ZBA Hearing - October 14, 2020

For that reason, I imagine they have to limit the agendas.

If pandemic conditions applied and meetings started at a sooner time, then perhaps we wouldn't be having this conversation because the CDR would have heard more cases yesterday.

It's an unusual circumstance.

uh chair

i was going to ask you about that uh what time their meeting was because i

thought maybe we can do a special um frank if i could

short time yeah we have eleanor sharp who's at the

um would like to speak on this here miss sharp

your mic has been unmuted you can wait to be sworn in and speak to this case

good afternoon miss sharp uh please spell your name identify yourself spell your name for the

stenographer please can you hear me yes eleanor sharp e-l-e-a-n-o-r-s-h-a-r-p-e executive director

of the philadelphia city planning commission we're a firm to tell the truth the whole truth

nothing about the truth i do thank you please proceed so i just wanted to clarify that because

of the tax abatement issue that we have a lot of applicants for CDR so this is not a typical case

outside of the pandemic and despite our typical determination of who makes our agenda

we have an onslaught of cases that we have doubled up our CDR meetings so we have more cases

we have less time than we have cases to hear and we make decisions based on the times that we get

from L&I of what's been notified. And despite our regulations, there's a piece that's missing

that has not been mentioned that despite meeting all the requirements to be put on an agenda is

not a guarantee that one will appear on an agenda because there are other factors that we have to

consider. And that's part and parcel of why we're so backed up because we have multiple cases

waiting to be heard. This is not an unusual case. There's multiple applicants who are clamoring to

be heard to meet the deadline before the tax abatement expires. I just wanted to be sure that

that was stated in the record that we didn't deliberately not include them on CDR. And they

have been put on our October 22nd CDR and also to advise that that meeting may

require a second appearance by this team which will further not delay the

appearance to ZBA because the code does require one to complete CDR prior to

appearing to the ZBA. Thank you for that explanation. If I may briefly respond.

Please.

Ms. Sharp mentioned the agenda and the fact that there's no guarantee.

That is certainly not clear in the CDR publications.

And I did carefully look at the agenda.

There were six items on yesterday's agenda.

Three of them were by right, meaning they don't have to worry about zoning board schedules.

One of those, by right, took testimony for well over an hour from residents who were so opposed to the project.

So I'm just confused as to the decision making when this matter was well known to be scheduled for a zoning hearing on the 14th, why it didn't make the agenda for the 13th.

It's a rhetorical question. I'm not expecting a response.

but just wanted to respond to Ms. Sharpe briefly.

Can you hear me?

I'm sorry.

I think you heard what I was asking Mr. Reuter.

I was trying to figure out if there's a way in which we can move forward with your case today.

But in any event, if we held it, we'd have to come back.

I'll have a full-blown hearing anyway.

So, I mean, unless – I don't see how we can do it based on what testimony of the law department and Ms. Sharp.

So, Tanya, the 22nd is a week from tomorrow, correct?

So Chair, if I could, which is typical for me, if a project goes to CDR, I have to get notification of its completion to schedule.

I have to get notification of its completion to schedule.

Once I get notification from BAGE,

I will work with the applicant to immediately schedule

so that they can be heard.

So hypothetically, if the case gets heard at CDR on the 22nd

and they give a ruling and you get notification,

i'm not putting words in your mouth i'm asking could we potentially uh have the hearing on

tuesday the is that the 20th potentially or is that too well no they're scheduled for

20 seconds second so thereafter we still have i meant to say the following week

we still have a posting requirement

but again i can work with the applicant so that we can get it scheduled honoring the posting

requirement so that they can come before the board as soon as possible i'm speaking i meant

to say the 27th not the 20th i apologize tanya what is the posting requirement under the virtual

rules? Is it three weeks or two weeks? This would be a continued case, so two

weeks would be appropriate. Can we take a chance and pick a date two weeks from

today and post it so that we can satisfy that requirement if for some reason the

CDR process is not

complete, we understand we'd have to

repost.

Sharon, that's your call.

Any legal barriers to doing

that? I think it's a

reasonable question. I believe you could do that as long

as the posting requirement

is met and the hearing

does not commence until completion

of the RCO, or rather the

CDR process.

okay my only final request would be that uh the uh planning commission issue its

uh decision as soon as possible once that process is complete

um i again i don't is is councilman jones on

i have no hands up currently okay all right so we're all in agreement here uh mi 2020

that's 001236 5001 umbria street is being continued but we're not going to have a date

certain is that correct i thought we're going to select two weeks from today and i understand

we're taking a risk because we don't have 28th the 28th tanya yes chair at two o'clock yes chair

okay 28th and that and this is sharon slid it with the understanding that it would be

further continued should the CDR process not be completed as of that date.

Okay, thank you. Okay. Thank you very much for your patience. Thank you.

Thank you, everyone. Any other requests for continuances or withdrawals?

I have no hands up at this time. Thank you, Tanya. Okay, all set.

Am I number 2020-000092, 1000 South Broad Street?

The attorney's Jared Klein.

Mr. Klein you've been promoted to a panelist you can share your screen as you need to

and please wait to be sworn in good afternoon Mr. Chair members of the board

hey jared i'm sorry go ahead yeah i'm mixing it up i apologize i'll swear him in and then we'll go

okay mr klein yes please identify yourself for the record absolutely uh jared klein it's k-l-e-i-n

from blank rome 130 north 18th street philadelphia we're in firm to tell the truth the whole truth

We're in the firm to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?

nothing but the truth yes i do thank you okay

Yes, I do.

