Hearing board for the city of Allentown for April 27th, 2026.

We have two matters on the agenda this evening, and um we'll have our secretary call that list uh mainly to determine if there are objectors or interested persons for each case, Tabby Case number one special use application of 112 114 North Eighth Street LLC at 112, 114 North Eighth Street is the appellant present.

The appellant is present.

Are there any objections to case number one?

Are there any interested parties not necessarily objectively just to case number one?

Interested parties, keep your hands up three case number two, special use application of 138 North 9th Street LLC at 138, 142 North Nine Street.

Is the appellant present?

Appellants present, represented by council.

The appellant is present.

Are there any objections to case number two?

One are there any interested parties not necessarily objectors to case number two?

Three.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

It's nice to see you all again.

My name is Jeff Fleischaker from Gross McGinley here on behalf of the applicant, uh 112 to 114 North A Street LLC, the owner of the property.

Uh we are here today for both this and the second matter on the agenda.

These are special exception applications under the uh historic building demolition overlay district for the demolition of in this case uh 112 to 114 North Eighth Street in Allentown.

Um I have two witnesses tonight here.

I have Alex Wright, who's a member of the LLC, and I have Carlos Tovar, who is the uh architect uh for the building.

Um just as a as an introduction, and I think before the hearing you were reviewing the ordinance, there are some very specific uh pieces of the ordinance that we have to meet.

Uh I believe it's two out of the four pieces that we have to establish uh to to meet the special exception criteria uh for demolition of these buildings.

I'll be using my witnesses and we'll sort of go through it as we go uh to get through if we've satisfied those.

Um I don't think I have any other really any any preliminary issues, just where would you like the witness to sit?

Right up here.

So we'll start with Alex Wright IGHT?

Correct.

Do you sort of tell the truth?

Alice, can you introduce yourself to the board, please?

Uh Alex Wright.

And yeah, pulled out from the Alex Wright.

Pleasure to meet you.

Uh Alex, what's your relationship to 112 to 114 North Eighth Street LLC?

I'm one of the uh owners of the property.

All right, you're a member of that LLC?

Who are you?

Are you a member with other people?

Uh my mom.

Okay.

So you have authority to speak on behalf of the owner here tonight?

That's correct.

Okay.

Um when did you when did the LLC acquire these uh what we'll call two pieces of property, even though it's a simple single people?

Uh 10 years ago.

Okay.

So 112 to 114.

The LLC has owned these properties for at least 10 years.

Correct.

What's the current use?

Uh current use is uh two uh storefronts and two apartments.

Okay.

Um so can you see the the the image that's up there today?

These representative of the two properties?

This is correct.

Okay.

So which one is the the residence and which one's the storefront?

So the the two storefronts you see in the front, uh one with the sign, the other uh with the two mailboxes, and uh the apartments are one is above and then one's in the back.

Okay, so what's identified as one twelve, the the unit with the brick face also has a a rear building in the back of the property?

Yes.

And that's where one of the apartments is.

Correct.

And the one fourteen, uh both uh excuse me, both units, both buildings, both structures have uh commercial on the first floor?

Correct.

And a rental unit on the second floor or behind.

Correct.

Okay.

Are they currently occupied?

Uh one apartment is occupied, and uh, I believe one commercial space is occupied.

Okay.

So the commercial spaces using both.

Uh so you said one is occupied, that's at 114?

Correct.

Is that a uh new or an old tenant?

Uh I think they might have uh they just came in.

Okay.

Uh was there a period of time that they were vacant beforehand?

Yeah, it was vacant for a long time, a year plus.

Okay.

They came in for like the season.

Okay.

What kind of space is the at 114?

What kind of space is the commercial unit there?

I think they're doing like the tax service.

But what kind of physically?

How big is the space, the commercial space at 114?

Maybe 250 feet, 300 square feet.

So it's a very small, uh a very small structure.

And what about at 112?

112?

Same thing.

It's a little longer, but it's like really narrow.

Okay.

And with both of those, you've had some difficulty in the past with getting them rented or getting them occupied?

Yeah, it's been impossible to find like long-term tenants to just the way that you know spaces are constructed, and same thing with the tenants.

Okay.

So with the one that you've that you've recently occupied at 114, what kind of rent are you getting there?

Again, like a few hundred bucks a month, something like that.

Okay.

A few hundred dollars a month.

900?

900 a month.

Yeah.

Okay.

Um which uh is there a uh residential property that's occupied at 114?

Yeah, there's an apartment above.

Okay.

And is that currently occupied now?

Correct.

And how much rent are you getting there?

I believe they pay about $800 a month.

Okay.

What can you talk to the board about what the condition of the upstairs apartment is?

So the upstairs apartment, it's habitable, you know, it's it's up to code, but as far as like, you know, HVAC, you know, real air conditioning and stuff like that.

Uh you know, we don't have any of that stuff in the building.

Um like in the summertime, they put the AC unit outside.

It's it's livable, but it's nothing, you know, like spacious or you know, any real uh you know, amenities or stuff like that.

If I may, Mr.

Wright, just for the sake the meeting is recorded.

If you could just take the microphone and just call in a little closer in your mouth, you got it in a perfect.

Yeah, that just makes everything a little bit clear.

Thank you.

I appreciate it.

So with the residential unit at 114, there's no uh centralized uh air conditioning?

No.

It's uh it's a window unit.

So they put it in the window in the summer.

Uh and if you're getting $900 a month, $800 a month, is that a consistent tenant or has there been some vacancy issues there as well?

There's been some vacancy issues, yeah.

Okay.

Um what about 112?

Is there currently a residential tenant there?

No, that's vacant.

Uh and then you have you do have a uh residence unit in the rear of the property, yeah.

So there's the one at 114 that's occupied, and there's the one in the rear at 112.

That's occupied?

Uh I have some like family that stay there, but it's it's pretty much not occupied.

Okay.

And let's talk about the physical condition of the 112 residential unit as well.

Similar problems?

Similar, yeah.

So old old fixtures?

Yeah, stuff is always like breaking down the gas boiler, stuff like that.

So it's a lot of like, you know, patch and repair, same thing with the roof, you know, like we'll have leaks, we'll patch it, but everything's so old, it requires like complete, you know, demolition and it's been that way since you've owned the property?

Since we've owned the property.

But in the time that you've owned the property, you're committed to consistently maintaining as best you can for the property.

Correct.

So that it's habitable, the tenants don't have water, you know, running in their you know, rooms and stuff like that, but there's only so much patching up you could do.

Okay.

So uh let's talk to the board about what your intentions are here with these two properties together.

What are you looking to do?

So our intention is to demolish the properties and you know build new housing for the city.

What kind of new housing are you building?

Uh multifamily residential.

Okay.

Okay.

And I know Carlos is gonna testify a little later about those specific details, but while you're here, what do you understand that you're putting in in the place of these these two these two structures?

Yes, it'll be uh 23 uh new apartment units.

Okay.

That's over multiple floors, I assume.

Correct.

Seven stories.

Seven stories.

Um with the multiple with these units that you're putting in, are you looking to put in high end high-end luxury units?

Uh yeah, it'll be uh, you know, stainless steel appliances, quartz countertop, centralized air conditioning, you know, uh good stuff.

And with those with that good stuff, are you looking to have a a price point that is uh equally elevated?

Yeah.

Uh it'll be affordable though.

That'll be affordable unit.

So you're looking for something that's accessible to the community but not necessarily a luxury rate.

This is correct.

Okay.

So let's talk about that in the context of this neighborhood.

Let me sure try and understand what I just heard.

I heard you said you asked if the uh price points were gonna be elevated at all.

So he said yes, but then he said, but they're gonna be affordable.

Those seem to be in conflict with me.

Like so why don't we just say what you think the price point might be?

If you know of course, yeah.

Our price point will be around like 1250, 1275.

So it'll be a little elevated, but not at new market rates, which are like 1900, 2000.

And we're talking about 1275 for a one bedroom apartment?

Correct.

Okay.

So elevated from the current rate of eight or nine hundred dollars a month.

Correct.

But not center city Allentown uh one bedroom 2500 a month.

