You don't have to be nervous. So you're requesting a visitor accommodation. Am I correct?
Yes, yes. So my proposal is to ask the city of Philadelphia to grant me visitor accommodation for existing structure.
And the neighborhood description is at the corner of O'Neill and Durant.
And it's between the front street, north front street and second street in the Northern Liberty section.
the this is the size and the site plan of the property next one is the existing lot that where
is located on the map the next screen to have is this is a deep map it's showing the north and the
south side and this is the scale and the where the part the blue square is where the property is at
It's between O'Neill, Howard, and Hancock, and between Girard Street.
It's at this corner.
We have your tax clearance.
That's your posting.
Am I correct?
And then here I'm going to go through the interior and exterior photo of the property.
Let me ask you a question first.
What happened when you went to the RCO meeting?
That was on the 7th of October.
What happened there?
I present, delivered the presentation to the community there.
And they, after the presentation, I had to leave.
And then they'll vote.
And I believe the organizer sent in the documentations to the city of the vote.
I don't know what the voting voting is. Yeah, I don't I don't I don't think we have that yet.
Am I correct, Hillary? That is correct. The council office did not have it either.
All right. So proceed. Just want to see where we stood with that. OK. OK.
So the the home style is is a Trinity. Trinity style is the the staircases whirl around from the bottom of the basement all the way up to the third floor.
Um, so, uh, it has four room, uh, two bedrooms, one bath.
It's 862 square feet.
Um, the, it's, uh, the camera is above grade.
Um, well, why don't you show us the photos?
Show us the photos.
Show us the photos of the inside and outside.
So this is the, in front of the street.
This is the property and this is the, uh, alleyway.
that's different and this is the in the back patio probably and this is
back patio of the property and this is the north view of the house
and next one is the south view of the property
this is the unfinished basement this corner that's behind this door is the half bath
half bathroom and this is the basement half bathroom inside next one is the living area
this is the entrance right after you come in the front door this is the kitchen
and then it's just a second picture of the the kitchen and this door is to go outside to the patio
next one is the first bedroom the bedroom number one the door as you see on the right hand side is
where the staircase is is that and all the way at the bottom I mean all the way in the back that is
the entrance to the full bath.
This is the inside of the full bath on the second floor.
Next one is the second bathroom on the third floor.
There is no bathroom. It's just a room and with a staircase all the way up to the top.
Let's have a flat roof of this house.
so that is the um the interior and the extra photo of the of the house have you have you
already started how long have you had this property um since june of this year and have
you rented it yet i have big problems with renting it because of the economic no i'm saying have you
use it as an airbnb yet no i have not i want to write the book okay okay all right good good good
good good all right questions from the board
so so at the rco meeting do you were at the rco meeting right yes yes i was do you remember what
the vote was or the conversations and the issues that came up according to their policy um they
I have to leave. Then they will discuss about the presentations and each of the members, they will cast in their vote.
And then the organizer will submit the paperwork.
So after the meeting, I have to draft the House policy for guests, and I did send that to them too.
So let's say if I'm going to rent it out, these are my policy, make sure that guests respect their neighbors and make sure it is quiet as well.
Okay, thank you.
Questions to the board.
Do you know if there's any other visitor accommodations on that block?
I heard, just hearing it from rumor that there are, but I do not know that it is formally or legally approved.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And why do you want to use the property for visitor accommodation?
When you bought the property, were you planning to live in it, rent it out?
Yes, I wanted to do a long-term rental, and I also want to live there too
because it's in a great location.
As soon as I saw the house, I loved the location.
and I have my sister live five minutes from that from where the property is at too but then
I have a hard time renting it out and I hardly have anyone renting it my
mortgage is way higher than what I have lowered the rent down to I keep lowering it but then I
couldn't find any good renter that quality i mean qualify um to fit uh to get the place and even
open up for section a too but unfortunately um due to the trinity style um it's just not work
for a lot of people unfortunately and i thought of doing the visitor accommodations which is mean
allowed me it's all be it would be furnished and it would also allow me to live there when i don't have
And it would also allow me to live there when I don't have a renter, when I don't have anyone living there, too.
a renter
Thank you.
Other questions to the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any hands, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
The Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission, A-M-Y-B-O-Y-D.
Do you swear or affirm the tell-the-truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
The Comprehensive Plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing residential single-family, RSA-5.
The plan has not shown that there are unique physical conditions or circumstances that would prevent the property from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
Planning Commission recommends the board to neither request a variance or visitor accommodation.
Ms. Fahn, this is what we're going to do.
I'm going to hold this until next Wednesday.
We're going to vote at 2 p.m. because we believe that the RCO is sending the paperwork, but the councilman doesn't have it, and we don't have it.
So once we see where the RCO is, we'll let you know we're going to vote on this next Wednesday at 2 o'clock, okay?
Okay. Should I email to remind the organizer?
You can, but I tend to think that they're in the process of doing it.
But why don't you do that? You could do that too. It would be helpful.
Okay. Thank you very much. And thank you for your presentation.
Thank you so much.
And Mr. Chair, just to note the record is closed except for the RCA letter.
And if Mr. Fon, excuse me, Ms. Fon, if there's something that she wishes to respond to in that letter.
okay thank you okay thank you thank you all right have a good day thank you to you too
so number 15 mi 2024 005 563 5222 west columbia avenue lisa clark is the owner applicant
need to recuse myself yeah michael johns is recusing himself
Recommendation support from Parkside Association of Philadelphia vote was three to zero.
So I may have a system, please.
Ms. Clark.
Okay, they're coming back in.
Thank you.
Ms. Clark?
Now they should be able to hear you.
Hello?
Hi Ms. Clark, how are you?
I'm good. How are you? All right. I think I've already sworn you in. So just for the record, state your name. Lisa Clark. And this application is to enclose the front open porch under the existing porch roof as part of the existing attack structure for continuous use as a single family household living.
The proposed enclosed porch with zero setback is prohibited in the RSA 5 zoning district, whereas the maximum occupant area in the RSA 5 zoning district is 75% and 75.78% is proposed.
So our vice chair has a few questions for you, okay?
Yes, sir.
can you hear me hello chair yeah we'll hear you now ish yep yes good evening good afternoon ma'am
have you emailed in all the required documents that's needed to proceed with this case five
days in advance of this hearing yes i did can you please share your screen and you can proceed
can you see it it's coming up now yep we have it yep start your presentation miss clark
okay hold on uh this is for 522 west columbia avenue in philadelphia
Thank you.
Okay. History is in 2022, I acquired the property as an existing duplex with enclosed entries. I need to move this. Hold on one second, please.
History is in 2022.
I acquired the...
okay i tried to get the certificate of occupancy was was declined because property was not zoned
as a two-family dwelling in 2023 i obtained proper zoning for two-family dwelling and filed
for a building permiss to renovate the two units and was informed that the enclosed porch
was not legally zoned and that the existing coverage is 0.78 percent less than one percent
opened a maximum 75% required by the Zoning Board.
In 2024, I started the process to legalize the existing
enclosed porch and the existing lot coverage.
This is a copy of the refusal.
We have that.
The application for appeal.
The project information form.
um hold on go to the next this is a copy of the deed of the house okay
uh the certificate of compliance um i had to submit paperwork i submitted everything and
i'm waiting for them to get back with that um certificate of of compliance i submitted everything
And these are the pictures that confirm that everything was submitted and they accepted it.
Okay, this is a license inspection of proposed plans, of revised proposed plans.
And this is a picture of the house.
As you can see, it is a double entry.
Okay, and go to the next one.
And this is the first floor porch area that I am asking for permission for.
Next one.
And this is the entry to the second apartment for the porch.
And on the right-hand side, you can see the porch on the outside.
This has been there, the neighbor said, over 30 years.
This house has been like this.
Okay, there's another picture of the porch for the second floor, and here are the plans. Wait, let me put my glasses for the zoning submission. That's the existing plan for the house.
and this is the zoning submission proposed okay go to the next one and these are the building
permit submissions which shows the entryways the configure of the entryways and the this here
is the ac unit and the other one for the downstairs is in the basement
hold on this is a copy of the notices that was posted
and that's the brick that's the brick enclosed porch am i right yes sir that's it that's your
brick enclosed porch okay yes okay and these are the notices that i sent out 120 to the
surrounding neighbors within 250 feet and i also sent five out to the rco boards and that's the
receipt of that. And here is a copy of the notice. And here's a copy of the RCO's meeting
with three people that attended and the approval. And that's it. Thank you. Are there any questions?
Questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
um just briefly i just wanted to note for the record the refusal indicates that
the use of this property is single family household living but it's my understanding
from the documents provided by miss clark and the zoning records that it is currently being
used as a duplex is that correct miss clark yes ma'am okay so we'll just add a provisor
to clarify that that use is not changing thank you that's from the virtual audience
I don't see any hands raised, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
I am report with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing single-family residential RSA 5.
The requested variance for occupied area is de minimis.
de minimis the proposed enclosed front porch was constructed without the benefit of
The proposed enclosed front porch was constructed without the benefit of port permits.
permits the appellant has not shown that the unique physical conditions or circumstances
that would prevent the property from being used in conformance with the front yard setback
requirements of the zoning code the refusal for minimum occupied area was triggered by
the enclosure of the front porch planning commission recommends that the board deny
the requested variance for lot area
and front porch setback, front yard tip.
MI 2024-005-563-5222 West Columbia Avenue.
I vote yes with a proviso.
Previously approved two-family household living use
to remain.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with proviso.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes with proviso.
All right, we have our four votes.
You have your votes.
Thank you.
Sorry, I just want to remember when your volume is down really low, it's very difficult to hear you.
So I just wanted to let you know that if you need to make an adjustment.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Clark.
Thank you.
I'm going to go to the list here.
Number one, MI 2023-002-778-2848-North26.
6th Street. Zen Jin is the attorney.
There's a letter of support from
Swamp Poodle Neighbors Parcels Association
with Provisos.
Coming back in as a panelist, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon.
Counsel, you've already been sworn. Could you just
state your name for the record?
Yes, my name is Zen Jin, Z-H-E-N.
Last name is J-I-N.
could you identify your client the relationship to the property
yes uh my client uh is is melia llc uh mohammed diallo is the uh uh managing member of the llc
they're the owner of the property thank you our vice chair has a few questions
Mr. Chair, I think we're having some technical issues
with board member Shahid.
Are you able to ask the questions?
Yeah, I am, sure.
Do you stipulate to the refusal and its accuracy?
Yes, I do.
please proceed thank you we have previously submitted documentation I'm going to go ahead
and put it on the screen for the board's review these were submitted five days in advance per the
zoning board requirements can the board see my presentation on their screen I can thank you so
this is an application for the use of this property as a two-family dwelling the application
is refused because the area, the district is zoned RSA 5. A little history regarding this property.
My client essentially inherited this refusal. The original owner was William Darnell,
who actually worked with the RCO, Swampoodle, quite some time before my client actually purchased
the property and then subsequently again got involved with Swampoodle to work towards a
mutually agreeable way forward. So this refusal goes back quite a ways, but the property itself
is a property that's located on North 26th Street. Here you can see the posting as well
as the map location of the property. The property is originally modified with an addition that's
by the original owner. And then subsequently, the former owner started the process of renovating
the property and the zoning with the neighborhood regarding a two-family use. My client inherited
the property and continued to meet with the neighbors, meet with the community. He actually
went and talked to neighbors on the block, among other things, to try to get a feel for what
concerns there are primarily with the proposed use. The final feedback generally is that
feedback generally is that the neighbors understand the use. They don't really have
the neighbors understand.
an issue with that as much as they're concerned about people on the roof deck maybe partying.
And therefore, we had worked out with Swampudo that we would not use the roof deck
other than for mechanicals. This deck was in existence at the time my client acquired the
property that was legally put in. So it's not something that we can really, at this point,
remove. Rather, we would agree to simply use it for mechanicals and storage accessory to the
unit upstairs. The application itself is for the use of the building as a two-family.
The layout as proposed is as follows. The property would be, the first floor would be one unit. It's
a one-bedroom unit, smaller, but it does have access to a basement, which can be used for
storage, washer, dryer, and other non-living-related uses, such as storage. The second and third floor
is a bi-level second unit, which also has access to the existing roof deck. That one is laid out
with the living and kitchen space on the second floor, taking up basically along with the powder
room, the entire second floor. And then there's simply two bedrooms on the third floor, along with
bathroom closet space. So the sleeping areas would be upstairs on the third floor. The second floor
would be completely living area. And then the first floor unit really has a large living area
and kitchen as well with just a single bedroom in the back. We met with the community twice
in order to give a better outreach to the neighbors.
We did actually obtain a small petition as well.
It's not attached with the exhibits,
but that was presented to the RCO at our second meeting.
And because of the outreach
and the feedback from the neighbors,
we did ultimately receive a non-opposition position
from Swamputo.
I believe a letter was also emailed to the board,
but at the time of our submission,
We did not have the letter yet.
Essentially, Suan Puto would ask that we make sure that it's limited to no more than duplex, two units, trash to be stored inside except for collection days, and the roof deck would be for mechanical use only and no basement living.
So that's all agreeable to my client, and this was actually discussed at the community meeting as well.
So, given the position of the community and also the pre-existing partial renovation of the property, we would ask the board's favorable review of our request for this variance to permit this property to be used as a two-family dwelling.
I'm happy to answer any questions and redirect the board to any part of the exhibits.
My client should be here as well, Mr. Diallo.
He can verify my testimony.
Why don't we bring your client on, Mr. Diallo.
Mohamed, can you raise your hand virtually to be identified?
Okay, they've been about to speak.
Sir, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Good afternoon.
My name is Mohamed Diallo.
That's M-O-H-A-M-E-D, last name D-I-A-L-L-O.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Please proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Mohamed, did you hear my presentation and also see my presentation before the zoning board?
Yes, I have seen and I've heard it.
Can you verify what I have represented to the board is true and correct and adopt it as your own testimony?
Yes, it is true.
Yes, it is true.
Thank you.
Questions from the board.
are there other um multifamily or duplexes um along that row um i believe there are i don't
have the specific addresses but there are a few not it's a mix of single family mostly single
family with some multifamily uh intermixed within the block so so the this request not to use the
deck uh was from the rco meeting yes yes yes from the community correct i just don't know the deck
the deck was actually installed before my client even acquired the property it was legally built
yeah i just don't know how you regulate that if it's already there and there's access how do you
you know how do you regulate that that's that's my question you know i don't think it has nothing to
with with the proviso but it's just hard to release i'm pretty sure that um the community would be uh
police i'm pretty sure that um the community would be uh the neighbors will be pretty on top
of any use of that deck i think again my client understands why they there are concerns and he's
more than happy to work with the community on that other questions or comments
questions or comments from our attorney hillary emberson
um just um briefly um mr jen going back to just the proviso so the the provisos that i
pulled out of swamp poodle's letter was maximum two dwelling units interior storage of trash and
recycling use of roof deck limited to mechanical access only and no household living in the
basement but those all all agreeable um are all agreed to by your client yes okay i thank you
thank you comments from the virtual audience
yes i have a hand up from the number ending again three five five two
i could you please state your name
adrian fernandez rompudo neighborhood process association rcio
adrian you've already been sworn please start your testimony
Okay. I just wanted to hopefully clarify first about the roof deck. The prior owner, Darnell Williams, he had properly applied for a roof deck, sort of like a deck porch, as a single family house.
So that was approved, the permit was approved, and it didn't require a neighborhood public meeting.
So when the change to the use multifamily was requested, the roof top deck was already there, and it was there legally, and neighbors are very concerned.
The way the block is laid out, that particular 100 block on the south side of the street, the house is a three-story.
Across the street, the house is a two-story.
Behind it, which we had done a public meeting for, there's one three-story house on an entire two-story block.
It was like that always on Bailey Street.
And the neighbors have had a lot of problems out of the three-story multifamily dwelling,
even though when we had the public meeting, the new owner promised to comply with certain conditions.
So the neighbors did not even want to think about parties or, you know, even permitting something like that
because there's none of that going on on the other houses.
There's about two houses that are rented as apartments.
All the rest are either owned, used single-family, or they're rented in single-family, which is pretty common in this neighborhood.
There's more single-family rentals than multifamily on streets like that.
So that's what's going on with the rooftop deck, and the four providers that we requested are as described already.
And otherwise, we support the multifamily use.
Thank you, Adrian.
Thank you for calling in.
We appreciate it.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No, I do not see anyone.
Planning commissions.
Yeah. Planning Commission.
Amy Board with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the RSA 5 residential single family zoning at this location.
The appellant appears to have a previous appellant.
Sorry.
Take your time.
The second dwelling unit appears to have been built without the benefit of permits.
There are no unique physical conditions or circumstances of this property that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the requested variance for a second dwelling unit.
Thank you.
MI 2023-002-778-2848 North 26th Street.
I vote yes with provisives.
Maximum two dwelling units.
Interior storage of trash and recycling.
Use of roof deck limited to the mechanical access only and no household living in the basement.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with provisos.
Senator Graham, my vote is yes with provisos.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with provisos.
Thank you. Thank you all.
Ishmael Shaheen, my vote is yes with provisos.
I win. My vote is yes with Proviso. Is my sound better, by the way?
That's better now. You're good now. Thank you.
All right. Number three, MI 2024-003-002, 3612 North 16th Street. Olaf Sokoloff is the attorney.
3612 North 16th Street.
Olaf Sokolov is the attorney.
Letter of unanimous opposition from the 13th Ward RCO.
They'll be coming back in as a panelist.
Good afternoon, Chair Bergman, members of the board.
Oleg Sokolov here on behalf of the applicant, Gordon R.A.I.
Inc. Just for the record, could you spell your name for the? Sure. Oleg, O-L-E-G, Sokolov, S-O-K-O-L-O-V.
Where are a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
I do, Chair. Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yeah, my client is Gordon, RAI, Inc., Augustus Gordon, managing member of the, or pardon me, a director of the corporation, which should be on the line with us today.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, Councilor. Do you agree with the reading of the refusal or stipulate to exact receipt?
Good afternoon, Mr. Shahid. Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed and required to proceed with this case five days and I've added to this hearing?
Yes, I have.
Thank you, Counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you very much.
Good afternoon, once again, members of the Board.
What we are here seeking is a variance in order to erect a new structure to be used as a three-family dwelling located in an RSA3 district.
There are a number of refusals that have been generated as part of this request, one of them being a use refusal and one being a side yard, as well as a parking refusal.
We are, as the board is well aware, RSA 3 requires one parking spot per unit.
And unfortunately, we are unable to provide on this site any parking for a three family.
We met with the RCO twice in an attempt to try to garner feedback and understand what kind of concessions or what kind of ways we could change the project in order to have some support from the RCO, but unfortunately we were unable to obtain it.
What I will go over is the fact that this neighborhood is ripe with variances granting multifamily use in RSA 3 and RSA 5 district.
