[4:24] If I could have your attention, please for a moment.

[4:30] » I just want to go over the hearings for tonight. First hearing is going to be 28

[4:35] Locust Street. Second hearing will be 260 West Milton.

[4:40] Third hearing will be 34 South 13th. Fourth hearing will be 329 Folk Street.

[4:49] Fifth hearing is 1100 Bushkill Drive. Sixth hearing is 1111 to13 Bushkill

[4:56] Drive. Last hearing will be 36 South 12th Street. And we'll be starting

[5:01] momentarily soon as the rain stops.

[6:02] You ready? >> Yeah. Go for it.

[6:05] » Are you ready? >> Ready.

[6:08] » All right. I'll open the first hearing. The secretary be the purpose, please.

[6:13] » All right. Applications hereby made for a public hearing before the East and

[6:16] Zoning Hearing Board for a property known as 28 South Locust Street Zoning

[6:20] District, West Ward, block class C. Variance is as follows. 59515D

[6:26] proposed rear yard setback of 12 feet 10.5 in required as a minimum rear yard

[6:33] setback of 25 ft 59533 J3 proposed north and south off-

[6:40] streetet parking spaces are less than the 4ft sideyard setback required off-

[6:46] streetet parking spaces shall be at least 4 feet from any side lot line. The

[6:50] above action is request to proceed with a proposal to build a two-unit duplex on

[6:54] the existing lot. The appellent is Michael Brett at 123

[6:59] South Third Street, Eastern Pennsylvania. Uh the owner is the

[7:03] Redevelopment Authority of East Pennsylvania, 123 South Third Street. Um

[7:09] 50 adjacent property owners were notified and it was published in the

[7:12] press. >> Thank you, sir. See the applicant is

[7:15] present. Is there anybody else here in the audience that wants to speak at this

[7:19] hearing?

[7:22] All right, I'm going to have you guys sworn in now. Do you want to stand up,

[7:25] please?

[7:32] » This just for 28. >> This is just for 28 Locust Street.

[7:38] » You're here for another hearing. You don't need to be sworn right now.

[7:49] I do. [clears throat]

[7:53] » Yep. >> Yeah, the rain's super loud.

[7:58] » Y >> Mr. Tman, with this property posted?

[8:00] » Yes, it was. >> Okay. You want to start, sir?

[8:03] » Yep. Thank you, uh, Mr. Chairman. Uh, my name is Will Edinger. I'm the solicitor

[8:07] for the redevelopment authority. Last name spelled OE T. I n ger. We are here

[8:13] on 28 South Locust Street for variances related to rear yard setback and uh

[8:19] parking relative to the sideyard setbacks. Um just some history on this

[8:25] property. It was formerly a a blighted property which was acquired by the

[8:31] redevelopment authority through eminent domain. Um to the rear of the property

[8:37] is Dutchtown Park. Um there are some challenging physical features to the

[8:41] property like steep slopes. Um in 2022 the redevelopment authority in

[8:47] conjunction with the city uh did a lot consolidation plan in which it took what

[8:53] I would call basically jigsaw pieces and made them into a regular lot. Um the

[9:01] to the north of the property is the parking for Dutchtown Park uh which and

[9:07] the park itself form is the backyard to this property. Um the proposal is to

[9:14] have a uh to construct a duplex with one unit being uh owner occupied and the

[9:20] other unit to be basically an aging in place facility. Um,

[9:27] but other than that, we are required to have three parking spaces and this is a

[9:31] limited site and there's not a lot of on street parking at this spot. Um, it's a

[9:36] class C block under the zoning ordinance. Um, so to provide on-site

[9:41] parking, we really the only place we can place it on this property.

[9:46] » So, so you meet the parking um criteria, just not the the width of the parking

[9:51] spaces. Well, the the parking spaces themselves are wide enough. Just their

[9:55] location relative to the property to the sideyard is too close to the sideyard.

[10:00] Um, in one instance, the neighbor is the

[10:04] city of Easton. It's its parking lot. So, uh, and on the other side, there's

[10:10] what looks like a crumbling down parking spot already, but we would just be

[10:14] cleaning that up and putting a parking spot there.

[10:28] though the the board is aware. Would you identify yourself for the record,

[10:32] please? >> Sure. My name is Michael Brett. I'm the

[10:34] deputy director of the redevelopment authority here on behalf of the

[10:37] redevelopment authority. >> Thank you.

[10:47] So the first set is um the planning application where you can see the kind

[10:50] of chopped up. It was originally three lots, 26 Locust Street and 28th Locust

[10:54] Street. Um as you flip through the proposed lots and ultimately became the

[10:59] approved lot um known as 28 South Locust Street is a combination of a

[11:04] consolidation of the two smaller lots and then a lot line adjustment with

[11:08] Dutchtown Park behind it to square it off and give it, you know, a more um

[11:12] buildable surface area. And the final um print out is the proposed zoning

[11:19] diagram. So it shows the residents um in elevation and plan. The lower um the

[11:26] lower unit as as Mr. Edinger described is an ADA compliant wheelchair

[11:31] accessible aging in place unit with a um a300 foot home built on top of it.

[11:39] » And for the record what Mr. Brett just described

[11:43] uh along with another attachment a memorandum

[11:48] and the planning commission resolution dated August 3, 2022

[11:55] uh has been marked as exhibit A1. >> Thank you.

[12:01] » We're happy to answer any questions from the board.

[12:04] » Uh the uh re our setback is that proposed u lot one or two. So it's it's

[12:11] one lot because it's a dup a stack duplex.

[12:15] » Okay. >> So it'll be one 12 foot 10 inch setback

[12:19] to the rear yard which to the rear property line which is itself um city

[12:24] property. >> So it's in order to meet the rear

[12:28] setback the building orientation or dimensions would take up more street

[12:32] frontage. Um but to maximize the street frontage to get um three off streetet

[12:36] parking spots we we approach it as a kind of

[12:40] short and a narrow um footprint so that we can maximize the street frontage for

[12:44] driveway aprons. Um so it was like one way we weren't going to get we're going

[12:49] to be sacrificing something either way and I think the parking is more

[12:53] valuable. It was our kind of judgment call on this.

[12:56] » Any other questions from the board?

[13:02] » No, no further questions. You have anything

[13:05] else you want to add? >> No, that's all. Just ask respectfully

[13:08] that you grant the variances as requested.

[13:10] » Was there anybody I forgot? Was anybody else warning? Wasn't it? Was there?

[13:14] » All right, I'm close the hearing. [clears throat]

[13:21] » Yeah, I mean

[13:26] I'd rather have

[13:38] Yeah, absolutely. >> Motion to approve by Mrs. Panto.

[13:44] » Second. >> Second by Mr. Lopac.

[13:48] » Miss Panto. >> Mr. Loac.

[13:51] » I >> Mr. Civetella.

[13:52] » Hi, >> Miss Thomas.

[13:53] » Hi. >> Granite. Good luck.

[13:56] » Thank you very much. Have a good evening.

[14:09] » [snorts]

[14:14] » All right. Open up the next hearing. Your secretary with the purpose, please.

[14:18] [clears throat] >> All right. Applications hereby made for

[14:19] public hearing before the East and Zoning Hearing Board for property known

[14:23] as 260 West Milton Street zoning district southside street corridor

[14:26] enhancement block class B. Special exception 59514F13F1

[14:33] proposed a 6' high fence in the sideyard. Requirement special exception

[14:38] for fences over 4 ft in height. Above action is requested to proceed with a 50

[14:43] foot by 6 foot high pressuret treated lumber uh standard privacy vertical

[14:48] boards with one gate fence. The appellant is Raymond Gonzalez at 913

[14:53] Woodbine Avenue Ben Salem, PA1 19020. The owner is um Katherine uh Puffer at

[15:02] 260 West Milton Street, Eastn PA. Uh 29 adjacent properties were notified and it

[15:08] was published in the press. [clears throat]

[15:11] And then I have uh the East and Planning Commission resolution from August 5th,

[15:16] 2026. Now therefore, it be resolved that the East and Planning Commission

[15:20] recommends to the zoning hearing board that the special exception be granted

[15:24] for the six-foot fence at 260 West Mil Street based on the findings that the

[15:29] proposed use is generally consistent with 59507C

[15:34] considerations for special exceptions request 59540C

[15:37] criteria for special exceptions in the city's comprehensive plan with the

[15:42] following conditions. One, the applica application is subject to any conditions

[15:45] the zoning hearing board may impose. Two, all additional comments from the

[15:49] zoning administrator, zoning hearing board, codes and planning department and

[15:52] city engineer shall be met. >> Thank you, sir. Is the applicant

[15:57] present? Come forward, please. Is there anybody else that's here for this

[16:01] hearing?

[16:04] I have many standing, please. It's going to be sworn in.

[16:16] And Mr. Tman, this property was posted. >> Yes, it was.

[16:19] » If you give your name and address for the record, please.

[16:22] » Yeah. Deter. I don't think it's on. Is it on?

[16:25] » Yep. There you go. >> Katherine Feifer, 260 West Mill.

[16:28] » Thank you. Okay. Tell us why you're here.

[16:30] » Um, I'm just purchasing a fence because the area is a little bit dangerous and I

[16:35] have a dog. So, your 4 foot fence, a 4 foot fence is

[16:41] not um good for you. Why? >> That dog's definitely going to jump over

[16:45] that fence. [laughter]

[16:50] » That's hard to argue with.

[16:59] So from the from the photo we have is that the defense cover looks like it's

[17:04] almost triangular. >> Yeah. Back um one just because it's a

[17:10] little bit of a dangerous area if you're looking around the corner. We wanted to

[17:13] make sure you could see the corner. As you know Milton and Philadelphia is

[17:20] pretty pretty intense. So we did that. And then also my neighbor owns some of

[17:26] the yard on the side. So, we wanted to be cautious of that as well.

[17:29] » Okay. Any questions?

[17:33] » Just one, when you say dangerous, are you talking about the traffic

[17:36] surrounding the property? >> Yeah, I would say the traffic and

[17:39] there's a lot of car accidents there. >> Thank you.

[17:49] Has your dog jumped to 4ft fence? Um, no, but he jumps. Um, he's a cattle dog,

[17:57] so in training he kind of jumps for fun. So,

[18:02] » okay.

[18:05] » All right. Any other questions?

[18:21] » All right, reporters. No further questions. You have anything else you

[18:23] want to add? >> All right. Close the hearing.

[18:46] I have a dog.

[18:55] » Yeah,

[19:04] » Mr. Thomas made the to approve. Second, Mrs. Panto.

[19:10] » Miss Thomas. >> Hi,

[19:12] » Miss Manto. >> Hi,

[19:13] » Mr. Civetella. >> Hi,

[19:15] » Mr. Lopac. >> Hi.

[19:17] » All right. Where'd she go? >> Thought you jumped the fence. All right.

[19:22] [laughter] >> It's been approved. Good luck. You don't

[19:27] have to stay. I mean, you can if you want to, but you don't have to.

[19:44] Ruin >> sir. All right. I'll open up the next

[19:48] hearing. The secretary read the purpose, please.

[19:50] » All right. Applications hereby made for a public hearing before the eastern

[19:54] zoning hearing board for a property known as 34 South 13th Street Zoning

[19:57] District Westward Street corridor enhancement block class C. Variances as

[20:02] follows. 59515 F6 proposed 19 foot and a half uh wide

[20:08] driveway required driveways shall be no more than 10 ft wide. 59533

[20:14] J3 proposed zero sideyard setback required off- streetet parking shall be

[20:19] at least 4T from any side lot line. The above action is request to proceed with

[20:24] uh they want to remove old bricks and replace them with concrete so that cars

[20:29] can park in the back of the house. Uh, the pellant is Glad Glattis Orons at 348

[20:35] Wed Wedgewood Drive, East NPA 18045. The owner is Suzanne

[20:43] Peter Rosowskis. Sorry if I messed that up. At 34 South

[20:48] 13th Street, East NPA. Uh, 40 47 adjacent property owners were notified

[20:53] and it was published in the press. >> Thank you. See the applicant is present.

[20:58] You want to rem remain standing. Is there anybody here in the audience that

[21:01] wants to speak at this hearing?

[21:06] » I ask you to be sworn in now.

[21:25] » All right. You may be seated. If you could um Mr. Tilman, this

[21:30] property was posted. >> Yes, it was.

[21:32] » And Mr. Chairman, before you proceed, if I may, Mr. Tilman, unlike uh the others

[21:37] in our uh packet tonight, uh there was no authorization included with this

[21:43] particular appeal. Is there one on file? >> There is.

[21:46] » There is. Thank you. >> If you could give your name and address

[21:50] for the record, please.

[21:54] » Is that on? The microphone on? >> Is have turned on? There you go.

[21:57] » Brian Rodriguez, 341 13th Street. >> And your name in?

[22:04] » Gladis Rodriguez. Uh my address is 348

[22:10] Wwood Drive, Houston, PA.

[22:15] » Thank you. >> So tell us why you're here.

[22:19] » So we would like to install a driveway in the back of the yard. Um the the

[22:26] yard's basically useless anyways other than for a driveway and we think it'd be

[22:32] really convenient especially in the winter when there's uh you know state of

[22:37] emergencies and they make everybody clear out 13th Street like no one's

[22:42] allowed to park there be easy for >> Do you have photos there?

[22:48] » Yeah.

[22:52] You want to give them to the secretary first, please?

[22:55] » Yeah.

[23:11] Would

[23:30] you like to come up and identify these after I marked them?

[23:43] Okay, I've marked this photo A1. If you can identify that for the board, please.

[23:53] » Oh, so that's the entrance from the alleyway into the yard.

[24:02] » You want to pass it down? >> It's in the front.

[24:05] » And I've marked this as A2. Would you identify that please? That is the

[24:10] current patio driveway

[24:15] » already there.

[24:22] » And A3,

[24:27] that's a little area that we'd like to turn into a garden once we're done

[24:33] renovating the house.

[24:39] and A4.

[24:44] » That is a picture of the alleyway behind the house.

[24:49] » Just showing that the other properties, >> this is A3,

[24:53] » also have a fairly small yard. >> Mr. Tilman, if I can interrupt for a

[24:57] second. What does A3 have to do with >> These are just photos of his rear yard

[25:03] that he took that the applicant took. So, but this has nothing to do with the

[25:06] with the parking pad >> typically. No,

[25:09] » no, he's just showing the description of his backyard.

[25:12] » Is there any kind of impervious surface? >> No, he's in a street. He's in a street

[25:17] corridor, so he can go 100%. >> Okay.