Thank you.

Okay, Mr. Snell.

Thank you.

All righty.

Jared, have you emailed an exhibit packet with the required documents, which are proof of ownership, proof of tax compliance, a copy of the refusal or referral, and photos and plans five days in advance of this hearing?

Yes, I have.

Okay, great.

Also, have you met with the RCO, and do you have a letter from them?

Yes.

Great. Okay. You may continue.

Thank you very much. Good afternoon, everyone. Again, Jared Klein on behalf of the applicant. I do have with me my client on the line, Dana Valenti. If the board could promote her to the ability to speak as I move through my presentation, that would be helpful.

uh so this application is for 1000 south broad street as the board may know that is

also known as lincoln square um this is an overhead view of where the property is

um the board's well aware it's at the corner of broad and washington and it runs through to

carpenter street and it's the site of a large mixed use development that i'm sure the board

is well aware of. This application is for signage. It's a collection of signs for the tenant spaces

and parking that are around the project site. The signs, the refusals that we were issued,

and I'll put those up on the screen for you, primarily dealt with the overall square footage

of the signage. The zoning code was not designed for a project or lot of this size. So the signage

minimums and maximums, while they make sense for less intense commercial areas, with a project of

this site, we need some additional signage, both for parking and identification of our tenants.

the collection of signs are going to be installed at four areas around the property

we're calling them a b c and d you can see on the site plan sign a is going to be a pylon sign

that's a freestanding sign i'm circling with my mouse here that's going to be for tenant

identification sign b is a blade sign sign c are directional signs for parking

and there are several sign C's so the board is aware. There are two here, one at this corner

and one at this corner, and sign D is another tenant blade sign. Taking you through

briefly through some of the photos of the site, this is a rendering of what sign A,

which is our freestanding pylon sign, would look like. Here are some additional architectural

detail. The parking blade signs will look substantially similar to these and will be

installed at the four locations around the property that I referenced. This is the additional

blade sign, again, showing both the location of parking and existing tenants.

And this is an example of what the parking blade signs will look like.

um we had a couple of meetings as we ramped up for the zoning hearing here um we met both with

a preliminary conversation with the art commission and a couple conversations with sasna uh out of

those conversations came some suggested tweaks which we've made and we do have revised plans

that I sent to Ms. Saleta prior to today's hearing, those revised plans have nine pages

because of the amount of signs. But here are the key changes that are identified in those

revised plans. For sign A, which is the pylon sign, we've angled the base of the sign to make

it less inviting for people to sit on it or use it as a recreation spot. That was something that

came out of the SASNA conversation. For sign B, we revised the plan to show that as a non-illuminated

sign. Some of the other signs will be statically, not internally illuminated. But sign B, we removed

the illumination. And two of the signs, the sign C signs and the C signs have been increased in

height slightly at the request of both the Civic Association and the Art Commission to make those

signs fit in a little bit more contextually against the building. So there have been some

So there have been some slight adjustments to the height, less than a foot for both.

slight adjustments to the height less than a foot for both

And sign D has been reduced slightly in height and centered to make it a more attractive installation.

All of those revisions were presented to SOSNA at our meeting, and their letter of support is before you on the screen here.

and before I ask my client to come on just to sort of recap the issue for the amount of signage here

this is a large site with both pedestrians and vehicular traffic coming from multiple directions

so we need multiple tenant identification and parking signs not only so potential customers

can locate the stores within the site, but also to make sure that there's no traffic backups on

Washington Avenue, Broad Street, or Carpenter that surround the site. The multiple parking

directional signs will make it easy for vehicles traveling to the site to more efficiently find an

entrance to the parking as they drive around it. So we're trying to reduce circling, double parking,

things of that nature that, you know, cause a traffic backup.

Dana, are you on the line and unmuted?

And if you're not, could you raise your hand?

Virtually.

Good afternoon, Jared. Can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Good afternoon.

Please identify yourself, spell your first and last name for the record.

Dana Valenti, D-A-N-A, V as in Victor, A-L-E-N-T-I.

Thank you.

Do you swear and affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do.

Thank you.

Please proceed.

Thank you.

Dana, did you have a chance to listen to my presentation this afternoon?

I did, Jared.

And do you adopt my statements as true, correct, and your own?

I do.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, we can certainly answer any questions the board may have, but that concludes our presentation for now.

Questions from the board?

No.

Anyone else wish to testify in this case?

If so, please raise your hand.

No hands at this time.

Thank you. Planning Commission?

Good afternoon, Chairman and members of the Board.

Ian Litwin with Planning Commission staff.

I believe I need to be sworn in still.

You want to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?

Yes, I do.

Thank you. Please proceed.

Lincoln Square was an important step towards redeveloping Washington Avenue as a mixed-use corridor.

These signs will support the two floors of commercial uses included in the development.

In addition, these signs will require art commission review prior to permit issuance.

Therefore, we do not have opposition to granting the variances required.

Very much.

Mr. Klein, did you say nine pages?

Yes.

Thank you.

Okay.

MI 2020-000092, 1000 Broad Street.

My vote is yes with the proviso.

nine page revised plan nine pages adopted to the approved today um this is sharon saletta can