Correct.

Okay.

With an intention of making them accessible.

Yes.

Okay.

So the neighborhood itself around around these two properties.

Can you talk to me?

Sorry to clarify when you say accessible.

We're talking about financially accessible, not ADA accessible.

Well, they'll have to be ADA accessible as well, but not all of them.

Right.

But there's an accessibility.

That that word is is is wrought with interpretation for that.

I'm talking about financially accessible.

Yeah, absolutely.

So the neighborhood around these two properties on 12th Street.

Can you give me an idea of what it what it feels like, what it looks like?

Yeah, so next door is a grocery store, uh, next unit next uh on the other side's a four-unit apartment building, I believe across the streets, like twelve or fourteen units in the So it sits within a pro the the street itself, this this 100 block of North uh 8th Street.

There are similarly situated properties on the street.

Yeah, say yes or no.

There we go.

Um are they in similar at least to your understanding similar condition?

Yes.

In fact, you you're you're a member of an LLC that owns a property on the street, yes?

Yes.

You own which address?

Uh 118 North 8th Street.

So not the next door to 114, but the one next door to the top.

That's the grocery store.

Okay.

Is it in similar condition?

Yes.

Okay.

Um would you describe the street as a place that would be supportive of escalated rents in its current condition?

Yes.

Okay.

Um is there a lot of walking traffic on the street right now?

No, it's actually very dangerous.

There was a shooting or murder actually across the street, maybe like a month or two ago.

And uh, you know, one of my tenants who lives on next door, they woke up in the morning and they found a gun and a shoe like on the street, you know, right in front of their door.

So it's it's pretty dangerous around there.

But you still want to build new apartments there.

Well, that's the whole idea, right?

You got the PPL center right next door and all that stuff, so you want to connect that, right?

And make the you know area walkable and people not afraid to, you know, access the area anymore.

So your intention of building this 23 unit seven-story apartment building is not just a financial one, but it's to improve the walkability of the neighborhood.

Of course.

Improve the community.

That's the goal.

Okay.

Um as part of this project, we went to uh the historical architectural review board.

Do you remember that?

Yes.

Okay.

Um, what we'll have, I guess, marked as a one at this point.

Okay.

Thank you.

So Alex, I've put in front of you what's been marked as A1.

Do you recognize that?

What page is that on?

No, it do you recognize the whole document itself?

Yes, yes.

Sorry.

You this is the document that you saw before we went in front of the Harb?

Yes.

Okay.

Um at that meeting, you were you were there and you were active participant in the meeting?

Yes.

Uh, where we discussed what we were intending to do with the property, sort of the historical features that they were worried about.

Yes.

Okay.

Um sorry.

Um, as part of this project, if this board were to grant you permission to demolish these two buildings, would you be willing to consent to a condition that you permit a uh uh uh a license architectural uh salvager to enter the property and identify and remove any historically or architecturally significant artifacts?

Yes or pieces of the the building itself?

Yes, I would.

So for example, if someone wanted really wanted the framework of the front door of 114, you'd be okay with them taking that out.

Not a problem.

Okay.

And anything else within the building that an architectural salvager who found some significance with, you'd be okay with.

No problem.

Okay.

Um we had a conversation with the board about the the design of the new building.

You remember that?

Yes.

Uh and you also are willing to acknowledge a condition, and it's not necessarily a condition of approval, but recognize to this board that the design features of the new building are are in flux at this point.

Yes.

Um but that you're committed as the owner of the LLC building this to make sure that the front, the facade and the rear of this building uh matches the architectural significance of the neighborhood.

Yes, correct.

Has some throwback to old Allentown.

Yes, correct.

Uh and that I know we have a a mural or a painting on the side of the building and the depictions that even that you'd be willing to work with city officials to put something architectural historically significant.

Yes, as Mr.

Tavar explained, that's just a placeholder.

So if the city would like us to do something, you know, historically or you know, something along those lines, you know, we'd be more than happy to incorporate that.

Okay.

Um I think that's all the questions I have for Mr.

Wright at this point.

Right.

Um you indicate that you've had a lot of turnover in these um particular units.

Um yet um attorney Fleischaker's uh brief letter to summarize the case uh indicated that there's a strong demand for housing.

Um I've actually heard other data points from like Leah Valley Planning Commission that indicate you know Lehigh and Northampton counties together are 9,000 plus dwelling units short.

Um I guess I'm trying to understand why why do you think that these units are not perpetually leased with that substantial shortage of of apartments in the area and the in the counties?

As we stated before, these buildings that were built so long ago, some of them over a hundred years, they're just dilapidated, and it's like trying to put lipstick on a pig.

You know, you can continue to make these patches and repairs, but tenants don't want to wake up to no hot water in the morning or the gas boiler not working, or these pipes are old and there's lead in the it's just that they're tired of these old buildings.

They want to live in something new, and that's you know not gonna break down on them.

So that's been the problem we've been having.

So you're suggesting that that any old building in the city is not likely to be rented.

Not any, but some of them as far as let some some of the buildings, you know, like like this that over the years, you know, the hundred years, previous owners they haven't taken care of them that well, they've just painted over the brick, they haven't you know kept up with it.

Some of them are you know beyond repair.

But you've owned these buildings for 10 years.

Why why is it necessary?

I mean, I'm not I've I've spent a lot of time dealing with older buildings, and um, I mean, some are beyond repair.

These just from the surface of it don't look like they're beyond repair, and there is a point where you said you know you patch a roof and then you have to go back and patch it.

There is a point where you can't patch a roof anymore and you simply need to replace the roof.

Um or if the hot water heater is been repaired, why wouldn't you just replace it?

I guess I'm confused as to why renovation is not an option in this particular case.

And we're not looking at for at least none of the evidence I've been presented with so far presents buildings that are so far gone that they they can't be rehabilitated.

And there's been some magnificently historic uh restored historic buildings uh probably in this block and certainly within a couple blocks of that.

So I'm um why why is renovation not an option for these buildings?

Well, is building's not one of them, you know.

You say, yeah, maybe the roof just needs to be replaced, but when you open that roof, what if you see all the rafters, you know, and studs are you know, water damage and need to be replaced.

So you you peel off one layer and you realize there's five more layers underneath that you know need to be replaced, you know.

Like you see the paint on front of the brick, you know, when you're dealing with historical brick, you know, there's other buildings on an H Street that you mentioned, they're beautifully repointed.

You know, they're not they don't have paint slapped over them like this one.

You know, this building probably changed hands between ten different owners before we got it.

Unfortunately, some knucklehead painted the bricks.

So now for us to sandblast it into all that, you know, we looked into that, but they messed up.

You certainly don't want to sandblast the pain.

Correct.

The previous owners basically have messed it up so much, you know, it is beyond repair in some aspects.

So you know, that's what we've experienced so far with this building.

Okay.

Can I ask a little bit of follow-up to that?

Sure.

Uh so let's suppose that that with Mr.

Ungar's questions, Alex, that you put in uh a certain amount of work uh into these facilities, repairing the roof, a foot a new roof, uh new HVAC and all the systems.

Do you have an idea of what that might cost you?

Probably a few hundred thousand dollars.

Uh and if even if it's just a hundred thousand dollars for these two units, is there in your experience working with these units in this area?

Is there a ceiling or a cap to the amount of rent you can expect to increase for the size and the structure of these units?

Yes.

And what would that be?

Maybe like around 950,000 dollars.

Okay.

So there in your experience working in this area with these properties, there's a limit to what people will pay for the size and the scope of these properties.

Correct.

Uh including the commercial spaces on the first floor.

Correct.

And the commercial spaces on the first floor are limited primarily by the fact that they are tiny small spaces.

Correct.

Uh, and that limits the rental ability.

Correct.

So even if uh to Mr.

Unger's point, some of these properties could have some reinvestment into them.

There's a limited return on that investment that makes it not financially a viable statement.

Correct.

Okay.

And that's using your experience not just with these properties, but as a developer in the city of Allentown.

Yes.

And so just to be clear, we're just we think it's a hundred thousand dollars, just we're not.

There's like there's nothing, you know, pro forma or uh an estimate or anything to present.