[25:23] » Yeah. No, you can.

[25:30] » And this is A5. That's the rest of the patio driveway.

[25:37] » No, this is the drive already there.

[25:43] » Folks, can we keep >> Oh, okay.

[25:50] » Yeah. So, there's like a patio patio driveway

[26:00] and then a six

[26:04] That's another view of the entrance from the alleyway into the backyard.

[26:10] » And there are [clears throat] there are uh landscaping stones there. Is that an

[26:16] accurate description? >> Ugly landscaping stones.

[26:23] » Replace all of that. >> Was that six?

[26:29] Yep. All right. This is A7.

[26:42] » It's basically the same photo. It's just >> You want to just keep that one then and

[26:46] we'll mark the next one. A7.

[26:52] » All right. Then the replacement A7. Would you describe that, please?

[26:56] » Uh, again, another photo showing that other neighbors also have

[27:01] 100% driveway for our yard.

[27:17] May I?

[27:23] Thank you.

[27:36] So, in other words, you're not you're not going to have any green yard at all.

[27:41] » Yeah, we will. In that one photo that I showed that I said I want to turn into a

[27:46] garden. >> Okay.

[27:47] » Yeah. >> I mean, he means green that you're going

[27:49] to park on. >> So, you're not going to park on

[27:53] » I wouldn't I would not like to park on grass. I would like to park on concrete

[27:57] or asphalt, >> right? Yeah. No, Mike, with all due

[28:02] respect, that's not what I was >> asking if he was going to have any green

[28:07] grassy yard at all. >> Well, there it would be about a 25 Well,

[28:13] no, I think it's a 20 by like three foot area.

[28:18] » That's that area that I want to turn into a garden.

[28:23] And what is the size of the rest of your yard that you're planning on? You You

[28:27] keep saying driveway. Is it Is it just >> It's already covered in concrete. It's

[28:32] just It's all busted up. And

[28:37] » I think it was I I don't know which which how you marked it, but you can see

[28:42] in this photo that there's a concrete slab right here.

[28:45] » Okay. >> And then there's a paver area right next

[28:50] to it. So your your entire yard is already

[28:55] » Yeah. >> concrete or or

[28:57] » I just want to replace it with something nice.

[29:02] » And this is just for cars in your household.

[29:04] » Mhm. >> And how many cars you have?

[29:06] » There'll only be two. >> Maybe two.

[29:08] » Yeah. Once I'm able to move in. >> Once I'm sorry, what?

[29:13] » Once I'm able to move in. >> I'm I'm renovating it. Currently living

[29:18] with my mom. So, it's just going to be you in the

[29:22] house. >> Mhm.

[29:23] » And your mom? >> No, just me.

[29:25] » Well, then you have two cars. >> Yeah. A truck and a

[29:28] » Okay. Okay. >> Any questions from the board?

[29:35] » I know there were some people that wanted that were sworn in.

[29:39] You want to come forward, please?

[29:50] If you would state your name and address for the record, please.

[29:52] » David Cubic, uh, 36 South 13th Street. Cubic. K U B I C.

[30:02] » My only concern was it was brought to our attention by the realtor that it was

[30:08] going to be a multi-purpose home and it was listed as a single family. If it's

[30:13] him, and it's just him living there.

[30:17] » I have no objections. >> That's I think that's I think that's

[30:19] what he said, right? There's no >> that's what he just stated. That's when

[30:23] my whole I was like, "Okay." Because it was brought to our attention from the

[30:27] realtor that it was to be renovated and made a multi-purpose home. And I'm

[30:30] thinking to myself, you know, >> we've been here for 17 years. All of the

[30:34] neighbors on the block has been here for more than 20 years. We maintain that

[30:38] alley. We snowblow it. Um I have neighbors with disabilities, so you

[30:44] know, to try to keep it open in case there is an emergency so they can get

[30:47] their cars out of the back in the winter time. It gets to be a community effort

[30:51] back there. So, that was my major concern. If it's him, welcome to the

[30:56] neighborhood. If it's his two cars, I can handle it. So, I don't

[31:00] » And again, you don't Your plan is not to have it a multi-unit

[31:05] » place. No, no. One family for the house. >> I only seen him in passing one time. I

[31:11] wish he would have introduced himself. You know, we could have had this

[31:15] conversation probably in the backyard. Unfortunately, that didn't happen. I

[31:19] hope to see him in the future and >> you know, we can go from there.

[31:22] » Looks like there are no backyards. [laughter]

[31:27] » Listen, I have five tomato plants in my backyard. So, all right. There you go.

[31:31] » You know, you know, we we do have a little bit of

[31:35] backard and you know, everybody tries to keep their stuff.

[31:39] We were just concerned that, you know, it was going to be a parking pad for

[31:42] » for apartment. You know, like I said, like it was said to me to by the realtor

[31:47] before they [clears throat] had purchased the house. That's what the

[31:49] intentions were. I don't know if that was maybe that was a different seller

[31:53] for all. I was just concerned. >> Well, he stated on the record that it's

[31:56] not. So, >> which is fine.

[31:58] » Got him on that. >> Thank you for your time.

[32:01] » Thank you. >> Thank you.

[32:02] » And Mr. Mr. Tman, if I may, just for the record, what is the current designation

[32:06] of this property? >> It is an A2 semi- detached dwelling.

[32:11] » Single family. >> Single family.

[32:13] » Thank you. >> Okay. Anybody else that was sworn in?

[32:18] You weren't sworn in. >> Well, there

[32:25] sir, were you sworn in? You weren't sworn in.

[32:27] » Okay. >> Yes.

[32:34] Yes, >> I do so swear.

[32:37] » You give your name and address for the record, please.

[32:40] » 1236 Northampton Street. Will this construction of yours in your

[32:46] surrounding property affect my restaurant, Brooklyn Eats, SNS, my

[32:50] awesome neighbors, or the Paxosa school? >> No.

[32:55] » Any of that surrounding area? No. >> All right, then. I wish you the best on

[32:59] your construction then. Thank you. >> Thank you.

[33:03] » Thank you. >> Anybody else?

[33:08] » Any other questions from the board?

[33:13] » You have something?

[33:26] » So that's a good point. So, um, so you're going from

[33:32] your >> property line to property line,

[33:34] » property line to property line >> wide,

[33:36] » zero yard setback. >> Is that

[33:41] » And I don't have a measurement of of it. We don't have any drawings or anything.

[33:45] Is that necessary to fit two cars or is that

[33:49] » just just for like a approach angle and since it is a fairly narrow driveway in

[33:54] the back and I have quite long truck uh just to be able to to have some more

[34:02] approach angle. >> You have a 19 and a half wide driveway.

[34:07] » Mhm. [clears throat] >> I'm trying to follow suit. Yeah.

[34:10] » And then, you know, having one car parked, let's say, to the left and then

[34:14] I would try to come in with my truck and park it on the right side.

[34:19] » Yeah. >> Just to have two two parking spots.

[34:24] Could you could you have a foot on each side?

[34:27] » How how wide is the property? >> I think the property is about 20 ft

[34:32] wide. >> Oh, just 20.

[34:35] » Yeah.

[34:40] » 10 ft. 9 ft is the >> That's 9 ft

[34:44] 9 by 18.

[34:55] I know. Yeah. So, what we're

[35:02] » Would you would you be agreeable to have a foot on each side so that you have

[35:07] some space between property lines so that you can at least uh take care of

[35:12] the property on your own side. So if you're if you're from property line to

[35:15] property line, you have to go on somebody else's property to take care of

[35:19] it basically. [clears throat] >> And water runoff.

[35:22] » And water runoff also would be >> you give yourself a little bit of

[35:27] permeable surface. >> I I can do that. Yeah.

[35:30] » Okay. >> I I'll put a one foot

[35:36] margin on either side of it. So, you realize that is going to require that

[35:42] you uh on the record modify your appeal to request not a zero sideyard setback,

[35:50] but a one foot sideyard setback on each side.

[35:56] » I'm I'm sorry, one one more time. >> It's okay. We would ask if that's what

[36:00] you're willing to do uh that you verify you are willing to revise your appeal to

[36:06] request a one foot sideyard setback on each side of the property.

[36:12] » Okay. >> Instead of zero

[36:16] » So would I would I have to resubmit that application and come here again?

[36:20] » Nope. I'm asking you to do it now on the record.

[36:23] » Oh. Uh yeah. Okay.

[36:36] All right. Any other questions?

[36:41] » Now, Mr. Chairman, do you want to specify that that one foot setback be

[36:48] saw or grass and not stone or any other? >> I understand.

[36:54] » I I don't I don't typically have a preference. No, I mean Okay.

[36:59] » Jacob. >> Okay.

[37:02] » Just just ask.

[37:09] » All right. The board has no further questions. Do you have anything else you

[37:12] want to add? >> No, sir.

[37:13] » All right. Thank you. I close the hearing.

[37:18] » I would suggest the board consider attaching a condition prohibiting rental

[37:24] of the spaces to

[37:50] Mr. Thomas, Mrs. Thomas and make a motion. Okay. To approve

[37:55] » Mr. Lopac. Second >> with that condition.

[37:58] » That condition. >> Yes.

[38:00] » All right. Uh, Miss Thomas. >> Hi,

[38:02] » Mr. Lopes. >> I,

[38:04] » Miss Mr. Civetella. >> Hi,

[38:06] » Miss Panto. So, it's been it's been approved with the condition that you can

[38:10] only use it for people with that property.

[38:14] » Can't rent it out. >> Okay.

[38:16] » Okay. >> Thank you.

[38:19] » Thank you.

[38:34] Ready.

[38:51] » Ready. All right. Open up the next hearing. Your secretary to purpose,

[38:54] please. >> All right. Applications hereby made for

[38:58] public hearing before the eastern zoning hearing board for a property known as

[39:01] 329 Folk Street zoning district southside block class C. Special

[39:06] exception for an A7 multifamily and variances as follows. 59514C1

[39:12] proposed an A7 multifamily dwelling required a special exception.

[39:17] 59514D proposed existing lot area of 4,875

[39:22] square feet. Required minimum lot area of 5,000 square feet. 59514D

[39:29] proposed existing 5 foot bill line required a three-foot build two line.

[39:35] 59514D proposed existing zero rear yard setback

[39:41] required a minimum 25 foot rear yard setback. 59514D

[39:47] proposed existing imperous coverage of 67%.

[39:51] Required maximum impervious coverage not to exceed 50%.

[39:56] 59514F3 proposed. No street trees require street

[40:01] trees shall be planted along all streets in accordance with chapter 5542 and as

[40:06] determined by the city forester 59532A2A proposed 1219 square ft per dwelling

[40:15] unit required a minimum lot size 1250 square feet per dwelling unit. The above

[40:22] actions request to proceed with the conversion of an A2 mixed residential

[40:26] business into an A7 multi-use. The appellent is Atten Vermin at 831 Walnut

[40:32] A Eastn PA 18042. The owner is Avis Property LLC at 831

[40:39] Walnut A Eastn PA. Uh 38 adjacent property owners were notified. It was

[40:45] published in the press. We also have the resolution from the

[40:51] Eastn Planning Commission dated August 5th, 2026.

[40:55] Now, now therefore, it be resolved that the East Planning Commission recommends

[40:59] to the zoning hearing board that the special exception be granted for the A7

[41:04] multifamily use at 329 Folk Street based on the findings that the proposed use is

[41:08] generally consistent with 59507C. Considerations for special exception

[41:14] request 59540C criteria for special exceptions and the

[41:19] city's comprehensive plan with the following conditions. One, an impact

[41:23] assessment and mitigation statement is submitted and reviewed by planning

[41:27] commission as part of the land development application. Two, the zoning

[41:30] hearing board consider new information provided by the applicant at the August

[41:35] 5th, 2026 planning commission regarding the applicant's commitment to planting

[41:40] forestry trees along the frontage of the property. Three, the applica application

[41:46] is subject to any conditions the zoning hearing board may impose. Four, all

[41:50] additional comments from the zoning administrator, zoning hearing board,

[41:53] codes and planning department, and city engineer shall be met.

[41:57] » Mr. Tman, I um And I could have heard it wrong, but did you say A2 or A12?

[42:03] » Did you hear it? >> It did say A2 and I was going to wait,

[42:05] but it is an A12 existing. >> All right,

[42:09] » is is the applicant present? >> Is there anybody in this audience that

[42:14] wants to speak at this hearing? >> Have you stand up, sir, be sworn in,

[42:19] please?

[42:28] Yes, I do. >> Okay. You want to give your name and

[42:31] address for the record, please? >> Hatton Verma, 831 Walnut Street, Eastern

[42:36] PA. >> And uh chair, Mr. Chair, this property

[42:41] was posted. >> Thank you.

[42:46] » You can tell I forgot, didn't you? >> Did. All right, sir. Tell us why you're

[42:49] here. >> I'm requesting to turn this uh

[42:53] commercial unit into a three unit apartment building. It has an attached

[42:58] house is one lot is one parcel and it's due to the hardship that I'm going

[43:05] for this because I'm not able to rent that spot out at all and I'm not looking

[43:09] to construct anything outside the building that is already

[43:14] existing. So everything that is I'm doing or proposing it's inside. So I'm

[43:18] not increasing the footprint. I'm not doing nothing that sort.

[43:23] Can you speak then to the all the proposed um

[43:30] codes that you that you know that are our codes don't allow for you? So you

[43:34] could tell the board you know why you need all the variances and I think one

[43:39] is a special exception. >> Uh which one?

[43:44] » All of them. >> I don't have anything in front of me

[43:46] right now to tell you. Um,

[43:49] » so you have a so you have a minimum lot area of 5,000 square feet and you're and

[43:54] you're proposing 4,875. You have a three foot build to line. You

[43:59] need five feet to build 25 foot rare setback. You're proposing

[44:05] nothing. You have a maximum impervious cover

[44:09] coverage not to exceed 50%. You are at 67%.

[44:13] Uh, you're proposing no trees when it calls for trees.

[44:17] No, I am proposing trees. Four trees. >> You are?