And as part of the exhibit packet, a list of about 10 properties was submitted.
We did notice 124 nearby neighbors and five RCOs as well as the council person's office as part of our meetings.
You can see this property was just purchased in July of last year.
Are you showing your presentation?
You don't have anything up yet.
I'll show some photos.
Can you share the screen?
That's okay.
Apologies, Boarder.
We have all that. Why don't you go right there,
photos and also their plans?
Everybody can see that now, correct?
We're good.
Let me just go to some photos of the site first.
So you can see this is currently an empty lot. We're just looking to erect this structure here.
It's been an empty vacant lot for quite some time, as far back as I could see in the history. So
we really think that bringing this lovely new construction to the area, an area that, as I
said, already has a number of granted variances for multifamily use, will be in conformity with
neighborhood and would add a nice amount of dwelling units that would be affordable for
for the neighborhood let me just go to the plans
all right so here here's what we're looking to build um the the front setback would be in line
with the porch so hence no no refusal issued on the front setback of any kind and the property
itself is has a large separation from the property behind it despite the the issuance of a refusal
for the rear yard because the property back there is also set back pretty far so and and the board
can see that while the two structures directly adjacent to this property are two-story there
are a number of three-story properties further down the block as well as across the street
This is just the sitemap.
and here we are with the floor plans this would be the the first floor and basement unit there we
are requesting basement living here it would just be a bedroom and a bonus room as well as storage
for the first floor as as the board can see the property is set plan to be set above grade so
So there will be windows in the basement unit, as well as an exit well in the rear.
And that, again, would be in conformity with the remainder of the block, where they have elevated porches and first floor is set about four feet above ground.
This would be a continuation of the first unit.
This would be the first floor.
So the first floor unit and basement unit would be a three-bedroom, two-bath.
The second floor unit would be a two-bedroom, one-bath, and the same for the third-story unit.
You can see that we've put a number of windows to make sure that light is entering the property from all different sides.
the the property adjacent to it and the other direction is also a vacant lot.
And then what I'd really like to turn the board's attention to is our list of
previously granted variances for multi-family use in the neighborhood.
You can see that these 16th Street properties are just a block away,
A number of properties already on the block granted up to six unit multifamily designations in an RSA 5, as well as in an RSA 3 for a two unit, one block away, four unit.
The properties within the RSA 5 or RSA 3 that have previously been granted variances go as high as a 12-unit dwelling at 1536 West Erie, which is just a couple blocks away from the subject property.
And that one is, in fact, a four-story dwelling, so even taller than we're requesting here.
We're not requesting any kind of height variance or anything.
All we're talking about is the use, the rear yard setback, and the parking issue.
Here are our posters hung at the property.
We had a little bit of an issue with getting the tax clearance.
There was a small balance, but that was paid, so the best we could do is generate the receipt
that payment for the board to review today would be happy to answer any why don't you uh
oh why don't you show us the letter from the rco sure and try to give us an idea what happened with
the rco um were you at the meeting i was at the meeting yes i i am hesitant to give you the board
the full description. There was some personal back and forth as my client resides in New York
and is looking to invest in some real estate and build some real estate here in the city of
Philadelphia. My belief is that the RCO kind of took issue with, I'll say, an out-of-towner being
involved in a development in this particular neighborhood. And also, they certainly were
pushing for the idea of single family use and conformity with the code without kind of
understanding that that is not economically feasible at this site nor would a property
of that size be able to be put for sale or rent and that is the reason that a number of other
pardon me, a number of other variances for multifamily use have been granted. It also
was not a very well attended meeting. There were only 10 of us total at the meeting with
mostly the board and the board being the members of the 13th Democratic Board, as well as the four
other RCOs that are involved in this. Those RCOs are composed of one or two people at the most.
In terms of neighbors that are directly affected that voted, it is only two.
So we really think that this is a project that would benefit the neighborhood despite the RCO's, I'll say, somewhat irrational objections to it and a bit of a lack of understanding of what is feasible on this site and in this neighborhood, especially in today's economic climate.
Olak, the two properties next to it, are they multiple family?
They are single family.
The two directly next to it that you saw in the picture that are.
No, they are single family properties. And then the property on the other side of Jason is vacant.
No, they are.
They are single family properties.
And then the property on the other side of Jason is.
Move up the thing a little bit. I'm going to see their letter. I can't see their letter from there. I see that the next one underneath.
there was also some discussion of this the idea that there are going to be seven bedrooms in total
and that each bedroom could in theory house two people so the concern was the the um
overcrowding of the property or just the density while in theory yes any bedroom can house
two people, I suppose. My bedroom at home houses two people. However, in these multifamily units,
especially in the location that, you know, fairly close to Temple Hospital area is mostly for
student or used by employees of the hospital or Temple. So we really don't see, we'd be happy to
have a proviso that we would never have 14 people at this location. It's certainly the density is
way too high. They complained about the trash plan, am I right in saying that? Yes, there was
some complaint about the trash plan, and as we discussed, each unit does have a mechanical room
to store trash until pickup day. We also proposed doing an additional private trash pickup day with
the RCO, but that was not, I'll say, not really considered in their analysis of whether or not to
to support this variance. But as I can show, each unit has a separate mechanical room that's fairly
large and would allow for storage of trash for at least a few days, if not a full week. The
basement unit, in fact, has a mechanical room and then a large storage room in the front as well.
questions from the board question do any of the properties on the block they all have porches
it seems do any of them or any structures go out to the face of the abutting porches
so it is kind of a the rendering is not very good they don't the property is set do you mean
set to the porch itself to the end of the porch as opposed to the the right so your your building
appears from your rendering and also from your site plan that the face of your facade is aligned
with the face of the of the porches so i'm asking are there any other uh houses on that block or
properties on the multi-family properties on that block that uh have their front facade in line with
the porches of the other houses. So the the block is a little disparate if I could just bring up a
Google image and show the board.
So, because of the way the block is set up, some of them have a front lawn, and then the porch that start, some of them begin, this is an old picture, but some of them, these are set back a little further, but go back farther.
And then this way, we start getting into some multifamily dwellings that are set right to the sidewalk that are not exactly the same in terms of the porch structure.
they don't front this street though
I'm sorry
the ones that you just showed at the corner
they don't front 16th street
they front
yeah correct they don't front 16th street
the entrance is not on 16th street
that's correct
so I couldn't see the actual
in the RCO letter but did
that letter contain anything
about just the rendering
that you all showed
at the RCO meeting because it looks nothing
like the current housing stock there now? There was some discussion about building materials. We
were not at all married to any kind of building materials and we're happy to make it a brick
facade to be more in line with the neighboring properties. If I could just go back to the
previous question and show that you'll see that some of these properties begin a little further
out and then the porch goes a little further. It just depends on how much of a front yard is allowed
And these are the three-story properties here at the end.
There's also just a number of vacant lots along 16th Street on this block.
And then there's another that, once again, doesn't front 16th Street, but another multifamily.
and then there's another that once again doesn't front 16th street but another
multi-family dwelling in terms of materials once again you can see the the block wall the color may
look similar is kind of disparate in the types of bricks that are used but we would be happy to
accept the board proviso that a similar material to the the neighboring properties be used in terms
of this brick color or anything of that nature and this is the site itself this is not the total site
These are two parcels here. Yeah, I think by one of my concerns in terms of bulk and mass is that the the bulk of your building, because you placed it at the edge of the face of the the the porches that are adjacent, it just seems overwhelming.
um but if it was it was set back to the face of the the facade of the buildings it may not
be so apparent that and the fact that it's so different from all the rest of the houses which
have porches um so that's that's something also in terms of in terms of consider allowing us
a proviso for a smaller setback in the back
in order to move the building further back?
I can't speak for the entire board,
but in terms of my sense of having it at least conform
with the plane of the bulk of the rest of the properties
on the block, it makes sense that it be set back.
Also, in addition, it makes sense to have a porch too,
but that's, can't make you do that.
So we do certainly have the room in the back. I'm not sure why it's the side yard issue. We have the room to move it further in the back. So if the board would consider granting this, if we just move the property back to be in line with the neighboring properties, we would be happy to accept that.
I think we need to see what it looks like to be able to say that with conviction. I mean, a question I have for you is, given the side yard is an issue, was there any consideration to not do three units to make and to leave a little bit more of a side yard?
typical width of a building in Philadelphia of a single family home or even a duplex is
anywhere from 13 to 15 feet wide which would have gotten you much closer to the side yard
of the eight feet versus the three feet that you currently have due to the bulk of this property
had it been considered to just reduce the scale and scope. Our feeling on it was either way you
be generating a side yard refusal while i agree it would be less of one because at 15 feet we'd
be at five feet versus the three however that creates really really narrow units and with the
the necessity of a staircase in order to allow for any kind of multi-fam whether it be two units or
three it still just leaves units that are very very um narrow and and the floor plans would not
kind of accommodate especially the larger one the the three bedroom would not accommodate
bedrooms of any kind of reasonable size nor living spaces so that that was a consideration
certainly but because of the stairwell that's really where we ran into the um width issue and
we figured as i said because it was generating a refusal for side yard anyway um we thought it was
better to offer a larger unit size especially in this you know somewhat single family neighborhood
so we're hoping families would be living in these properties as well what's what's your uh
your what's your what's your building height the building height is 30 feet so oh yeah 30 feet so
max is 38 what's your uh top of slab below grade in other words what's your basement slab height
below grade right right here if you can see it three so you're so you're you're the ceiling
height your your grade is at minus three from from your first floor correct and then your basement
is minus eight so minus minus nine so you're like six feet below grade which is kind of low
I would argue that you've got room
in terms of the height to raise the basement up
as much as possible
I'm sorry
the consideration was to not be too far
above the neighboring two-story properties
so while we could have gone to 38 feet and yes
create you know done a little different of a analysis with the basement the thought was that
analysis with the basement the thought was that if we're going to be next to these two-story
if we're going to
properties we don't want to be significantly above them yeah i definitely is already pretty
significant so i mean i feel like i hear the argument but i don't know that that visually
is in line with what we're seeing particularly if particularly if you if the building moved back
yeah you've got a lot of backyard i think also you have a really rich site you have like a
you have an opportunity to do a deep side yard which would allow you to have a window well to
actually allow light into the basement especially considering at this point you have an occupied
basement um so we do we do have some some light obviously coming into the the basement through
the front window and the back um being exposed but just unfortunately if you go to the if you go to
your can you go to the floor plans for a second you've got the bonus room that's in the basement
that has no light right so and so to um to um board member ty is a point um if there was more
of a setback of course from the side you'd be able to get probably a window into that space
can i see this second well that's the basement can i see this first floor plan
also just the thing i mean as a designer i would not put a wall on the bonus room i think one is
misleading. It makes people think it's a bedroom when it isn't. It makes people, especially when
they're renting, operate it and use it as a bedroom, which causes lots of safety concerns
in basements, in a space where that's already something that's generally contested by neighbors.
It's misleading to tenants.
That's certainly understandable. And I do thank the board for its suggestions here.
Can you show the second floor? I just saw the first floor. I didn't see the second floor. So that's the first floor. And then the second. Is there roof access? Is there a roof deck?
There's no plan for any kind of roof access here.
Gotcha.
Thank you.
Other questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
not at this time mr chair comments from the virtual audience yes mr chair i have a hand
up from charles richardson i have allowed them to speak
mr richardson how are you good could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
Certainly. Charles Richardson, R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N, Office of Councilwoman Cindy Bass, room 508 City Hall.
We're referring to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
The Councilwoman joins with the RCO in rejecting this request for a variance.
the statement of irrationality and things along those lines were kind of you know misleading
folks don't always come out to community meetings in that area and at times the RCO does have to
step in and do a you know do their due diligence for the community as far as that goes so you know
Whatever the perception was that might have been taken away from that, it kind of makes it, you know, a little bit deceptive because that's not how it is.
Councilwoman stands firmly with the RCO and asks that you deny this variance.
Sure, sure.
Can I, hold on.
Let me see if there's anyone else in the audience that has comments, then you can respond to that.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience who has a comment?
Mr. Chair, I don't see any further hands.
I'll proceed.
Mr. Chair, I would ask, given some of the recommendations of this board, if at this
point the board would allow us to potentially continue this matter and submit some revised
plans, given some of the board's recommendations into account, and if we feel that Ms. Wynn's
suggestion, for instance, which would generate a different refusal, we will withdraw and resubmit
this application. But we do think we can make some adjustments that would speak to the board's
concerns and perhaps be back before the board to review this once again. Planning commission.
um so i hillary i'd like to ask then should i go on the record as the planes stay now okay
As the plans stay now?
um also amy board with it
Also, Amy board with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing single-family residential RSA 3.
The properties on the side of the block base were built as twins with side yards and no parking.
The appellant has not shown that an economic detriment would occur if they were to comply with the side yard requirement.
We are aware of five legal multifamily dwellings on this block base, but most of the twin homes are single-family.
The City Planning Commission recommends that the Board grant the requested use variance for parking, but deny the requested use variance for three dwelling units and for the dimensional variance for side yard.
Thank you. MI 2024-003-002, 3612 North 16th Street, I vote no.
michael johns my vote is no cheryl gaston my vote is no tanetta graham my vote is no
iowen my vote is no dismal shaheed my vote is no thank you sir thank you members of the board
okay um we're going to hear number four and
MI 2024-003-186-226 Manheim Street and MI 2024-003-187-222 Manheim Street.
Rachel Pritzker is the attorney.
There are letters of opposition from 13th Democratic Award and also Solo Germantown.
Good evening.
Hi, counsel.
Yes, still in the afternoon.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Rachel, R-A-C-H-A-E-L, Pritzker, P-R-I-T-Z-K-E-R.
Referring to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
yeah so one of the husband and wife couple a team presley and rishonda um alexander
our vice chair has a few questions sure good afternoon council do you agree to wait the
reading of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy yes i've emailed in all the required
documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing
yes thank you council please proceed and share your screen okay
can you see my screen we can okay it's a little bit of a complicated matter so bear with me and
i'll do my best to not over complicate it um 222 west manheim and 222 226 west manheim i'm gonna
try to present them together they're similar some slightly differences but for the most part
but they're similar. I'm going to start with the refusal.
They're both zoned RSA 3. The refusal is just for three units in existing structure.
As you can see, this board has already granted a variance back in 2017. It was approved in 2020,
issued in 2020, the zoning permit for multifamily household for three dwelling units. These
properties both have histories of being three units. You can look in the zoning archive which
we've attached to these applications. I'm going to go through sort of the detailed facts as best
as I can for this project. So 222 West Mannheim is an existing structure. So is 226. You can see
from my screen, existing structures, three-store existing structures, longstanding.
There were various work that has been done to the property since 222 West Mannheim was
purchased in 2009, 2226 was purchased in 2016, and substantial work related to a make-safe
was issued and complied with on both of these properties.
So there's been a lot of structural work that's gone in since the acquisition of these properties.
In February 18th, 2020, a variance was granted for three units for 222 Mannheim and 226 Mannheim already has zoning records for three units back since 1962.
During the process of getting these make-safes done, both properties had violations for vacant structures, so vacant structure permits were received and issued on the property, so to comply with the violations.
so to comply with the violations. As the board knows, if you have a variance on a property or
As the board knows, one...
have an existing non-conforming use, anytime you get a vacant property license, it wipes away any
of the prior uses. So you have to go back through the process again to get multifamily if it's
zoned RSA 3 or whatever. In this case, there's a zoned RSA 3. So we are bringing this all the
back through. In the meantime, around 2023-ish, I wasn't involved with this as a different lawyer,
members of one of the non-coordinating RCOs and a developer and a church organization
submitted for Act 135 conservatorship. These two properties have been in litigation for Act 135
conservatorship up until one is resolved in the favor of the owners that I represent here today.
The other one will be shortly resolved to the same extent, but it's not finalized yet.
So being careful, kind of what I say around that as well.
During the time that the permit was issued for the zoning permit that was issued back in 2017, it was issued in 2020.
All this litigate, the make safe happened.
We cleaned the violations up and then the Act 135 conservatorship went on.
So that was really the focus was litigating through Act 135 conservatorship, which is, like I said, almost been resolved.
already resolved on 2222. As a result of the vacant structure licenses, those and the
Act 135, the building permit that was issued to start building some of these out, which I'll show
you the interior photos, had lapsed. And so then we had to go all the way back through this process
again to request exactly the same thing, which is just three units and existing structures.
These structures are like 2,592 square feet on 2,000 square foot lots. There are directly
adjacent properties um on that are three and four family two two two eight uh west manheim is four
units two two two zero so our two two zero is four units two one two is three units and two one five
is three units this is not out of character for this block in particular as you can see it's close
to wayne avenue which is a commercial corridor which despite its commercial nature it's littered
with RSA 5, RSA 3 properties.
And again, these properties had already been granted
and were already existing three-unit buildings.
I'm gonna go through the RCO.
This is the zoning posters.
We went to the RCO first back in July
and what it was not known to me at the time that one of a couple of the members of the not
coordinating RCO were actually involved in testifying against the current owner related
to Act 135. Most of the meeting was related to that which was a huge conflict of interest and
not appropriate for an RCO meeting setting. As a result of that meeting we asked for another
meeting where they would recuse themselves and or limit the conversation to being about
the zoning variance.
The coordinating RCO was kind enough to allow for another meeting, which was difficult to
say the least.
And I do these three, four times a week.
And this was unbelievably difficult.
As you can see from this meeting notice, there were 58 people in attendance at this
meeting.
Some people were not let in the meeting. Some people were let in the meeting.
The chair of the RCO did as best of a job as he could with support from the council office staff to kind of keep this meeting moving.
And ultimately, what you see here is two people that were opposed to it.
11 people, so two people opposed to it, 11 people somehow opposed to it that included
Faith and Solo Germantown, which includes members who have been litigating against this property
for years or helping to support the litigation. And really seven letters of seven votes in support
from directly affected near neighbors. Most of the meeting, although 58 people attended,
there was maybe seven to 10 people that actually lived near there that got notices that spoke in
non-opposition of the project. So what you're noticing in opposition is people connected with
the neighbor, the RCO that was not the coordinating RCO, not actual near neighbors for this project.
This is exemplified in whatever this was that was submitted by Solo Germantown, which I can't even
begin to read it so i'm not going to waste the board's time i'm not sure what this really means
I'm not going to waste the board's time. I'm not sure what this really means, what the asterisks and the slashes, but the coordinating RCO, it's closer to realistic as to what happened.
with the asterisks and the slashes.
Even again, there's 58 people there. And again, this is the second meeting.
I will just also share this that was sent to the council office where there was a ton of people that were near neighbors that had attended the meeting that reached out to me that said we couldn't get in the meeting.