Not for these properties, no.

Okay.

But I yeah we'll get to that in the in the closing piece of it.

I know the question.

We did have an objector.

I want to make sure the objector indicates a reason you would do witnesses.

Well, but are we doing where the objector can ask questions of witnesses that have as a registered objecting party at a hearing, or are we gonna slide through it?

We're gonna give them a chance, but we'll finish your case first.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Uh so before I call Mr.

Tobar, I I think struggle in my mind a minute.

I think I can have the board take public notice uh of the fact that there is uh the Allentown 2030, the comp plan and that I can distribute to the board as at what we'll mark as a two pieces of that comp plan as part of this presentation.

So I'll do that, uh having this marked as A2.

Is this just your joint exhibit, so I label it appropriately for our records?

I'll just read both apps.

And I'll commit that in the next hearing this will also be A2, so we won't have to relabel it twice and get really fun.

Uh so rather than dive into that now, uh I've uh I'll just indicate that I've pulled some selections from the the comp plan of Allentown Vision 2030 uh that talk about uh zoning updates that talk about uh apartment and and living unit affordability uh and do mention some things about historical restoration uh that we've talked about, but also point to the idea that in some instances improving the walkability of communities uh and improving the availability of well-maintained apartments as well within the community the comprehensive plan of the city of Allentown.

Uh so with that I'd call Carlos Tobar, please.

Uh Carlos Tovar?

Uh T-O-V-A-R.

I do Carlos, can you uh introduce yourself to the board, including where you work and what your relationship to this project is, please?

Um my name is Carlos Tobar, I'm an architect.

Um I'm the architect of the project.

Okay.

Uh and I put in front of you what we're gonna have marked as A3.

Do you recognize that, Carlos?

Yes, I do.

Uh is that your architectural plan for this this building?

That's correct.

That's my architectural plans.

Is this a presentation that you made as part of this project?

That's correct.

Okay.

So let's talk a little bit about 112 to 114.

Uh when were you hired on this project?

Uh six months ago.

Okay.

And when you were hired six months ago, what were you told to do?

Uh to develop multifamily.

Okay.

And for this for these two particular units.

For this, correct, for the two units.

And when you did that, did you uh before you started doing any of the actual design work?

Did you take stock of what the neighborhood was, what the area was, uh certain uh uh communal conditions in the area?

So the name of the company is uh design urbano urban design.

So we really focus on on the urban design first.

So before I start any project, I really had to walk the neighborhood.

I really had to identify police department, a school, convenient and store.

I really need to walk.

You know, I typically uh sometimes even I sleep by the neighborhood, so I wake up in the next morning, I have coffee, and then I can see what's really happening.

So yeah.

Did you do that for this project?

Yes, I did.

I didn't know I stand to sleep there, but I walk by.

So you walk by this project on more than one occasion.

Yeah, many times.

Uh different parts of the day, different parts of the night.

Correct.

And actually I can tell you how the neighborhood changed as you come this way south.

Okay, so let's talk about how the neighborhood changes as you come this way south.

Yeah, so as soon as coming up as where you're going towards Hamilton Street, um, you can start seeing all the all the neighborhood really in and very solely never, the landscape is beautiful.

Uh you can see the the the brick residential housing as you go.

And then right before this block, things start changing.

And you see, you know, one of the things that I can see is a lot of these small homes, people start doing these.

Uh start putting uh small retail, small commercial space, and now that residential component starts getting lost.

All right.

So as you approach this property, you you start in a historic district with well-maintained homes.

Correct.

And as you get to this neighborhood, are the homes less well maintained?

Uh less well-mantained, it has to do with what I just saying when they start incorporating a little bit of the retail.

So now the residential is starting moving away.

Okay.

Uh and with regard to these two properties, 112 and 114, uh, how would you describe them in relation to uh how they would identify to the well-maintained areas?

It not really well maintained, and and they they don't they don't relate to it.

Okay.

Did you tour the inside of these buildings?

No, no, I haven't been inside this building.

Um so you came up with uh an architectural design only after you sort of got a sense of what the neighborhood is or what it uh did you also get a sense of what the neighborhood could be at that point?

Yeah, that's correct.

And what uh what sort of tools did you utilize to figure out what the neighborhood could be?

Uh my previous experience, um I have been developing other other um other uh other buildings in the neighborhood.

So I think as you start getting to Hamilton, you know, uh the you start looking at more density on the buildings.

So that's one of you know one of the factors.

Okay.

And so A3 represents the end product of all the the preparation and the work that you put into it.

That's correct.

Okay.

Um so let's talk about some of the features of the building that that you're proposing.

Um if we go through this, how many apartments are being proposed here?

It's 23 units.

All right, are they all one bedroom?

Are they efficiency units?

What's the main thing?

They're gonna be uh studios.

All studios?

Correct.

Okay.

With the intention of a single family residence there?

Yes, single family residence, yeah.

Okay.

Um and it's seven stories?

Uh that's correct.

The building is seven stories.

Is it seven stories of residential or is there some data?

It's six six story residential, one story of uh uh commercial, and then um amenities for the for the residents.

Okay, and is there parking as part of this plan as well?

Uh not with the building, but uh adjacent to it.

Okay.

So there the there has been some consideration when you're adding density to the neighborhood of where people park if they want to live in.

Uh that's correct.

Actually, um what I know is the the my client already have uh a contract with the parking authority.

Okay for residence.

Yeah.

All right.

So we have seven six stories of residence with 23 units total with some commercial space on the first floor.

Correct.

And you also said with some amenity space on the first floor.

What sort of amenity space you take?

Really, the amenity space is more about of half a small uh lounge area, like small sitting area where you can open your mail, drink your coffee, something small, but really the building is this is not a building they have amenities within the building because we are using the neighborhood as an amenity.

We want the people living here to walk out and go through the neighborhood.

So the design that you came up with uh features and emphasizes walkability of the neighborhood.

That's correct.

Uh and encourages the residents to get out of the building and engage in the community.

That's exactly correct.

Okay.

So I also want to turn, I think it's page eight, so there's a page that has a just a placeholder that's marked building elevations, and I want to turn to the next page after that, where there appear to be uh two building elevations an east and an east elevation view.

Are you there with me, Carlos?

That's correct.

So this shows the design that you that you intended for the front of this building, or is this the rear of the building?

That's the front of the building.

Okay.

So talk to the board about the design that you put together for this building.

So what I did here is on the three stories, as you can see, I'm using a brick material and I use uh a coordinates.

So I want to relate on the scale to the residence.

And then, you know, I I want to mark that line.

And then after that, I go with the rest of the residential.

So really what I'm trying to do is in the phase, the first uh three stories, uh, be able to relay the to the neighborhood.

So as we look at the the image that's on the screen uh uh for the board there, uh next to one twelve where we're proposing is a three-story brownstone now?

Correct.

And you're looking to to sort of match the elevation line of the top of that building through this proposed design?

Correct.

Continue the horizontality and also uh the windows that we have in those stories trying to uh to relate to the scale of the window.

All right, so even though it's a building adjacent.

It's a new design, you're proposing sort of a throwback to old feel.

That's correct.

Okay, and as the architect, you feel like this contributes to uh the design of the building?

Uh contribute to the to the neighborhood and what's happening from from how it starts in from the historic portion of town.

Okay.

Uh did you have an opportunity as part of this project to review the community or excuse me, the comprehensive plan for the city of Alentine?

Yes, I think.

Uh and in doing so, did you try to make your design match that comprehensive plan?

Um not trying to match, but I relate it to too many things.

Like, for example, the horizontality on the three on the three stories, so you can have that shadow line.

Okay.

So that's that's one of the things.

Um and also uh uh eliminate some of that verticality and combine a little bit of the horizontality.

All right, so I think we're talking about two different things.

You were talking about the historical design standards within the ordinance that you tried to match.

Um I'm talking about both tools because on the on the new plan, uh it give you a little bit of of architectural standards.

So even though the building is proposed to be much taller than the neighboring buildings, you tried to build something that was continuous and and showed some community with this with the surrounding area.

But that's correct, especially on the first three stories.