[44:20] » Yes. >> Per the

[44:24] » Oh, okay. Okay. I'm sorry. >> And then the minimum lot size of 1,250

[44:30] ft versus your 1219 square feet. So,

[44:38] let let me see if I can make this easy. Uh in your opening statement, did I

[44:42] understand you correctly when you said that you were having difficulty renting

[44:48] the commercial unit? >> Yes. Because of uh the traffic that will

[44:52] bring to the neighborhood. Um uh we proposed barber shop that got denied. We

[44:57] proposed a couple other units and they were denied different businesses and

[45:02] there was one approved but then neighbors complained because it was

[45:06] actually helping. It was something to do with community helping and these people

[45:11] will line up front of the location early morning like 7 o'clock 10 20 of them for

[45:17] whatever they the business was I think they were helping they were government

[45:21] site something like that but anyways they were denied to renew the lease for

[45:26] the second time since then we haven't been leased at all

[45:29] » okay and so all you're not there are three separate units in the building

[45:36] presently So there is

[45:42] so there's a house same parcel same lot there's a house attached and then

[45:46] there's a building which is commercial also attached so it's like I guess this

[45:51] was mix right so the commercial building that is there

[45:57] this is the entire commercial building right here and we are just dividing that

[46:01] within the premises that exist two into three apartments

[46:09] and they all have because the corner property it has all all the three

[46:13] apartments have their own entrances and windows.

[46:22] » There are two buildings on this property.

[46:25] » There is a house attached to the building.

[46:28] » Are they both on the same property, Mr. Tman?

[46:31] » They are. So if you look at

[46:36] and the packet here at the corner one. So, this single family house, well, it's

[46:40] a part of the mixed juice, but it's connected to the commercial building.

[46:44] Got it. >> Which I'm not touching at all. That

[46:47] stays as is. >> I was going to ask you that. So, you're

[46:49] doing nothing with the house. >> We're not doing nothing with the house.

[46:53] » And the house is just a single family. >> Single family. Yes.

[46:57] » And we do rent out to section 8. So, that's what's going to be used for as

[47:00] well.

[47:06] We're not changing anything on print. No,

[47:09] » only interior.

[47:15] » Exactly. Right. Correct.

[47:19] » I see a garage. Is there Is there a garage?

[47:22] » That garage is going to turn into like a studio apartment.

[47:25] » Okay. That garage was for the house.

[47:28] » No, it was for the commercial. >> Commercial.

[47:30] » Yeah. And when you were talking about the the

[47:33] denied rentals, did you own it during this? Can you give a little more? That

[47:37] was >> I own the property for past five to six

[47:39] years now. >> Okay. And throughout that, you've tried

[47:42] to go to a garage. They got denied so forth and so on. So you've made various

[47:47] attempts for five years. >> Yeah. And where the garage is, that's

[47:50] like a very narrow street. It got parking on both sides. And um

[47:58] so we did rent it out to a um milwork business but they were having difficulty

[48:05] getting big trucks delivery so they left.

[48:12] » Yeah.

[48:17] So with those four dimensional variances involving existing conditions, you're

[48:25] going to plant four trees in the front to address 59514F3

[48:31] leaves you requesting a 31 square foot per dwelling unit variance for each of

[48:37] the three new residential units. >> Yes, please. boils down to

[48:52] try.

[49:07] Do you have any other questions for him? Any

[49:11] questions? No further questions. Anything else you want to add?

[49:16] » Okay. Close the hearing.

[49:31] You do want to attach as any approval you enterainment

[49:37] that he installed those four. >> Okay.

[49:43] We can do it the planning commission. >> Okay.

[49:49] Who made the motion? >> Mrs. Pens made a motion to approve. Mr.

[49:54] Lac second with that condition. >> All right. Miss Pa.

[49:58] » Mr. Lopac. >> I.

[49:59] » Mr. Civetella. Hi, >> Miss Thomas.

[50:02] » Hi. >> It's been approved with that with the

[50:05] condition to add the port trees. >> I will definitely will do that. Thank

[50:08] you very much. >> Thank you.

[50:09] » Good luck. >> Thank you.

[50:14] » Yeah.

[50:25] » Mr. Chairman

[50:29] desire to Do you

[50:32] » I'm okay. >> Yeah. Okay. We're doing this separate,

[50:36] right? >> Yeah, we are doing it separate. So maybe

[50:38] if we need to >> Okay. All right.

[50:45] Are you ready? >> Yep.

[50:47] » All right. Open up the next hearing. Second to read the purpose, please.

[50:51] [clears throat] >> All right. Applications hereby made for

[50:54] a public hearing before the Eastn Zoning Hearing Board for property known as 1100

[50:58] Bushkill Drive, zoning district river corridor, block class B, special

[51:02] exception for an A12 mixeduse residential business and variances as

[51:07] follows. 59517 C5 proposed an A12 mixed residential

[51:13] business required a special exception 59517D1

[51:18] proposed building height of 62 ft required a maximum building height of 40

[51:23] ft 59517F3 proposed shrubs along the street side of

[51:29] the building required street trees shall be planted along both sides of all

[51:33] streets in accordance with chapter 5542 And as determined by the city forester

[51:39] 59517F6 proposed driveways driveway to be 24

[51:45] feet wide require driveways access via street and not an alley shall be no more

[51:51] than 10 ft wide. The above action is request to proceed with construction of

[51:55] a mixeduse residential commercial building for the redevelopment of

[51:59] existing property along Bushkill Drive. The pelen is Brandon Walker at 1 Oxford

[52:05] Center, Pittsburgh, PA5219. The owner of the property is uh City of

[52:11] East at 123 South Thirdrd Street, Eastn PA. 25 adjacent property owners were

[52:17] notified. It was published in the press and resolution from the Eastn Planning

[52:24] Commission July 1st, 2026. Now therefore, it be resolved that the Eastn

[52:30] Planning Commission grants conditional preliminary approval of the submitted

[52:34] plan titled the Foundry Site Development Plan provided that the applicant aderes

[52:40] to the following conditions. One, the plans shall comply with the planning

[52:44] staff's analysis memorandum dated June 22, 2026 and comply with all comments in

[52:51] the April 24th, 2026 letter from LVPC. Two, the zoning hearing board grants a

[52:57] special exception and variances required with this application and subject to any

[53:01] conditions. The zoning hearing board may impose all variances that have been

[53:05] addressed and submitted revision shall be withdrawn on record. Three, monuments

[53:11] and markers shall be verified and shown for all corners of the property. Four, a

[53:15] note indicating the site is not within the 100year foot flood plane shall be

[53:20] added to the plans. Five, standard approved uh city certificates shall be

[53:25] added to the plans. Six, all additional comments and concerns of the city

[53:29] engineering engineer, city forester, zoning administrator, fire department,

[53:34] codes department shall be met. Seven, the plan shall not be recorded and with

[53:39] the county of Northampton, Pennsylvania to all plan titles and certificates are

[53:42] endorsed by authorized signatures. >> Thank you, Toman. Um, is the applicant

[53:49] present? >> Yes. Anybody here for this hearing?

[53:55] Anybody that wish to speak at this hearing? I need you to be sworn in now.

[53:58] If you don't, if you're not going to be sworn in, you're not going to speak

[54:01] later.

[54:19] » Mr. Chair, this property was posted. >> I I was getting to that.

[54:23] » Oh, I'm sorry, sir. [laughter]

[54:27] » Hi, y'all. >> Councelor, if you could have your um

[54:32] applicants give their names and address for the record, that'd be great.

[54:36] » Can just make sure that's on. >> Hi, this is Mark Mulligan, uh VM

[54:42] Development Group representing the preferred developer. Uh address 1 South

[54:46] 3rd Street, 9th floor, Eastern PA. Gretchen Rice representing VM

[54:53] Development Group 1 South 3rd Street Eastern PA.

[54:55] » I'm sorry, your last name >> Rice. R I

[54:58] » Oh, Rice. Okay, thank you. >> May proceed. And sir, you are

[55:05] » Brandon Walker. I'm with HDR Engineering for the project and that would be uh

[55:13] Oxford Center, Pittsburgh, PA1529. And before we proceed, Mr. Chairman, Mr.

[55:20] Tilman, can I just ask one thing just to get it on the record? Was there a

[55:24] determination made as to whether that this port this property or any portion

[55:29] of it is located in the flood plane? >> The the back end where the

[55:37] the storm water um ripin uh just just barely breaks the

[55:44] boundary of the flood plane, 100-year flood plane. Um, we had discussions with

[55:47] the city and uh with Brandon Walker that will be relocated outside of the

[55:53] 100-year flip. >> Okay. Thank you.

[55:59] » Now we can proceed. >> Good evening. Um, thanks for seeing us

[56:04] this evening. Um I just wanted to state for the record that uh we it came to our

[56:09] attention uh late on Friday and more into Monday even though we had gone

[56:15] before the planning commission and shown our plans and so on and you know we've

[56:20] been working with the city's team for better part of two years and this

[56:25] project's been in progress for five years and it's gone through a couple

[56:28] iterations that um some members of the public did not like the uh facade design

[56:35] uh that we uh had proposed at this point in the project uh and that we are

[56:39] planning to meet with council next uh month and propose a variation on the

[56:46] shell of the building. But that is not to say that we are here tonight though

[56:50] to solidify the zoning uh request that we have here tonight to try to then

[56:55] solidify the shell of the buildings so that we're all uh we're all on the same

[57:00] page. So that's why we're proceeding this evening and we're happy to take all

[57:04] the questions necessary um you know at that council meeting andor at the next

[57:08] planning commission meeting as it relates to shell and design and scope of

[57:13] the exterior of the building. >> Thank you.

[57:16] » Um as it goes to today and tonight's um very limited scope um we're here to

[57:22] discuss um this building. There are two this is on one side but they're

[57:26] separated by the street. So we're actually here for two applications. Um

[57:30] that is the current look of the shell as of Friday which will most likely be

[57:34] changing in the month of September. That is the represents the parcel. If

[57:40] you'll notice the what u you know what Dwayne was just talking about and being

[57:44] asked about is the storm system actually is shared on both properties

[57:49] and then goes through that all the way in the far right outlet is the outlet

[57:54] that was being discussed. It's barely inside the buffer. Technically, D

[57:58] already granted us the uh the waiver to put it exactly there, but it's not a big

[58:04] deal. When engineering looked at it, we can pull it back a few feet. It seemed

[58:06] to be some concern. It's no problem at all. We're here to try to please as many

[58:10] parties as possible. Um but yep, so the first thing we're here for tonight is

[58:16] the special exception, which is really just a figure of the fact we're in a

[58:20] special um we're in a special exception zoning corridor, which is the river

[58:23] corridor. Um and as that is just I don't if you remember with the silk mill uh

[58:29] you know every business was special exception in the river corridor. So um

[58:34] we feel that you know we already have a lot of mixed use in the river corridor

[58:38] and we're hoping that that continuation of developing this actual Bushkill

[58:43] corridor with mixed use is still in keeping with uh zoning compliance. So

[58:49] there's really not much more to say other than this is a accepted principle

[58:52] already all over the silk mill and was granted before.

[59:00] one of the two actually three right we have three on this property variances

[59:05] right we have building height that's the first one the original proposal we

[59:11] proposed to um the city back in 21 and then reproposed in 24 the mic is not

[59:17] liking me um required us to get a at least a 10 foot variance because we were

[59:24] doing a structure and then three floors above now we're just doing four floors

[59:28] so it's basically the The reason that we are asking for at

[59:33] least 10 ft and possibly 20 feet, it's not quite 62. Um, it's actually 60 ft.

[59:40] when we actually looked at the plans more carefully um by just to explain it

[59:44] a little bit at a time the way that we would like to make the apartments

[59:48] instead of having eight foot ceilings which are very low more in keeping with

[59:51] the mill and other buildings in the corridor as you can see building K I

[59:56] don't know if anyone has visited the silk mill recently the big building D

[1:00:00] the large buildings there also down the street you have Hmel Lumber and then of

[1:00:04] course the paper mill all are tall buildings we believe those represent the

[1:00:08] masses of the buildings in the corridor, not the, you know, not the small homes

[1:00:13] and various other businesses that are located directly across the street.

[1:00:17] That's our that's our feeling on it. And we would like to have apartments that

[1:00:21] had higher ceilings 10t, which is why we're proposing going from 40 to 50 ft.

[1:00:26] That would be 10 ft outside of the current zoning request.

[1:00:31] We would also like to go an additional 10 feet. Um, we have the support of the

[1:00:35] Carl Stewart Arts Trail here tonight. Jim Toy is here. is the executive

[1:00:38] director and uh we feel that um it's important to show off the the site.

[1:00:43] They're actually already planning on leasing the commercial space on the

[1:00:46] first floor as their trail office and and gatherings place. And they would

[1:00:51] like to also have a roof deck where they can host parties and fundraising events

[1:00:56] to help the trail, which the city will be building after the fact. Really not

[1:01:00] on us. That's going to be on them to do all that along the river corridor um on

[1:01:04] the edge of the property. and they would have liked us to do a um a roof deck.

[1:01:09] And in doing that, we would need the elevator to go to the roof and we need

[1:01:11] at least one stair tower to go to the roof. So that's the additional 10 feet.

[1:01:15] The reason it says 62 feet is that's technically the top of the building, but

[1:01:19] technically it's occupied space under the zoning, which is brings us down a

[1:01:23] couple more feet to what we'd actually be requesting. So we need 60 feet of

[1:01:28] zoning and 62 feet in reality. I'm not sure if that how that is exactly if that

[1:01:32] makes any sense to you. Um, so that really explains Oh, one more. Go back.

[1:01:39] Um, what are we missing? >> I just wanted to

[1:01:42] » for clarity, the building is 50 ft high. >> Yep.

[1:01:46] » There is a very small elevator shaft and stair

[1:01:51] tower that would extend an additional 10 feet above that 50 ft. We could probably

[1:01:55] get four stories in the 40t requirement, but we would rather have a product

[1:02:00] that's got a 10 foot ceiling than an 8 foot ceiling. We feel like that's a

[1:02:04] better quality product. Feel like that's better all all around and in keeping

[1:02:09] with the other products and other buildings in the corridor as Mark

[1:02:14] mentioned. >> Yeah.

[1:02:15] » So, we're not asking for a 62 foot building, but the way the zoning code is

[1:02:19] written, you still need a variance to accommodate that elevator shaft and

[1:02:23] stair tower. to clarify that because I'm wondering where the extra 10 feet was

[1:02:27] coming [laughter] from. Okay, >> thank you. Well,

[1:02:29] » so and as Mark was saying, building K, the silk mill is 73 feet. This building

[1:02:33] would be 50. >> If I may though, just clarify because

[1:02:37] I'm not quite clear now. [laughter]

[1:02:44] » The amenity on the roof >> presumably will be fenced in or or

[1:02:51] enclosed so nobody falls off the roof. No,

[1:02:53] » no, it'll have a fence, but the So, you imagine the building is 50 feet high to

[1:02:58] the to the top of the parapit, let's say. Okay. And then

[1:03:02] » 10 more feet for an elevator shaft and stair shaft for people to get in and out

[1:03:07] of that area. Then around that will just be open space with railings.