We didn't know what the forum vote was. They did it on a forum. It was disorganized. They said to put it in the chat. And we were kicked off the meeting at this point. So this is just what other folks had been saying. And then there was some confusion about who could vote and who couldn't vote and how many people.
and mostly what I heard was that was really inaccurate and people that actually lived there
couldn't get in to voice their support. Again, I had reached out to the council office and he
provided me in green the actual near neighbors who voted or didn't get to vote but had showed up,
through Zoom or whatever, however this meeting was held. So if you can see a lot of the people
in green were actually people that lived there and people who supported the project. Most of the rest
of the individuals didn't live anywhere near here, didn't share their address, or some provided
opposition because they wanted a condo in an existing building, which is kind of irrelevant
for zoning. This was also a list that was provided just to show how many people were at this meeting,
You know, some people that didn't have anything to do with the area, didn't live anywhere near there.
And again, individuals who are involved in a litigation, which should not have been included or should have disclosed that to the community as a whole.
Again, just to provide, you know, zoning permits were issued for this property for three units in front of this exact board.
And due to the Act 135 nature of this and some of the other stuff that was going on related to the make safe, we had to go back through this process.
I don't know if our architect is on, but we did provide, even though it's an existing structure, we did provide plans.
We wanted to make sure after the first meeting that it was a clear layout of what was going on and what we were proposing so that the community could see it.
There's no living space in the basement.
It's basically for utility space and mechanicals.
This is the first floor. And again, it's an existing structure. So it has all the same exterior aesthetic character of that block. Kitchen, bedrooms, bathroom, keeping into context with kind of some that's already there. I'll show you the photos of the interior in a second. Second floor, same thing. And third floor, similar layouts for both 222 and 226.
As the board can see, during the process, after getting the zoning permit, they did apply for a building permit for 222 West Mannheim to start the construction.
However, it was expired, given the legal proceedings that went on.
And so it has been built out to some extent with framing and mechanicals.
And we would just be looking again to finish up this work under a new zoning permit.
We would have to demolish the entire interior of this if we were going to do a single family home.
And given all the legal proceedings, the character in the neighborhood, the adjacent structures that are multifamily and the exorbitant cost that has gone on through the legal proceedings and to repair this and to even go forward with what's there would be an unnecessary hardship.
And again, it's already been approved by this board before. And 2226 was already a longstanding three unit building since 1962. I just put the cover sheet of the Act 135. I'm not going to go into too much detail about that. I don't do Act 135 conservatorship, so I don't have all the info.
but I did want to provide at least the cover sheet to the board that was where that these are
legitimate proceedings that were going on sort of in the middle of some of this process.
And I'm not sure how long Act 135 takes, but I can imagine it's not just, you know, a quick
process. And like I said, this one is resolved, and then the other one is still ongoing shortly
to be resolved. Other than that, I think I'll pause to have my, answer any questions, but have
my client adopt testimony, and then I'm happy to provide any other additional information.
Why don't you bring your client on? Is there a Akeem Presley and Roshanda Alexander
in the audience?
Akeem Presley, yes, but I'm not.
Yes, I'm here.
Yes, I'm here.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Akeem Kresley, A-K-E-M-P-R-E-S-S-L-E-Y.
Where or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Akeem, have you heard my testimony today?
Do you believe it to be true and accurate, and do you adopt it as your own?
okay is there anything else you want to add for the board
no okay questions from the board yeah i've got a couple questions oh go ahead i'm sorry
no real quick i just don't know how long did the uh your clients own the properties
and when they purchased them yeah according to um opa or atlas 222 west manheim was purchased in
09 and 226 was purchased in 2016 akeem correct me if i'm wrong because i know sometimes atlas is not
accurate can you unmute that's correct can you hear me yes
yeah uh so
clearly the proposed uses seems to me to be consistent with other houses on the block it's
a huge property and it's been a three um unit um building in the past so i'm trying to get
an understanding i know um miss pritchard you said you of course don't do the um uh the uh what
is it called receivership or whatever it is a conservatorship but how so how long has that been
going on so to my knowledge is looking at these pleadings at least uh almost two years um there
were other violations on the property that were being corrected like the make safe that this is
all on atlas and lni's website that i looked up um so i know that that was all being worked on
since 20 just pull it up
222 has been they've been getting permits since uh a decade ago alteration permits use permits
minor permits all issued, completed, or some expired. So there's been work ongoing with this
property for at least the past 10 years. And then the Act 135, Akeem can correct me if I'm wrong,
but it's going on two years now. And is there any, are there any plans to do anything to change
the front in any way, porches or anything, or they're going to remain kind of consistent with
the rest of the block yeah i think the plans are just on the interior i'm sure you know they'll
fix up if there's masonry issues um our architect chris hamill is on so if you want him to speak
to any of that detail but um my understanding is this is interior renovations and i know that a lot
of the external renovations um you know the with the make safe and the exterior windows and the
porches um those are all have to be addressed and there's permits pulled and complied with related
to some of the exterior features which probably had to do with some of the structural issues with
the make safe etc but all this has to be resolved especially given the act 135 it they had it has to
be fixed you know with the court supervision gotcha um can you go to the plans for a second
yes absolutely um can we promote chris um him i just want him yeah okay they have been promoted
the panels or could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
that we're coming back in short sure so these will all be two bedroom units it looks like
they seem to be decent size layouts excuse me um this is chris hamill i apologize for
interrupting i i'm on now could you please spell your name for the stenographer uh yes
My last name's Hamill, H-A-M-A-R-Y-E-L.
We're a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Richard, Michael.
Yeah, I just wanted to see the layout of the plans.
Again, they seem like pretty decently laid out plans, two bedroom units.
That second floor unit could have a larger living room, dining room, because you do have a pretty large bedroom.
but appreciate the fact that you're not doing anything to the front and it
keeps the character of the neighborhood so thank you
Other questions from the board?
So I have a question just in terms of what happened in the RCO meeting.
Was the RCO concerned of like the work stoppage and that this, they were able to financially pull this off?
Was that something that?
That's a great question. Yes. And as per the Act 135, one of the things you have to show to the court is that you are able to actually make those repairs.
otherwise they will provide conservatorship to someone else to do those repairs so
with the court granting the current owner the ability to keep the property he did have to show
his ability to move forward with the construction but that was a concern and we did address it and
Akeem was pretty like vulnerably truthful about the financial concerns that he was dealing with
when he first acquired the property I don't think that he totally understood all that was entailed
given some of the structural issues with the property, but yes, absolutely. And he did state
that he was able to do that, which is why the conservatorship didn't move forward against his
interest. That was for the 222 property, but you're talking about two now. So the 226 is still
in the conservatorship process, correct? Yes, it's at the end of it. Okay. So I guess my concern is
Is this too much to have two units going now?
Moving forward with two, if he's okay with doing two, two, two,
then there will not be any kind of stoppage and stuff
because apparently there's some history with the way this property
has been upkept with the RCO letter and the RCO comments.
So there's been some concern about that.
Yeah, I think that's a fair question.
Akeem, I don't know if you want to speak to that directly
to board member graham related to the ability to uh renovate both of these buildings um
at the same time and and avoid you know additional stopping given that was one of the main concerns
yes yes i have the ability to um to do both at the same time and that's what i had to prove to
the judge the only thing that stopped them from closing the case honestly was a mail slot i had
the mailbox and they wanted me to put a mail slot so that was the only thing that stopped
226 from being closed out which I sent my attorney over the pictures this week so it should be closed
as of now it should be closed already 226 should be closed too that was the only thing that they
wanted was a mail slot versus the mailbox and to be clear it's a different attorney than than myself
other questions from the board
questions or comments from our attorney
Hillary Emerson
I didn't
know if Ms. Prisker
wanted the owner of the other property
to also adopt her testimony
yeah Akeem is
Roshanda on
I'm yes
they have been allowed to speak
hi I'm here
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Roshanda Alexander, R-A-S-H-O-N-D-A, Alexander, A-L-E-X-A-N-D-E-R.
Where or affirm the tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Please proceed, Counselor.
Ms. Roshanda, have you heard my testimony today?
Do you believe it to be true and accurate, and do you adopt it as your own?
Thank you.
questions or comments from the virtual audience
i do not see any hands raised mr chair questions or comments on um uh planning
may we board with the planning commission these comments will be for 226 manheim and 222 manham
street the concept comprehensive plan recommends no change to the rsa3 residential single family
zoning at this location the proposed use is consistent with documented prior use
the city planning commission recommends that the board grant the proposed use variances for three
family dwellings um i'm going to vote for both uh mi20 just want to make a quick note for the
record. I'm sorry I missed it before. Because these are RSA3 properties, there should have
been refusals as well for not having accessory off-street parking. So I just want to note that
for the record that they were missing. Thank you. Number four, MI 2024-003-186-226 Manheim
Street, and number five, MI 2024-003-187-222 Mannheim.
MI 2024-003-187-222, Mannheim.
I vote yes for both.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes for both.
Teneda Graham, my vote is yes for both.
Iowen, my vote is yes for both.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes for both.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
All right. Number six, MI 2024-003-335, 621-25 Reed Street.
Leonard Alteri and Michael Phillips are the listed attorneys.
A letter of opposition from Pashon Square Civic and a letter of opposition from Council Member Squillin.
Michael Phillips is coming back at us.
Afternoon, counsel.
Hi, counsel.
Could you please state your name as spell for the court stenographer?
Good afternoon, Chairman Bergman, members of the board, Michael Phillips, P-H-I-L-L-I-P-S,
with Claire Harrison Harvey Bransburg, 1835 Market Street, 14th floor, Philadelphia PA, 19103.
We're a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
I do, Mr. Chair.
Did you identify your client, the relationship to this property?
I'm here on behalf of 621 Partners, LLC, which is the owner of 621-25 Reed Street.
Yoav Shifman, who is a principal with 621 Partners, is here as a witness.
I also have available to testify Veronica Bloom with NPN Realty.
Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to waive the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Good afternoon, vice chair. Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you, counsel. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
All right. Can everyone see my screen?
We can. You might want to make it a little bit bigger, sir.
So good afternoon again. Michael Phillips here for 621 to 25 Reed Street.
This is a CMX2 zoned property that is located mid-block in a C of RSA 5.
The CMX2 designation likely has to do with the fact that it is a former garage.
And you see the curve here.
This is the property that I'm, my cursor over this.
Again, it's the property here that I've highlighted.
um this is the rear along earp street and i will give you just some additional orientation so here
um is the the property 621 reed again like i said it's in a sea of rsa5 in a very residential
um single family and uh and multi-family uh area um and my client purchased this property
in 2020, but went under contract in 2019. And we went under contract, we originally obtained
plans and the permit that you see in front of you in September 2019 to adaptively reuse this
former garage that was, you know, again, used as a garage in the 40s. It was a furniture warehouse
in the 50s through the 80s, and then it was an auto repair garage with retail sale of used
automobiles from 1987 until the time my client purchased the property. We received an as-of-right
permit to construct a four-story addition on top of the three-story existing building,
utilizing the low-income affordable housing bonus,
which yielded an additional seven feet of height
as well as four additional units
for a total of 12 units.
The units are, these are the approved plans.
The units, there are four on each floor.
And so this is a typical floor plan for each of the floors.
It's occupied, being utilized on the second through fourth floors.
What we're here for today is relief concerning the first floor and the requirement of the CMX.
concerning the first floor and the requirement of the CMX2 commercial use along the first 30 feet of depth of the building.
These are some interior photos that show this current first floor use.
And, you know, it was never the intention to use this for residential, but it quickly became clear that along the 600 block of Reed Street, there just is no viable commercial corridor here, and it's become increasingly difficult to find a tenant.
We recognized this early on and actually sought relief from the board back in 2020 for initially four additional units on the first floor, which would have brought this to a total of 16.
We brought that not only to the community who was opposed to that plan as well, but we went and appeared before the board in November 2020.
Now, just a little additional context. At the time we're appearing before the board, we're in the middle of the pandemic. So even, you know, finding a commercial tenant was even more difficult here and it was exacerbated.
There were conversations at the board about whether there could be a compromise. Now, parking is at a premium in South Philly. We are not required to have any parking as a CMX2 parcel, but we looked to do a compromise where we would only increase the density by two additional units at the rear.
And I will show you the plan. So we would just do two units, 943, 945 square feet at the rear of the property and provided some parking at the front for four cars.
And that would alleviate some of the additional stress on the neighborhood.
Um, that plan as well, uh, was rejected by the community. They felt that we had not, uh, made a concerted enough effort to locate a commercial tenant, um, for this property. They wanted us to look at, um, artist, uh, loft uses and, and a whole array of commercial uses, um, and, uh, were not opposed, were opposed.
Now, one other thing that is important to point out is under the South District plan, under the comprehensive 2035 plan, this area in particular was called out for rezoning.
And I'll zoom in. It is this. Circled in blue and specifically our property is this one right here that is highlighted or that is outlined in black.
And you'll notice that this is, they say it's, you know, changed from RSA 5 to RM 1 to match the existing multifamily housing in the area.
But here, you know, we have that out of context, out of place CMX 2 property.
Now, if we were RM1 at the time we submitted the initial zoning application with the affordable housing, we actually would be allowed to do 15 units by right without any parking.
Here at CMX2, we are seeking, again, 14 units total, 12 existing plus two, and then to add the four additional parking spaces.
Now, when we went before the community the first time, we didn't just come in without any support.
Now, the RCO, Passy Young Square, has opposed us.
But in terms of the neighbors, we had a neighbor petition of support.
And if you look at the addresses, I mean, these are from the individuals who live at the multifamily condominium building right next door to us at 617.
We have people on 641, 623. The president of Passion Square Condos at 617, who unanimously supported the use and who all want a residential use.
Again, this is a mid-block property at 621 Reed Street.
You'll note that even after Patchy Young Square voted to oppose, we went with an additional neighborhood letter of support that clarified that the individuals directly impacted along Earp Street, Reed Street, disagreed with Patchy Young Square and did not want a commercial or industrial use at the ground floor.
Now, admittedly, it's not up to the individuals whether a commercial use should be allowed on the ground floor.
We know that it's zoned CMX2 and that it was our obligation to put a commercial use, and we attempted to do so diligently.
attempted to do so diligently. But there's a hardship because there is no viable commercial
But there's a hardship because...
tenant that we've been able to locate here. Now, initially, my client is a broker that listed
himself, was unable to find a suitable tenant. And for the past three years, since November of
2021, the property has been listed with Veronica Bloom of MPN Realty.
Over the past three years, there have been a total of 48 outreaches about this property
in particular, so less than two per month.
And those are just people reaching out.
It's not anything where these are individuals who are all extremely interested in the unit.
But there has been some interest from people.
Unfortunately, none of the interest has been for a permitted use.
We've had individuals come and want to do automobile conversion, electric auto conversion.
We had a storage and mechanic who wanted to use the space.
We had an arcade concept who potentially wanted to look at the space.
However, it was too small for their uses.
There was a CrossFit, which would fall under personal services. However, after further discussion with the CrossFit studio, that wouldn't work either because it would be extremely disruptive to the 12 individuals who live above.
Apparently, when you do CrossFit, you drop the weights on the ground, it reverberates all throughout the building, and the use wasn't conducive with the existing multifamily.
So after three years of taking another stab at finding a commercial tenant, we've just been unsuccessful and we're coming back before the board with the plan that does make sense, that is less impactful, that is consistent with the multifamily in the surrounding neighborhood, and that also utilizes the existing curb cut and garage to provide some relief for parking.
I believe the I've heard, you know, Mr. Chair, you've asked, you know, what is the situation with the community?
Why are they in opposition? And I believe in this case, it's because the community believes that we've already maximized our density.
We got our 12 units, went through the, you know, the buy right payment in lieu and that's it.
We shouldn't get any more. Discounting the fact that if it was RM1, we'd be able to get the additional units.
and discounting the fact that we tried to do the right thing here.
We attempted to develop this property consistent with the CMX2 zoning
and have been totally unable to find an appropriate commercial user
or any commercial user who's interested in this first floor.
I'll have Ms. Blum come and she can attest to this as well,
but the first floor unit is-
Mr. Phillips, before you go on,
did you take this plan back to the board too? How many times have you been to the board before?
This board? Yeah. Only once. Initially, when we came before the board, it was a four-unit plan.
Former Chair DiCicco suggested that we try to reach a compromise that would provide some parking.
So this plan, specifically with the two units and the four parking spaces.
Yeah, but then you said you took that back to the RCO and they rejected that?
um they rejected it the first time three years ago and they've rejected it again now three years
later um so and my client does not want to have a uh vacant uh first floor use we believe that we
want to to uh get this leased up get it to a productive use um it's listed right now for
17 and 14 cents a square foot which is actually a little below market rate market rate within
in the neighborhood, as Ms. Blum can attest to, would be $20 a square foot. As you get on the
commercial corridors, you can get up to $25. But, you know, based on the $17.14 a square foot,
you would think we'd be able to find somebody interested. But there are also logistical issues
with the property being mid-block. It's not conducive for a grocery use because of deliveries
and because of the difficulty accessing. So, you know, as of 2024, there have been a total
of five inquiries. It's not because the listing is inactive. The listing is continuously updated,
but we just cannot find a buy-write commercial user for this mid-block property at 621 Reed
Street, and we are seeking the board's approval for a variance this time after we've tried for
approval for a variance this time after we've tried for another three years unsuccessfully.
another three years unsuccessfully.
I would like to ask, you know, my client, Yoav Shiffman, if he could come on to adopt
my testimony as my owner.
And then I would, after that, like to call Ms. Bloom to ask her just a few quick questions.
Okay, they've been allowed to speak.
Eric, could you please state your name as spelled for the stenographer?
Yoav Schiffman, Y-O-A-V-S-H-I-F-F-M-A-N.
Aware or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Thank you.
Please proceed, counsel.
Yoav, you heard my testimony in this case?
Yes, sir.
And would you agree that what I have stated and that my testimony is true and accurate, to the best of your knowledge?
Okay. And have you diligently attempted to find a commercial tenant for this ground floor space for over three years?
Correct.
Okay. And you have been unable to, is that right?
Okay. I would just like to call Ms. Veronica Bloom to briefly implement my testimony.
Bloom? Bloom?
I have been out to speak.
Can you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Veronica Blum, V-E-R-O-N-I-C-A, B-L-U-M.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Veronica, you heard my testimony about your efforts to list the property over the past three years, correct?
Okay. And with my testimony about the $17.14 square foot and that being a little bit below market rate, was that all accurate to the best of your knowledge?
Okay. And this first floor unit is 3,300 square feet?
Is that correct?
