rsa5 residential single family zoning at this location this property has a documented history
as single family use dating to 1973. at some point after that date an owner added a dwelling
unit without the benefit permits through no fault of the current owner the city planning commission
recommends the board grant a proposed use variance for two dwelling units. Thank you. MI 2024-006-174-911
East West Moreland Street. I vote yes. Charles, my vote is yes. Cheryl Gaston, my vote is yes.
Sonetta Graham, my vote is yes. Iowen, my vote is yes. Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes.
Number 12, MI 2024-006-220-2123, Catherine Street.
David Orfanides is the attorney.
There's a letter of deferral from South of South Neighbors, SOSNA.
Vote was eight in support, six in opposition, four were near neighbors, and one in absentee.
Also, a letter of opposition from North Washington Avenue, NOWAC, are willing to support the application if it's only a third edition and not a third and fourth.
are willing to support the application if it's only a third edition and not a third and fourth.
Mr. Orphanides.
Good evening, Mr. Chairman.
Would you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Certainly. David, D-A-V-I-D, last name Orphanides, O-R-P-H-A-N-I-D-E-S.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?
Do you identify your client, their relationship to this property?
Certainly. My client is Matthew Berman, the owner of 2123 Catherine Street. I'm sorry.
Our vice chair has a few questions, sir.
Certainly.
Good evening, counsel. Do you agree to wait to read another refusal or stipulate to exact accuracy?
Good evening, sir. And I say yes to both.
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 share your screen.
So good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board.
Again, my name is David Orfanides from the law firm of Orfanides & Toner, and I'm here for 2123 Catherine Street on behalf of Matthew Berman, who is the owner of the property.
The proposal here is to take the existing two-story dwelling at 2123 Catherine Street and to place upon the top of that a two-story addition.
As you can see here in the rendering, the third floor portion is a mansard roof that extends to the front building line at its lowest part, the part that angles forward the most.
As you'll see on the plans, but as you can also see in this rendering, there is a deck above that because that's stepped back at least five feet, or stepped back five feet from the extreme front building line.
And then beyond that, which you can barely even see up in the upper left-hand corner there, there is a fourth floor.
The only variance that we have in this situation, and you have it here at tab 3A, is one that
I was just before you on for back in November for 1918 Cater Street.
I believe you just had one last week, 1608 South 12th Street, where property owners have
look to not comply with the requirements of setting any floor above the second floor back
eight feet from the extreme front building line when there are structures with two stories of
inhabitable space to either side, which is what we have in this case. And you can see it right here.
So there are two two-story buildings to either side, which is why that requirement kicks in.
um what's interesting about this block though is that and here i have photos which are a tab five
you can see the two-story building that's next to us to the east and then what happens is there's a
three-story building that goes doesn't honor the cornice line of the two-story buildings like our
building will do goes up full three stories with the bay at the second and third floor level
It drops back down to the two-story structures similar to my client's property, but then at the end of the block, you have three-story structures, flat front with bays, without bays, all the way down to 21st Street.
there is a structure here that looks to have the eight-foot setback. We would argue that even
though that looks like in checking with the zoning code or zoning archives, that that was built by
Wright, that that is less desirable and less good for the fabric of the block, the aesthetics of the
fabric of the block, than what we are proposing. What's unique also about this block, aside from
the three stories to the east, and as you'll see the three stories to the west on our side,
is that the south side is completely three stories and you can see as i scroll through
some have bays including the this is at the top photograph is the property directly across from us
but three stories straight up so this is not a block where seeing a three-story structure like
you might see on some of the smaller uh named streets in this graduate hospital section of
philadelphia where they're largely two stories catherine street is a wider street and you have
a lot of three-story structures that exist. In fact, all of them on the south side, as you can
see here, panning all the way down to 22nd Street. And then panning around on our side, the north
side of Catherine Street, you can see three stories again. Flat front breaks the cornice line
of the two-story building that leads into these two buildings down at the northeast corner of
22nd, and Catherine. And then you can actually see here at 2141 where variant
And then you can actually see here at 2141 where variance was granted exactly like the
variance that we're looking for today.
And I have a copy of the zoning archives for 2141 in my package at tab six.
That variance was at calendar number 37819.
The notice of decision was dated October 2nd, 2019, application number 97390.
so there is you do have situations where this is this variance has been granted on this very block
here in this situation it looks to be newer construction so the cornice was above was
closer and there is a cornice that's closer to the two-story cornices but not in line like ours
will be when this is done we also have photographs of the rear of the property that you can see here
we are building straight up in the back above the existing one and two stories as you'll see
on the section plan that i'll show you in a minute in a minute um we we comply with the
open area requirements um at every level of the building um in building in this fashion
you can see here what what what are your what's the what what variants do you have what do you
Again, the only variance is the same one that you've granted relief from for me back in November last week on South 12th Street.
And again, so the notice of refusal, which I showed you, was simply for that setback.
And we believe, and I know it's getting late.
I'm not going to go on and on about this.
And what we did here is we actually, like we did with the one I presented in November, we did the comparative study, both in section view and in a rendering view.
of what could be built as a matter of right where you have the eight feet back straight up so our
fourth floor is actually um a little over 15 feet back 15 feet six inches back um so basically what
you're doing is you're pulling the third floor front doing the mansard and then pushing the
third floor back um the building is 45 feet deep um with the eight foot setback at that third floor
It eliminates, it makes it very difficult to have a second room along with the bathroom at that level.
And it basically eats up almost all of a front bedroom.
So you're left with essentially one bedroom and a bathroom at that level.
And then speaking real quickly to SOSNA, it is a letter of deferral.