[1:03:12] » Well, that's what I'm saying. It will it will be enclosed with railings

[1:03:16] » with Oh, yes. With I'm sorry. Yes, we're saying the same thing.

[1:03:18] » Roof deck will not be the entirety of the roof. There's only one entrance, an

[1:03:25] egress to the roof deck. We're limited to, I think, 750 square feet.

[1:03:28] » We're only It's the 750T is the limit, >> which is a very small portion of the

[1:03:31] roof. So, that area will be enclosed by some kind of fencing or railing.

[1:03:35] » Right. >> Right.

[1:03:36] » I was hoping otherwise, >> but it would probably be

[1:03:40] » We don't want anyone to fall off clearly.

[1:03:41] » It would likely be centrally located in the center of the roof structure. So, it

[1:03:45] wouldn't necessarily be on an edge. >> That's what I'm trying to establish. So

[1:03:50] it will be set back so that from the street it will appear as a 50-foot

[1:03:56] building not a 60ft building. >> That is correct. Other than the stair

[1:04:00] tower and elevator exact small block. >> Okay.

[1:04:03] » Which I'm not sure if you can see in the you Yeah, you can see it.

[1:04:06] » You can just barely see it. And we're going to paint it a different color, a

[1:04:09] lighter color so that it disappears into the clouds there to the right above the

[1:04:12] tree. >> You'll see the stair tower.

[1:04:16] » See it? >> Okay. Well, there you go. Perfect.

[1:04:18] That's the idea. painted. >> No.

[1:04:21] » Yeah. Well, we'll paint it a lighter color. You know, a lot of I was

[1:04:24] discussing with Dwayne this morning. We were discussing the aesthetics of the

[1:04:26] building. You can do things to change the appearance. Like next door, they it

[1:04:30] appears to be five stories, but then they made the other stories a different

[1:04:33] color to change the appearance to help mitigate the height.

[1:04:39] » Very good. Okay. Oh. Uh

[1:04:43] » just another view. >> Another view. Okay. Again, we're going

[1:04:45] to be doing the shell of the building. All right. Um Okay. Okay, next variance,

[1:04:49] street trees. So, this is again to what we feel is

[1:04:55] helping the trail and also the public and the corridor. Um, we hope everyone

[1:04:59] will eventually see it that way. Um, so we uh we're looking for ways to first

[1:05:04] off calm the traffic. You know, you get zooming down Bushkill, it's not

[1:05:07] considered really a residential street right now and uh people get cooking and

[1:05:11] and you know, they go right by. So doing on street parking

[1:05:17] is absolutely a traffic calming scenario and so that's first why we came up with

[1:05:22] it. Then of course now with the trail involved the trail would like parking

[1:05:27] for the amenity of the trail and you know at the silt mill even though it's

[1:05:31] private parking and we've had to put up signs and especially a few years ago

[1:05:33] when there was all that those problems down at the at the soap mill with people

[1:05:37] coming from New York and parking it became a problem. So, we would have to

[1:05:40] sign it, which would mean that technically anyone who wants to use the

[1:05:44] trail would have to park on the street and then walk AC walk down to the end of

[1:05:49] the property and into the new bridge that's being erected in that location.

[1:05:53] Um, so the street parking is the best parking for people to come and use the

[1:05:58] trail. Of course, people probably going to park in the lot like they do at the

[1:06:01] silt mill, but we thought that the, you know, the parking is important. The

[1:06:06] reason that's important to the street trees is we were unable um between the

[1:06:11] fat parking the the on street parking and also the fact if you'll look

[1:06:15] actually go back a slide if you could two slides actually no that's good go

[1:06:19] one more notice that the super high voltage power lines run above the uh

[1:06:27] next to the building up above the building so they're actually taller than

[1:06:29] the building um so we've had to pick trees that um you know will grow to a

[1:06:34] certain height or they're going to topped as it is. And so we've just been

[1:06:38] sensitive to having too many trees are going to get topped at some point. We

[1:06:42] also want to mention that besides, you know, mitigating this with some bushes

[1:06:46] because they're not going to grow as high or be difficult. We also have a

[1:06:50] great many trees being planted on this site, especially on the south side,

[1:06:53] hundreds and hundreds of trees are being planted in the buffer between the

[1:06:59] building and the stream as per our NPDS permit. So we're looking at like two or

[1:07:04] 300 trees. So we are not having a lot of street trees. Um and there are though

[1:07:09] just inside if you go back. Yep. See if you'll notice only those three street

[1:07:13] trees are actual street trees under the designation street trees. But we've

[1:07:17] highlighted the trees that we're planting elsewhere that are directly

[1:07:22] within 10 ft of the street tree area just on the other side of the sidewalk

[1:07:27] so that you guys can get a better idea of the fact we are planting hundreds of

[1:07:30] trees on the site. Uh again, not even really the zoning ordinance is per the

[1:07:35] NPDS permit. Any questions on

[1:07:40] » any questions from the board? >> That. Okay. So, that's our thoughts on

[1:07:44] street trees. Uh and then our last is hopefully a simple one with this

[1:07:48] project. So to have the proper two-way um street

[1:07:54] uh I should say parking uh you know exits and ex emergency vehicles all the

[1:07:59] things that are important to get in and out of a site of this size um on this

[1:08:03] side of the street and not on the other side of the street different zoning

[1:08:05] corridor. Um we're not allowed to have driveways that are more than 10 ft. Uh

[1:08:10] and in this case we're requesting 24 ft which is a standard full size two-way

[1:08:14] driveway. uh especially important uh at the west end of the site where we're

[1:08:19] actually going to create an intersection where we're going to have uh crosswalks.

[1:08:23] Actually, the planning commission requested us do a proper designated

[1:08:27] crosswalk, you know, a proper pend one so that people can from both sides of

[1:08:31] the site can share, you know, and get over to the trail and and so on and so

[1:08:35] forth. So, we're requesting two driveway entrances that are 24 ft for emergency

[1:08:40] traffic and for pedestrian and our use as well as probably public use whether

[1:08:45] we like it or not. So,

[1:08:49] that's it. Just those three variances. There was some discussion um which we

[1:08:53] got a little confused. There was plan review had gotten a little messed up and

[1:08:57] so it came out that we had like 10 variances. These are really when we went

[1:09:01] back and got it organized. It's just these three for anyone who's wondering.

[1:09:05] » Okay. Thank you. Any questions from the board?

[1:09:09] All right. Then I'll take questions from the audience that were sworn in and

[1:09:15] particularly that is for these uh for the one special exception and for the

[1:09:21] three variances. That's where your question should be or

[1:09:25] comment should be geared to.

[1:09:34] right now. Can't I mean it's only this.

[1:09:45] » If you give your name, address for the record, please.

[1:09:47] » Hi, my name is Jennifer Talerico. T A L A R I O. I'm at 406 West Burke, East End

[1:09:54] 18042. Um, I just had a question uh based on

[1:09:59] the the drawings that have been distributed about the previously

[1:10:02] distributed plan and the current plan. I'm not actually technically sure if

[1:10:06] it's part of the existing variance discussion about the parking lot

[1:10:10] underneath and and its relation to the flood zone. So, I understand the uh it

[1:10:16] was simply the storm water adjustment that was in the 100-year flood zone and

[1:10:20] that has already been adjusted. Is it the case that the current plan being

[1:10:25] suggested is consistent with the prior distributed plan um in terms of the

[1:10:30] impervious surface allocated to parking on this side of the Bushko corridor?

[1:10:35] » We have a plan for you. One second. >> No, Mark, I don't think that was her

[1:10:39] question. She's asking if this plan has changed from the previous plan.

[1:10:43] » Correct. In terms of in terms of the parking just that

[1:10:46] » it has not, but if you'd like to I mean if we can share with you the

[1:10:50] » It has not. It is not. It has not changed. Okay. So, and and we're fully

[1:10:53] in compliance. There was some confusion and we're well under the impervious

[1:10:56] coverage compliance that's required. >> Great. Thank you so much. And I just

[1:11:00] want to also go on record. My questions or or concerns that you may hear later

[1:11:05] have nothing to do with the facade. So, >> no problem. Thank you.

[1:11:08] » Thank you. Anyone else? >> Oh,

[1:11:13] » hi. I'm Jim Toya. I'm the executive director of the Carl Sterner Arch Trail.

[1:11:16] » I'm sorry. Sorry. Your name again? >> Jim Toya. T O I A.

[1:11:21] » Thank you. >> And your address, sir?

[1:11:24] » Uh 238 Beacon Hill Road in Califon, New Jersey.

[1:11:30] » Thank you. >> I teach at Lafayette College as well. So

[1:11:34] very often here in Easton and feel like I live here more than I do in New

[1:11:38] Jersey. So, um, first of all, I just want to say, um, we're very happy to

[1:11:43] have VM development and Silk Mill as a

[1:11:48] stakeholder and and, uh, people who have been working with the Arts Trail for

[1:11:52] the, uh, 15 16 years that we've actually been in existence and they have

[1:11:59] [clears throat] done a lot of work with us to help us install artwork. Um,

[1:12:04] they're great neighbors and we really appreciate that. Um, and I'm very

[1:12:08] excited. We're very excited about having the opportunity to be uh on the um not

[1:12:15] really a commercial building, but but the pre the have presence uh on the

[1:12:20] south side of Bushkill Drive there at the foundry. Very excited about that.

[1:12:26] So, thank you guys for what you've been able to do so far and we look forward to

[1:12:29] that in the future. One, my one question is about the trees.

[1:12:34] » So, I'm all for trees. We're an arts trail that's surrounded by art uh and

[1:12:39] nature and we we uh rely on the natural side of that. I just want to make sure

[1:12:43] there's going to be enough room for the artwork with the trees. That's a lot of

[1:12:48] trees. >> I agree. Um so that's something when we

[1:12:50] get into actually the trail design with the city. We're going to need to that's

[1:12:54] in after this phase, but we are going to need to figure there's a lot of trees

[1:12:58] required by NTP and we've actually went for a waiver, right, Brandon? We've they

[1:13:03] wanted like 700 trees and we were like that's they there would be nothing so

[1:13:08] other than trees every like two feet. So they've agreed that that's kind of

[1:13:12] crazy. So we are I mean that's something you should definitely soon we need to

[1:13:16] get to. Yeah. You probably heard that tonight and welcome back. But just

[1:13:19] saying yeah we're going to need to sort that out so that the trail can

[1:13:21] interweave. You know we've talked about this for years. Yeah absolutely. We'll

[1:13:24] figure it out. Don't worry. >> I know. I just wanted to

[1:13:27] fair enough. Okay. >> Thank you very much.

[1:13:29] » Thank you. >> Anyone else?

[1:13:32] » [snorts]

[1:13:43] » My name is Bruce McCutchen. Live at 619 West Lafayette Street. I'm

[1:13:50] also president of the Forceville Chapter Trait.

[1:13:53] Am I

[1:13:57] I understand that the storm water piece in the the flood zone is going to be

[1:14:04] moved. >> That's correct.

[1:14:08] » Is there is there public record of your application and and

[1:14:15] for storm water management? >> Absolutely. Right.

[1:14:20] » Yeah. Absolutely. >> So um one, it's going through the MPDS

[1:14:25] process. So that it's an actually an individual permit that is going through

[1:14:29] the county conservation district. And just to give you an idea, we're right

[1:14:34] now in technical review comments. So um >> so that permit has not been issued yet.

[1:14:39] » It's it is we are addressing a few minor comments that have come out. Um nothing

[1:14:45] really to the to the degree on storm water. was more um some minor items of

[1:14:51] like addressing sizing of mulch sock and and rip wrap sizing that kind of

[1:14:56] » Okay. But question remains observed >> there is an over that

[1:15:00] » um it is submitted into um planning as well. Um a copy of it submitted in

[1:15:08] through the planning department. Um but yeah, the permit for it would come

[1:15:12] through the conservation district. >> Okay. The um certainly

[1:15:18] As far as the Bushkill stream is concerned,

[1:15:21] not having a scrap metal plant there anymore is a good thing.

[1:15:26] » Um, but we're very concerned about what comes down. We want to see improvement,

[1:15:31] » correct, >> for our beautiful stream, not

[1:15:34] » a detriment to it. >> Yeah. And and

[1:15:38] that would be nice to see what's actually going to happen.

[1:15:41] » Yeah. And that's that's that was the approach whenever going through the

[1:15:45] design. Um, Of course, with the state regulations, no matter what is a uh

[1:15:50] meeting or reducing um discharge volume and and peak flows and and we make sure

[1:15:56] to do that. >> Are there retaining

[1:16:00] pools associated with this complex? >> Um no, there isn't. Um basically, and

[1:16:07] this maybe is getting outside of the purview of the the zoning.

[1:16:10] » Yeah, this is really a planning. >> All that runoff is just headed right to

[1:16:13] the street. >> Uh it's

[1:16:16] No, it's actually being while it's being collected in the storm system that

[1:16:20] that's there and uh I'm not exactly sure if this is this is

[1:16:26] a again if that's a planning question or a zoning question

[1:16:31] but yeah I mean we we're so we're um going to be discussing this in front of

[1:16:36] plan again probably October 7th is what we're guessing and that's when although

[1:16:40] between now and then you're more than you should go to you know and get a copy

[1:16:43] of the what we've submitted I mean, but everything meets the requirement from

[1:16:49] not just the local county conservation district, but also this had to be

[1:16:53] reviewed by, you know, by pad. So, we're we're meeting all the requirements. So,

[1:16:59] again, planting all the trees, which of course now Jim is concerned about, etc.

[1:17:03] But yes, we're trying. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you very much.

[1:17:06] » Thank you. >> Anyone else?

[1:17:22] That's awesome.

[1:18:00] Attorney Harding, are you do you have a thumb drive to give to the secretary

[1:18:05] what you're going to be using. >> Um,

[1:18:08] I don't, but I can provide it. These are not I'm not submitting these

[1:18:13] as exhibits or record. They're just for reference.

[1:18:20] » Okay. >> If there's an objection or anything.

[1:18:23] » Yeah. No, if you're not submitting them, >> I actually was gonna let Kurt speak

[1:18:26] first because I think it's important why we're here.

[1:18:33] So, uh, Kurt Elely, 305 West Monroe Street in Easton,

[1:18:40] concerned resident. I'm going to ask permission to distribute a a copy of the

[1:18:46] East City Code sections on zoning variances

[1:18:51] and special exception review. Um, >> you're welcome to, but the board is

[1:18:56] intimately familiar with >> Oh, I know you are.