Okay I think that's all I have for Mr.

Tovar on this.

Board have any questions.

I do just have one clarification.

Um I noticed you mentioned commercial space on the first floor.

Yes, on the ground floor.

Sorry, no commercial space, sorry.

Amenity.

Okay, yeah.

Great.

I just wanted to clarify because I did not say we don't have commercial space.

Yeah.

No.

Okay.

No more questions.

No more questions.

All right.

Thank you, Carlos.

Thank you.

So uh I would like to hear from the objecting party and the interested parties as well.

I think I've heard I know the interested parties are gonna talk about the neighborhood a little bit.

I do not know what the objector is, and then I'd like an opportunity to close after that if that's all right.

That's okay.

Okay.

Uh we had one objector, I think.

I'm not sure where that person is.

Oh, there you are.

Would you like to relate anything to the board?

Uh yes.

Let me just come on up here and pull that mic right up to you.

I have your name.

Uh Charlie Versaggy, V-E-R-S-A-G-G-I.

I live at 338 North Eighth Street.

Right hand, please.

Right.

Yeah.

Yes.

Hi, I'm I'm Charlie Versagi.

I live at 338 North A Street on Memorial Day weekend, and I'll celebrate my 40 41st year living in the neighborhood.

Uh I also own 336 North Eighth, which I rented for several years, and now I've combined it with my house because I've decided to live in uh retire in place, live in place, and uh just spent a couple hundred thousand dollars fixing the roof, fixing the HVAC, fixing the water heaters and so forth.

I also owned uh one time three thirty-seven North Eighth across the street from me, which I also invested money in and brought that up to standards, and that and that was a 12-year rental for me and before I sold it.

Now I'm out of the rental business for a whole lot of reasons, not the least of which I lost enough hair, and I don't think I'm gonna lose any more.

Um my objections uh here are really uh twofold.

Uh and uh it applies to both of these properties.

So I I mean I'd be happy to come back a second time and say exactly this again, but if it if we can do it now, that's fine.

Let's let's do it once instead of twice.

Okay, because they're the same same basic objections.

Uh I've been a proponent of reducing the density in the neighborhood since I got into uh old Allentown.

And uh in the era of Bill Heights administration, uh in my house I actually had an organizational meeting addressing two combined units across the street from me on on North Eighth, 300 block and North Eighth.

I think it's 39 and 41, 339 and 341, which old the city eventually took over.

Those were uh combined two buildings similar to this, uh but they were more house-looking than these are.

And um that had 11 units in it, and we combined them and brought up to two single family dwellings.

The one has been occupied since I think the day we finished it.

Uh you probably were on the board at the time, so um uh maybe we finished it, and the second one has had a single family in there rotating, but you know, it's been maybe only three owners in the in the 30 years that those places have been restored.

So I've been a proponent of this.

I've also was on the board of the school district in Allentown 20 years ago.

And and I've learned a bunch a bunch of things about that, and meaning that one of them is that we have uh too many people living in too short a too small a space, and especially downtown in this urban core area in the residential neighborhoods.

Uh it's just is it just too many people and too many people it gets congested.

There's trash that gets involved, uh, you know, there's cars double parked, trying to find places to park, moving along.

And so there's a density to me is heading in the wrong direction.

Now, where these two properties are located, uh, and I think it was referenced lightly, the the housing authority already owns several large multi-unit facilities in this neighborhood.

So one across the street, I believe, from the eighth street property.

And as we speak, right across from Central Elementary School on uh Turner between eighth and ninth, there is a multi-building multi-unit building going up.

Steel is in the ground now.

I mean, and and so we're adding another yet another multi-building facility.

These two properties, this guy over here is gonna be 23 studio apartments, which uh I did the calculations based on the square footage and some of their documents, and it looks like it's gonna be a 500 square foot average per unit.

Uh that might be kind of cozy for a family uh to live in there, but you know, so be it.

Um and and the next building has 40 some odd unit, 40 units in it.

Uh those are average 750, but there's single uh studios with one bedrooms and larger, so the average is about 750 square feet.

I don't know how you're gonna get twelve hundred, fifteen hundred dollars from or five hundred square feet studio.

I mean, that might be a little aggressive, even with stainless steel and and granite.

But so be it.

So number one was was the density.

I think this is a setting in the wrong direction.

The parking uh the garage that was identified for uh North Ninth Street, interestingly the same parking garage they the R Museum says they're gonna be using when they move to 10th Street.

So that could get a little cozy in that parking garage unless they all have a contract that zones out, you know, the right number of units.

Um my other piece was the just the historic nature of the of the neighborhood.

Uh this area is probably the most highly restored area in an old Allentown, not this particular block, but pretty much as uh as uh Mr.

uh uh Alex just said earlier.

I mean, once you uh or call those uh once you you l come to this block, you notice a change in in the character.

Um what this D needs is more historic character, not less.

And uh uh the the seven story facades that were presented in the package um just doesn't work.

I mean it's it to it double the height of anything on this block and it would stick out like a sore thumb, I think, in this neighborhood.

Uh so I'm I'm I object to the size of the building.

Uh I know they have to have that size to get the numbers to make the math work.

I mean I that's just my guy, that's an old uh uh real estate guy, but um the aesthetics in the neighborhood uh uh it will not make that area a selling point in my opinion.

Any questions from uh you folks?

Any questions?

I don't think so.

All right, thank you.

There were also three interested parties.

Are they present?

Do you wanna add something to what's been said?

Okay.

Can I have your name?

Yes, my name is Ruth Rachel Green.

G-R-E-E-N.

You raise right hand.

Sorry, tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing sound yet?

I do.

And where do you live, ma'am?

Uh I live at 114 West Island Street, and I manage the buildings at 112, 114 North Eighth Street and 138 and 142 North Ninth Street.

I I will note just this is Alice's mother.

So she's the other member of the LLC.

Yes.

She wanted to make comment.

I can either ask her questions as we would normally or make the board's preference have her comment as an interested party, though I technically represent her at the same time since I represent the LC that she's a member of the case.

Whatever you prefer.

Why don't you ask her some questions?

Sure.

So three point two up.

Sure.

So Ruth, you indicated that you're a co-member of 112 to 114 North A Street LLC.

That's correct.

With your son Alex?

Yes, and I manage the buildings.

Okay.

How long have you managed these buildings?

Uh 15 years.

All right.

Since you've owned them?

Yes.

Um and you heard some of the testimony today about the condition of the buildings.

Since you are uh primarily the the the manager of the buildings, why don't we talk a little bit about the condition of let's start with 112, which is a commercial space with two residentials.

Let's talk about that space.

Well, 112, 114 is a very odd space.

It's difficult to get tenants in that area.

Not so much because of the condition of the units, but in general, there's a few blocks on 8th Street that are people don't want to rent there.

People with who have money and would make good tenants don't want to come there.

Now the condition of 112-114, we've maintained it as best we can.

If you look at the facade of 112-114, it's not the historic type of facade that you see at uh 142 North Ninth, for example, which is a uh brownstone.

It's there's actually a brownstone next door one ton north twelve street.

Strictly speaking, it's just brick.

That's not a brown stone.

142 North Ninth is a brownstone.

But uh it's brick.

And in fact, we have done a new roof on one of the buildings uh five or six years ago.

Um the upkeep of the building is you know, we pass our inspections, it's definitely habitable.

In fact, there was some lead abatement done by the city of Alenton up in I think it's one fourteen, that's the one upstairs.

We do everything we can to keep it painted to be habitable, but it's just that building was built in 1880.

When we took it over, it had been neglected for over 50 years.

In fact, someone had nailed plywood to the roof.

Uh to fix the roof, I guess.

I I can't imagine.

But so, you know, of course, we fixed that and put down an appropriate roof.

That was some years ago.

There's only so much that we can do.

You know, I try to keep tenants.

We we just got a very nice little tenant to open a uh a small business there.

But it's difficult to get tenants there because there's no parking, of course.

So it it's strictly walk-in.

And I have had businesses there.

I had a nursing business that was walk-in, and that was fine while they rented it.

And I believe this business as well is hoping to have uh walk ins.