Okay. And can you just briefly, I started explaining here some of the uses and some of the interested tenant, but can you just explain some of the logistical challenges of finding a by-right commercial user for this 3,300 square foot first floor space?
yes the the size of the space is a little larger than the majority of commercial spaces in this
neighborhood um which in the beginning we thought would be great but when we did like for instance
we had a grocery store that was very interested but the way that the street is structured anytime
that they would go to have deliveries made or any sort of logistical challenges that sometimes face
a store like that they ended up walking away from the situation because they wanted to have a good
relationship with the neighborhood and didn't want to block a street for 40 minutes while they
unload pallets of everything that they needed. So that happened consistently. There were some
uses that were a little too loud. Basically, every time we got close to doing something,
they felt like the neighborhood, even if it was allowed by right, the actual use within the middle
of a residential block that was this dense with only one lane of driving traffic was going to be
a problem. Can you explain just the CrossFit? Because I know that's by right use, it's personal
services, but what were some of the complications there? Why didn't that work out? Generally,
CrossFit needs to be in a single-story building without residential units touching it on either
side because when a weight's that heavy or dropped, it actually affects the top of a building more
than it does directly above it. It actually makes the foundation shake, and it sounds like
a bell is being rung in the building and also in the adjacent buildings.
That's why you'll see them in standalone garages, usually.
And can you just, how long have you been a commercial broker in Philadelphia?
20 years.
Okay. And can you provide your opinion on the viability to find a market rate commercial tenant at this site?
i mean we've been we don't just wait for people to reach out to us we reach out to
tenants who we think would be a good use and um we have signed hundreds of leases since taking this
this assignment on and it's proven to be difficult for many you know all sorts of different reasons
so it's been frustrating because we do want to find a commercial tenant in situations like this
But the proximity of the neighbors and the large size of the space in relation to this single lane drive aisle has proven to be.
in relation to this single lane drive aisle has proven to be very difficult
i have no further questions uh for ms bloom but uh he will be available to answer any questions
if the uh um if the board questions from the board questions from the board
yeah go ahead yes oh okay oh i'm sorry go ahead turn it oh no uh real quick
the two parking spaces that you're that you propose were they for the two units it was actually
uh four parking spaces and it would be for um use of any of the 14 um there there would be a total
of 14 units in the building so the four parking spaces would be for the use of the uh of those
tenants okay are those parking units going to be for sale or is it no no no and question did we
Do you see a diagram, a plan or anything that is behind the doors there?
Yeah, I don't know. Yep.
Yeah, I can pull it up.
I mean, this shows the turning radius just into the existing curve cut with the four parking spaces.
This shows how the parking spaces would be here.
We have that enclosed trash room, bicycle parking, and then the two units are in the back along, you know, at the Earp Street frontage.
And what is in there now?
Nothing. It's vacant.
This is it now.
The bicycles are, you know, still there, but beyond that, it's nothing.
I guess my question is, you're supposed to have this space be the entire ground floor frontage and then 30 feet back.
Correct.
So what I'm seeing is this garage door and then there are these two other doors.
are they entrances to the units up above or what do we right so this this door here is the entrance
to the trash room the door on the left the orange door okay and the door on the right is uh the
entrance to the um to the units above okay and then the garage door and the garage door has been
there just because this was a former um auto body um shop so it's a vestige from uh from the past
but the new parking are they utilizing the existing garage door yes it would there would
be no changes to the garage door there's as you can see here there's an existing curb cut that
we would utilize yep so we're not okay so there's no changes to the side and then on that first
floor were there thoughts of just doing all parking or parking and like lobby spaces as
opposed to trying to put two more units in there were at one point there were thoughts about about
that about how you know we were going to mix up the um the uses but we did want to have some active
ground floor use um just for safety security um you know eyes on the street so it was important
to us that um even especially along the erp street frontage that we you know kept an active
user there and that um you know it wasn't just uh solely for for cars and then currently where
if i'm a current tenant where are the mailboxes currently
yo if you are still on can you um address mailbox i believe they would they're probably
inside the mail inside a mail room in the front it just didn't look like there was one on the
plan so i was trying to figure out like from the parking side to the two units to how you access
the public so the mailbox is actually in the residential lobby that's where we receive
packages and mail okay um so it's the door in relation to this plan here it is right
so this is this is that um that front door that you saw um and so the mailboxes are right here
right when you walk in got it okay
other questions from the board oh i guess the the um you don't kind of show any you show the
turning radius off the street into the parking lot but all of your cars are volkswagons and so
And so I don't see I got 16 feet. So, you know, I don't see the depth of what those parking spaces are and any kind of turning radius to kind of get out so you can pull in back into a parking space.
I don't see, I've only got 16 feet
so I don't see the depth
of what
I don't know how you kind of maneuver to go out front wise of the parking lot. That's one to the layout of the units on the ground floor are concerning to me because there's absolutely no real sort of natural light or natural ventilation into the main living space.
It's all kind of dark. I know there'd be borrowed light from these bedrooms or something like that, which is kind of not not the most optimal condition.
So that concerns me, just the layout of the units having two units in the back with no real sort of natural light and ventilation and natural ventilation for the for the living dining areas.
um board member johns if i could just interject um quickly so i in in reviewing this matter it
seems like there's actually about three refusals related to parking that's missed that are missing
from the refusal it looked like they were they were the applicant was previously advised by lni
that they there would be refusals but they did not end up on the refusal for some reason um the
The refusals were a drive aisle with being narrower than permitted, no ADA accessible space, and the stall size is smaller than what's required for a standard car.
So I was going to put this in my comments, but I'll say it now.
Now, I recommend that we that the board request a corrected refusal before voting on this matter, because I think the full extent of the refusals was not listed on the refusal.
I'm not I'm not sure why. It seems like they were communicated to the applicant, but they never made it on to the refusal for this particular iteration of the project.
So. Gotcha.
we still want to take we want to still take public comment though right
yes we we can there's nothing there's nothing about the project that's changed it's just
there's refusals that for some reason didn't make it on the the refusal i gotta be honest
i'd have a hard time parking a car there i don't think i'd get it in that's just me
um questions or comments from the virtual audience
I do not see any further hands, Mr. Chair.
How about planning?
Do you want to wait for planning or do you want to comment now?
Hi, Amy Ward with the Planning Commission.
Yes, I'd like to wait for the amended refusal.
Thank you, Amy.
Can we, though, get a comment just on the proposal for the multifamily and just separate or in the CMX2 use?
Because I believe the amended refusal will solely impact the parking spaces.
And it wouldn't be an amended refusal. It would be just it would be a corrected refusal. Right. Because there were just refusals that are omitted from the current refusal. So there's not there's not changes to the plans that are being proposed. We just need the refusal to accurately reflect what relief is actually being requested.
Mr. Phillips, I think we should let planning vote on the whole thing and not not try to separate it up myself.
Yeah, that's right. I just, yeah, I mean, again, the plan is unchanged. The refusal as, you know, if there are these additional parking refusals, you know, that would just be reflected there. But, you know, we would seek, you know, that relief as well. And I'd be, you know, willing to hear, you know, if there's board comment, like, for example, on the ADA, you know, accessibility space, or if we, you know, there's a request to enlarge in one of the spaces, we could do that.
You know, our goal here was just to find a viable use and to, you know, we felt like we could fit four cars in there.
That would be a benefit to the community, given the issues in Pashtun Square with the availability of on-street parking.
But, you know, we're happy to take, you know, the board's advice.
So, Hillary, this will be closed except for that, right? Am I correct?
And then have a chance to make comments on that?
Well, so what we'll do is we'll have a resumption hearing, then we'll get the we'll get the corrected refusal addressed quickly and we can bring this back for a resumption hearing and we can open it up to board member questions or comments regarding the refusal, comments from the applicant, comments from the audience.
I don't know if there really will be any, as well as the Planning Commission's recommendation.
Okay, sure. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Phillips.
All right. Thank you. And I apologize about the refusal.
All right. So, number eight, and we're going to hear eight and...
So number eight, and we're going to hear eight and nine together.
So eight is MI 2024, 005-507, 3313 North 16th Street.
And number nine, MI 2024, 005-508-3315 North 16th Street.
There's a letter of support from the Nicetown Tioga Improvement Team for both.
And there are some provisos.
Mr. Chair, I have to step away for about 10 minutes.
Thank you, Michael.
Rachel?
Are you sworn in again, or I'm good?
No, you just state your name, please.
Okay, Rachel Pritzker.
Could you identify your client in relationship to the property?
My client is 7-1 Realty, LLC, represented by Nadal Hassan, who's a member of that entity.
The vice chair has a few questions for me.
Counsel, do you agree to wait the reason of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits as needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing?
Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you. Can you see my screen?
We can.
Okay. So this is 3313 and 3315 North 16th Street. Just going to go to the refusal.
they both have uh similar if not identical refusals this project uh as well as the adjacent
one proposes the erection of a semi-detached structure with a roof deck three roof deck and
three roof deck access structures which i don't know that that's accurate of our architect explain
and for use as multi-family household link for nine dwelling units as you might uh realize from
the RCO meeting, we reduced it to seven units in each building. So there are proviso plan forms
reflecting that. The refusals were generated mostly based on the RSA3 zoning and also to keep
some of the existing characteristics on the block. It's worth also noting that this board
granted a variance back in 2019 for four units under a different zoning permit. So again, just
showing the need for relief related to the RSA 5 zoning on this site. I'm going to go through the
hardship, application, deed, RSA 5 zoning, aerial map. And as the board can see, there's significant
vacancy in this area as well. So the seven units is not going to overcrowd the neighborhood as
there's a lot of vacancy. And also, and I'll mention this adjacent structures that
include multifamily units as well. So this property 3313 is 2,389 square feet, according to OPA.
It basically is an extremely large lot that has single family zoning. Again, there had been a
variance granted back in 2019 for multifamily on this lot. There are other also properties located
with multifamily units as well. Most recently is 3320 North 16th Street, in which this board
granted eight dwelling units on a vacant lot similar to this. Also, 3337, four units,
three, three, two, one, six units, et cetera. The property is 20 feet wide. And given some of the
architectural features of the adjacent structures, we've included some additional refusals to match
the porch, rear yard depth allowed for, for example, rear yard depth, which allowed for
better layout and design for the project, but also keeping in context, the existing structures
and adjacent structures nearby. The other refusals are for occupied area. We basically
have chosen to limit the building to three stories rather than four stories to better align
with the existing three-story structures, maintaining the architectural consistency
and scale of the area. In a lot of conversations with the community, one of the main concerns was
In a lot of conversations with the community, one of the main concerns was that the exterior
more so modeled the existing character of the block with the bay windows and the porch.
So as you'll see from the revised design, that was included in order to keep in character
with the existing building.
Building the larger occupied area allowed for the size and scale of the unit mix that
the community supported in addition to keeping, again, in context with what was there. We do
believe that this will contribute to the revitalization of this area, will provide
more affordable housing units, which is important for the city of Philadelphia.
The other refusals relate to parking. If I can show you the better aerial of the block,
there's no parking curb cuts on the block there's also some slopes as you can see which would mean
that you'd have to kind of dig into the hill to provide parking would maybe take one and a half
spaces off the street to maybe provide once a spot on the street given the nature of the block
and sort of the way we would have to design this parking was completely not feasible for the site
And again, there's a lot of vacancy in the area, so parking wasn't of the highest concern, more so the aesthetic and unit count when we discussed with the community.
We met with the community in October for a public meeting, and we have had support from the community.
This is their letter.
We had 13 people in support, and I think it's one no and two table, which I think just they didn't vote or didn't provide one way or another for both of these projects.
Again, as mentioned, they had asked us to make some changes, which we did related to the size.
Sorry, not the size of the units, the number of units.
They want us to eliminate the studios, which we did.
They wanted trash storage in the rear, which we were already providing.
They wanted some considerations for local hiring, which we would, of course, do, although unrelated to the zoning.
And then most important was the redesign of the building facade to match the surrounding structures, which was really important, keeping with the bay windows.
So that was changed. This is also the zoning permit, as I mentioned, where it was approved for multifamily back in 2019, just showing that the request is not out of character for what's already been approved.
And obviously, the market conditions are slightly different.
And again, 3.3.2.0 is probably the best example recently with eight units, although this is seven units, a little bit smaller.
So I'd like to bring on, if possible, Gabe Deck from Gnome Architecture to go through the design and the changes that we made.
And then happy to take any questions.
All right.
Dave, and I'll have to speak.
Would you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Gabriel Deck, G-A-B-R-I-E-L, Deck, D-E-C-K.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Gabe, are you able to share your screen and go through the plans?
Well, I think you'll be able to do so.
Okay, he'll be rejoining as a panelist, and then he'll be able to share his screen.
Okay, can you see my screen?
We can.
Okay, so as Rachel mentioned, we had originally proposed nine units for each building, and
it has now been reduced down to seven units per building. As far as the unit or the lot footprint
here, you know, we are holding the front setback of the building to be in alignment with the
neighbor properties, as well as the side yard setback to be in alignment with the context of
the block with a minimal side yard. So trying to match the character of the block. Height-wise,
we are looking to do just basement plus three stories rather than going up the full 38 feet to
to kind of maximize things we're trying to make it as contextual as possible
from a layout perspective the building is organized from left to right as the basement
through the roof deck so bottom lowest level units are three bi-level units that have a common
entrance as well as a shared front porch so we have three bi-level units a two-bedroom unit in
the very front and then one bedroom unit in the middle one bedroom unit in the back
Moving up to the second and third floor, matching layouts with one-bedroom units facing the front and the back as flats.
moving up to the second and third floor matching layouts with
The top floor one-bedroom units also have private roof deck access.
So we did have a third pilot house previously.
Now it's just two pilot houses per building.
Pilot houses are in conformance with the zoning code, though, so no issue there.
As Rachel mentioned, we do propose for shared trash and recycling at the back of the property,
access by way of a side yard to the back that everyone has access to.
And then most importantly was kind of the context to make sure we were kind of being contextual in our design.
So most of the buildings on the block and the surrounding area are three stories and have front covered front porches.
A lot of them have a lot of ornamentation and bay windows as well.
So we worked closely to kind of replicate that aesthetic and make sure that the design of the house or the structures was in conformance and would kind of nestle in nicely with the context of the surrounding block.
That's pretty much the gist of it. Rachel, anything else I missed?
Can you just go through just the dimensional variances, just from a design perspective, the side yard and the rear yard depth?
Sure. So we have a zoning table here. We had four refusals here for the use.
lot coverage was within RSA three maximum is 50%. We're proposing 64%. And then the side yard
minimum was eight. I'm sorry, the eight foot, we're proposing three foot two. And then the rear
yard is a 20 foot deep minimum. We're proposing 10 feet. Again, it's really just, as Rachel
mention to kind of make the building feel as contextual as possible on the block so we spread
our square footage out over three floors rather than going completely vertical but we do have
a three foot two side yard on both sides of each building and then the rear yard we have a 10 foot
deep rear yard versus 20 which is the minimum for the area
Thank you.
Do you have somebody want to adopt your testimony?
Yes, Nadal Hassan should be in the audience.
nidal hassan please raise your virtual hand away to be sworn in
all right they have been allowed to speak
sir could you please state your name and state your name and spell for the stenographer
Yes, Nadal Hassan, N-I-D-A-L, last name Hassan, H-A-S-S-E-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, sir.
Please proceed, counsel.
Nadal, have you heard my testimony today?
Do you believe it to be true and accurate, and do you adopt it as your own?
Thank you.
Rachel, just out of curiosity, next door, how many units do you have?
us directly adjacent yeah i'd have to look um
most of blocks will multi-family i'm sure right yeah so yeah so 3301 is three units 3320 is eight
units 3321 is six units 3323 is seven units 3329 is three units 3337 is four units um and most of
Those were the ones that were granted recently a 3-3-2-3 and 3-3-2.
The rest are from well before this decade.
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
Yeah, is the basements all below grade?
Because I think you have units.
The basement in the first floor can compromise one unit.
I mean, compose a one unit.
Okay, there it is.
Okay, so it's three units that share the basement and the first floor.
Correct.
Okay, and that basement, I see you have a bedroom and bath and all that below grade.
Correct.
Yeah, the first floor is held up as far out of grade as possible just to get as much natural light.
Yeah, the first floor is held up as far out of grade as possible just to get.
But yes, the bedrooms are in the basement.
Okay, and so there are, I think this in the rear is the rear window well?
Is that what I see in the rear?
Yes, we have window wells at every bedroom for egress.
And then the side yard is also allowing all of the egress from the rear and the side to get to the front, to the right of way, to satisfy all the egress requirements.
Thank you.
Any other questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson.
Just on the proviso form, it noted the reduction units. They did not note the reduction in the
pilot house. So if the board grants and grants with the revised plans, we would need an updated
proviso form that indicates one of the pilot houses on each one has been eliminated. Thank you.
questions or comments from the virtual audience
yes Mr. Chair
I have a hand up from Mr. Charles Richardson
I was about to speak
Mr. Richardson
good afternoon again Mr. Chair
you've already been sworn just state your name
Charles Richardson
R-I-C-H-A-R-D-S-O-N
Office of Councilwoman Bass room 508
City Hall
Councilwoman has no opposition to granting the variances
you planning commission to mr champs artists two more hands raised for the matter
the first one is a katrina williams i've allowed them to speak
why could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
oh i'm sorry my question was not for this particular matter um this is for my own
Okay, we'll get to you later.
Do you have another handout?
Yes, one more.
Marie Winfelder, I'll allow them to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell it for the stenographer?
Marie Winfelder, please unmute.
Marie Winfelder.
you can go ahead mr chair thank you um planning commission
amy boyd for the planning commission this testimony is for 3313 north 16th street and
3315 north 16th street the comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location
from the existing residential single family rsa3 the property was previously granted a variance
for four families. The appellant has not shown that seven units is the least minimum to afford
relief. No off-street parking is characteristic of the neighborhood. The appellant has not
demonstrated that there are unique physical circumstances or conditions of the property
that would prevent it from being used in conformance with the zoning code for side yard,
rear yard, and occupied area. The Planning Commission recommends that the board grant
the requested variance for multifamily with provisor for four units, grant the requested
variance for no off-street parking, and deny the requested variances for side yard, rear
yard, and occupied area.
Do you mind if I respond, Chairman?
Okay, I just want to make note that the four units was approved in 2019.
There's an incredible amount of vacancy in this area and on this block, which does show
that there's no viable way to provide four units or a single family home. And as mentioned, the
most recent zoning permits and variances that were granted on this block in particular were
six and eight unit, sorry, seven and eight dwelling units. So we're in character with what was there.
Thank you. I'll load these both together. So number eight, MI 2024-005-
Excuse me, Mr. Charris.
I just want to note, in addition to the revised plans, there were also provisos requested by the RCO.
The ones that are enforceable if the board decides to grant this and would like to add them are maximum seven dwelling units, trash stored in rear, and commercial trash pickup.
Then in that same proviso that we put, piled houses removed from each?
That is in the revised plans.
We don't need to add that.
All right, that's perfect.
Perfect.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay, so let me start again.
Number eight, MI 2024-005-507.
Number eight, MI 2024, 005-507-3313 North 16th Street, and MI 2024, 05-508-3315 North
6th Street, I vote yes.
Maximum seven dwelling units, trash stored in rear, revised plans, one page, stamped
by ZBA on November 13th, 2024.
And that is for both, correct, Mr. Chair?
