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