So you do get some some residential and some commercial use at these properties.

We do.

We do the best we can with what we have.

Is it fair to say it's difficult to get a continuous and consistent uh uh uh uh rent role?

It is difficult.

You have to be selective in the tenants you're taking, and the tenants are looking at what's around it.

So while North Eighth Street, we we've been on North Eighth Street and we own other buildings on North 8th Street for 15 years.

Parts of North 8th Street are beautiful, and we've contributed to that beauty.

Other parts of North 8th Street, not as beautiful.

We do our part to keep our building well upkept with decent tenants.

It it's a bit difficult.

Would you describe this area, this block as one of those areas that's not as well not as beautiful as some of the areas on North Eighth Street?

Well, actually, I think we have tenants down the block who can probably speak on that better than I.

Okay.

But I I believe you were here for Mr.

Unger's questions of your son about the condition of these units.

I I believe I was.

I don't know if I could answer any better than Alex did.

You you provided some of the shows, right?

And I think that's a good thing.

Yeah, it's not like we just took the buildings and said, hey, we don't want to put any money in the buildings.

Right.

And I'm I want to ask very specifically, Ruth.

Right.

Since you've owned them, this is not a it's not a situation where you've allowed them to to deteriorate to a poor condition.

No, I don't I don't allow that.

You know, we have decent habitable, we have to pass our five year inspections, we have to keep it up to snuff, but there's only so much you can do with what you have.

And you believe as someone who's owned property in this area down the street as well and other properties in Allentown that converting these two units into uh seven-story, modern, more modern 23 unit apartment would be a good thing for the community.

I think it would probably be very helpful to that end of North Eighth Street.

How so?

Well, if you walk down the block uh down North Eighth Street, going toward um Gordon Street, there's a very beautiful row houses that have been well kept up.

They're they're lovely.

You definitely you don't want to knock any of them down to put up seven-story buildings.

The further up you walk on 8th Street towards city center is somewhat deteriorated.

I'm not sure why.

You know, some of the buildings are are decent.

There are issues with other buildings with gunplay on the streets, as I think uh one of our one of our tenants had mentioned they're here tonight.

And and other buildings that are not well kept up.

And do you think in your experience in this neighborhood that if you were to build something new showing the investment in the neighborhood, it would lead others to take a similar investment in the neighborhood?

Oh, definitely.

And encouraging others to take a similar economic investment in the neighborhood would include increase improve.

I tried to make two words one, would improve the walkability of the neighborhood.

Definitely.

And it would increase also, you know, the the ability of the the lower North Eighth Street to to maintain its lovely facade and still be lovely.

I mean, I have complaints all the time.

People are hanging out on the steps.

Drug users that are just congregating there.

It's just it's it's a little bit tough on that end of 8th Street, and I think that would be a big help.

And you think the new construction would stop some of the loitering problems that you're translating now?

It would keep 8th Street lovely.

I don't have any other questions on the screen.

Thank you.

I just have one follow-up question.

In I think you were referring to it was challenging for some of the to maintain commercial tenants there.

You mentioned because there's no parking.

Um, but yet uh adding for certain kinds of businesses.

In other words, the the nursing business where they're hoping people will walk in and say, hey, I need whatever, they're willing to come there.

This is a notary, and they're hoping that people will walk in.

It's a walk in kind of business.

But but generally speaking, in in downtown neighborhoods like this, that the parking during the day on the street isn't that bad because a lot of people are away at work.

It's the evening where parking becomes tight, and of course, with 23 new dwelling units, wouldn't that exacerbate parking?

I think they've made arrangements for that.

But I believe they have some arrangements for that.

Hopefully.

In a lease deck scenario.

What's that?

In a in a parking deck scenario.

Oh, yes, I believe they do.

Okay.

Yeah.

And I'll just note that I I think I don't know if we've gone through that level of technical zoning review for this project as to the parking piece.

I do know that tonight's just about demolition, sort of an overview.

I understand those issues.

We've had those issues before, and we're gonna have them again with the city.

Uh but I don't think we're at that technical level yet as to where that is.

And if I may, with respect to parking and with respect to the status of the overall zoning review, a full land development submittal has been made for both of the projects on tonight's docket and land development submittal does involve comprehensive site plans.

It does involve a more comprehensive scope of review than the limited purpose HBDL review that's being put forth before the board this evening.

Comprehensive review comments have been offered at this point.

The appellant hasn't requested any other need for for zoning relief, and there have been no other obvious non-starter relief type needs identified.

Obviously, the project is still filtering its way through the land development process, but when an applicant engages in that manner with the land development process, it it generally in the key to good faith effort to work with the city and engage in a continuous dialogue to produce a compliant project with number of voices heard along the way.

And certainly if that if if during that process more relief is necessary, we'll absolutely come back before the board.

Understood.

And I I wasn't trying to regulate the parking.

At the same time, you know, this particular overlay um does have some language in it, like number three.

Um any potential community benefit that would accrue as a result of the demolition.

Well, you have to look at that holistically.

It's not just if you demolish the building, what happens, you have to kind of weigh the benefit of the overall new project that's proposed as well.

And I think parking and scale and are all things that we ought to consider.

It's exactly why we've put forth not just taking the building down.

So I think the harbor view to the comments there talked about creating a vacancy or a hole.

This is not just tearing it down to put a parking spot.

This is tearing it down, but putting something to your point, Mr.

Ungar, something that benefits the community greatly.

There may be some challenges, as with every project in the city, there are challenges.

Uh, but uh if and when we need to address the parking issue in more detail, we certainly will.

Any questions?

Okay.

Thank you, ma'am.

You're welcome.

And I promise I don't represent anybody, anybody else who'd be in and as an interested party today.

Okay, there were some other people that identified as interested persons.

Good evening, guys.

Good evening.

Uh Peter Spassado.

Peters Asado.

Yes, ma'am.

Uh S P O S A T O.

I'm Drake.

So good evening, guys.

I reside at 118 North A Street, which is two doors down from there.

And you know, that block I've been there over four years.

That block is a sh- excuse my language, but it's a shithole.

I have watched people get shot there.

I have watched people OD there.

I pick up baggies to hide them for my children because of how big of a nightmare that block is.

And where that gentleman said is a historic building.

Don't get me wrong.

The 300 block of 8th Street, it's a beautiful block.

That block is amazing.

This block needs to be shut down.

All of those uh housings apartments that they have there for the city, those need to be moved.

Because there's nothing but to my opinion, monsters, drug addicts, drug dealers, gangbangers coming in and out of there.

And whether you build new buildings or not, or you fix it, no one wants to live there.

I don't want to live where I live.

Had I known what I moved into, I would have never moved from where I was at to where I moved.

To be honest, like it's it's we need new.

You know, some things need to be left historically, some things need to be left the way they were.

But if we look at 7th Street, look at Walnut and Ninth, where the church was.

There was nothing but homeless and drug addicts ODN over there.

We replaced that.

Now we don't have that problem.

Same thing on Seventh.

The only reason why we have homeless people there is because of the whole the bus depot in the back.

If we move that depot, we wouldn't have that problem there either.

It seems as though homeless people, drug addicts, things that us, men of families, women with families that don't want that around our children.

They're afraid of new construction.

So I I'm in all favor of building it, putting up new space.

Maybe to give people an idea to walk and see the city, like they were saying, you know, instead of getting in your car and trying to drive somewhere.

You know, build bike paths, build walk paths.

Philly did it.

They built one from Philadelphia to Delaware.

And then look at downtown Philadelphia.

There's one whole block, just one block.

One's what, 15, 20 blocks?

It's historic.

Nothing else.

But it's beautiful.

But where we live, it's it's it's not safe.

And I get up every morning.

I exercise, I do a two-mile walk, and it starts on ninth.

I go all the way down to where uh uh what is that um that end road there with a car washes off of ninth.

It's uh Sumner down to Sumner.

I go up to 12th, I come all the way back down to Hamilton, Hamilton down to sixth.

When I walk by the new construction early in the morning, there's nothing out there.

But when I open my door, I gotta tell some guy to get off my porch.