If you take a look at their letter, the zoning committee, first of all, they make it clear that the thing that is before the board right now,
the third floor mansard is what's preferred. They do speak to a number of issues that were
raised by the near neighbors, and none of those are zoning issues. They are things that we can
address. I was not at the community group meeting, but they're not zoning related. They're more
construction related. And even NOAC's letter is regarding the upper floor, the fourth floor,
which is a matter of right because it's below 38 feet. But you can see the zoning committee
voted 4-2. The neighbors were split. We actually had a better zoning committee vote for this one
than we had for the one that I presented to you in November. It's just in this case,
the near neighbors were more split, which hence led to their position of deferral.
But I included at tab six, like we did with 1918, all of the other mansards that were granted
variances in the neighborhood. It's considerable. And for these reasons, we believe that there's
a hardship because of the depth of this lot, because of this requirement, because of how it
impacts the habitable space inside. We feel this is in harmony with the intentions of the zoning
code, given the existing conditions like this throughout the neighborhood. And it obviously
isn't going to have any impact on traffic or transportation. Okay. I want to bring your client
on. Sure. Matthew, architect, who's already been sworn, actually, on another project, and then
Matthew Berman, the owner. So, if Matthew Berman could be promoted to panelist and sworn in.
Mr. Berman, please. They're coming back in as a panelist, Mr. Chair.
All right. Could you please state your name and spell for the stenographer?
Yes. Can you hear me? I can. Matthew Berman, M-A-T-T-H-E-W-B-E-R-M-A-N.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Could you turn your video on, please?
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Matthew, are you the owner of the Subject Promises 2123 Catherine Street?
And whom do you reside there with?
Currently not residing there, but we will reside there with my wife and mother-in-law.
There you go.
Thank you.
That's what I meant.
You will reside there.
And did you hear the statements I made to the board today?
I did. And are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
I did.
And are they true and correct to the best of your knowledge?
Yes. And would you adopt them as your own? Yes.
And would you adopt them?
Okay. Thank you, Matthew. That's it.
Then I would have Samuel Turner who actually has already been sworn in on a prior presentation.
I do remember that. Mr. Turner.
Mr. Turner, just for the record, state your name.
Coming back in.
sorry mr chair i think i cut out while i was joining you've been sworn already please proceed
counsel sure uh mr turner you're you and your firm are the architects for this project correct
and did you hear the statements that i made to the board today yes and are they true and correct
to the best of your knowledge yes would you adopt them as your own yes thank you um from the board
can we see the plans again and walk through what the primary use on the fourth floor is going to
be so sure i can do that in section or a floor plan view which one would you prefer i could
either one i can read both okay so here's the floor plans so i'm gonna and i'm gonna zoom in
a little bit to make it a little easier to see so it's basically like a common a common living area
They've been calling it a four-season room, but it's a common living area with a half-bath.
And what's the depth on the deck that's in front of that unit?
In front of that? Okay, let me just go to the...
Or the total square footage of the deck portion.
So the deck at the third floor level, correct?
The deck at the fourth floor level.
I mean, above the third floor roof.
Correct.
Yeah, so it's 10 feet, six inches deep by 16 feet.
And it's set back to five feet, the required five feet from the extreme front building line.
And you can see it here.
There are stairs that go up to a deck above the fourth floor, but there's no pilot house there.
And then with the total height, what is the total height of the entire proposed addition, including the railing, the parapet and the pilot house above the fourth floor?
So there's no pilot house above the fourth floor, as you can see in this.
And I'm going to go I'm going to use the by right drawing because I think that that really helps show it the best.
Yeah. OK. So let me zoom out.
so what you have that's notated here it's a it's a typical building right that's not
yeah yeah so it's 38 feet plus the the um the deck is going to be fiberglass roof and then a railing
above so it'll be the 41.6 the railing will be the same height as the permitted parapet
height and so it complies with the height requirements for the rsa zoning district
And then in your survey of nearby similar properties, how many of them or what percentage of them had a fourth floor and a roof deck?
The one that was that that are presently existing.
Yes. I don't I think this the adding the fourth floor above within the height limit is a newer design that we're just starting to see.
And again, that was granted, the variance for that was granted in November, in my case
on Cater Street, and then last week on South 12th Street.
But many of the, what's that?
I said, go ahead.
I was about to ask another question.
No, no, no, no.
And again, I know, you know, it's, I wonder as well, I looked at it and, you know, I thought,
well, I haven't seen this before in all the years that I've been doing this.
And it seems to work within the height limits, given the floor to ceiling heights.
And again, the refusal that we're here for is the front of the third floor.
But yes, the fourth floor is a newer design.
And then two more questions.
What are the ceiling heights on the new proposed third and fourth floor?
And then maybe the owner or the architect can answer, is the basement finished?
I'm going to show you on the floor plan.
So I know because that question did come up when I was here for 1918.
and the in the basement is just a storage area but is it is it finished the finished storage
area well when you say finished um just that like the walls are sheetrock heating cool okay got you
yeah is it conditioned space i would have to defer to sam and or matt on that i mean whether they i
think ultimately whether it will be or won't be yeah i think the plan is for the the basement to
be unfinished as a part of this work. Still, again, just in zoning, we're still in a schematic
level. But and then in terms of your question about ceiling heights, it's pretty limited.
And then in terms of your question about ceiling heights, it's pretty limited.
I think we're looking at around seven foot eight ceiling heights for the third and fourth.
So really trying to get within that permitted maximum height.
Okay, understood.
Yeah, and you can see here the floor to floor.
So you're 19 to 28, then 28 to the third.
I know part of that was the original, I'm assuming part of that is the original roof assembly and then the forest assembly, which is why I was asking.
Gotcha.
Other questions from the board?
Questions from our attorney, Hillary Emerson.