Excuse me, Chair.
This is Sharon Saleta.
I just did text you the actual provisos that the RCO is requesting, if you'd like to review them.
I mean, I know that, you know, it's because the process, to my understanding, is also health, the health, welfare, and safety.
And I don't think that any of the provisos are outside of the guidelines.
But, of course, I'm not the attorney for the zoning board.
So we do need to get a handle on the trash and to have an understanding of the trash.
And I think we all get that.
And I certainly sympathize with that.
I have problems in my neighborhood as well.
But again, according to council, we can have a proviso that says commercial trash pickup
and that all trash from all the units must be stored inside.
For all floors.
This is all floors.
all right okay thank you anyone else would like to testify in this case
no more hands here somebody either has a radio or television on the background
no more hands here
if you can mute that that would be helpful planning commission
thank you chair ian hegarty on behalf of the philadelphia city planning commission
the comprehensive plan recommends zoning map change at this location to cmx2 and the variance
conforms to that proposed zoning district and so the city planning commission would recommend that
the zoning board grant this variance. Thank you. MI 2020-000224 2330 North 29th Street
my vote is yes with the following provisos all trash trash from all units to be stored indoors
and have a commercial trash pickup my vote is yes with provisos yes for provisos yes with provisos
calendar number 0379 248 geiger road
Karen, did we get exhibits?
No exhibits.
I'm sorry?
We did not receive exhibits and it was previously listed on October 21st.
And no hands, Chair.
you're you're muted chair yep sorry about that uh mi 2020-000379248 geiger road my vote is to
dismiss. My vote is to dismiss. Dismiss. Dismiss. Dismiss. Calendar number 1010-2608 West
Dauphin Street. The attorney is Jeffrey Young.
Mr. Young, you can unmute yourself.
Great. Good morning, members of the board.
Good morning, Mr. Young.
Can you put your name and address on the record, please?
Yes, Jeffrey Young, 3900 Ford Road, Suite B, Philadelphia PA, 19131.
I am here today on behalf of the applicant.
And we have the property owner, excuse me, Mr. Sam Tarrou, who is on the line as well.
Okay, and do you swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Do you also agree to waive and stip?
I do agree to waive the reading.
However, I cannot stipulate to its accuracy, which I will get into during the presentation.
Okay, have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance, refusal,
referral, photos and plans, five days in advance of this hearing?
And have you met with the RCO and do you have a letter?
Yeah, so exhibits have been mailed, emailed, excuse me, to the board. We have not met with the community organization. Our RCO is the Charbury Mansion CDC. However, our community meeting is actually scheduled for tomorrow evening.
The CDC did not want to schedule a special meeting
ahead of their normal meeting time,
but they have agreed to allow us to proceed with the hearing
and we asked the board to hold its decision
until after correspondence from the RCO.
Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta.
There would have to be a follow-up hearing scheduled in that case.
Resumption hearing, right?
And that, Mr. Young?
I'm sorry, I said it one more time.
we'll have to do a we'll hear the case but we'll have a resumption hearing okay uh once you
completed you know your meetings or whatever so we'll hear the case now and then we'll do
the resumption all right thank you okay you may proceed thank you thank you
again members of the board uh jeffrey young here on behalf of the property owner mr sam tyru
here for 2608 West Dolphin Street.
Here, first exhibit, you'll see that my client
is the property owner.
Excuse me, I'm sorry to interrupt.
This is Sharon Silvita again.
Given that there won't be any time saved
since the resumption hearing will have to be scheduled
at a point when the continuance
would likely have been scheduled,
are we sure we want to divide this into two points
and go forward today?
we can do the whole case at one time right yeah the only thing we're missing is yours
we can do the whole case at one time right yeah the only thing we're missing is the rco
it's exactly so if you were to continue it you would be able to have the rco input that's in
the same hearing and that really that really wouldn't cost you any additional time since
there's going to be a second hearing in any case exactly yes so if after our meeting tomorrow if
If this meeting is continued and the RCO submits its letter to the board, will the board be
able at its next hearing to continue the hearing to vote the matter?
No, they won't, but they wouldn't have in any case.
We would continue it.
Attorney moving party, you would contact Ms. Sunkit.
Yeah, I think that's a better way to go, Jeffrey.
That works.
Time-wise for everybody.
Got it.
Thanks for the suggestion, Sharon.
So we can do attorney moving party, correct?
That's right.
Mr. Young?
All right.
Very good.
MI 2020, that's 001010, 2608 West Dauphin Street, attorney moving party.