[1:19:00] 40 C and 40D >> but I'll be sharing to all of you.

[1:19:27] » Yeah. Yeah, we the whole book. Yeah.

[1:19:32] » So, >> right, for the for for for the record,

[1:19:36] what has been handed to us by Mr. Eli is ostensively a reproduction of uh because

[1:19:44] it doesn't look like a photo copy. So, a reproduction of uh section 595-40D

[1:19:52] of the Eastn Zoning Ordinance, chapter 298, Floodplane Management, section

[1:19:59] 298-18G,

[1:20:02] and section 595-40, although it's not marked as such, it is

[1:20:07] section 40, subsection C relative to special exceptions, which I will mark as

[1:20:13] exhibit 01.

[1:20:19] Thank you. Thank you very much. Um,

[1:20:25] I'd really love to read it, but I'm not going to do that. I'm going to assume

[1:20:28] that you are reading it and well aware of what it says. But the bottom line is

[1:20:36] a variance requires that there be specific issues about the property. got

[1:20:43] nothing to do whatsoever with whatever the applicant wants to do with the

[1:20:49] property. It's not about a hardship to the applicant. Uh we want our plan to

[1:20:55] have an extra five feet for this purpose or six feet for that. It's got to do

[1:21:01] with whether or not that property can be developed within the code or not. And

[1:21:08] this ha this property has a huge number of uses

[1:21:15] and certainly plenty of opportunity to be developed in the way that they

[1:21:21] would like without seeking a variance. And I'm I'm very concerned about that

[1:21:29] process that allows for variances to occur or variances being granted when

[1:21:36] really they're the hardship of the applicant and absolutely not any

[1:21:42] hardship or problem with the site or property itself. This isn't just the law

[1:21:48] as it appears in our code, but it is virtually a quote of his of what appears

[1:21:54] in the municipalities planning code for the state of Pennsylvania. It's

[1:21:59] directed. It is the law. And my I'm here just to ask if we could please follow

[1:22:07] the law and not grant these variances for whatever the reason. They're in

[1:22:14] there. They're meant to be in this particular zone

[1:22:20] and we ask that you you uh allow for them to actually be the law of the zone.

[1:22:27] Please don't allow those variances. Thank you.

[1:22:35] Go ahead.

[1:22:40] » Um, I would just simply say that since we've been doing this for 15 years and

[1:22:43] we've come before your board for many variances,

[1:22:47] um, that the Silk Mill, if not granted special exceptions or variances, would

[1:22:53] never have been redeveloped. Simple.

[1:22:58] » Thank you. >> It's It's great. We're not here to talk

[1:23:00] about the silk mill. This is We're here to talk about a very different which has

[1:23:04] plenty of potential. Thank you, Kurt. Um, so my name is Cody Harding. Many of

[1:23:09] you know me. Uh, I live at 410 North 10th Street. Uh, I measured it today.

[1:23:13] It's approximately 1,800 feet from this site. Um, I think we should revisit

[1:23:20] Bruce's question about flood. Uh, sorry, I think it was Solicitor Nichki's

[1:23:26] initial question about whether or not this parcel is in the flood zone. And I

[1:23:31] know there's a Mark, Mr. Mulligan has told us not to

[1:23:37] worry about it. We're moving the drainage facilities from the flood zone,

[1:23:40] but I think it is very important to note that the parcel is in the FEMA

[1:23:45] designated flood zone. The parcel line extends into the Bushkill Creek and

[1:23:51] clearly is in the blue zone AE, which is the this is FEMA's flood hazard map.

[1:23:59] And so the question was not is your construction in the flood zone, is your

[1:24:04] building in the flood zone, is your project zone that you've designated on

[1:24:08] your plans in the flood zone. The question is, is the parcel and

[1:24:12] consequently the storm water runoff in the flood zone? And it is undeniable

[1:24:16] that this parcel on the south side of Bushkill Drive is in the flood zone. And

[1:24:22] consequently, it is our position that because the flood provisions and also

[1:24:28] storm water provisions of the city code have not been considered, this

[1:24:32] application is not ripe for presentation to the zoning board. There's a litany of

[1:24:38] requirements that we all spent last year reviewing that need to be met before it

[1:24:44] can be presented for zoning, including I know D was involved in the remediation

[1:24:48] of the site and reviewing it. I'm not sure that they've completed 102 and 105

[1:24:53] permits. I could be mistaken. But we also were told that uh Mr. McCutchen

[1:25:01] from the uh Trout Unlimited asked about what was happening with the storm water

[1:25:06] and we saw the applicant sort of stumble through their answer. We all know if you

[1:25:11] look at their plans, the storm water is going to be channeled

[1:25:15] from the north side of the property across Bushkill Drive into one facility

[1:25:20] which will run all the way down into the Bushkill.

[1:25:26] They also would need a permit for the crossing of that storm water across the

[1:25:31] state road. Bushkill Drive is state road 2019.

[1:25:35] I have seen no evidence that that's been accomplished and numerous other

[1:25:41] requirements for this to be presented because it's in the flood zone. And so

[1:25:46] it's my position I certainly isn't the only problem I have with this project,

[1:25:50] but it's the primary one is that because the flood zone has been sort of talked

[1:25:54] around and ignored. We can even look at here's the close. Now, we're being told

[1:25:59] that this moved. This is being moved. But the flood zone is this squiggly

[1:26:04] little line there. You can see it at the bottom. It says FEMA flood zone. This is

[1:26:09] from the developer's own plan. Project boundary is an irrelevant sort of uh you

[1:26:16] know to marker that they created.

[1:26:27] So I we can talk about some other things, but I think the zoning hearing

[1:26:31] board needs to be considering this as the primary concern and that this

[1:26:35] application should be deferred until they resolve all the

[1:26:38] » that's not our that's not what we're we we are here to see to to hear what's in

[1:26:44] front of us right now. That's beyond our scope.

[1:26:48] Your scope is to enforce the zoning provisions of the code.

[1:26:52] » Correct. What's in front of us right now? What's in front of us right now is

[1:26:57] not what you're talking about. >> It is incomplete.

[1:26:59] » That's your opinion. >> It is not my opinion that it's in the

[1:27:03] flood zone. It is in the flood zone. >> Okay.

[1:27:09] » [clears throat]

[1:27:16] » I mean,

[1:27:20] I don't want to I clearly we respectfully disagree, but I do think

[1:27:24] that the flood provisions need to be discussed

[1:27:28] and if it's the it is up to the zoning board to

[1:27:33] scrutinize those provisions and >> Mr. Niski, is it up to us to do that?

[1:27:37] » Well, let me let me [clears throat] Let me ask you this, Attorney Harding.

[1:27:42] Referring to what you have on the screen right now, 29818A, no varian shall be

[1:27:47] granted for any construction development use activity within the floodway area

[1:27:51] district that would cause any increase in the BFE, which of course is the base

[1:27:55] flood elevation. Um, do you have any belief that what is

[1:28:01] being proposed will cause any increase? Uh and then ultimately I would ask the

[1:28:08] three individuals sitting at the appellence table uh if that has been

[1:28:13] addressed and discussed with planning and durate when with the city during the

[1:28:18] planning of this project. I I I think that that's a great question

[1:28:23] and I think that's a question that I was interested in asking and so you're

[1:28:26] asking that for me and I'm happy to move on and leave that question on the table

[1:28:30] to be answered later. I think for the sake of everyone's time, I'd like to

[1:28:34] just move on to one other point. >> Okay. So, so my question to you would be

[1:28:38] a no. You don't have any belief or any reason to believe that there would be

[1:28:44] any increase in the base flood elevation?

[1:28:46] » I I would I I don't have any scientific evidence

[1:28:52] of that. Yeah. >> And it's only

[1:28:53] » I didn't know I that's why I was asking. I didn't know if you did or not. All I'm

[1:28:57] presenting is that regardless of the representations of the

[1:29:01] applicant, the flood provisions are invoked because this parcel is in the

[1:29:07] FEMA designated flood zone and therefore provisions such as 298-18

[1:29:13] should be considered. I am not an expert who should be making the sort of

[1:29:17] assessment, but it's my analysis that this has all been ignored.

[1:29:22] Might I suggest that we have these three individuals address this now while

[1:29:29] you're at the podium so that you don't have to come back up when they do

[1:29:33] address it in case you want to ask questions of them.

[1:29:39] I I assume they're going to tell me not to worry about it, but I don't see any

[1:29:43] reports available. Um >> well, let's not assume. Let's hear from

[1:29:47] them. >> So, yeah. Um again to cover what was

[1:29:53] previously stated um we did look at actually pulling the outlet for the

[1:29:58] storm water. Um there's actually a hydrodnamic separator inlet what

[1:30:03] actually improves water quality for Bushkill Creek from any of the collected

[1:30:07] runoff that is going to the storm system. Um, but we've we've uh looked at

[1:30:13] that from a previous comment that was received through uh planning and we're

[1:30:18] going to be able to adjust that back. So that is on the record here that we'll be

[1:30:23] able to um eliminate that disturbance within the 100red-year flood plan um I'm

[1:30:29] sorry the 100red-year flood zone AE as depicted on the drawing that is from the

[1:30:35] FEMA map that is imported in through uh you know FEMA's [snorts] uh online web

[1:30:41] service that you know you get that shape file from them. So that's actually where

[1:30:46] it's supposed to be. Um, as far as storm water um, reduction quality, all those

[1:30:52] items, those are being addressed again through the 102 process that is

[1:30:57] submitted through the county conservation district. Um, for us to get

[1:31:02] approval is a reduction in um, peak discharge, reduction of volume and

[1:31:10] through increase of water quality. And because it is an individual permit, we

[1:31:14] have to meet all three of those. and we have shown to the conservation district

[1:31:21] that we do meet that criteria um through this pro for this project. Um and so uh

[1:31:28] so a uh effect would be a reduction in the discharge amount to Bushkill Creek

[1:31:37] during the peak design storms. not to get too technical in it, but you analyze

[1:31:41] certain key design storms and look for a a reduction in volume and in uh peak

[1:31:48] flow. >> So, and I don't want to put words in

[1:31:51] your mouth, but just trying to interpret what you just said. Um, is it my

[1:31:55] understanding that you're saying that um, this development as it's being

[1:32:01] proposed with the system you're talking about installing will actually decrease

[1:32:06] the base flood elevation instead of increasing it? Correct.

[1:32:10] And is there to answer uh attorney Harding's question, is there um a a

[1:32:18] report or or a study or something of record that establishes that with and

[1:32:24] and if so with whom? >> Yes. Uh there is a post construction

[1:32:28] storm water management plan and calculations that uh were filed with the

[1:32:33] county conservation district. Um and it's also available to available and

[1:32:38] it's also available um has been loaded to the planning website. So, I'm I'm

[1:32:42] assuming it's available. >> Can I can I ask some clarifying

[1:32:46] questions? And I I was doing a lot of talking and I should have asked more

[1:32:48] questions initially. Is there any permeable pavement in this design?

[1:32:54] » No. Um >> are there That's fine. Are there any uh

[1:32:59] rainwater uh what they call like like rainwater

[1:33:03] retention uh rain rain gardens >> uh there so the and this is getting

[1:33:08] along into um the fact that it was it's an act two site and the fact that it's

[1:33:13] going through remediation process because a site and those areas that have

[1:33:18] to >> you you can't infiltrate in areas where

[1:33:23] where you actually have an act two site. So, um there's other measures through

[1:33:26] planting and soil um amendments that we've reduced the

[1:33:31] » Was there any consultation with PennDOT for permitting running a storm water

[1:33:35] across the state highway? >> We're going through the process of

[1:33:38] actually getting a storm water easement across Bushkill Drive. Okay. With

[1:33:43] Pendot, >> um we have to do a separate one with

[1:33:46] PENDOT for actually the lighting system and we're going through that process

[1:33:50] currently. So, if I'm understanding correctly, all

[1:33:55] of the storm water that's being channeled into the rainwater system

[1:34:01] will go into the bushkill and somehow it's going to lower the base flood

[1:34:06] elevation. >> Yes. And it's

[1:34:09] » that seems to defy physics. >> Well, it's no water goes downhill. So,

[1:34:14] » you're adding water to the bushill and it's going to be less likely to

[1:34:17] » less currently than less than today. Yes. But there are no retention ponds on

[1:34:22] site. Correct.

[1:34:26] » That's sounds like magic. Um >> I would say off the flooding that's I

[1:34:32] will move on off the flooding. I still argue that this is not right for because

[1:34:36] of the parcel being in the flood zone. I'd like to talk about the impervious

[1:34:41] surface which is another one of the zoning variances that I believe should

[1:34:46] be on their application that is not included. We've been told

[1:34:50] It's in the river corridor. This is the provision of the river corridor. Max

[1:34:54] pvious coverage 30%. There are some exceptions, but I think it's important

[1:34:59] that we look at what that site looks like. Now, this is a Google satellite.

[1:35:02] » Let me interrupt you before you go any further. Mr. Tilman, has a determination

[1:35:07] been made that an impervious surface variance is necessary for this project?

[1:35:13] » Yes, it was determined that it's not needed.

[1:35:19] Do you want a question, Mr. Telman? I >> I'm I'm just curious how that's possible

[1:35:22] when we're looking at a site that is significantly overgrown, full of crushed

[1:35:27] pavement, gravel, dirt, and that will be converted into predominantly a parking

[1:35:33] lot. I I just don't understand how this isn't more than 30. I I've had an

[1:35:38] architect look at this and tell me that it from their assessment, it's about 38%

[1:35:42] impervious pavement on this parcel. the the the the statement that I heard

[1:35:49] at the planning commission presentation was, well, it's less than is there now,

[1:35:55] so we don't have to worry about it. And when I look at what's theirs now, it

[1:35:58] certainly doesn't seem less than a parking lot in a four-story building.

[1:36:07] Um, the one thing I'd just like to point out is, um, that growth [snorts] is

[1:36:12] probably only about an inch deep. Um, is underneath is the remnants of again the

[1:36:19] scrap metal yard, the mining that was there before that that is rock

[1:36:24] underneath there. Um for all intents and purposes, it is very solid uh I believe

[1:36:30] silt stone. Um so where how the site is being developed is actually to um we're

[1:36:38] going to bring in a lot of fill but it'll be more of a if you want to go on

[1:36:42] the the uh USGS classification an AV type of soil and that's actually being

[1:36:49] specified for the fill on the site which should actually grab some absorption

[1:36:54] volume for those uh initial runoffs. Um, and then actually with the what you

[1:37:00] don't see there, um, you know, what's what might be green there is weeds. Um,

[1:37:06] if you would take note to the planting plan and the amount of actual, uh, trees

[1:37:11] that we're trying to add to the site u to actually increase the coverage

[1:37:16] values.

