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.