Calendar number 2174-2720 South Fairhill Street.
did we get any exhibits i did not receive exhibits um we do have a letter from councilman
squilla in non-opposition and that letter refers to rco support but no it's i believe it's the
first listing and i have no exhibits is anyone here for 2720 south fairhill yes i have a marcy
they put their hand down chair all right so we can we'll have to continue this correct
not i'm sorry here you go oh i'm sorry hi this is marcy zammar z-a-m-m-e-r here representing
2720 South Fairhill Street, Philadelphia DPA. Are you an attorney? No, I am not. I am
the contractor. Well, no, the applicant and or his or her attorney has to testify.
I didn't realize that it had to be an attorney, so I just... Or the owners, unless it's an LLC
or an LP is it is it a corporation it's a private residence that a small addition was built on the
rear and we were denied just for a minimal refusal right so the question again is this is privately
a private home and the applicants have a deed shown that they're the owners correct yes well
they would have to testify. Unfortunately, the owner is a senior citizen, retired veteran,
not able to attend, and his daughter is a health care worker, and she was also unable to attend
due to, you know, work commitments. Excuse me, this is Sharon Saleta. In any case, we are not
by law permitted to go forward unless either the applicant, the property owner, or an attorney
representing the property owner appears and in any case we did not receive the exhibits for this case
i was under the impression all of the exhibits were submitted via the rco um no the rco would
never submit the exhibits it would be the applicant okay and the approval letter did
come through from councilman's councilman's office and the rco uh approved it as well
yeah but again we still by law we're not uh we needed the owners to testify uh what i might
suggest is you speak to the owners and have them contact mr councilman squilla's office
you may be able to have some attorney or someone help them through this process so we're going to
have to continue this okay i would ask that it be continued like as quickly as possible this has
been ongoing like for the whole calendar year of 2020 and um there's a lot of draft coming into the
to the homeowner into the property it's just a very small 96 square foot addition we we understand
that and uh we're not trying to be difficult but by law we have certain guidelines and we have to
follow those and ma'am i have a question everything you've testified to do you swear or affirm to tell
the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes i do thank you so uh staff will work with the
So staff will work with the applicant to see about getting a date as quickly as possible.
applicant to see if they're about getting a date as quickly as possible
Thank you so very much.
And I'll be notified, I assume?
Thank you very much.
I appreciate it.
So MI 2020-002174, 2720 South Fairhills continued.
Calendar number 2184-3716 Avalon Street.
This is Sharon Saleta.
The owners are appearing pro se.
Their names are Rachel and Michael Garozzo.
Garozzo.
Got it right the first time.
Thank you.
Okay, sir, can you put your name and address on the record and spell your last name?
Michael Garozzo, G-A-R-O-Z-Z-O.
Is Rachel there to also?
Yes, I'm here.
Rachel Garozzo, G-A-R-O-Z-Z-O, 3716 Avalon Street.
Okay, and do you both swear or affirm to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
We do.
Have you emailed the exhibit packet with proof of ownership, tax compliance,
refusal referral photos plans five days in advance of this hearing and have you met with the rco and
do you have a letter yes we have thank you you may proceed good morning board good morning
thank you for letting us present our uh petition to have a driveway widening uh for our home
we are screen sharing right now uh this is our uh denial we had originally met with the zoning
board or not i'm sorry with the uh rco who uh denied our original request and we came back
a couple of months later with a proviso plan, and that was voted in favor of widening the
driveway. We had originally requested, you want to show the picture, the original plan?
Okay. Original plan. So this is the original plan that we had requested.
where we have the existing driveway.
We had requested a widening of the driveway by 10 feet
and a two foot widening of the driveway
to the opposite side.
Excuse me, excuse me?
We need to see exhibits.
We don't see the exhibits.
You don't see the exhibit?
We're working on it.
I selected, oh, I didn't click the share.
Can you see it now?
So this is the original plan that we had submitted.
It was over the borderline that we were permitted by zoning by six feet, I believe.
Six or four.
Six feet.
and therefore the uh civic association decided that the request was too big
uh and therefore we had to or we thought to revise our plan to change our driveway
to the proviso plan which we will show now you know just a second
which is this. So we, in essence, we got rid of the separate walkways on each separate side of
the driveway and requested that the driveway just be widened to a double-width driveway.
We have one photo that we can show you of the house and the driveway.
so the driveway as you can see is we will we are replacing this driveway
and we want to widen the this up this first line is where we are allowed to go to
and this line is where we want to go to based on the proviso plan the first line would be a six
foot addition and but we wanted to add a full eight foot wide driveway so that it would match
the width of the current drive and this is a pretty tall hill it's a four or five foot hill
that used to have a tree on it, and we intend to flatten that all the way down.
uh that used to have a tree on it and we intend to flatten that all the way
We also will grade this appropriately to our neighbors here, so that there won't be an issue with having to build a retaining wall or anything.
We also have a letter from our neighbor on that side of the driveway,
which is here. This was from our neighbor at 3714 Avalon Street, which was submitted