You know, and I have like I said, I have five kids all ranging from two to fourteen.

You know, I have three girls, I have three boys.

So any aspect, yes.

Where this man is at?

His area is beautiful.

I'll never deny that aspect.

You know, chew to Gordon, a little farther, beautiful.

But lending to chew, shithole.

I'm sorry.

It's gotta be fixed.

As they said, old pipes, old things, you know, it's it's habitable by you guys coming in and looking at it and going, okay, this is all working, it's doing what it's doing.

You'd have I don't know, I have to fix it or replace it because it works.

But it's it's it's not in good condition, it's not the best that it could be comparatively to everybody else that's getting stuff.

As that man said, you know, they're putting up a new building back there, so why can't we put one, you know?

Maybe make it safer for my daughter to come outside.

I got a fenced in backyard, I'm afraid a crackhead's gonna hang out back there, you know.

So thank you.

Yes, sir.

Thank you so much.

Okay.

Your exhibits are admitted.

Thank you, Record.

Just uh the one one.

I thought there was one more.

Oh.

Yeah, if I might.

Anything to add to what's already been said by the various interested versions.

So my name is Philip Hart, two Ls and Philip H A R T.

I'm part of the historical architectural report.

Yes, I do.

So I represent part of HARB.

Yes, I'm part of Harb.

Um, and I'm gonna read some comments that we have.

These have been reviewed by the Harb.

Um, so it's not just me speaking, but I'm speaking on behalf of the group.

Um, so this 8th Street project, uh, unanimous support.

We do endorse this project, complements the architectural context of the city.

The property that it will replace while under HBD overlay does not represent the apex of architecture for its era.

Conversely, the new building will be quite striking, tall, narrow.

But ironically, this fits a major feature of Allentown is its varied skyline, features of various size, shape, formation, massing.

So while this changes the skyline, it does so within context and with geometric interest.

Project will dramatically increase population density for its footprint, will be almost exclusively residential.

Not featuring a host of amenities will incentivizes residents to never leave.

It will not have on straight on-site parking.

And in this case, we we think these are great features as it will result in more people walking through town, as noted.

As we know, the most interesting and cultivated places are those designed around the speed and vantage point of the pedestrian.

We shape our buildings, and our buildings shape us.

This organic growth, growth, and grassroots support is what we desperately seek for the future of Allentown.

This building encourages that.

Thumbs up.

And finally Freight Street and often overlooked, but flagship asset of Allentown is our city's network of A, B, and C streets.

We may think about these as a labyrinth of alleyways upon alleyways, but they are indeed fully flooded streets, carry addresses, and plenty of foot traffic.

In this light, we need to see character-defining massing in all minor streets connected to this project, namely Webster and Rough Wall Streets accessing the rear face of the building.

Oh, wait, one second.

I think Scott has a question.

I well, thank you.

Um, and I I agree.

I think the uh, and I still not sure we haven't decided where we're going with this yet, but I have to agree.

I think that the uh the architectural rendering is very sensitive and appropriate to the historic um context of the neighborhood.

Um, from in your opinion, was or or in Harb's opinion, was there any discussion in any validity to maybe after the third story step the facade back a small amount to try and further strengthen the tie to the existing.

I mean, because seven stories and in prior to the substantial renovation and rebuilding of downtown, even Hamilton Street, most of the buildings were five.

So, and I understand that this is a transition zone between the very appropriate historic uh renovations on the 300 block and 200 block.

So in the 100 block, I think it it does make sense to kind of transition upward a little bit.

And I guess I think seven seems a lot, but I just didn't know if the the Harb had any thoughts about the you know, well, I think the the lines of the building are very appropriate in terms of the rhythm and pattern of windows and the vertical lines and horizontal lines, just didn't know if you thought there was any credence to stepping back the front facade, some amount, maybe not a lot, um, above the third story.

Great observation.

I know we kicked a few ideas around just on the fly.

Um that certainly makes sense to me, just off the cuff.

Um, so it's not quite as imposing.

Um we're open to that.

I think these drawings show that there's a good faith effort to to make this look appropriate and to to add identity and add rather than subtract.

You know what the proposed height of the building is at seven stories, but do you know how high it's supposed to be?

I do not.

Do you know how high the the structure it used to be the Mayflower storage property, which is just a few doors north of this one?

I'm not for on the west side of north, you know, the west side of eighth street.

It's now 12.

I think it's 12 or so uh significantly uh sized uh apartments or maybe condos.

How high that one is that my question.

If you don't know, you don't know.

I'm wondering relative to that, how high this is.

I'm looking at a photo on is this exhibit one on exhibit one.

It's not there's no page numbers, the second last page.

Nope.

Sorry.

The fourth page from the back.

So right before you get into the Sanborne fire insurance maps, there is an um Google map aerial view, and I think I think that shows the building.

Yeah, yeah.

Um, two, three, four.

That that looks to be five stories.

Okay.

It goes all the way from eighth to the half street between ninth and eighth.

Right.

And it it looks like there's one, two, three, four.

Maybe it is about five.

And they are that was a commercial or industrial building at one time, and they may have high floors, high ceilings, and it might end up being about the same height, I'm wondering as what they're but we don't know at this point.

I think the uh I can't read the font is a little bit too small, but there is uh there is a there is a height there, I think.

We can ask the architect, what's the the total height of the building?

That's a little eighty.

Okay.

That says level eight.

Yeah, but that says seventy-seven feet, I think below it.

So is it seven stories or eight stories?

Yeah, eleven feet per story.

Which matches about a seven-story building with roughly just about eleven feet per story.

Okay.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

Um, go ahead.

Yeah, I don't think I can add anything better than Mr.

Hart did about this project.

Uh the heart the A one that we submitted indicates that there was a finding by staff that there was no real architectural or historical significance to these these two buildings.

Right.

Uh I think we've uh provided enough that we are working diligently to provide a community effort here or community improvement with this project, increasing the walkability and the community feel for 8th Street.

Uh and with that, I'm resting on Mr.

Hart here.

Uh I'm hoping that I can do that for both projects, but I think he most eloquently said that this is a net benefit to the community, which I think gets us past the special exception for the demolition.

Um I will say that this applicant will continue to work with Mike and the zoning office as well as with the planning commission and the planning office to make sure that this uh meets and exceeds everybody's expectations and doing better for the city.

Okay, thank you.

I guess um I think I have a follow-up question for the architect before we get into that.

All right.

Um, if I may, you can stand there.

Um you I I assume you heard my uh hopefully you heard my compliment first.

Thank you.

Yeah, really appreciate that.

Um this is just a question.

This is not I'm not specifically stating that this is my position, but you heard what um uh Mr.

Hart said about the uh my question about stepping back the facade.

And I'm gonna guess that you actually considered that um and chose not to.

So just walk me through your design thoughts about uh because I know that's done as a matter of fact, the Swans building, which is a large one that was referred to by another uh applicant.

That one does have some some stepbacks of the facade so as not to just overly kind of because I think Central Elementary is not a particularly tall school, and so in order to try and um blend it into the the heights of the rest of the neighborhood, the the the the facade was stepped back.

Um just give me some thoughts you have about whether that you think that's applicable here or you don't.

Um this is something if you go through through many of my project, this is something that I that I that I usually do.

In this case, you look at the square footage of each unit, it's just such a tight space that we just don't have any more than get the use line is the units less than 500 square feet.

So it's really tight.

This is why I I came out when this oversized corners, even the irrelated to the building next to it, but I tried to create a shadow line.

If I could, I'm I'm with you guys.

Is it's something that definitely I will I will definitely do that.

Okay, thanks.

Thank you.

I would I would note that I think that the stepback is actually a requirement in the historical district for buildings over three stories that they are the required as part of the design standards, but we're not in the historical district, we're just outside of it.

So there is some attention to detail, but not as much as as that.

So I I just wanted to add that one comment.

I appreciate the question.

And he gave me a he gave me a good response to the uh the question.

I guess then for for Mr.

Wright, um again, relative to, and obviously, and Mr.

Versace very wisely uh understands that the scale of the project is connected to uh a certain unit count to make the pro forma work.