I said for both.
Yep, for both.
Okay, thank you.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Yeah, sure, that's okay.
I forgot, Michael, that slipped away.
Okay, Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes, with provisos for both.
Tana Graham, my vote is no.
Iowen, my vote is yes with provisos for both.
Ishmael Shaheed, my vote is yes with provisos for both.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right.
So the number, we're here, we're going to do 11 and 16 together.
MI 2024-005-512-1213 Cressy Street and MI 2024-005-612-1211 Cressy Street.
A letter of no position from Fishtown Neighbors Association.
Applicant provided a petition of support from over 100 signatures.
an applicant provided six to eight letters of support.
Counsel Catherine Mismer.
Mr. Chair, I just want to clarify for the record on 1213 Crease Street,
the letter from Fishtown Neighbors was in support
where it was a letter of no position for 1211 Crease Street.
Thank you.
katherine could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer
yes it's katherine misamer m-i-s-s-i-m-e-r 1835 market street suite 1400 19103
we're a firm to tell the truth to hold truth and nothing but the truth
i do could you identify your clients in their relationship to the two properties
Yes. With respect to 1211 Cree Street, here on behalf of co-applicants Denise Petrino and Mark Getson, co-trustee of the Myra Getson Vocable Trust, which is the owner of the property at 1211, and on behalf of 1213 Cree Street, the owner of the property at 1213.
Vice Chair has a few questions.
Good afternoon, Council. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate to its accuracy?
i do i will just make a note i did raise this with the chair as well i'm sorry with board
council as well that the refusal on 1213 which reflects the small proposed addition
does state that it's above the existing two-story structure when in fact it's in front of and i just
want to make that clear and all the plans reflect that it's located to the front of the existing
structure rather than on top of the existing two-story structure
okay no problem um i believe we should be able to correct that internally um have you emailed
in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case
bodies in advance of this hearing we have yes thank you please proceed to show your screen
are you seeing the screen now yes we can great might want to make it a little bit look just a
little bit bigger it's a little a little bit of an eye test that's better thank you we'll go back
and forth because i think the plans will show up much bigger so just please correct me if you need
it adjusted so thank you um we're here today with an application for the use of two buildings on
crease street for a child care center um as stated there is a posed small addition to the 1213 crease
Street building, no change to the 1211 Cree Street building, and again, the only refusal on each parcel
is for that child care use. I have with me today Denise Petrino, who is the head of Fishtown
Montessori School, and project architect David Whipple. This is really a community-centered
project and embraces the sense of community and civic duty that is a pillar of the Montessori
method. The Fishtown Neighbors Association issued a letter of support in no position with respect to
these applications. And as we'll scroll through, he was able to obtain a petition of support with
applicant was able to obtain a petition of support with over 80 individual signatures
over 80 individual signatures.
supporting this request, including the properties on either side of this parcel.
I do attach a map for you visually to see the concentration of support in the immediate
neighborhood. The green star is the location of these two parcels, whereas the yellow dots
are all of the support letters that were received um and i did include uh in our full exhibit
package all of the support but i will not scroll through that today in preservation of our time
but i did want to make reference to the fact that there's overwhelming support from the community
here um i did want to note 1224 marlboro is directly related to the existing fish town
montessori location at 1212 marlboro street they are in support as well as the two cree street
parcels on either side of the proposed parcels that are at issue today, 1209, and then 1215 Greece.
I do want to note that the proximity of support is vital here because 90%, almost 90% of the
families that attend this school do walk their children to school. So this is a really a
neighborhood-based school. It's an amenity in the neighborhood and a resource for many of the
families that live here. So I wanted to start sort of on the Marlboro Street side, just to
familiarize everyone. Some of the board members may recall back in 2021, we were here with an
application for the building you see on the screen. This is a former church, and this is the
home of Fishtown Montessori School. It's in connection with this use that we're here today.
So, as you can see from this aerial, this is the existing Fishtown Montessori School in the church building.
These are the two Cree Street properties. And as you can see, the rear yards are directly adjacent.
So it's a unique opportunity to naturally expand this use and give the students some more and much needed space.
um there's a growing wait list at fishtown montessori and nowhere for the school to expand
to host those students um as you can see here it's a historic church building it really can't
handle and accommodate in addition to host additional students and they really need to
preserve this outdoor space for a play area obviously with children in preschool and lower
ages, they need that outdoor space as part of their everyday education and play.
The Cree Street properties, on the other hand, are directly behind this play yard, as you can
see from the aerial, and could accommodate the required space for those extra students that are
looking to join Fishtown Montessori School. The main entrance will remain from Marlborough Street.
No children will be accessing the school through Cree Street. They will, through the main entrance
here. And if their classrooms are in either of these buildings, they will process through the
yard to their school. Crease Street Corridor is unique. As you can see from some of the photos,
these are the two buildings we're talking about. This is 1211 Crease. This is 1213.
The proposed addition on 13 would bring it in line with the orange 1211 building.
so it's basically duplicating what's there to bring it to the street frontage it does give
back a parking space on crease street as well as there would be no parking in front of the building
on crease um this is the 1213 building i'm sorry 1211 yes 1213 orange is orange is 11 gray is 13
just for reference this is the rear of the 1213 building this is directly across the street on
even side of crease street this is a community garden further up the block on this same block
on crease street um this really is a community centered block these neighborhood institutions
are vital to the growing and family neighbor nature of this of this neighborhood today's
proposal includes that small addition referenced on 1213 to bring it in line with the neighboring
structure at 12 11. no changes are proposed at 12 11. both properties would then be used for
expansion of fishtown montessori school serving as an additional office space and classroom space
so you can see these are the zoning plans and i'll make this a little smaller so that you can see
them chairman um these are the zoning plans submitted in connection with the expansion of
1213 again it's a small two-story addition that would bring it in line with the orange to 1211
building this is the proposed layout the first floor of crease street would be a classroom
small restroom area. And this is the access to the rear yard. Again, that's when children would
be coming in and out and leaving the school through that rear yard that connects to the
through that rear yard that connects to the existing 1212 Marlboro location.
existing 1212 Marlboro location.
Upstairs would be another classroom similar layout with a restroom and a small office to the rear
for staff. And then there is no proposed addition to the 1211 building. It would be used in its
current form but again it would be a small nursery space on the first floor and office above and this
is vital to the neighborhood. There isn't a shortage of daycares and child care centers that
are currently enrolling infants. And many of the families currently enrolling older children in the
Fishtown Montessori school have advised that there is nowhere to send their infants and younger
children in the neighborhood. So this is, you know, an urgent need in the neighborhood as these
families continue to grow and want to stay here in Fishtown. I did want to let Denise Petrino,
head of school, sort of speak for a moment on Montessori, Fishtown, Montessori, their success
at the Marlboro location and why these two Cree Street properties are ideal for the natural
expansion of the school. Denise, can you raise your hand if you're in the audience?
could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer hello my name is denise
spetrino and my last name and my name is spelled d-e-n-i-s-e s-p-e-p-e-r-i-n-o
refer to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth i do please proceed counsel
Thank you. Denise, did you want to walk through the overview of Montessori that we've prepared? We'll keep it brief in mind of the board's time.
Of course. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. This slide demonstrates how much children love our center and families love our center. Moving on, we want to briefly go into the level of quality of care that we're offering, which has recently been recognized for us with an award for excellence in education in Philadelphia.
We really are a valuable resource in the Fishtown neighborhood. We're a commodity in the neighborhood that parents rely on for high quality care.
Moving on, our program is unique. I myself am a lifelong educator. I've been in early childhood for 30 years with a principal certification, a master's in teaching, learning and curriculum.
and I'm currently getting my Montessori administrator certificate. The level of
quality that we are offering is unparalleled in this neighborhood, and it is highly desirable,
which is reflected in the demand that we have. We serve currently 85 children and their families,
and we want to grow to provide more seats to the to the children. The parents are relying on us.
This is a picture of a picnic that we had at the end of last year. It's really a community
resource and one that we're proud to offer. Moving on, the zoning variants,
your approval today will enable us to offer 25 more seats for three to six-year-olds
and offer up to 10 seats for infants, which is in Philadelphia, I believe there's only one other
Montessori infant, and that's all the way by the Navy Yard. So this level of care is not even being
offered really in the city, and we're proud to offer it. We want to offer it, but we need your
approval to do so. We're also offering really high-quality jobs. Our jobs that we have,
they qualify for the Philadelphia Quality Jobs Program. We have right now employing 25 staff
members over 30 hours a week. And we would like to offer more quality jobs. I think the zoning
would at least offer 10 more quality jobs in the neighborhood. For people who are dedicated to
early childhood education and wanting to grow, we support that learning for our staff as well.
We are a neighborhood resource and we are a as as evidenced by the numerous letters of support, we are really impacting the neighborhood in a positive way.
We're really mindful of our impact as well. We have met many sustainability measures in order to reduce our trash and we're going to be using the Marlboro Street for all of our trash, which we have a commercial account with.
And, you know, finally, if we just want to scroll through these last slides, we're offering something that's super unique, super high quality and something that we're just grateful to be able to do.
And something that we're just grateful to be able to do, but it's really in high demand and there's and this is the only reasonable location for us to to do this.
But it's really.
There's nowhere else for us to do it. We have this opportunity right now and we're asking for your support and your go ahead to help make it happen.
So thank you very much for allowing me to take the time to to share our beautiful program.
And you can see the smiling children here.
You're going to really help facilitate that in the city.
So thanks so much.
Thanks, Denise.
Chairman, I just have a few minor points and then we can wrap up.
Let me ask you a question.
Should she adopt your testimony?
Yes, she can do it now or when I finish.
Either way, it's time while she's on it.
Denise, have you heard my testimony today?
Yes, I have.
Would you agree it's true and correct?
Yes, I do.
So, would you adopt it as your own?
I would.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I just had a couple more minor points, more particular with the zoning respect.
Both pre-street properties are currently zoned RSA 5.
As a result, the proposed child care use generates the use refusal on each site.
It's long been recognized, and I share this report that was issued.
It's a little older now, but just to bring to everyone's attention that one of the greatest hurdles for child care providers in Philadelphia happens to be zoning.
um this report was published by the philadelphia citizens for children and youth
and it's entitled swimming upstream child care providers and zoning process in philadelphia
the one line in the executive summary i've highlighted for you that i want to share is
having child care facilities located in areas accessible to families which often means
residential districts lifts a tremendous burden from time challenged parents of young children
having high-quality facility that is easily accessible to every parent's desire.
Obstacles to operation, getting restrictive zoning, burdensome requirements,
reduce supply of child care, and make parents hunt for child care more difficult.
So I just want to share that with you as you understand that essentially this is a neighborhood
resource that the zoning code tells us can't be in the neighborhood. So the request is that while
While the RSA 5 use typically makes sense in the neighborhood, we have to allow for
neighborhood resources too when the demand and support are there.
The Commonwealth Court has recently held that where the proposed use is less impactful than
the permitted use, the applicant need not provide the property can use, cannot be used
for the permitted use.
The child care use here would actually minimal impact to Crease Street as all pick up and
drop off again will be through Marlboro.
The child care center is open from 8.30 a.m. to 3.00 p.m. with optionally pickup at 5.30.
There are no regular nighttime activities.
Single family residence, on the other hand, brings 24-hour activity to the site with potential impacts on parking, trash pickup, et cetera.
Child care use is providing immediate benefit to the community and preserve the existing buildings.
We met with FNA.
As you know, you have their coordinating RCO letters for each site.
the meeting was well attended and several participants who i believe are here today
have also spoke their positive experiences with fishtown montessori we believe this project will
not alter the essential character of the neighborhood as again it's a neighborhood
resource that's already there today and is desperately needing expansion will not impair
the appropriate user development of adjacent property we do have letters of support from
both neighboring free street properties 1206 1209 and 1215. the project will not be detrimental to
public welfare and again Ms. Citrino of Fishtown Montessori as well as our project architect are
both on the line to the extent there are questions. Thank you. Questions from the board?
Questions or comments? Go ahead. Okay, so you currently have 85 children. Do we have the age
ranges for those children now? Yes. I think it's toddler for kindergarten, but Denise,
do you want to speak to the exact ages? That's correct. We serve children right now
one and a half through six years old. Okay. This expansion would allow us to serve children
under the age of one and a half, as young as really six or 12 weeks. Okay. And that's the
10 infants you're talking about? That's the infant classroom. Yes. Yes. And then you were going to
have 25 more seats for those between three and six years. Is that what I'm hearing? That's the
additional classroom space. Okay. And I know this isn't the zoning issue, but we have made
arrangements for the special fire.
um special uh uh fire code i guess and safety issues with respect to younger children like this
that there have to be uh uh means of ingress egress um for those that are not capable of
self-preservation we've made same connection with the um state licensing and requirements
she would have to provide all the requisite egress yes and you'll note that um handedly
the infants will be on the first floor rather than the second floor for that purpose that
that was my next question uh was there going to be some office space as part of this addition is
or on the 1213 side there is a small office space for staff um located behind the uh
behind the bathroom on the second floor.
And again, those are the three to six-year-old classrooms
on the 12-13 side.
Gotcha.
Thank you.
Any other questions from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
Yes, I have a hand up from a Robert Everett.
but i have allowed them to speak yeah hi mr everett you were already sworn this morning sir
all you have to do is state your name first name is robert last name is everett e-v-e-r-e double t
please start your your presentation just here to confirm uh our letter from the rco
as it's given and that's it okay thank you very much for taking the time to call us we
appreciate it is there anyone else in the virtual audience yes mr chair i have a john kadish i've
allowed them to speak i could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer
uh yes john a dash k a d as in david a s as in sam h you swear or affirm to tell the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the truth yes are you a neighbor um yes i live directly across the street
from where they're proposing to please please proceed um so i i've been living in the neighborhood
for 11 years i i am a former teacher i taught for over 20 years and i currently still work in
education so i appreciate the montessori school i appreciate what they're doing i don't have any
problem with that and i do believe it is a positive impact for the neighborhood itself
but when we moved into the neighborhood 11 years ago before it became what it's becoming now
I wasn't moving into a home that was going to be opposite a commercial property.
We bought the home together because we wanted to live on a residential street that was not a business street.
My concern is, in our neighborhood, there are already three daycares and nursery schools,
one of which is on the corner of Crease right now, which is right about three houses up from our home
and some of the other homes that this is impacting that there is already a lot of traffic on the
street because of that. But we do support that daycare. And like I said, there are at least
two to three other nursery schools and daycares in Fishtown also. The other point is that there
is tons of commercial property currently available on Gerard and Frankfurt where this could go.
I don't think it would create a hardship.
I also work in a private school, and I am aware of many campuses around Philadelphia where they have to split the location of the school basically because we don't want it in a residential section.
The other thing is they're saying there's little activity.
There will be little activity on crease.
We're making the assumption that the school is going to stay there forever.
So if it doesn't and something were to happen to those properties, it would be zoned at that point commercial and it could impact what happens on the street further on with the possibility of adding trash cans or dumpsters.
And I think the purpose of living in a residential corridor is to have neighbors live in a communal
environment.
I think taking two of the houses that are on the street and rezoning them to non-residential
takes away the possibility of new families and new neighbors coming in to be part of
the fabric of the neighborhood because now we're making it residential.
One of the properties also does have an off-street parking space right now, so that would not
impact the parking on the street as well.
It's a very active community with children playing on the street all the time.
So I just think putting a commercial property right across from the existent residence is
a commercial property right across from the existing residences i can't support that
I can't support.
all right thank you thank you for your comments um is there any other comments in the virtual audience
station we have stephanie dormant they've been abuted and allowed to speak yes how many were
How many more hands do we have, Jason?
We've got about five more after Ms. Norman.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. Hello, everyone. My name is Stephanie Norman, S-T-E-P-H-A-N-I-E, and Norman is N-O-R-M-A-N.
Hold on. Hold on. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you live in a neighborhood?
it. I do. I am John's next door neighbor at 1214 and a half priest. Are you are you in favor of
this project or against it? I'm against it. All right. For any other reasons than what John has
said? No, I think he summed it up very well. Thank you very much for your time. Next hand, Jason.
Chair, we have Natalie Short. They have been unmuted and allowed to speak.
Thank you. Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
My name is Natalie Short, N-A-T-A-L-I-E-S-H-O-R-T.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you live in a neighborhood?
Yes, I live at 1321 Marlboro, about less than a block down Marlboro Street.
Are you in favor or against this project?
In favor.
um could you give us any reasons other than all the testimony we've had already
um yeah i've lived here since before the school opened and i honestly see no downside to their
presence um i live downstream from the school traffic wise and i haven't noticed any issues
with traffic or parking i do see some of the same families every day walking there and from there
which is nice to see and i also have an 11th month old son and i've unfortunately learned how
hard it is to find a preschool spot at all, let alone a spot that I would be happy to send him to.
There simply just aren't enough daycare spots in the neighborhood. So I think a Fishtown Montessori
expansion would only benefit the neighborhood. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for
taking the time. Next hand, please. Chair, we have someone with the last name Cornbrooks.
They have been immune and allowed to speak. Hi, could you please state your name as spelled for
the court stenographer. My name is Charlotte Kornbrooks, C-H-A-R-L-O-T-T-E, Kornbrooks,
C-O-R-N-B-R-O-O-K-S. Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth? Yes. Do you live in a neighborhood? Yes. Are you for or against this project? For.
Thank you very much. Is there anything different you can tell us than what we've already heard?
uh i would like to having i would like to underscore the point that there is currently
not enough child care in the neighborhood um and also add that infant care is even less
available um i'd also like to say that having had my child in a different daycare and moved
to Fishtown Montessori, the level of care is superior, and the ability to be able to walk
your child to school is beneficial to the entire neighborhood beyond Priest Street. So that's it.
Thank you. Thank you very much for taking the time. Next hand, Jason, whoever's there. Jason,
please. Chair, this is Javette. The next name is Heather Schreiner. They have been unmuted and
allowed to speak. Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, Chairperson. My name is Heather, H-E-A-T-H-E-R, last name Schreiner, S as in Sam, C-H-R-E-I-N-E-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you live in the area?
I do. I've resided within a three-block radius of the school for the past 10 years.
Are you for or against the project?
I am for the project.
Thank you very much for taking the time to calls. Next hand, please.
Okay, Chair, I am back. The next hand is Sarah Buckley.
How many more hands do you have?
After this, just two.
Okay, thank you. Please proceed. State your name and spell for the court stenographer.
Good afternoon. My name is Sarah Buckley, S-A-R-A-H-B-U-C-K-L-E-Y.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Do you live in the neighborhood?
I live in the greater neighborhood, and I'm a mother of two children currently in the school.
Are you for or against this project?
Are you for or against this project?
I'm for the project.
I'm for the project.
Thank you very much for taking the time to call.
Thank you very much.
Next hand, please.
If I could.
Go ahead.
Ms. Buckley, go ahead.