[1:37:20] Okay. So, if I understand correctly, because there's stone under the dirt,

[1:37:25] the impervious This isn't going to be a problem.

[1:37:28] » Other other than the piles of asphalt and then whatever bricks and other stuff

[1:37:33] that are there. I mean, we can all talk.

[1:37:38] » I have two more questions and then can talk about the other building, I guess.

[1:37:42] Um, in your renderings, you showed sidewalks that seem to extend all the

[1:37:46] way down Bushkill Drive. Do you plan to construct those sidewalks? It's my

[1:37:50] understanding there's no sidewalks in that area at all right now in the

[1:37:54] renderings that were presented. >> Go ahead.

[1:37:58] » So, in conjunction with the city of Easton who has a a corridor grant,

[1:38:03] there's a there's a they've received a grant for

[1:38:07] mobility and in conjunction with them, we are building a certain amount of

[1:38:10] sidewalk for them and then where they're building, you know, we don't know

[1:38:13] exactly, but there will be sidewalk. The goal is to

[1:38:16] » down to the mall. >> Yeah, the the goal was to extend

[1:38:20] up to >> because we don't control.

[1:38:22] » Yeah. So, we can't we can't quite get there, but we're planning on doing as

[1:38:25] much sidewalk and you know and mobility as possible in the corridor. Yes.

[1:38:30] » And then I I I think my last question is just um

[1:38:38] a series of questions. Um how many square feet of developable space is

[1:38:43] being built on this southside property approximately?

[1:38:50] cubic feet. Square feet. I don't understand.

[1:38:52] » Square feet. Square feet of rental space. Do you can you guess or not

[1:38:57] guess? Can you approximate >> it? It's not I don't understand because

[1:39:00] I don't understand the relevance. I >> I think from my reading of the plans,

[1:39:03] it's about 90,000 square feet of rentable uh square footage.

[1:39:10] » Okay. >> Right. I mean, does that sound about

[1:39:12] right? 90. >> No idea, but keep going. Well, do do you

[1:39:15] know how much of it is uh retail or commercial space?

[1:39:22] » Well, I mean, so our plans have changed a little bit over the years because we

[1:39:26] um you know, I'll go even though that's not part of this discussion. It's for

[1:39:29] the planning commission. >> Yeah, we we are getting

[1:39:32] » we're getting off the thing. But I'm I'm just I'll give you a quick what we

[1:39:35] already discussed today earlier is you know we originally had planned the the

[1:39:39] trail was here saying they wanted 6,000 ft of commercial space and then they've

[1:39:43] reduced it to 1500 to 2,000 ft. still slightly not sure yet on the south side.

[1:39:49] But then on the north side, for instance, there was a discussion of um

[1:39:53] the uh the um sorry, Nurture Nature had originally

[1:39:59] started off with us a couple years ago and we did this whole design process

[1:40:02] with them where they were going to take 20 or 30,000 feet. Long story short,

[1:40:06] they ended up not being able to get their grant at the right time to do what

[1:40:09] they wanted to do. So that whole thing changed. So, but we were happy to

[1:40:12] discuss this in front of planning commission. I'm sure that it's another

[1:40:15] discussion. Um,

[1:40:19] » yeah, I think interpretation. No, no further.

[1:40:22] » Harding, could you leave that up for one second?

[1:40:24] » What's that? >> Could you leave that picture up for one

[1:40:26] second? >> Oh, sure. You want to leave this picture

[1:40:28] up? >> Just for one second. I just because I

[1:40:30] don't know if I had I don't know if I got clarification on the imperous

[1:40:34] surface ratio and why that picture there is less than what I'm seeing on the

[1:40:42] plans.

[1:40:50] So the soil composition underneath what you see there is actually much more

[1:40:55] impervious because or sorry it's much more impervious. Right? You got me

[1:41:00] thinking wrong. Um because it's really a compacted very dense rock

[1:41:06] bed that's on top of that scrapyard that everything was sat on for million many

[1:41:11] many years. And so when you actually do the soil sampling it's considered

[1:41:16] impervious coverage. And so what you have what you're seeing

[1:41:20] in the way of greenery is weeds growing up like they grow through concrete

[1:41:24] basically >> or grow on concrete. That is what it's

[1:41:27] been explained to us. >> Okay.

[1:41:32] » My understanding would be that if weeds can grow through it, it's not impervious

[1:41:35] surface. >> Um but um you know I I'll conclude my

[1:41:41] remarks with just saying that these are not necessary variances. These are

[1:41:44] variances that they would like because it will maximize the profitability and

[1:41:49] the density of this site and that also the flood zone provisions of our own

[1:41:53] code have not been enforced. Thank you for your time.

[1:41:56] » Thank you.

[1:42:05] » Were you sworn in?

[1:42:11] Hi, my name is Richard Sparat. I live at 917 Hillside Avenue.

[1:42:16] » I'm sorry. >> S P A R S H A T.

[1:42:21] » And your address again, sir? >> 917 Hillside Avenue in East

[1:42:26] » 917 Hillside. >> Yes.

[1:42:28] » Thank you, sir. Um so my question was really about the

[1:42:32] variance for um 10 feet for apartments and I think that is nice.

[1:42:37] » Sorry the variance for what? >> 10 foot for apartment ceilings.

[1:42:40] » Okay. >> And I agree. I think it is nice to have

[1:42:42] apartments with 10 foot ceilings. But I would question why that wasn't thought

[1:42:46] about at the beginning. And if they want apartments with 10 foot ceilings then it

[1:42:50] should be a three-story building not a fourstory building.

[1:42:53] Um my second question really um just to help educate me is the um the nature of

[1:43:00] mixed use. Um I presume there's a purpose for mixed use or I guess this is

[1:43:06] my question. Is there a purpose for mixed use? As in is it really there to

[1:43:12] support the needs of the people in the building or is there some other reason

[1:43:15] that the building should be mixed use? That was just to educate me.

[1:43:22] We're not here for use variants. >> Fine. Okay. Um so then my first question

[1:43:27] really is um why the variant should stand have apartments with 10ft

[1:43:31] ceilings. If they want apartments with 10ft ceilings then they should have

[1:43:34] three stories of apartments not four.

[1:43:39] » Thank you. >> Thank

[1:43:44] good question. So, our goal was to keep the mass of the

[1:43:49] building in keeping with the other masses of the buildings and the rest of

[1:43:52] the corridor. And so, we're we're thinking that that seems to be in line

[1:43:58] with everything else. >> But if you wanted to mitigate this

[1:44:01] project to better conform with our zoning ordinance, could you do three

[1:44:06] stories? >> Yes and no. So, the the the idea is is

[1:44:10] that do you want I guess the the idea is um well, of course you can build

[1:44:15] anything. It's a new building. So the answer is yes, I guess in the short term

[1:44:18] of it. But the long of it is if you want a um if you want a a a project in

[1:44:23] keeping with the corridor and so that is what we were going for was in keeping

[1:44:27] with the corridor >> like to have a project that's more in

[1:44:31] line with the zoning code than the corridor. So it's just

[1:44:35] » sorry we could in theory do a four-story building with eight eight foot ceilings.

[1:44:41] We'd still, it's not a density issue necessarily because that's what we would

[1:44:45] likely end up with. We're just trying to prod produce a better product.

[1:44:49] Understood. The other option would be where we don't have a height restriction

[1:44:52] on the opposite side of the building, opposite side of the street is to

[1:44:55] potentially go even higher. Um, so we were trying to make them more balanced

[1:45:02] on either side of the >> I'm just trying to get to Mr.

[1:45:06] Attorney Hardy had mentioned about the profitability of this project and that's

[1:45:10] kind of what I'm getting at. That's, you know, is this why we have to go four

[1:45:14] stories instead of three? Would it be not profitable to do do

[1:45:20] three stories? >> Did Did I just understand you to say

[1:45:23] that across the street you could go higher

[1:45:27] under the ordinance? >> Correct.

[1:45:29] » And and you're trying to keep the buildings consistent from one side of

[1:45:34] the street to the other. It's still higher on the north parcel as you'll see

[1:45:37] when we get to the next hearing, but could be

[1:45:40] potentially even higher, I think. So, uh,

[1:45:46] sorry. Um, to speak to the profitability when we responded to the city's RFP,

[1:45:52] multif family or mixed use rather was requested in that RFP from the city as

[1:45:57] was an extremely dense site. That was specifically the request. And so we're

[1:46:03] attempting to meet that density requirement and spread it out over both

[1:46:08] parcels as best as we could. >> Thank you.

[1:46:30] » Yeah. So the ANR is 90 ft. Say that again.

[1:46:35] » For the record, we could build the building across the street to 90 ft and

[1:46:38] we tried to mitigate building that to 90 ft because we think that is a little too

[1:46:42] tall. >> So between the two buildings together,

[1:46:45] if it was a matter of profitability, you could increase the height of the other

[1:46:49] one to maximize. >> We could, we just don't think it'd be

[1:46:51] good as a product. Correct. And it would really screw up the massing of the

[1:46:55] corridor. >> Thank you.

[1:46:58] » Any other questions from the board?

[1:47:03] No further questions. I don't know if you have anything. Oh, wait. I'm sorry.

[1:47:05] There's more people. My my my fault. Please.

[1:47:11] » Hi, my name is Tony Mittman, 36 North Thirdrd Street, Houston, Pennsylvania.

[1:47:17] Um, my concern about this whole thing is zoning is supposed to re uh protect the

[1:47:23] character of our neighborhood and the character of our city. And Eastston is

[1:47:28] very historic. College Hill and downtown and the whole thing and Bushkill Drive

[1:47:32] is a very passive quiet connector between College Hill downtown and into

[1:47:36] Forks Township and it hasn't changed ever and at great city expense the city

[1:47:42] of Eastston was able to purchase Eastern Iron and Metal and is in process of

[1:47:46] doing remediation of the Brownfield site. So

[1:47:51] this is not about the developer and the whole project. It's about an opportunity

[1:47:55] for the city of Eastston, which right now currently retains ownership of that

[1:48:00] tract of land. How many acres is it? Acres

[1:48:06] » about >> developable? I think five.

[1:48:10] » But I've always loved that piece of land because on the north side there's an

[1:48:14] escarment along the back of the the lot. And so having raised four children on

[1:48:21] College Hill for 35 years, um I'm very aware of the lack of open space, not

[1:48:26] only on College Hill, but in all Eastern's neighborhoods. So if it were

[1:48:30] up to me, I'd put nothing there except a wonderful park with escarment and

[1:48:33] climbing and all of that. And so if that opportunity were to be available, I

[1:48:38] think that'd be wonderful. That would be my vote. But it's not, you know, not one

[1:48:42] person's decision. But if it's developed, there are ways to do it with

[1:48:47] the developer. And I there's no one that loves a silk project more than I do

[1:48:50] because I worried about it 58 years ago and had it in my initial slideshow 58

[1:48:56] years ago and then Phil and and the governor Randelle and everything got it

[1:49:00] done with Mark. I we've never met but I know it was nice to meet you. [laughter]

[1:49:05] So anyway, it's an opportunity because over the years I've met very many

[1:49:11] wonderful consultants and there's one in particular that could really resolve and

[1:49:16] bring a wonderful project to that land with the developer and the city of

[1:49:20] Eastston and that is uh Phil Mrick in New York. Uh, one time I invented I

[1:49:27] invited Fred Kent to come to Eastston to speak from project for public spaces in

[1:49:31] New York and he came to Easton and addressed 200 people at the Hotel East

[1:49:35] and so Fred Mrick was with Fred Kenton project for public spaces in New York

[1:49:40] for many years and now he's has his own consulting firm and the website is

[1:49:43] philmyrich.com philyrk.com

[1:49:49] and I think if you look at that it's the process that he does of it's almost like

[1:49:53] a cheret you like a design cheret with all the stakeholders and all the parties

[1:49:58] involved really looking at the land and the context with College Hill and

[1:50:01] Eastston and um [clears throat] open space need for uh whatever you know

[1:50:08] that's it's it's a process that I feel is always missing not only with this

[1:50:12] project but with everything when I look out the window that's too much it's just

[1:50:17] too much and more is being built right next door so when the next building you

[1:50:21] won't even see that building because the one that's right here So, um, new

[1:50:26] construction is a whole different thing than historic

[1:50:29] preservation. And so, new construction on cleared land, of which we have very,

[1:50:34] very little in Easton. This particular lot, because of the Carl Sterner uh,

[1:50:40] Arts Trail and the Bushkill Creek and um, the whole thing about quality of

[1:50:45] life and livability, this is an opportunity to do the right thing. And

[1:50:49] when I see these renderings of these kinds of apartment complexes,

[1:50:54] I don't I'd hate to see I think we'd all hate to see another error on on that

[1:50:59] beautiful passive uh Bushkill Drive. And it's a chance that I think if you bring

[1:51:04] out an outside professional to really uh sit down with everyone and say, "Okay,

[1:51:10] what is this land? How does it fit in? You know, Lafayette College could have

[1:51:13] bought it. It would be wonderful. All sorts of different things." But what I I

[1:51:19] don't want to be rude. >> Oh, go ahead.

[1:51:21] » But what what you're talking about is other possibilities that to this point

[1:51:26] have not come to fruition. No one else has stepped up.

[1:51:30] » All of these individuals, you know, Lafayette hasn't expressed interest.

[1:51:34] Yeah. >> The gentleman from New York hasn't

[1:51:36] stepped up. It's been >> Yeah.

[1:51:38] » You know, in its existing condition for how long?

[1:51:41] » Yeah. Well, it's it's you're right. I >> think what you're addressing does not

[1:51:45] really uh >> well, it's a zoning question because

[1:51:48] variances I I would I would suggest and and encourage you to table this so that

[1:51:55] so that it buys time to really sit down and say, you know, look look um because

[1:52:00] zoning is very important and your vote is very important and there's develop

[1:52:04] developer here has done a beautiful job on silk. There's no question about it.

[1:52:07] It's magnificent uh of national and global importance.

[1:52:11] very rare that a project like that would ever happen anywhere. So, it's

[1:52:16] wonderful. And so, I think something like this just it's it's very jarring.

[1:52:22] And so, since it is a zoning question, I would just urge you to table it tonight

[1:52:26] and just if anyone's interested in contacting Phil my work and just talking

[1:52:30] with him and, you know, bringing in someone like that who's who's so

[1:52:35] wellversed on bringing parties together on zoning issues and quality of life and

[1:52:39] development. So that's my comment. Thank you.