Um did you do uh a pro forma and is seven stories necessary?

Could it work with five or six or I believe we need seven to make it work?

And that's based upon you know hard hard math and construction costs and yes, correct.

All right, thank you.

And it's in the this is in the old B2, uh, which doesn't have a height restriction.

I again I'm not focused on height restrictions.

I'm focused on the special exception standards that are in front of me, and they they do ask us to look at the the whole impact on on the neighborhood and the block.

I understand.

And I think I it it's relevant as I'll mention it that the this property as well as the neighboring properties, I think are now zone GXC, which does allow four and a half stories by right, but if you put low affordable housing, it gives you another two.

So it is possible that when we talk about creating a uh a continuous community and and encouraging others to do this, that there is a possibility to build to this height, even though it's not B2 anymore.

There's it's close six and a half stories compared to seven.

So we're we're creating something that's continuous that that's that's that's has continuity to the old zoning ordinance as well as the new zoning orders for processes that followed that weren't able to benefit from the old.

Okay, thank you.

No.

Yeah, no more.

Okay.

All right.

All right, and the exhibits have been admitted.

Are we ready for discussion?

Yes.

Who'd like to start?

Scott.

Let me let me before you do it.

I always appreciate your analysis and comments, Scott.

But one of the things I'm wondering about is I'm looking at the black and white here of what is required.

And I haven't received I've received information, but in my opinion, it doesn't reach the point of sufficient credible evidence to show that it's not feasible.

I'm looking at item four here under what the obligations of the applicant are.

This is under item D4.

D four.

Yeah.

And and that relates also to one of the uh other items.

This would be C D135.

Uh uh B under I forget what it is.

B I don't see A.

Oh, there A, okay.

So it'd be D 2B, which is uh again um two items there.

That the denial of demolition would result in an unreasonable economic hardship, and the the existing building cannot feasibly be or reasonably be reused.

So those two three that I'm pointing out relate to evidence that may be out there, but but I haven't seen it.

So I that's one of my concerns.

I thought you said 2B, which is a site plan.

D four.

D four.

I got that.

And then I thought you said D2B.

D2B on the next page.

No, on the same page.

Oh, I see.

There you go.

Yeah, that's that.

So okay.

Um relative to the item four, it does specifically say that such as a property appraiser, a written estimate of costs of rehabilitation, which we did not get from a qualified contract contractor or report from an engineer.

So I do have a question, and I'm sorry, I don't have my an old ordinance because I use the digital version.

But I I know does it say that it has to meet all the requirements?

Oh wait, this is for demolition.

Okay.

Yeah.

I was I was referring to like the other criteria where they only need to meet one, right?

Okay, sorry.

Thank you for the same.

That's when you get into section um D5B.

But if you look at just section D4, it does I agree with you that we I mean I think the site plan, we don't have a necessary site plan, but I think the first floor plan of the architects rendering we just that's a certainly detailed, you can get the dimensions of a lot.

Um there's really not much of a site plan to a lot that the building is consuming all of, but yeah, I don't I don't know that we got a written estimate of we had a verbal opinion about that.

But it's also from the owner.

Correct.

So go ahead.

Go ahead.

Um I I certainly concur while there's some level of you know, there's some parts of the the building to the right that you know maintain some historical character, but there's not a whole lot, and the one at the left, you know, maybe is historic, but it's certainly um I walked past that that building for almost 25 years, and yeah, that's not a substantial contributor.

Um so I I have really have no objection to the demolition of these two buildings.

My only hesitation um is uh is just the size and scale of the what's proposed.

And again, I I absolutely think that the architectural renderings um really are very well done in terms of trying to capture the the rhythm and and scale of of the facade treatments.

Um yeah, I just I just have some level of discomfort with seven stories, you know, particularly your your question about the former Mayflower building.

Um not that we have to match everything, but you know, that's five stories.

I think you get to the unit block of 800.

Um, you know, even some of the the parts of the arena complex are only seven or nine stories.

Um so I I this is like a transition block, and I feel like it might just be a little too little bit too intense in terms of scale.

And again, that's we're splitting hairs with uh um this section.

I mean, it does as I indicated to attorney Fly Shaker, and it asks us to look a little bit holistically as to you know what what's the benefit.

Um I think the easy answer is I'm fine with demolishing these buildings, it's just what do we put there?

Um and I think something very similar to this is probably good.

And again, I don't know that that's even it's even up to us to make that level of refinement.

It's kind of a yes no.

Um, but uh I think uh attorney flycation uh flight cation is easy for me to say um flight case here is uh easy or is very thoughtful about um providing some proposed what's going there because just saying, hey, we want to knock these buildings down, and I think that would be a flat denial because you've not met any of the other like how do we know if the knocking the build unless they are a threat to society, knocking them down is not gonna be a net positive to the to the arena or to the arena to the uh area.

Um that's my I'm probably have some more thoughts later, but that's my yeah for stab at so you ask me to go first.

Yeah, well, I asked you to go first because this is the first um item like this that come across our desk since I've been on the board.

So um you have something I've been considering is just like really what is before us today, um, and you know, what do we have purview over, what's going to be handled in terms of like impact and um you know some of the concerns that we heard about parking and um you know uh trash disposal and things like that, like that will be handled later on in the land development um process.

So you know, my understanding is like we're evaluating the demolition of these buildings and whether you know um what is proposed right now in in a variation of form um would be a public benefit um compared to what's there now and just looking you know, I I do I agree with um what the representative from the HARB said in terms of um their assessment of kind of the architectural and historic significance, I believe staff also found that to be true.

It is in line with the comprehensive plan.

Um I do think in terms of um the addition of housing, um, just in terms of the number of units, the the type of unit um is needed.

Uh so I yeah, I don't and because I'm looking at the old code, I do I will defer to you all in terms of if it's meeting all the requirements.

Um, but I I am generally supportive of this if we can demonstrate that they're meeting the the requirements of the old code.

But according to what I'm seeing on my screen and the new code, they are I note it is interesting um that it's there's two stages.

So the first one states this is section D on page 660 69 that um building regulated by this section shall not be demolished uh or partially demolished unless such action has been given special exception approval by the zoning hearing board.

An application for partial or complete demolition of a building regulated by this section shall not be approved unless all of the regulations of this section have been met.

And so then you go through sections two and three and four, and so in four, it it provides or requires the evidence that the building cannot feasibly be repaired or reused.

Um written estimate, cost of rehabilitation, that's a requirement, and then it goes into special exception standards that also need to be met.

Um and then I note under B of that, which is section D5B, in order to obtain approval from the proposed demolition, the applicant is required to provide credible evidence that proves to the satisfaction of the zoning hearing board that one or more of the following conditions exist.

And condition four is that the building is not historically or architecturally significant.

So I think I think that box is checked as far as I'm concerned, because um especially 112 is probably the least uh significant building on that probably several blocks of eighth street.

Um so I think that box is checks.

I guess the question is, you know, is it necessary to provide the written evidence of the infeasibility um to reuse that structure?

Because I think they're kind of I feel like they're tiered.

Um and then I think you know, the more we talk about the more we talk about height, um, you know, if the if the new ordinance allows six, six and a half stories only if there's affordable housing involved.

Um again, this block is is I think transitional between you know the historic residential district in which a seven-story building would be wildly out of character.

You know, here going taller than three stories, I think makes sense and um you know, understanding that the new ordinance permits up to six, six and a half, the Mayflower building behind by my count, although it's a small picture, looks like it might be six stories or five stories.

Um I think I'm a little bit less you know concerned about the the magnitude, particularly if there are other parts of this block that that have similar, and I can't picture all of them.

I think I said I feel like 112 is one of the worst looking buildings.

Um if there are other spots, I'm they there might be future buildings that are built to a higher scale that kind of accentuate that transition moving towards center city.

So I think you know, really, Bob, it's I don't know what your thoughts are about, you know, is it necessary to get that?

And we've heard verbally and certainly I understand the the scale of the project, you know, if you're gonna demolish them going three stories alone, probably doesn't pencil out at all.

So well, I I agree that the net benefit of what's being proposed is uh positive.