I think they're gone now, Mr. Chair.
Next hand.
Sasha Feynman has been allowed to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. My name is Sasha Feynman, S-A-S-H-A, last name Feynman, F-E-I-N-M-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Do you live in the neighborhood?
I don't.
Okay. Are you for this project or against?
I am for it. I'm an employee. I've been working at the school for the past three years.
Well, thank you very much. We do appreciate your time.
Absolutely. Thank you so much.
Can I just note also that having the school campuses in close proximity within like where you can just walk from one from the other, it actually makes a really big difference on the school community and what the school is able to do to maintain that community field to do all school functions together rather than being spread out.
It's a huge benefit.
Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Next hand, please.
Yes, Herva Beckeri has been allowed to speak.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Herva Beckeri, H-I-R-V as in Victor, A, B as in Bravo, A-K-E-R-I.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Do you live in the neighborhood?
I do. I live on a 1300 block up Crease Street.
Are you in favor of this project or against?
In favor.
Thank you very much. We appreciate your time. Is there anyone else left, Jason?
Yes, one more hand. Lisa Traum, I've allowed her to speak.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Hello, my name is Lisa Traumann, T-R-L-I-S-A-T-R-E-I-L-M-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Do you live in a neighborhood?
I do. I live on the 1300 block of Cree Street as well.
Are you in favor of this project or against?
Very much in favor.
Thank you so much for taking your time to cause.
Planning Commission.
Anyway, I'm bored with the Planning Commission.
This testimony will be for 1211 and 1213 Cree Street.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning application
from the existing single-family residential RSA 5.
The appellant has not shown that there are unique physical conditions
or circumstances that would prevent the property from being used in
conformance with the zoning code. The Planning Commission recommends that the
board deny the requested variance for child care center.
I'm going to do both at the same time.
MI 2024-005-512-1330
13 Cree Street, and MI 2024-005-612-1211 Cree Street, I vote yes for both.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes for both.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes for both.
Tana Graham, my vote is yes for both.
Aya Nguyen, my vote is yes for both.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes for both.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
All right, we're going to move on to number 12, MI 2024-005-520-912-28 Walnut Street.
Michael Phillips is the attorney.
Recommendation of unanimous non-opposition from Washington Square West.
A letter of non-opposition also from Council Member Squilla.
Hey, counsel, you've already been sworn. Just for the record, state your name.
Good afternoon. Michael Phillips, Claire Harrison, 1835 Market Street,
Creek 1400, Philadelphia PA, 19103. Here on behalf of Sweet Green Philadelphia, LLC.
And our vice chair has a few questions for you, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulate towards accuracy?
I do. Have you emailed them all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in advance of this hearing. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen.
Thank you.
So, good afternoon. I will try to keep this one as brief as possible. I know I have a tendency to be loquacious, so I'm going to do my best here.
So, good afternoon. I will try to keep this one as brief as possible. I know I.
This is an application to expand an existing sweet green at 10th and Walnut from its existing 1,269 square feet to 2050 square feet.
Essentially, Sweetgreen is taking over a former dry cleaner that's next door right here, Expert Cleaners and Tailors.
So this is currently Sweetgreen.
They're just expanding their operations.
This is the existing business.
Again, the location received special exception approval for takeout restaurant use in 2005.
And this is the proposed new area. There will be a water station, some additional seats, and there's no signage that's part of this. This is the new area all to the left.
This is the existing area. There is not going to be any change in hours of operation, staffing levels, menu offerings.
It you know, the business will continue to operate during the course of the improvements that are made further there.
And I'm just going to pull up a letter that we have in here from Sweetgreen that I think lays out right here.
You know, there will be no significant changes to existing refuse load, pickup schedule, loading, unloading.
The trash plan that was submitted in 2005 will remain the same.
Again, there's no change here.
We're simply expanding the use.
It's a special exception, not a variant.
So there will not be any additional detrimental impacts by virtue of expanding the use.
I'd just like to ask Pamela Haver, if she's here, on behalf of Sweet Green, if she could be promoted to panelists to adopt my testimony.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell it for the stenographer?
Please wait for your virtual hand to wait to be sworn in.
And if Pamela Haber is not available, I would ask Erin Flatter if she can be promoted.
Which one is available?
Do we see a hand?
Yes, Pamela Haber.
Okay, sure.
Hi, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yes, it's Pamela, P-A-M-E-L-A.
Last name Haber, H-A
B as in the boy, E-R
Where or if I'm to tell the truth
The whole truth, nothing but truth
Please proceed, counsel
Ms. Haber, did you hear my testimony a moment ago?
Okay, and do you agree
That everything that I stated is true and accurate
To the best of your knowledge, information, and belief?
And do you agree to adopt my testimony
As if it were your own?
I have no further questions for Ms. Haber and would offer ourselves available for any questions.
Questions for the board.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Only a note for the board that we did receive the fully executed copy, the lease that we requested, so this matter is ready for a vote. Thank you.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further answer, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning at this location from the existing commercial mixed-use CMX-5.
The appellant has shown that the proposed takeout restaurant would not cause detrimental impacts beyond what would normally be expected.
The Planning Commission recommends the Board grant the requested special exemption for takeout restaurants.
Thank you. MI 2024-005-520-912-18 Walnut Street. I vote yes.
Michael Johns, my vote is yes.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Tanetta Graham, my vote is yes.
Iowan, my vote is yes.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you very much.
Number 14, MI 2024-005-554-522 South 17th Street.
Henry Clinton is the attorney.
There's a letter of opposition from Center City Residents Association.
There's a letter of opposition from Center City Residence Association.
No explanation.
No explanation.
Applicant did provide a support with 28 signatures, five from the block.
Back in the other hand.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Good evening.
Good evening.
Sir, you have already been sworn once today, because just for the record, could you state your name?
Henry Clinton, A-T-N-R-Y, C-L-I-N-T-O-N.
Could you identify your client in relationship to this property?
My client is Waybar, LLC, and the principal of which Robin Barrera is on the call, B-A-R-U-A.
Vice Chair has a few questions, sir.
Good evening, Counselor.
Do you agree to wait to read another refusal or stipulate to his accuracy?
have you emailed them all the required documents and exhibit that's needed to proceed with this
case obviously in advance of this hearing i did but two days ago i sent in the streets approval
everything else was in timeline that's fair uh please proceed and share your screen
thank you mr sheeve thank you mr clinton
good afternoon mr chairman members of the board uh henry clinton on behalf of waybar llc
um table of contents a1 through a10 uh this is a straightforward request uh for a single family
house in an rsa5 zoning district uh and we had two refusals one had to do with open space which
we have cured so the only issue before the board is whether or not we're going to maintain the
status quo of keeping a curb cut that's been in place for 65 years has been recognized by the
city with a no parking zone sign in front of it, is supported by the neighbors on the block,
and there's other garages in the area. And I'll go through it step by step. So here's a refusal,
two refusals. As I said, there's an open space, occupied area refusal. We've cured that. We do
have a proviso form in my package if the board looks kindly upon this request. So now the maximum
occupied space is 75%. The second refusal has to do with the curb cut, as I said, that's been in
place since 1959, and I have a zoning record to support that. The RCO letter, just opposition,
as you say, there's no explanation, but I know the three reasons. The three reasons were the
open space refusal, which we've cured.
Second was they don't want a parking spot on 17th Street,
even though, again, it's been there 65 years.
And the third is they wanted a tree.
If we could fit a tree, we'll put a tree.
The soil is loose and granular per our geotechnical report.
And we'll put planters in front of the building
and I have photographs of what those planters
would look like.
here are our support signatures we have support signatures of as you say mr chairman five on the
block there's four on this page uh and one on the other page here it is 513 interesting the
the letters of support are these are 521 and 525 are directly across the street
and these two signatures 518 and 520 are on either side of the property
so here are the photographs here is 17th street
I'm just using my cursor from north to south this is a parking garage in place now there's
a curb cut here already I don't know if that curb cut is used by this garage I think the
cars actually ended on south street but here 601 and 603 south 17th street both have garages
So right now, this is a vacant lot.
And as I said, it's been vacant since 1959.
There's an existing curb cut.
There's a cyclone fence here.
There's two cars actually in the parking area right now.
And when you think about it, the garage that we're proposing is actually going to be less
onerous than what's here now.
When individuals are using this space, they have to take the cyclone fence, pull it out
on the sidewalk.
I don't know if they double park or park across the street, and then go into the space.
With the garage that we're proposing, it's going to open automatically, and a car will simply go in and out as needed.
Down the street, again, this is southbound.
South Street is right here where my cursor is, but southbound, the garage is here,
and the other garages on 17th Street are where my cursor is on the left-hand side.
this is the view looking towards center city again what i didn't point out was
Again, what I didn't point out was here's a no parking sign indicating no parking in front of the curb cut.
here's a no parking sign indicating no parking
So the city recognizes that there is a curb cut there.
And as I said, it's been in use for many, many years.
A close-up view.
Right now, two cars parking there.
We're proposing one car.
Here's our zoning notice.
These are some planners in the neighborhood of the type that we would suggest using in lieu of a tree.
We do have a proviso plan indicating that we did reduce the open space area to 75%,
and we will add a tree to the sidewalk to the property next door,
because my clients are also going to develop 520,
and we also will add a planner to the sidewalk pending Philadelphia Street's approval.
These are the plans.
a four-story property with the rooftop deck we're not you know not exceeding the rear yard space
requirements nor the height requirements a nice appointed garage door all brick
all the way up this is the rear of the property little balcony above the sliding glass doors on
the first floor there is no basement this is a slab on gray construction
uh metal siding on the rear of the property uh this is the zoning excuse me the turning radius
again i have streets approval at the end of the presentation and we've uh highlighted or circled
the areas of changes of the plans if we can get street approval for a street excuse me for a tree
next door we'll do it because my client owns that property uh and this is the
open space that we change in the rear. And then this is the planner if we're able to get
streets approval for that. Floor plans, I'll start from the left to the right. Again, as I said,
there'll be slab on grade, one car parking, bedroom on the first floor, ample rear yard,
second floor living room, kitchen area, a little deck in the rear, two bedrooms on the third floor
and two bedrooms on the fourth floor with access to a rooftop deck.
The rest of the documents are, again, what you would typically see
in a presentation such as this.
Here's our tax clearance.
Zoning map, again, indicating a single family living
on that particular area of 17th Street on the west side.
This is a deed indicating ownership.
Notice letter to all the neighbors, certificate of mailing.
And this is the zoning record we're able to locate in public records, indicating 522 South 17th Street.
This was a teardown.
This is 1959.
There hasn't been anything on this lot since that time, and it's been used for parking for as long as anybody can remember.
I can't testify under oath that it was used as parking in 1959.
But if I had to bet, I would say it was because of parking is tough in the area.
So in conclusion, I'm really just asking the board to look at this as maintaining the status quo.
There's been a curb cut there for many, many moons.
Cars are parking there now.
The community group, I'm not saying it was an illogical decision,
But I don't know if it was totally rational, being that that curb cut has been there for decades.
There's a sign in front of it indicating no parking.
As I said, the garage will be less obtrusive than is the current situation where you have a cyclone fence.
It opens out into the sidewalk, blocking passersby.
A garage would be easy access in and easy access out.
We're not affecting anyone's light or air, any development of adjacent properties.
It's in harmony with the code.
It's in harmony with the neighbor support on the block and in surrounding areas.
And again, I'm just looking for the status quo to remain as is.
The only thing that's different is cars are going to be parking inside rather than outside.
And with that, I'd ask my client to unmute himself, Robin, if you can, to adopt my testimony.
Sir, could I please, could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, I see a Colin Conway.
Or Mr. Conway, Robin, or Colin Conway is also a principal, Mr. Chairman of the LLC.
Thank you.
Hi, this is Colin Conway, C-O-L-I-N, C-O-N-W-A-Y.
I'm actually here with Robin Berua, business partner.
Yes, this is Robin Barua, R-O-B-I-N, B as in boy, A-R-U-A.
Yes, this is Robin Berua, R-O-B-I-N.
Do you both swear or affirm, tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
One other thing, Mr. Chairman, I do have streets approval, which here it is right here.
I neglected to bring that out. We not only have a paper copy, but also we have a plan
stamped with streets approval for the turning radius of the vehicle. So, Robin and Colin,
did you hear my testimony when I presented your project to the board? Yes, we did. And if you had
the opportunity to testify, would you adopt my testimony as your own and as true and correct?
Absolutely. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you. Henry, your only refusal is the off-street parking.
That's it, Mr. Chairman.
Questions or comments from the board?
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Just briefly, Mr. Chair, because I wanted to, with the changes that were proposed with the tree and the planters and the revised plans,
I just wanted to make sure only streets approval was needed for that, and that was confirmed to me by L&I.
So if the board is inclined to grant, there is one page of revised plans and streets approval would be required of those plans prior to permit issuance.
Thank you, Ms. Emerson.
You're welcome.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see a hand up from Breonna Wakefield.
I have not heard of you speak.
and good afternoon mr chair good afternoon you just state your name you've already been sworn
brianna wakefield and please proceed thank you mr chair council president johnson does not oppose
this project thank you very much for taking the time to calls we appreciated it uh anyone else
in the virtual audience yes i'm marcus ferrera i've allowed them to speak why could you please
state your name and spell for the court stenographer hello marcus ferrera m-a-r-c-u-s
f as in frank e-r-r-e-i-r-a you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but
the truth i do are you a neighbor sir yes 1620 south street please proceed sir i i'm also the
We chair the South Street West Business Improvement District.
We are a RCO that covers this area.
We, along with CCRA, oppose this project because it perpetuates a lower pedestrian hostile use that has been existing since 1959.
where what we really want to do is start recovering from the injury to the streetscape that has occurred as a result of years of disinvestment
where the Cross Town Express went and the redlining south of Pine Street.
Our neighborhood has been devastated, and we're slowly rebuilding.
And one of the things is we're trying to remove the jagged teeth in the area so that it becomes more integrated and pedestrian friendly.
And there's no hardship here where this developer can simply build a house with a front stoop like all the other houses on 17th Street.
The attorney for the applicant pointed to other addresses that happen to be on 17th Street, but the garages are not on 17th Street.
they face the smaller streets. I forget if it's Rodman or not Dane. So the actual barrages
do not face, they're not on 17th Street. As for the street tree, you cannot put a tree in front
of a door, and also per the new regulations, you cannot put a tree to 10 feet on either side
of the door. On the property to the north, when I walked by, I saw the PA one call lines and they
go right where you would hope to have a tree well on the property to the north. So there's no way
that you could put a street tree there. However, there were clearances in the subject property
um where you would be able to put a tree so to say that you could put a tree in the property
to the north pending streets approval yeah that's a nice theory but the reality is and i tried to
and i tried to raise this at the ccra meeting is that the reality is he can't because there's
raise this at the ccra meeting is that the reality is you can't because there's
utility lines under there as seen uh on the day that i walked by in advance of the ccra meeting
approximately one month ago um so i i urge the the the board to to uh vote no on this this property
can be easily built at right as of right um with uh you know front stoop like every other residential
address and they can make a nice profit on it in center city and this will also improve uh
pedestrian access to south street west the corridor and the bus stop which is uh the number two uh
right there at the corners uh 17th and south thank you mr chairman can i address that
mr ferrera thank you for your input we appreciate it you can yeah henry chairman this is 17th street
looking towards Center City. My client's property is at 522. Here's one, two, three garages that
front on 17th Street, which is contrary to what Marcus just said. So I understand the position,
but this curb cut has been used for decades. And again, we're adding a house and whatever
pedestrian thoroughfare was used in the past, it will just be used in the same manner,
but less obstructive than what we have right now where a cyclone fence is lifted out onto the
sidewalk and bars people from walking by, which a garage would not do. And it's consistent with
what is three garages that are less than a block away on the other side of South Street.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience that has a comment?
Yes, Mr. Wade Albert. I will have them to speak.
Hi, Mr. Albert.
Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
First name is Wade, W-A-D-E.
Last name is Albert, A-L-B-E-R-T.
Fair or firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Please proceed.
Thank you.
So I'm speaking on behalf of the Center City Residents Association.
And I spoke with or I emailed Mr. Clinton and I explained the basis for opposition.
And I could confirm that he presented that accurately.
I just wanted to point out that with regard to the issues, well, our concerns about the garage, this property that the subject of this application is north of south, and there are no garages on the 1700, or on the, on 1700, on south 17th street, rather, north of south street.
the picture that's before the board right now is south of south street uh so we opposed uh this
project because we we thought that the plans were out of character with context of that particular
block that's at issue um and um but i do however appreciate um that the that the applicant has
proposed the plans uh to eliminate the um the uh the other refusal thank you thank you very much
for taking the time to call.
Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No further answer, Mr. Chair.
Planning Commission.
Amy Boyd with the Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change in zoning
at this location from the existing
single-family residential RSA 5.
The appellant has not shown that there are unique
physical circumstances or conditions
that would prevent the property from being used
in conformance with the zoning code
for parking requirements.
The Planning Commission recommends that the Board deny the requested variance for off-street parking.
Thank you. MI 2024, 00554, 522 South 17th Street. I vote yes. Hillary, do we have revised plans here?
so we have revised we have one page of revised plans but if the if the well yes but if the if
the tree is that's on the plan i believe there is a tree on the plans am i right mr clinton yeah
the tree is on the adjacent property though at 520 oh okay okay that's fine so it's the planners
that are actually on the the the property itself correct or in front of the property itself okay
all right that's that's fine so yes revised plans one page um stamped by the zba today and then um
streets department approval of revised plans prior to permit issuance
revised plans one page stamped um 11 13 24 and streets has to approve prior
Michael Johns, my vote is yes with provisors.
Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes with provisors.
Senator Graham, my vote is yes with provisors.
i win my vote is yes with provisor thank you mr clinton thank you mr chairman members of the
Ayewen, my vote is yes with provisors.
Ishmael Shaheen, my vote is yes with provisors.
board have a great night is there anyone in their virtual audience whose case has not been called
i do not see any answers wait a minute we're going to take a
Mr. Chair, I'm sorry to cut you off, but I see
Tamika McCoy, Esquire.
I believe, Mr. Chair, I believe all of these individuals
who are raising their hands are on the 3.30 list,
which we will start shortly.
I saw McCoy's name on there.
Give us a five-minute break. We'll be back, and we'll go right to the list.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, everyone.
My name is Bill Bergman, and I will be chairing this 3.30 meeting.
Before I do, beginning, here's an announcement we have.
Beginning with the December 4th hearings, any documents or other information that parties wish to submit to the ZBA for hearings,
must be submitted through the ZBA's new online upload tool, ZBA Case Document Submission.
Information about how to access and use the submission tool will be included with hearing notices and zoning posters.
Please note that the applicant's documents are due five calendar days prior to the hearing.
Documents submitted by any other parties should be submitted at least 48 hours prior to the hearing
to allow sufficient time for processing.