[1:52:42] » Thank you. >> Any questions?

[1:52:44] » Anyone else?

[1:52:49] » Okay.

[1:52:56] » Hello everybody. Uh Coron Anderson. That's C A R O N. And Anderson S O N 630

[1:53:03] West Burke Street. I've been an Eastn resident since about 1986 and up on

[1:53:08] College Hill since about 1989. And I guess I have a a question first. Um, at

[1:53:14] the Silk Mill, the apartments there, how high are the ceilings?

[1:53:18] » Ma'am, that has nothing to do with why we're here.

[1:53:20] » Well, we're making a lot of comparison to the other buildings in the corridor.

[1:53:27] » 12 feet. >> 12T. And um I guess my concern is like

[1:53:32] with all the um electrical, heating, all that kind of stuff. If I was looking at

[1:53:37] an apartment, just me personally, I would want an eight foot ceiling and not

[1:53:40] a 10 foot ceiling. And I regret having a house with a 10-ft ceiling because the

[1:53:44] um economy is killing us. Anyway, couple other I just wanted to say one thing

[1:53:49] that um I get confused between the left and the right hand side and I guess

[1:53:53] we're talking about the lefthand side of Bushkill versus the right hand side

[1:53:57] which butts up against I think it's actually College Hill and I'm not going

[1:54:01] to stay for that discussion. I have a ride home. But, um,

[1:54:07] College Hill has always been a community, a neighborhood association.

[1:54:11] And I did a little bit of Googling and I guess you can find answers to almost

[1:54:14] anything whether you believe them or not on Google, but it says on average that

[1:54:18] if you're an apartment dweller, you move every two to two and a half years. If

[1:54:23] you own your property, you're likely to stay for 12 and a half or more years,

[1:54:28] depending on your age. And I'm really sad to see apartments going in butdding

[1:54:34] up against a neighborhood with all that historical significance with long-term

[1:54:38] residents. And it bothers me a lot. And it probably isn't a variance issue. It's

[1:54:43] just a personal site. The other thing is um traffic. I've heard everything from

[1:54:49] 40 to 50% increase on Bushkill, which isn't very well used right now. But if

[1:54:55] you go down West Lafayette Street at 8:00 in the morning, the cars are

[1:54:59] already getting to 13th Street, the cars are already backed up beyond the YMCA.

[1:55:05] And if you come off 22 on the highway to 13th Street at rush hour, the cars are

[1:55:11] already backed up onto Route 22. And I'm very concerned about the traffic, you

[1:55:16] know, that's increased traffic that's going to be it's got to go somewhere.

[1:55:20] It's either got to go to 13th Street, it's got to go to Third Street, which is

[1:55:24] often flooded, by the way, on Bushkill Drive. I've had to detour around West

[1:55:28] Lafayette Street to get down to 13th Street. I can see the impact being quite

[1:55:33] significant with all those units being going in there and all the people on the

[1:55:37] traffic pattern. Whether or not it increases Bushkill by 40%, it's going to

[1:55:41] increase the problems on the other two areas and the little I guess it's a

[1:55:45] causeway or a bridge going over 13th Street. I think it's going to be

[1:55:49] personally I think it'll be a nightmare. That's the end of my discussion. Thank

[1:55:53] you very much. >> Thank you.

[1:55:57] » Anybody else? [clears throat]

[1:56:02] » See no one else care to respond to anything or sum up

[1:56:10] I'll sum up that you know it's um we have done a lot of re renovation in in

[1:56:15] the city and um I think uh our record speaks for the fact we care which is why

[1:56:22] we're also you know we want to try to be open and answer everyone's questions. um

[1:56:27] you know, we've invested our basically our adult lives working here and

[1:56:33] raising, you know, raising our kids locally and and uh and um you know,

[1:56:37] we're we're I am fully invested in the city of East more than anyone wants to

[1:56:41] be. So, I will simply say that uh we think we're doing the best we can and we

[1:56:44] we we heard some of the comments tonight and like I said, we heard some of the

[1:56:47] comments earlier. We're gonna we'd like to do some redesign on the buildings,

[1:56:49] but that doesn't affect tonight's hearing. But I would say that um you

[1:56:53] know we feel we've presented a good project and we believe that we can meet

[1:56:56] all the criteria of this board tonight that's necessary and we think we've

[1:57:00] balanced it as best we can and we appreciate your your uh your your

[1:57:03] thoughts and uh and hope that you'll you'll vote in favor of our uh our

[1:57:08] request and thank you. >> Thank you. Close the hearing.

[2:09:49] who is >> Mike and then Miss

[2:09:52] » Panto and then Mr. Lac second.

[2:09:57] » Oh, Pam, I'm sorry. Pam >> Mr. Civetella.

[2:10:00] » I >> Miss Panto.

[2:10:03] » Mr. Lopez. >> Hi,

[2:10:04] » Miss Thomas. Granite.

[2:10:09] » Thank you.

[2:10:18] » Yeah. >> Five minute break.

[2:10:23] » Yeah, I know.

[2:10:27] » Are we having a break? Oh, okay. Okay. We taking five or

[2:10:31] » taking five? >> Okay.

[2:10:56] I don't know what's happening right now.

[2:11:06] Oh, hold on. It's just taking it. >> It says, "Please wait. You're a little

[2:11:11] too

[2:11:39] Nice. So, so my coach has got me playing this 14y old kid.

[2:11:45] » No, it's fine. Actually, I beat him handily like a bunch of It's imagine

[2:11:50] Florida >> from 10 a.m. to noon.

[2:11:53] » It's like 110 in the shade. >> And the thing is that I don't know I'm

[2:11:57] 51. I don't know. I'm 51. So, I'm out there. I'm killing.

[2:12:02] And then I would sit down in like the shade and I'm like, "Oh my god, I think

[2:12:05] I'm going to die." Like, I just So, I lost I lost eight pounds because

[2:12:11] » either mostly I lost three pounds of weight in five pounds of water

[2:12:15] » playing this guy. >> I couldn't believe I beat him. That's

[2:12:18] the first thing. My coach, you're guilty. Because he wants me. He's trying

[2:12:21] to get me into competitions and I'm like I'm like whatever. So,

[2:12:28] Uh >> oh. Did we break something?

[2:12:30] » It might have been like

[2:12:40] » Don't do it. >> Don't touch it. Just let the rain come

[2:12:44] back.

[2:12:55] » Keep me up. I've been up since 4:30.

[2:13:17] » Oh yeah. >> Okay. Well, you know, we share

[2:13:20] everything including backwash.

[2:13:50] You broke it. >> No, it worked.

[2:13:51] » Yeah, I don't know if it was laptop on there or just out or something like

[2:13:56] that. >> Is it coming back on?

[2:13:58] » Oh, wait. Is the TV off? >> No,

[2:14:01] it should be.

[2:14:06] » No, it didn't die. It just needs to wake back up.

[2:14:08] » Oh, I see it. >> Yeah, you have to wake the Autobot.

[2:14:31] Yeah. And it said >> Yeah.

[2:14:37] PC.

[2:14:40] » Yeah. But now it works. >> We hit some buttons and it turned off.

[2:14:43] » I think it was maybe when the lawyer put the buttons on.

[2:14:48] We just have to open.

[2:14:56] » Yeah. Let me look. >> Yep.

[2:15:24] I couldn't even

[2:15:39] tried to beat it and

[2:15:43] trickling. Nothing crazy. All a sudden it just opened.

[2:18:02] So, we'll see. There's a couple

[2:18:12] fun.

[2:18:41] We're going to call the hearing back to order.

[2:18:50] » You ready? Open up the next hearing. Secretary with a purpose, please.

[2:18:54] » [clears throat] >> All right. Applications hereby made for

[2:18:57] a public hearing before the East Zoning Hearing Board for property known as 1111

[2:19:01] 1113 Bushkill Drive zoning district adaptive reuse block class B variances

[2:19:07] as follows. 59522D proposed build two line of 17 ft

[2:19:13] required build two line of 5T. 59517F3

[2:19:19] proposed shrubs along the street side of the building. Required street trees

[2:19:23] shall be planted along both sides of all streets in accordance with chapter 5542

[2:19:28] and as determined by the city forester. The above action is request to proceed

[2:19:33] with the construction of a mixeduse residential commercial building for the

[2:19:36] redevelopment of an existing property along Bushkill Drive. The appellent is

[2:19:41] Brandon Walker at 1 Oxford Center, Pittsburgh, PA15219.

[2:19:48] The owner is the city of East at 123 South Third Street. Uh 25 adjacent

[2:19:52] property owners were notified and it was published in the press.

[2:19:56] » Thank you, Tom. I see the applicant is present. I'm going to ask anyone that

[2:19:59] wants to um talk at this hearing be sworn in now, please.

[2:20:15] went to tell me this property was posted.

[2:20:17] » Yes, it was. Thank you.

[2:20:21] » Good evening again. Hi. Oh, Dwayne did read it.

[2:20:28] » You're done, Dwayne, right? >> Oh, yeah. Yeah.

[2:20:29] » Okay. >> I did the same thing last time at least.

[2:20:32] Okay. Sorry. Too many of these hearings. Um, hi. Okay. So here we are here for

[2:20:36] just two variances. One similar to the south side which is again street trees

[2:20:42] and shrubs and parking. Um and then a new discussion which is a little odd. Um

[2:20:49] so our build two line is five feet is supposed to be 5t from the edge of the

[2:20:54] building. So I might you know that you basically you open a car door you're

[2:20:59] going to practically hit the building. So for instance we went with about 17 to

[2:21:03] 20 feet. Also, the the the road is curved, so it it it's 20 ft and then 17

[2:21:08] ft on the ends approximately. But, um, for instance, the marquee, any any

[2:21:12] building over three or four stories, you're not going to want five feet

[2:21:16] between the curb and the and the and the face of the building. So, we feel it's a

[2:21:22] better design feature. But, yeah, we can go through the slides.

[2:21:25] Sorry, I'm a little off. So, anyway, okay, there's the parcel.

[2:21:31] Um, just so you know, [clears throat] in comments that we received reloc we

[2:21:36] relocated the storefront for this on the actual street face.

[2:21:42] And then the first, like I said, the first variance we're dealing with is the

[2:21:45] build two line, which because of the curvature of the road is 20 ft in the

[2:21:50] center and approximately 15 and 17 on the ends. And we just feel it's better

[2:21:54] practice to not have the cars be directly right up against the building

[2:21:59] as it would be like in a downtown corridor.

[2:22:03] Um >> did I see do you plan to install

[2:22:06] sidewalks there? >> Yes, there'll be sidewalks there. Um

[2:22:09] there'll be bushes again. We're underneath the power lines again in some

[2:22:12] spots so there's not there's trees on the ends. We'll get we'll get to that in

[2:22:15] the next uh and there's bushes in that area.

[2:22:18] » Yeah.

[2:22:21] » So the build line is currently right along the curb, the proposed curb for

[2:22:25] the parking. So to be five feet away from that, we would have a five foot

[2:22:30] sidewalk. But as Mark mentioned, if you were to open a car door, you would take

[2:22:33] up almost three feet of that. And clearly having a multi-story building up

[2:22:38] against, you know, only five feet between the curb and the building at

[2:22:42] face. It's very tight. As a point of reference, the marquee here is an 18

[2:22:48] foot sidewalk from curb to front of building. So they have about three foot

[2:22:52] strip for um unloading and loading and then a um 15 foot sidewalk which allows

[2:23:00] for some of the seating that they have outside. But that feeling just for a

[2:23:04] point of reference is close to what we're proposing here.

[2:23:09] » And furthermore, not just the marquee, but pretty much every building three

[2:23:12] three stories this building marquee they're all over 15 feet. It just it

[2:23:17] seems that doesn't seem correct, but that's

[2:23:22] why we're requesting the relief. I guess we'll move on. That's our Any

[2:23:27] questions on that? Okay. >> Uh Street Trees, sorry, I did them

[2:23:32] backwards. So, sorry, the slides. She's like, what are you doing? Um, so again,

[2:23:36] the same uh discussion we had on the south building and then in keeping to

[2:23:40] try to keep the north and the south side looking the same. Um, we have only three

[2:23:45] street trees that are physically in the street

[2:23:48] as you know really street trees are. And then we've highlighted additional trees

[2:23:53] that we have that are very close to the street. And again, we're planting not on

[2:23:59] this side where there's not going to be hundreds of trees because you have the

[2:24:01] cliff face coming down, but we are going to be keeping all the mature trees that

[2:24:04] we can and then planting along the cliff face along the back. So, um, we're just

[2:24:11] again trying to request as many street stalls of parking for public use of the

[2:24:16] trail, which is why we're doing the street trees the way we're doing them.

[2:24:21] And that's really that's it for variances on this site.

[2:24:26] Any questions from the board?

[2:24:31] [sighs] All right, I'll take some comments from

[2:24:34] the audience. Yeah, they were.

[2:24:38] Anybody?

[2:24:42] Okay.

[2:24:49] There's no further questions you want to sum up.

[2:24:53] » Um, uh, thank you for your consideration and respectfully request that you vote

[2:24:58] in favor of hopefully these two variances. Thank you.

[2:25:01] » Thank you.

[2:25:07] obviously less.

[2:25:32] Is there a motion?

[2:25:45] and Mr. Thomas

[2:25:50] » Miss Thomas. >> Hi,

[2:25:52] » Mr. Lobac. >> Hi,

[2:25:54] » Mr. Civotella. >> Hi,

[2:25:56] » Miss Panta. >> Grant, good luck.

[2:25:59] » Thank you very much. Actually,

[2:26:11] the eggs might make my house look better. I don't know.

[2:26:31] All right, I'm going to open up the next hearing. Secretary to purpose, please.

[2:26:34] » All right, applications hereby made for a public hearing before the East and

[2:26:37] Zoning Hearing Board for property known as 36 South 12th Street Zoning District

[2:26:42] West Ward block class C. Variance is as follows. 59515D

[2:26:47] proposed existing lot width of 16 ft required a minimum lot width of 18 ft.

[2:26:52] 59515F3 proposed no street trees required.

[2:26:57] Street trees shall be planted along streets in accordance with chapter 5541

[2:27:02] and as determined by the city forester. 59533B

[2:27:07] proposed zero off- streetet parking spaces required two off- streetet

[2:27:11] parking spaces. 59515D proposed existing impervious coverage of

[2:27:17] 68% required maximum impervious coverage not

[2:27:21] to exceed 50%. The above action is request to proceed with the conversion

[2:27:26] of a single family residential to two units. The appellent is Jose Pores at 36

[2:27:32] South 12th Street East NPA 18042. The owner is Jose uh Porz and

[2:27:41] is that Bernicea Rodriguez. Um 69 adjacent property owners were

[2:27:47] notified and it was published in the press.