In addition, the following information should continue to be submitted through email
and not through the upload system.
Requests for continuances, withdrawals, reconsideration, and amended refusals,
as well as requests by attorneys to enter or withdraw appearances.
If you have any questions about the ZBA case document submission tool,
please contact RCOZBA at phil.gov.
Today is our Vice Chair, Ismail Shahid, President, Mr. Chair.
Our board member Cheryl L. Gaston, President, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member Tanetta Graham, President, Mr. Chairman.
Our board member Michael Johns, President, Chairman.
Our board member, Taya Nguyen.
Present, Mr. Chairman.
Also present is our attorney, Hillary Emerson, and our executive director, Ian Haggerty.
Here's our virtual format.
The proceedings are being recorded.
With your participation, you agree to be recorded.
The video will be available by contacting...
Hold on.
by contacting zbaexecutivedirector at phila.gov.
For our corporate stenographer, we ask attorneys and witnesses
to identify themselves before testifying.
If you're participating by phone, press star 9 to raise your hand
and star 6 to unmute.
To enter an appearance statement, call 267-270-5548.
Leave your email address and the address of the property in question.
And finally, the question answer box on the screen
is not for testimony. All comments or questions should be directed to our executive director,
ZBA Executive Director at phil.gov. Let's look at our schedule for this afternoon.
Number six, MI 2024-004-351-2420 Wesley High Avenue. That case is continued.
Number seven, MI 2024-004-851-1409-13 Fitzwater Street. This case has been continued by the board. Any other requests for continuance?
good evening mr chair this is jason hand i am your calls for the session
i did see a hand up but um it has since gone down now so you may continue okay okay thank you
so mi 2020 number one mi 2023 sorry mr chair it's it's back up a hand by strawberry mansion
community concern. Thank you. Mr. Sokoloff, could you come on too, please?
thank you mr sokoloff could you come on too please they've been allowed to speak
i think i think who is uh miss cummings on yeah
miss cummings you've already been sworn just for the record state your name bonita cummings okay
mr sokoloff
I'm here, but I don't know if anyone can hear me.
We hear you, Mr. Sokolov.
We can hear you.
You've already been sworn.
Just for the record, state your name.
Oleg Sokolov on behalf of Gymnast Limited Liability Company for 2821 West Lehigh.
Ms. Cummings, you start first.
What's your position?
Well, we had an agreement with the attorney representing at the time due to not having submitted certain requested documents, and there was no community attendance, that they would agree to a continuance, which is what we expect to do today.
So that was our understanding.
Okay, Mr. Sokoloff, could you give me your position on this?
Sure. Our position is that that was not our understanding.
Ms. Cummings stated that she would be continuing this.
We took issue with that given that we complied with all requirements for notice.
There was no request for any documentation to be submitted prior to the meeting by the RCO of Strawberry Mansion.
There are no stated guidelines for submissions.
And we were prepared to present the fact that there was no attendance is not something that we're able to control.
Are you prepared to go in today?
We are.
okay so what i'm going to do we we mr bergman we had that was an agreement and an understanding of
the attorney that represented from them the attorney mr bergman is my associate i spoke to
him right hold on hold on hold on mrs cummings let me let me tell you what we're going to do
we're going to go on would it take his testimony and hold the vote and then he can we can figure
out later about additional meetings or whatever but i'm not we're not going to vote on today we're
just going to hold the vote he has his client here let them go on and we'll go from there okay
and you know obviously you could if you want you can come on and object or do whatever you want
when i when i call but i'm going to hold the vote so that we can figure out where we are with this
if he's got somebody here they're going to go on okay so i'm going to call this in about 10 minutes
thank you both mr chair um mr sokolov has requested actually that we we call this case
first because he has a time commitment shortly. I know, but let me get through the rest of the
cases. No, no, no. Yes, I know we still have a couple other cases, but I mean right at first
once we get to the regular list. Thank you. So number one, MI-2023-002-691-7014 Woodland Avenue,
This case has been withdrawn. Number two, MI 2024-004-237-2826-28 Belgrade Street.
No exhibits first listing. Sean Ward is the attorney.
There has been no RCO meeting.
Is Mr. Ward's hand?
Not in the audience this evening.
he's not there no sir okay so mi 2024 004 237 28 26 to 28 belgrade cases continued mark must be heard
we're going to go back to mi 2024 004 350 28 21 wesley hi mr sokoloff please
Mr. Sokoloff, just for the record, state your name again.
Good evening, members of the board.
Oleg Sokoloff on behalf of the applicant Gymnast Limited Liability Company for 2821 West Lehigh Avenue.
And Mr. Chair, I do appreciate the indulgence.
I have an RCO actually at 6 p.m.
and i'm the only one on their schedule um our vice chair has a few questions sure
good afternoon good evening counsel do you agree to waive the reading of refusal or
stipulate to its accuracy good afternoon mr shaheed yes i do have you emailed in all the required
Good afternoon, Mr. Shahid. Yes, I do.
Have you emailed in all the required documents five days in advance of this hearing?
back in this
I have.
Thank you, council. Please receive.
Thank you very much, members of the board. It's nice to see you again.
I will run through the exhibit packet briefly, but this is simply a use request to use the property for the purposes of visitor accommodation.
This is a single-family residence located in RSA 5, and again, we are just seeking to use it as visitor accommodation, which is not in conformity with the requirements of RSA 5.
My clients have owned this property since 2020, have done substantial renovations to the property, as you will see, have attempted to rent it with market rate and below market rate and have been unsuccessful in doing so and are seeking to use it for the purposes of visitor accommodation.
now believing that this neighborhood does not have much hotel accommodation or any other kind of
accommodations for for visitors of any sort and this would be a revitalization of this block
this neighborhood they've put a lot of money into the property as you'll see from the interior
pictures and you will also see that we have over 20 letters of support from nearby neighbors for
this use so if i could just quickly take you to the pictures
you can see that the property was nearly completely renovated
this is the basement of the property
a complete renovation of the kitchen brand new stainless steel appliances brand new cabinetry
brand new floors and we really believe that this property would be well well used in the
neighborhood as the neighborhood as i stated has has very little to no hotel accommodations and
People really use these properties for family coming into town, for celebrations, for graduations, for births of children when people are in town for long extended periods of time.
This is the exterior of the property here.
It is this property here.
this property. A view down Lehigh Avenue and you will see that this property is also very
close to a number of commercial use properties including CMX2 which is right across the street
of the entirety of the block or half of the block there. So we also believe that bringing visitors
to this neighborhood could bring potential beneficial financial impact to other businesses
in the neighborhood, which, as the board knows, struggle somewhat in generating income.
So this would potentially be a boon on some of the existing businesses in this neighborhood.
Our application for appeal, our project information form, we did notice all the neighbors, and
I'll show the certificates of mailing for a meeting on October 28th.
And there were 147 nearby neighbors that were noticed.
My clients also prepared some proposed house rules that would deal with some of the issues
that we know could be existent at Airbnbs potentially, no parties, certain regulations
regarding pets. The amount of people that could stay in this house is reduced way below what
this house could potentially support. And then our letters of support.
This is on the immediate block, neighboring block, also neighboring block, and I'll show a map so the board can get a sense of how much work the applicants did do and how much community outreach they did do to garner this support from so many neighbors.
This is a neighborhood with a lot of vacancy. This is a neighborhood with a lot of empty lots. This is a neighborhood with a lot of, I will say, inappropriate uses of housing.
I will say, inappropriate uses of houses, some houses that are boarded up and have some nefarious uses to them.
So we really believe that the operation of a well-run Airbnb or visitor accommodation location would really, as I've been stating, bring some revitalization to this block.
again neighboring block
immediate block
and just to give i won't go through them all but just to give a board a sense of
how many people in the immediate vicinity of the property let alone in some adjacent parts
of the neighborhood. They really, Ms. Williams, who will come online and adopt my testimony in a
moment, can give you a little more context on how much they really went around the neighborhood and
ensured that people are supportive of this, regardless of the fact that we were not able
to get much attendance, or any attendance for that matter, at the RCO meeting itself.
at this time if I may bring Miss Katrina Williams on just to adopt my testimony please
and then we'd be happy to answer any questions the board or anyone else may have
Miss Williams yes can you hear me or could you state your name and spell for the sonographer
Katrina, K-A-T-R-I-N-A, Williams, Watson, W-I-L-L-I-A-M-S, Watson, W-A-T-S-O-N.
For a firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth.
Proceed, counsel.
Thank you.
Good evening, Ms. Williams.
Hello.
Ms. Williams, you are one of the members of Gymnast Limited LLC, correct?
Correct.
And have you heard my testimony here today?
I have.
And do you adopt it as your own?
I just want to, how much time would you say you and your husband spent walking around
the neighborhood knocking on doors to get letters of support?
Oh my goodness, hours.
And not only to get the letters of support, while we were renovating, the neighbors were
coming up to us and thanking us and looking out for us.
They'll call us.
We gave them our phone numbers.
They called one day because a screen door was open and they thought the main door was open and we were able to come down.
The neighbors in the neighborhood have been extremely supportive of the project.
OK, is there. Can you tell the board a little bit about the types of renovation that you did there and what condition the property was in prior to you beginning the renovations?
OK, prior to the renovations, the property looked like it hasn't been renovated probably since the original owners had bought the property.
um we did a complete reno um from the basement to the roof um as you see the basement was
totally we have marble floors in the basement brand new wooden floors oak throughout the home
um we have the exposed brick like the stainless steel appliances um the furniture top of the
line. We really wanted to make it a luxury stay. So anyone who comes and visits our city
will not only be able to enjoy the city, but to definitely be able to enjoy the accommodations.
Okay. And is it correct that you guys have attempted to rent this property as a long-term
rental and have been unsuccessful in doing so? Yes. Because it is a luxury property and everything
that went in it, we couldn't find appropriate tenants to put into this property.
Okay, and the size of the property, how many bedrooms, how many bathrooms?
One, two, three, four bathrooms, three and a half bathrooms, and four bedrooms.
Nothing further. Thank you, board. Any questions from the board?
Questions from the board.
Yes, I have a question. Have you used it as a, rented it out already as a visitor accommodations?
no only let family my husband and i and i have stayed there we let my niece and my nephew stay
there for overnight that's it we have not rented it out okay and and and all of your um canvassing
did you happen to talk to the neighbors that are immediately adjacent on both sides yes um my
husband is actually someone knew him from like growing up in their neighborhood right very next
door he's very supportive um and both neighbors have been supportive on both sides
thank you questions for the board yeah i have a question one um ideally what rent would you be
Ideally, what rent would you be hoping to receive? And two, if you've had such a hard time renting it out, what makes you think that this is viable as a short term rental location for people who might be visiting the city?
hoping to receive and
typically when people want to stay someplace they want to stay in town or downtown where other
things are this is not necessarily the most transit oriented place uh nor is it the most
tourist centric so i'm just curious as to how you see this okay well we're not far from the
dell um which we plan to market it as being close to the dell close to downtown close to temple um
um it is kind of an ideal an ideal spot we're about 10 minutes away from city line avenue
um a lot of people when they want to when they come to visit they come to visit and they come
to spend money and they would like comfortable accommodations and for the people who don't
necessarily want to be in a hotel who would like to be in a home i think it's a perfect place it's
very homey it's very comfortable it's top of the line i think people will really enjoy being there
with their friends and their family um i think it would be a i think it would be a staple in
philadelphia i honestly do and when the people come to visit they plan to spend money so instead
of maybe paying a hotel fee they'll pay for the airbnb and it'll be worth it
and then what was the what was the rent that you were oh we're like ideally i'm we're thinking
about six hundred dollars a night um because we do want a certain quality of person so we're not
going to go you know we don't want to bring in the people well airbnb does a great job of kind
of shifting those out but we want to bring in people who you know make decent money um and
will respect the property yeah but that's the short-term rental rate i was asking like if it
had been rented, what was the rent
that you were helping for?
Oh, $2,700.
$2,700.
Other questions from the board?
Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr.
Questions or comments
from the virtual audience?
I do not see any further hands.
Wait a minute, Mr. Chair.
I see a hand from Strawberry National
of community concerns.
Hello?
Are you?
Hello?
Ma'am, yes.
You've already been sworn.
Please comment.
Well, I'm commenting
because, again,
the understanding was that
there would be a continuance today
for one, which was an agreement between the representing attorney.
Mr. Sokolov was not present, therefore was not privy to the understanding that took place
between the representing attorney.
Also, we had no information that was shared with you today to be able to, as the committee,
which was present on the call, to make further decisions regarding whether this was acceptable
or not.
A lot of these renovations, although now have permits, started without them, and they start with the presentation to L&I as though people live in these places and they're able to do these renovations, like the rooftop deck, which is a concern for the community on this property.
We had no letters of support that was demonstrated at the time of the hearing in October.
These letters of support were done after the community meeting and with many addresses of people who live further than 250 feet from this location.
So we didn't have any, you know, anything that we wanted to have as the RCO also in full dimensions of what is actually in the property.
You know, people show you pictures. You don't really know, you know, what that is.
They could be pictures of anything.
So we asked, there was no presence from all of the, whatever the mailing were, you know, in terms of attendance.
So the hope was that we would be able to make a better decision with a continuance and having the community present to be able to really understand what their concerns were.
Much of that block is still residential single-family properties, and the advertisement of this particular location for the community and its responsibility.
this particular location for the community and the responsibility or civic duty of the RCO is to
make sure that people are being presented with something that is actually safe. So we did not
have any of that available to us to be able to move forward today. And even what you saw today,
when you saw something that was not relative to any support at the time of the meeting,
We do our due diligence and then you get a person that is allowed today to go ahead with support from people who were not on that call or were not even or not even near there.
So that, you know, is what I wanted to say. These places are not to be represented, you know, or misrepresented to people also on these sites.
They should be very clear about where they're coming, and we wanted to be able to address some of the things that are part of the renovation of that property, particularly the rooftop debt.
So thank you.
Mrs. Cummins, thank you, as always.
Anyone else in the virtual audience?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
A hand up from 3552.
Must be Ms. Fernandez.
i'll have them speak adrian
yes this is adrian you've already you've already been sworn you've already been sworn
just state your name and testify okay um adrian fernandez my last name is spelled f-e-r-n-a-n-d-e-z
for Swampaddle Neighborhood Parcels Association, RCO.
And I am asking that for 2821 West Lehigh Avenue,
the request for visitor accommodations
in our single family district,
that we be allowed to have a public meeting.
We've not heard from the current lawyer.
No one attended the meeting for different reasons,
scheduled conflicts or whatever,
except for Benita Cummings.
The information that's presented today, we know nothing about it, and some of it doesn't make sense.
For example, I believe I heard the owner say that they wanted to charge $600 a night for rent.
That doesn't even sound feasible for a family.
And also the lawyer, the current lawyer, he presented information that's contradictory to that because he said that the block was substandard housing, abandoned buildings and things like this.
So these types of information, we need to have discussions about with neighbors to understand exactly what they're trying to put there for $600 a night.
Does that mean they're going to have to have 10, 15, 20 people to kind of afford to pay for that?
This is all confusing in our single-family district.
There are – the Dell is closed most of the years.
We're a residential neighborhood that is Strawberry Mansion just south of an abutting Swamp Oodle,
and this project doesn't make sense,
and we do not want to promote visitor accommodations in our single-family areas.
We really need to have a public meeting, and we just ask this be continued so we can have a proper public meeting with proper notice and the refusal sent to the neighbors so they can see the paperwork, come in, hear the presentation, ask questions as normal, and we make sense of how this fits in for $600 per night in our single-family district.
Thank you very much for your comments.
If I may respond briefly, Chair.
Could you wait one minute, please? Is there anyone else in the virtual audience?
No, Mr. Chair, no further hands.
Please respond.
Number one, we properly noticed both Swamp Poodle as well as Strawberry Mansion.
The coordinating RCO assigned to us through the RCO system was Strawberry Mansion and not Swamp Poodle on this.
We sent out notices properly. We, again, as I stated, cannot control who is able to attend the meeting.
And in terms of the price point, while I don't really understand why the neighbors would have any control of a set price point that, one, isn't determined yet, and that, two, if it doesn't work for the applicant, they're welcome to reduce.
That's not a set price point. We're not stating that that is what we're going to charge and never move that. But it also does not impact the neighbors as this is a visitor accommodation request. And the price paid would not impact the neighborhood of the.
And the price paid would not impact the neighborhood or the ability of people in the neighborhood to afford housing.
So I just believe that this is an appropriate use of the property.
It is a type of use that's not, while non-existent, it may be non-existent in the neighborhood, could bring a lot of benefit to this somewhat commercial corridor and this block.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Planning Commission.
It's Ron Bednar from City Planning.
First name Ron, R-O-N, last name Bednar, B-E-D-N-A-R.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed.
This property is indicated for residential use on the city plan or adopted city plan recommends no change to the existing single-family zoning at this location.
The applicant's hardship is not supported with evidence of unique physical circumstances or condition of a property that would prevent it from being used in conformity with the use requirements of the code.
Therefore, we recommend that the request for variance for visitor accommodation not be granted.
We're going to hold the vote on this.
We will report back next Wednesday at two o'clock on where we stand with this case.
OK. Thank you. Thank you very much. We're going to move to Mr. Chair. I'm sorry. I just just to clarify, are we resuming next week? You want to vote next week? What what what is it that this is what I'm going to do? We're going to meet next week and decide what to do. We will announce it at 2 p.m.
Got you. Okay, understood. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Okay, sure. Number three, MI 2024-004-330-437 North 52nd Street. Tameka McCoy is the attorney. There's a letter of support from the 44th Ward RCO, and Council Member Gauthier has taken a position of support.
Good evening, everyone. Thank you.
Morning. Counsel, you thought we forgot you.
I heard you on the phone. You thought we forgot you, didn't you? Okay.
Could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Sure. It's Tamika, T-A-M-I-K-A. Last name is McCoy, M-C-C-A-T-O-Y.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Yes, I do.
Could you identify your client, their relationship to the property?
Sure. I represent Jim Ragoon-Anon, who owns 437 North 52nd Street and is the subject property for this application for mixed use.
Okay. Our vice chair has a few questions.
Good evening, Counselor. Do you agree to read another refusal or stipulate to his accuracy?
you know then all the required documents that's needed to proceed with this case five days in
advance of this hearing yes thank you counsel please proceed you've already shared your screen
okay thank you um this is the petition that had been submitted relative to the property located
at 437 North 52nd street. I am, um, displaying the settlement documents, uh, in relation to this
property. The property was acquired a few months ago earlier this year, February of 2024. Um,
it's my understanding that the tax clearance had been, uh, submitted. This is the certificate
it showing the tax clearance.
There were 127 neighbors who would be affected that were notified regarding the application.
There was an RCO meeting that was scheduled and attended on September 5th, 2024 at 645
We did get a notification from the RCO that they are in support of the project that was
emailed to the board.
I am showing a depiction of the property.