[2:27:49] » Thank you to the gentleman. Um is the applicant present?

[2:27:55] Anybody that wishes to speak at this hearing? I'm going to have you sworn in

[2:27:59] now.

[2:28:18] Does it tell me this property was posted?

[2:28:20] » Yes, it was. >> Mr. Nitzki,

[2:28:22] » sir, it's the one by my house. >> Sorry.

[2:28:26] » The one by my house. >> Oh.

[2:28:32] » [clears throat] >> Folks, I have been alerted by our board

[2:28:36] chairman that he lives two doors from this property. So, he will recuse

[2:28:41] himself from participation not only in the hearing but in this vote. Okay.

[2:28:48] Thank you. Who is the vice?

[2:28:55] So, the hearing will be overseen by our vice chair, Mr. Lope sack.

[2:29:04] » How you guys doing tonight? Um, can you start with your name and address for the

[2:29:09] record?

[2:29:16] » My name Jose Pesc.

[2:29:23] Thank you. Um, Alexis Nunees, um, 136 East West Street, Wing Gap, PA.

[2:29:31] » I'm sorry, Mr. Nunees. What was that? >> Um, my last name,

[2:29:34] » your um, address, please. >> 136 East West Street, Windgap.

[2:29:43] » Thank you. >> Thank you, gentlemen. Well, you got

[2:29:46] starting. Tell us why you're here. >> Yeah, I'm just here. I'm just helping

[2:29:49] him out. Just translating. I don't know much about the property.

[2:29:54] That's why he told me on the way on the ride here.

[2:29:57] » Okay. >> Yeah.

[2:29:58] » Um well, you guys have to kind of explain

[2:30:01] to us why you need some of these variances to do what you're uh looking

[2:30:06] to do. >> Um he wants to convert the single family

[2:30:10] into a a duplex and I think we're here because it doesn't have any street

[2:30:15] parking. I mean any um off streetet parking.

[2:30:19] » Uh that's one thing. So, we have um minimum lot width required. Your

[2:30:27] proposed is a little bit smaller. So, that's outside of the the framework. Um

[2:30:32] street trees should be planted along the street. You're proposing no street

[2:30:37] trees. Uh yes, the parking two off streetet parking spaces are needed. You

[2:30:41] have zero. Um and then maximum impervious coverage not to exceed 50%.

[2:30:49] uh your existing impervious coverage is 68.

[2:30:55] So you guys got to tell us why you need, you know, a little bit of

[2:31:04] to be honest.

[2:31:23] He was talking about adding a kitchen. I don't think that has to do with the

[2:31:28] various things you guys are talking about. [clears throat]

[2:31:31] » Why does he need to have a two unit instead of the existing single family?

[2:31:35] » Oh, he just needs help with the mortgage and he's he don't want to do it like,

[2:31:40] you know, like off like without permits and stuff. He want to follow the rule.

[2:31:46] » Okay. But the rule says he has to have two additional parking spaces.

[2:31:50] » Yeah. >> How how do we get around that?

[2:32:17] How long has he owned the property?

[2:32:23] » Six. >> Six years.

[2:32:28] and has had the same mortgage in place for those six years.

[2:32:33] » Yeah. Okay. What

[2:32:38] um I guess he just recently divorced with his wife, so he needs help. Like

[2:32:44] his wife was helping him pay.

[2:32:49] » Could you consider roommates instead of building?

[2:32:52] » Yeah, I was telling him the same thing. I said just get some roommates and we'll

[2:32:56] just help out. You don't need no permits and stuff for roommates

[2:33:01] » because [clears throat] he hasn't given us anything that would

[2:33:07] meet the criterion of a hardship. >> Yeah.

[2:33:10] » For the board to say, "Okay, just wave the two parking spaces that are

[2:33:15] required." >> Even if his wife is no longer there

[2:33:19] helping him out, >> that's

[2:33:22] not really a legal hardship under the law.

[2:33:26] I'm sure it's a personal hardship for him, but it's not a legal hardship

[2:33:30] relative to the property itself. >> Understand?

[2:33:37] » No, it's just one a single family.

[2:33:47] » Correct.

[2:33:54] He said that he will be living in the house as well. So, he would only need

[2:33:58] one extra parking

[2:34:04] » and there's nowhere there's no backyard or

[2:34:08] um alleyway or anything in the back where he can make parking.

[2:34:23] trees

[2:34:34] [clears throat] exist.

[2:34:56] parking.

[2:35:11] It's exactly Yeah. I mean that is an existing

[2:35:15] condition as is the lot width. >> Right.

[2:35:20] » Yep.

[2:35:24] » Right.

[2:35:32] » [clears throat]

[2:35:36] » Um, yeah, I just said it's it's the existing law is is one thing that you

[2:35:44] can't change and you can't change the impervious surface, but the parking

[2:35:49] spaces, there's no place at all that you can

[2:35:53] like have you don't have any land in the back that you have a alleyway or

[2:35:57] something behind the property where you can make parking spots.

[2:36:09] » It says um it's too small. >> Too small

[2:36:12] » in the back. Yeah.

[2:36:33] Since since the only reason you've given for

[2:36:39] wanting this or needing it is monetary, where is he going to get the money to

[2:36:44] install separate meters, to install a full kitchen, to install

[2:36:49] » bathroom >> firep? separation of between the two

[2:36:53] units >> if I'm not mistaken according to what he

[2:36:56] told me on the right here was that they did a cash out refinance and if when

[2:37:02] they separated and he got some of the money from the cash out refinance and

[2:37:07] then he going to use some of that to make it

[2:37:11] » then why doesn't he use some of that cash to help pay the mortgage

[2:37:16] » and then look for a roommate >> Yeah, I know. and keep the parking uh

[2:37:21] which I mean

[2:37:25] are there neighbors here who can testify as to what the parking situation is in

[2:37:31] the neighborhood? Ma'am,

[2:37:36] go ahead. Mr. Vice Chair, is that okay?

[2:37:41] » Yes. Okay.

[2:37:47] » Hi, good evening. My name is Julie Zando Dennis. That's Z as in zebra. A N D O

[2:37:54] hyphen Dennis. Um I live at 1032 Lehigh Street. So it's not on 12th, but um I

[2:38:01] have lived in the West Ward for nearly 20 years and I also uh serve as the

[2:38:09] council member representing the West Ward. I've been in uh conversations with

[2:38:14] public works at the city um on numerous occasions to try to come up with

[2:38:21] solutions to what I consider to be an acute parking problem in the

[2:38:26] neighborhood um >> in this neighborhood or in the westward

[2:38:29] in general. >> Well, the south side of Northampton,

[2:38:32] which is our neighborhood, both the applicants and my own. So, the north

[2:38:36] side uh has some parking problems, but not the density that it has on the south

[2:38:42] side of Northampton from 6 to 15th Street. And um

[2:38:48] this situation is dire um and in large part because of these conversions. Um

[2:38:54] there have been discussions by community activists for many many years really

[2:38:59] ever since I've moved to Easton about um first of all the history of conversions

[2:39:06] how single family homes have been converted into multi-unit homes.

[2:39:10] Sometimes a workers row home has been converted

[2:39:14] into three apartments. We're talking about a 20 foot wide workers row home.

[2:39:19] Um in many many instances I've seen that in the west ward. um and uh how those

[2:39:27] conversions destroy the fabric, the social fabric of the community. And I'm

[2:39:32] not being anti- renter. Uh many renters are very responsible, but the nature of

[2:39:39] let's say a homeowner versus a renter is that uh a renter's more most likely

[2:39:45] going to be a transient through the neighborhood and is not going to invest

[2:39:49] in the way that um a homeowner would. So I mean I have you asked me to talk

[2:39:58] about parking. Um uh there's there are during snow removal, it's just a crisis.

[2:40:06] Um during the summer months, um there are

[2:40:12] many streets that are too narrow to park um on the street. So people are have to

[2:40:19] go up onto the sidewalks. And then as a council member, I've received a number

[2:40:24] of complaints about people's sidewalks cracking or, you know, uh getting

[2:40:30] damaged because cars, you know, parked like on the sidewalk. And there's really

[2:40:36] no alternative in many instances. And um [clears throat] that area around 12 is,

[2:40:43] you know, is as dense as any.

[2:40:50] I'm happy to talk about other issues, but you know, just

[2:40:54] giving precedence to the parking issue. And also, um, just so you know, the

[2:40:59] conversations I've had with public works,

[2:41:03] you know, we don't know if it's a, uh, a lack of parking management or, uh,

[2:41:11] what or potentially like as Dave Hopkins says at public works, um, like

[2:41:19] 60 pounds of potatoes that you're trying to stuff into a 10 pound bag. Um I might

[2:41:25] be quoting that a little a little off, but

[2:41:28] um my suspicion is it's actually a little of both. You know, I think that

[2:41:33] there are too many cars um in large part because of these conversions and I also

[2:41:41] think that you know there hasn't been any efforts to try to manage those cars

[2:41:47] and there could be some efforts but the difficulty is for example parallel that

[2:41:52] not parallel but diagonal parking. Um the streets are are simply not wide

[2:41:56] enough to accommodate that. Um, so I've gone over that with Dave many times and

[2:42:03] we're sort of batting it back and forth and there is a proposal potentially to

[2:42:07] uh institute registration of cars just so that we have a sense of what we're

[2:42:13] looking at, how many cars there are so that then we can go to the next step and

[2:42:17] try to um uh come up with some solutions. But it's the situation's

[2:42:25] a a critical stage.

[2:42:29] » So, >> thank you.

[2:42:31] » Welcome.

[2:42:41] » You just got to go to the mic because it's being recorded. That's all.

[2:42:45] » So, if anybody's at home, they can hear you.

[2:42:56] I'm sorry, Mr. Eli. Can we have your address again, please?

[2:42:59] » Sure. Sure. 305 West Monroe Street, Kurt Elely, Ehl Y. Um, for a significant

[2:43:08] number of years, I was involved in the steering committee of the Westward

[2:43:14] Neighborhood Partnership. And during that period of time, many

[2:43:19] many discussions occurred about the conversion process and the impact that

[2:43:25] that had on the west ward. In fact, I thought that there was a moratorum.

[2:43:31] Pam, am I correct? Do you recall any of that? that there was at a time back,

[2:43:37] we're talking probably 15, 20 years ago, >> there may have been that

[2:43:40] » where there was a decision made by council to not allow conversions that

[2:43:47] they had to come to an end. I'm not sure when the process sort of changed and

[2:43:53] went in the other direction, but um the impact of those conversions in every

[2:44:00] every aspect of their life in the West Wart is was and still is impacted by the

[2:44:09] number of people. >> Unfortunately, and I I understand what

[2:44:13] you're getting at. I don't mean to cut you off, but they're not asking for a

[2:44:16] use variance here because, correct me if I'm wrong, but this the use is

[2:44:20] permitted. Correct. >> That's correct.

[2:44:21] » Okay. >> Oh, I understand that. I'm I'm just

[2:44:24] saying that

[2:44:28] if there are all of these other issues that you have pointed out the I mean I

[2:44:33] don't I didn't count them all but it was more than a handful it felt like of

[2:44:38] variances that are going to be required to allow in effect another conversion of

[2:44:44] a single family home. I I'm just asking that you really

[2:44:49] recognize the significance of that and the impact of that.

[2:44:54] » And I I don't want to speak for the whole board for for myself. I I pretty

[2:44:59] I'm I'm a real estate professional. So, we also have a housing crisis. So, we do

[2:45:04] struggle here and I'm sure council members understand the homelessness that

[2:45:09] we see every day, the struggle to keep up with rents,

[2:45:12] » an individual trying to keep his home afloat with today's economic situations.

[2:45:16] So, we all struggle with the parking. I will say as a Westward resident, I know

[2:45:23] families that own homes that own six to eight cars.

[2:45:28] So, whether you convert one house into two apartments, hopefully they have two

[2:45:33] cars. I know I know families that have six cars, four of them are broken down,

[2:45:39] three are operating. So, as you know, council members mentioned,

[2:45:45] it's going to be difficult because there's no law as to how many cars you

[2:45:49] can publicly park or publicly own. So, it's a it's a it's it's a great thing. I

[2:45:55] I I I wish him the best because I don't know how to alleviate it without

[2:46:01] basically cutting off public parking to folks, your friends, your neighbors. You

[2:46:05] have a birthday party, they might not be allowed on your street. [clears throat]

[2:46:09] So, it's a slippery slope.

[2:46:14] » Uh, interesting commentary. >> Yeah, I I we we I agree. I'm just trying

[2:46:20] to The other side of that fence as a resident and up here as the board is the

[2:46:24] housing crisis. >> Well, again, that that brings up another

[2:46:27] important subject. We need affordable housing. We need that

[2:46:33] across our city. all the houses or not houses, but the apartments being built

[2:46:41] are priced at a way that doesn't help solve the problem that you're alluding

[2:46:46] to. So, we we need a a plan and we've got a professional planner now in our

[2:46:53] city. She happens to be here today. So my hope is that she will be given the

[2:47:00] support to do the kind of planning that allows us to hopefully alleviate this

[2:47:06] whole entire mix of problems. >> I do hope so.

[2:47:10] » I mean basic economics is supply and demand. So more supply should equal, you

[2:47:17] know, should help. >> We'll be able to work it out.

[2:47:19] » Yeah. But adding an additional even if it's one car, even if it's only what at

[2:47:25] beginning might be one person additional that becomes two or three. Yeah.

[2:47:31] » Um I'm just saying there's a whole history of the problem that was caused

[2:47:36] by conversion, the efforts made by the city to bring that to a close and where

[2:47:42] we are today. >> I just thought that might be helpful.

[2:47:45] That's all. >> Yeah. Thank you.

[2:47:46] » Thank you.

[2:47:59] So, um, >> anything else you gentlemen want to add?

[2:48:13] » No, we're good. We're board's good. >> No, we're good.

[2:48:15] » We're good. All right, close up

[2:51:12] Mr. Lozac >> I

[2:51:14] » Miss Panto >> Miss Thomas

[2:51:16] » hi. >> All right. So it was denied um for the

[2:51:21] situation but you know we wish you the best and probably look for a roommate

[2:51:25] situation be a lot easier. Thank you.

Zoning Hearing Board 8/17/2026

Transcript