It has the notices that is affixed.
Here is another with a up-close shot of the actual notices.
There were building permits that had been obtained for this particular property, and
I am showing the building permit.
Inside is contemplated that it's a two-unit.
On the first floor, there would be a child care facility.
and on the second floor would be single family living.
It was essentially, you know, construction essentially was begun to essentially get the main points situated
main points situated and so that this could be presented. A copy of the deed for this particular
and so that this could be presented.
property is also affixed with Jim Ragunan on as the owner. And so that is here. I have drawings
that would show the renderings for what's contemplated. Essentially the first floor,
as I said, it's going to be a child care facility. The young lady who would be operating the child
care facility is Marcella Stetler, who's been in this business for 12 years. It is contemplated
that there would be, this is the front entrance here. There is a entrance into the facility.
There's also going to be a side entrance. I'm going to show the next page here with a ramp
For a secondary entrance, this is for the childcare facility. So the daycare would be on the first floor with a handicap accessible ramp on the side. So there's a front entrance, a side entrance, and a rear entrance for the building.
There's a kitchen in the middle, and then the office area with a restroom is depicted at the back of the first floor of this particular structure.
The second floor would be essentially a two-bedroom living quarters.
Here, it marks a bedroom, but this would essentially function as a living room.
There's a balcony, living room, kitchen, bathroom, and then two bedrooms.
The entrance, one of the concerns for the RCO was that there was a separate entrance for the second floor residence from the daycare.
And that is shown on this particular drawing.
Actually, let me do this.
So there are two doors at the front elevation side by side.
One would be for the early child care center.
The other would be for the second floor unit.
so it's separate entrance for both. The sign that would be affixed for the first floor is going to
be a painted on sign. It's not going to be anything affixed to the building edifice. It's
going to be painted. And essentially, this is the letter from the 44th Ward Democratic RCO,
and they essentially had issues with the trash plan and operation time that was squared away
during the course of the RCO meeting
so that everyone was on the same page.
They had suggested the ramp and separate entrance.
And so that was incorporated within the plan
based on their concerns
and meeting the needs for their concerns.
For that, they submitted their support for the project.
At this time, I would like to bring in Mr. Ragunanon
to adopt the testimony that's been provided
and we'll address any questions that the board has.
oh i should i should uh include that mr ragunanon actually owns one of the neighboring houses
actually the next door um structure to this particular unit as well so he has been part
of the community for a long time you see his hand jim yes hi could you sir could you sir
could you please state your name and spell for the court stenographer jim ragunanan j-i-m-r-a-g-o-o-n-a-n-a-n
we're referring to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes please proceed counsel
thank you uh mr ragunanan did you hear the information provided to the uh board yes and
And do you adopt that as if it were your own as truthful and accurate in all respects?
I would submit on that.
Questions from the board.
How many children are going to be in this facility?
That is a question for Ms. Marcellus.
That's her.
I believe if Mr. Ragunanan is able to answer, he can address it.
yes it should be to like 20 of them
and what
so it's up to 20
okay and what ages are we talking about
I know it's preschool so it would be before
kindergarten so before age 5
okay and
And what did we, was there a plan that I see the action?
Was there a plan? Did I see the actual area that we're talking about here? What feet are we talking about for this child care space?
Sure. So this is the front of the structure looking directly across the street. This is 52nd Street, the north section of 52nd Street. If you were to look to the left of the building, there is a mixed use property just a few steps away from where this building is actually situated.
If you were to look at the other direction on the corner, there are other against mixed use properties as well that have commercial spaces on a lower level, residential spaces on a top level.
So it would not be inconsistent with what's already existing within the area.
This is the exterior of the building.
but again what what size space for the uh for the child care portion of this
you so so it would it occupy the entire first floor uh let's see if um
perhaps mr ragunanan can provide the square footage do you have the square footage
because it's kind of small i can't you know okay based on the plan i'm not sure i can't
remember if on 35 you're like close to 400 square feet 350 square feet i guess something like that
yeah okay are you realizing the basement for the daycare also no the basement is just going to be
uh space for the access to the utilities and that sort of thing okay
is there a rare yard yeah where are the kids gonna yes there is a uh rare yard
and is that where the kids are gonna play and what have you do we have yes and they're there
they have a direct access uh from the building to the real yard yeah i'm assuming that i guess i
assume um i guess concerns about the the layout that you have in front of us one it kind of
doesn't match what you described in terms of the two doors in the front because this really you
know um seems a little different well you do have the two doors in the front but you're going to the
kids are going to be walking through a kitchen through an office to go to the backyard which is
which is a little odd and there's no there's no bathroom separate bathroom which is required by
daycare um within the daycare space so it's my understanding i'm not sure how this ramp is going
to be designed if they are going to have maybe steps at the back end or um something that enables
access to the rear yard i'm sure that's something that could be done um there is another rear
entrance here there's a bathroom um you know there's a desk space closet space and a bathroom
the back of the bathroom is in the office area right yes bathroom has to be in where the children
are and the number of children should be listed based on the square footage of the space
so i'm a little i'm a little little concerned about the information not being um real clear
on the plan but i do appreciate the fact that looking to do something other than a some kind
of storefront uh there and it's and the proposals for daycare um i know that site very well it used
to be a flower shop for years and years and years 50 years probably um so see something happening
um but it's just odd that you're coming to zoning and the works started like months ago
on the renovation so that's a little odd uh but so those are those are my concerns the layout
kind of doesn't make sense well sir uh the building was acquired in february it used to
be loretta's flower shop and it was loretta's flower shop for decades um the work just started
I think sometime around August, September, though it's not yet complete. And so concerns that you
would have could be essentially accommodated, particularly the design for the side ramp
and access to the rear yard. But thank you for your edification in terms of the area
and its needs i i go the same concern about the restroom um you need the restroom being
you need the restaurant being in the office area like you have to go all the way through the whole
in the office area like you have to go all the way through the whole building
building just to go to the bathroom so i think they're probably and you know i know the state
would probably let you know there needs to be more restaurant young people you can't go you can't
have kids go through a kitchen to go to a bathroom you just can't i mean so i don't know and i don't
know what's been submitted for these plans been submitted for floor plan floor plans been submitted
for building permit, you know, and the daycare requested due daycare came after the construction
started, and now you need to revise the plans to comply with daycare requirements. Maybe that's
the issue, but these plans on the first floor don't comply with daycare, and the second floor
plan shows what three bedrooms or four three bedrooms and a kitchen they don't make sense
just in terms of an apartment so perhaps we can bring the daycare owner in she is on the
no i don't i don't i don't i don't know i don't need that just i just we need to see plans that
make sense right i'm support i support the the project i honestly do i'm glad it's a daycare
glad you know something positive is going on this block instead of another stop and go right
but plans that are presented need to make sense that's all that's all that's all i'm concerned
you're showing us a four three bedroom apartment with a kitchen that's enclosed right it doesn't
make sense right a daycare that you're showing that shows just a commercial space a storage space
in the office, in the bathroom, in the office, and you call them in at a daycare.
It doesn't matter.
Yeah, there's no classroom space.
Excuse me, could I clarify the statement about the kitchen?
The food is going to be coming processed already.
It's going to be in the basement, in the freezer,
and it's not going to have no kitchen in the first floor.
but it's going to have the bathroom in the first floor also for the kids okay the plan let me i'll
just say this one more time the plan doesn't make sense right if even if you're going to have if
you're even if you're saying that the kitchen is going to be in the in the basement right that's
fine too but now it's glad you zoomed in so now you got kids going through a storage room through
an office to go to a bathroom doesn't make sense right doesn't make sense i support a daycare but
the plans don't make sense you need to have so why don't why don't why don't we do this correctly
why don't we look at this council i think you've heard a lot of comments all right i think
excuse me no i'm talking i'm talking council you've heard a lot of comments i think we have
to have a resumptive hearing and come back with plans that that are good for a daycare or that
or more of a workable product.
Is that okay?
That's fine.
So what we'll do is you get with your client.
I think you've heard enough.
And then you go back and, you know,
make sure that it's feasible,
what you're trying to do.
And I think you probably have to look at the apartment
on the second floor too
about what you're trying to do there, okay?
All right.
So we're going to have a resumptive hearing
to come back with plans that make sense, okay?
Will do.
Thank you.
All right.
um number four and council sorry we had you here so long that i no mr chair i just i just wanted
to verify that in addition to having the resumptive hearing for for um different plans
clearer plans um that we will also take public testimony and oh yeah sure sure no that's what
i said at that time that's right yeah we'll have all the pieces for the hearing thank you yeah
yeah yeah we're good and can we number four can we make sure that the sign is if the sign is on
this then there needs to be something for what we're doing about this sign you said you're going
to put the painted sign on the building it's still a sign so is that part of the application or
the sign would have to be a separate application because this is a change of use only
So any sort of construction like the ramp or the sign or any of that,
that's all got to be separate zoning applications if zoning is needed.
Okay. All right. Thank you.
So number four, MI 2024-004-331-1900 Huffnagle Street.
Jermaine Harris is the attorney.
Here's unanimous support from Raw and Herst Civic Association
and a letter of non-opposition from Council Member O'Neill.
They'll be rejoining as a panel shortly.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Mr. Harris.
Good evening.
Good evening.
It's still our afternoon.
We didn't get to the evening yet.
We're still here.
Would you please state your name and spell it for the court stenographer?
Jermaine Harris, J-E-R-M-A-I-N-E-H-A-R-R-I-S.
tell the truth oh okay yeah i do nothing but the truth okay and could you identify your client and
relationship to this process property sure my client is uh jose torres and uh he is the owner
of the property okay and our vice chair has just a few questions sure good evening counsel uh do
you agree to wait to read another refusal or stipulate to its accuracy? I do. Have you emailed
in all the required documents and exhibits that's needed to proceed with this case five days in
advance of this hearing? I have. Thank you. Please proceed and share your screen. Sure. Yeah, I was
saying, Mr. Chair, that it all balances out because the last time I was here last week,
I was the first case that was called. Well, we try to plead. We try to plead.
okay let me share my screen okay can my my screen be seen okay all right okay so
this is concerning a legalization hold on let's see
excuse me for one second
Okay, so this is concerning the legalization of additions that were done to the first floor.
And specifically, what we're talking about is, and these are plans of the actual building and what the building is.
uh we have here
what was a porch uh a front porch right here and then it was converted to this it was encased
basically so it went from this right here
to an encasement right there that's the first thing and then the second thing is is that
what i'm pointing at right now uh a roof was extended
a roof was extended five feet
to this right here
let me go through my exhibit packet
Excuse me.
Sorry, let me get my, I'm just trying to get my packet here.
if I sent on Friday.
So this is my exhibit packet.
Again, these are black and white pictures.
but this is what as it currently stands right now this is the side that was
increased it was increasing height by five feet this is a another angle of the
Another angle of the side being increased from what it was.
side being increased from what it was
Another picture of that, of the front.
Another angle of it being increased.
Now, my client, he, as I stated at the beginning, this is to legalize it.
So this is something that he did without permits.
uh this is he's he was unfamiliar English is not his first language he thought that he could just
do he thought that he could do these improvements or these additions uh without permits and he
didn't realize that there was a problem with it until LNI contacted him and gave him a violation
uh for this this is a posting of the uh zoning notice for today's uh hearing
these are the plans and again um pretty much this is the black and white of what i
of what i first presented of this but basically
this is the same thing
where the side
was increased by five feet
to where it is
right now
and same thing
front porch
is now
encased
by that
The front porch is now part of the living room, right?
Correct.
And can I ask that where he went up?
What is that in there?
So that is.
So he went up, he went up, he went up.
Is there a second floor he built up there?
Tell me what that is.
No, there's not a second floor to that.
But what I'd like to do is because I'd like to have the – and he should be on – he should still be on the call.
I'd like to have him answer exactly what the use of – what he uses that for.
Could we possibly have Mr. Rodriguez promote it?
But we don't need an interpreter?
I don't think – well, I don't –
You said that part of his problem with the building was he didn't speak English out.
Right.
But I have the architect here who speaks, who, uh, who, uh, who speaks that.
Right.
Hi, good afternoon.
Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell?
Yeah, I can.
Could you state your name and spell for the court stenographer?
Yes, my name is Damaso, spelled D-A-M-A.
Last name Rodriguez, R-O-D-R-I-G-U-E-C
Where are firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel
Okay, Mr.
Had you been working with Mr. Torres on this particular project?
Okay, so what is, there was a
you heard that there were uh questions as to the side and what this is being used uh what the side
was being used for with the addition of five feet what is that particular use what is that a kitchen
what exactly is that that is in addition to the kitchen okay you just add that five feet
Okay, so it was the kitchen. It was a kitchen to begin with. It was just added. The ceiling was raised by five feet.
That's correct.
Okay. Was there any other questions that anybody had about that particular structure before I continue with my presentation?
Do we have pictures of what's inside this?
no we don't have pictures of the uh inside we don't have pictures of the inside
of it unfortunately but that is what it's being used for
but man i i guess jermaine the question is is it just they have a high ceiling in the kitchen now
or yes yeah in fact mr mr rodriguez could you answer that question please
yes um and then as you see on the pictures he had like a small
And then as you see on the pictures, he had like a small addition.
So what he did, it was right in.
So he wanted to replace it, basically he didn't have no knowledge.
He wanted to stay in the kitchen a little bit more.
So he lifted high to be the same height of the first floor.
That way it could be everything level.
Okay. All right. So, as I continue further with the presentation.
Well, we, you know, we, we have the tax clearance. We have,
we have we have we have all that yeah we have all that the tax clearance the deed um we also uh as
uh mr chair you noted uh we did do a presentation with the we did do a presentation with the um
rco that right they had war on hearts had no concerns about this they didn't feel that it was
uh bothersome to the community they didn't feel that it was affecting anyone's light or air rights
um they didn't think it was any parking or congestion issues with it um so
they supported the project and we do have uh we do have no opposition from
the council person in this particular uh district as well so this is something that
But he realizes that he shouldn't have did. We know that, you know, we know it's not ideal, but we would ask that in light of the fact that there is no opposition to this, that the use that that that this variance be granted.
And then we would ask for any other questions that you may have of myself or the architect of this.
Questions from the board.
So was it confirmed that the enclosure made it part of the living room or was the enclosure of the porch making a whole different, a separate room?
No, the enclosure, the enclosure of the porch is basically now the living room.
It's an extension of the living room.
Okay. Thank you.
That's exactly what it is.
Questions from the board.
And I have one more question. Was this happening? Is this a common occurrence on the block? Is that what made him think that he could just do that? I'm just curious as to what made him not seek permits to get this work done.
well it's not it's my understanding that this is something that was not uh this is not something
that is common on the block to answer your question he felt that it would be he felt well
he felt that the the side portion of it that it was starting to rot and he just wanted to improve
it or to give it the extra airspace of it for that and with the porch he just wanted more space he
didn't want it to be open anymore that's what the architect and the client has conveyed to
he didn't want the porch anymore he just wanted the he just wanted to have additional space
or enclose that space the porch space the architect do this did the architect do this work
wouldn't be prior mr rodriguez it would be the question please okay did you do you work on this
project with him from the beginning no no i got involved in base they didn't have no knowledge
of what was going on and they had a violation good thank you
questions from the board any more questions or comments for the our attorney my my comment again
it's i'm not sure what i'm i'm supposed to be approving here because i don't really know what's
inside here. And I'm being told that these things are in this, these additions, but
it's a little hard for me to, to, to approve this when I'm
To approve this when I'm just seeing some pictures outside and I don't know what plans for outside and I don't know really what's inside.
I would be happy if the board would allow me, I would be happy to supplement the record and provide pictures of the side of what of what is in the side, what is in that.
I mean, it's clear with the living room what that is.
But if you need pictures of the actual side and the inside of that, I would be happy to get that.
The one zoning refusal we have is the thing that he built up, took it out, and took the side distance away of the yard.
He went from eight feet to a four foot ten.
So the question, what are board members saying is, and what I said from the beginning, I mean, I hear what he's saying, that he did this to make it level with what the ceiling may be in the living room.
But I think we have to see what's in there. I mean, I just, you know, I mean, it's not it's not a real big space, but he went up and it's I think, Jermaine, you've got to come back and at least say, look, this is what's inside.
And look, I see what he did in the front. I mean, he came out three or four feet, took the porch away, but it's the side thing going up that is the question.
That's fine. That's fair enough. We can again, we can supplement the record.
We could do we can do however you want it, whether you require a resumption or whether we could do a resumptive hearing.
Hillary, do we want to take public comment to see just to be to get it over with?
Yeah, I do believe there. I do see someone, I think, from the RCO with their hand raised to comment.
So I think we should let them comment and certainly they could come back if they would like for the resumption hearing.
But I think we can let them comment now.
Comments from the public audience, please.
Hello.
Hi, could you please state your name as spelled for the court stenographer?
Lee Horn, L-E-E-H-O-R-N-E.
You swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do, Mr. Chairman.
Please proceed, sir.
Hi, my name is Lee Horn. I am the zoning chair for Ron Hurst Civic Association.
As you know, on October 17th at 6 p.m., we held a public meeting between Mr. Germain and the owners of the project and the public who were notified by the attorney.
We only got two neighbors on, but I did speak to them.
Um, it is our opinion that, uh, considering the fact that they maintain their garage and exterior, uh, uh, surface parking spots, added two additional surface parking spots, the, the, um, the enclosure in the front and the raising of the roof on the side, meet the style and type of the existing structure.
and that most of the neighbors that I spoke to
and the board of the Civic Association feel that this adds to
and does not distract from the neighborhood
and is not, from our understanding,
is not intended to turn a single-family home into a multifamily dwelling.
we request that the zoning board approve this project thank you very much mr horn we appreciate
your comments is there anyone else thank you is there anyone else in the virtual audience
hillary we want ron to take we want ron to take a position i i defer to planning on whether they'd
like to take a position at this time we're on resumption.
Yeah, I think we're going to sort of defer on this one
until we get the full record.
All right.
So we're going to have a resumptive hearing.
And I think while you're at it,
we'd like to see what the new living room looks like
because he came out there
and what this kitchen that he went up on looks like too.
that's fair enough um could i i'm not available next wednesday uh i don't i don't i don't know
i love the resumptive hearing will be scheduled so oh it will be okay okay we'll we'll figure
The result of hearing will be scheduled. So it will be OK. OK, well, we'll figure that out.
We'll let you know what it is. And we'll we're on. We're understanding that you're not available next Wednesday.
OK. So, you know, we took public comment. You put most of your case on.
You need to supplement it. Let us know what's in there. And we'll go.
All right. Have a good. Have a good evening.
Is there anyone in the. Virtual audience whose case has not been called.
No, Mr. Chair, no further hands.
Thanks, everyone.
I'm sorry we got a little late tonight, but I appreciate everybody staying around.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Have a good night.
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you, staff.
Have a good night, everyone.
Great job.
Good night.