Um I think the uh the attempt by the architect to give a nod to the other structures uh that are historical.

I think it was it's it's a pretty nice looking uh proposal.

So I don't know if under the circumstances maybe it it may be clear enough, maybe that you can't just keep going with what is there that something better is needed.

Um but I don't uh whatever you guys think.

If if we I mean it's clearly stated applicant shall provide and it's written, and it's either cost of rehabilitation from a qualified contract or a written report from a professional engineer saying that the structural soundness of the building is such that it has to be you know demolished.

So I that's my only hang up.

Yeah, or two of you.

Not necessarily it has to be demolished because of safety, but simply that the cost of renovation, which is what was testified to, just we don't have a written contractor's estimate to validity or to validity to that, um, indicating that the you know the cost of renovation, you know, could not be financially supported by the the metrics of the building as it stands in in the the uh the floor plane.

I think uh um uh Miss Green indicated that it's you know, in some case, like just an awkward now, you know.

I think that 412 is kind of narrow, so it's just creates an awkward floor plate.

Um so I suspect that there might be evidence that could be provided that would support that.

It's just black and white letter of the ordinance suggests it needs to be provided.

So you want to add something to me?

Yeah, I I guess I'm I'm kind of leaning towards um the testimony that we heard today regarding kind of the unique characteristics of the site, like not really being um leaning itself towards being a profitable you know, tenant space, um, the um issues that they've had finding tenants, um the uh ongoing maintenance that they've contributed to the building since they've built it.

I'm I'm willing to um kind of accept that testimony as evidence that that would meet that criteria.

That's where I'm leaning right now.

Okay, all right.

Well, are we at the point where someone's willing to make a motion?

Sure.

I would I'll um move um to approve the special use application at um 112, 114 neck north and eighth street to demolish the existing buildings.

And I think correct me if I'm wrong, I'm blanking.

I know it's possible for variances, but we're allowed to add conditions to special exceptions too, correct?

Well, under the general special exception, yes, but those have been supplanted by this, right?

This is a special one, so supplanted by this, which doesn't mention that.

Right.

Although I mean it does say that you know the the uh on section D6 that HARB comments the city Harb Um shall be provided with the opportunity to provide comments with the zone to the zoning hearing board.

Um we've done that.

Yeah, but I understand, but I feel like the uh you know the only condition I was gonna offer, and and maybe we can just ask the applicant if they would accept that.

Um because I feel that the architectural drawings that were provided are so appropriate.

Um I often we say we'll we'll grant the approval subject to the application and the and the building being constructed as testified to.

Um I think that's a reasonable condition.

Um it's reasonable.

The only thing that worries me about that here is that we're in the middle of land plan the land use planning that I'm not sure that planning is gonna be bound by that condition necessarily, because there's we're sort of dealing with design standards that there.

I I think that we can testify.

I mean, what design standards sorry to cut you off, what design standards could the planning commission have if it's under the new the old ordinance?

With respect to attorney Fleischaker's comments, I do I do acknowledge his point that while there might not necessarily be prescriptive standards in the ways if this were under the under the new code and overly prescriptive condition by this body could could risk winding the applicant up in a feedback loop where attempts to satisfy comments by the planning commission, which has uh a little bit more legal attitude and authority to consider context or to be able to put together sort of a boutique set of recommendations for a particular project could then lead to a need to return to this board as a question comes up as you understand my concern is I do.

I think on this project, Scott, they'd be willing, and I'll ask them specifically that they'd be willing to commit to a condition that to the best of their abilities, they will commit to keeping the design with the if we even if you want to name a specific feature that they we can stick to.

I'm just worried that that we're gonna get in that spot where someone says now you need to change it, and then if we change it, then we're back here.

Well, I guess I mean maybe you just answer the question is that you know maybe our condition is you know, we we grant approval for this project as it's presented, as may be modified by by other city departments having jurisdiction of the design element.

Right, so that's not the you know, the the uh owner doesn't decide when they get the final cost opinion that like oh that's way too expensive, we're gonna cut back and do something that that I don't want to see because I think part of the reason I'm supportive of this is because the architecture is so appropriately done.

And I think that as you phrased it, they're fine with a condition that uh subject to third-party review and a third party demand, they're not gonna make any change to the current echo the the current architectural structure of this proposal.

So we can a condition that is built as designed or as presented, unless required to be changed by a third party, not the zoning hearing board, I think we'll be fine.

Yeah, a third party having jurisdiction.

However, you want to phrase it, I'll I'm thrilled.

I'll let our uh attorney write that, but does that make sense to you?

Yeah, absolutely.

Okay.

So subject to that modification and uh and the approval of the applicant, which appears we have, I get no, I'm getting nods.

Uh I'll make that modification.

Subject to that, I'll second the green.

The proposal.

I thank you.

All right.

You're up next.

Uh we've been at it for an hour and a half.

I don't know if you want to break, or we can just slide right in.

It's up to you.

It's a lot of wholly different people coming at you.

Uh so for the record, my name is Jeff Fleischaker from Gross McGinley.

I represent the applicant in docket number two, which is 138 to 142 uh North Ninth Street.

Uh we're gonna reverse the order a little bit on this presentation.

Uh and I'd first call Ruth Rachel Green as a witness, please.

Oh, did I have I'm still on the room?

Okay, there we go.

Okay.

Ms.

Green, how are you?

Can you introduce yourself to the board and tell them your relationship to 138 to 142 North Ninth Street?

Sure.

So I'm one of the members of the LLC, uh along with Alex.

And we've been in Allentown since 2011.

It's about 15 years.

Okay.

Uh and 138 North 9th Street owns 138 North.

The LLC owns the property that it's neighboring.

We've had 138 North Ninth for quite a few years.

I'm not sure exactly how many years.

And we recently acquired 142 North Ninth.

And when you say recently, you mean in the last few months?

I mean in the last two weeks.

Okay.

Uh and 140 North Ninth Street, the third property is under agreement.

That's correct.

Um and it will be eventually novated to either 142 North Ninth Street LLC or 138 North Ninth Street L.

One of the it's gonna be under common ownership.

Uh I'm not sure how we're gonna work it.

It might be its own, or we might combine them.

I'm not really certain.

What's that?

Combined.

Combine them.

Okay.

So all three properties are gonna be under the uh the same ownership at some point.

That's correct.

And that'll be an LLC or a corporation that you and Alex own together.

Okay.

So let's talk about 138 North Ninth Street, which is up on the screen.

This is of the three properties, this is the more distinctive property uh architecturally, is that right?

Right.

And this is the property that you've owned the longest.

Um not sure how long we've owned it.

I forgot.

Well, of these three properties, it's the one that you've owned the longest.

Oh, yes, 138.

We've had I don't know exactly how many years, but all right.

So let's make sure to Mr.

Hanzo's point, making sure that we're speaking into the microphone as best as possible tonight.

Um about what's what's currently in 138 North Ninth Street.

So 138 North Ninth Street is zoned as a two-family, and it has a commercial slot on the bottom floor.

Is it fully occupied?

Uh no.

Uh the the commercial space is currently unoccupied.

We were fixed the when the long-term tenant moved out.

We were kind of working on fixing it up.

And then I have two tenants upstairs.

Okay.

So for the let's let's start at the first floor, which is the commercial space.

When you say that you were you the long-term tenant recently left, how long ago is it?

Free as taxes was there over 20 years.

Okay.

Um when you say that you were going to fix it up, what sort of work needs to be done to the first floor commercial space?

Uh the first floor needs the needs, you know, new drywall.

Uh it needs new drywall, new framing, new everything.

Okay.

Uh, what about the internal systems of the first floor?

Plumbing and electrical.

Well, that's another issue.

So the plumbing is is okay.

Um the systems in the building are gone.

So the gas boiler is uh was quite old, and that bit the dust over the winter.

Okay.

So the gas boiler that served all three floors uh over the winter time bit the dust.

Right.

Now, again, that that didn't really it made the building difficult uh to to maintain you know financial stability because uh gas was so expensive for the six-month period for heating the whole building that uh in the winter time we didn't make a profit.

But whatever.

So what did you you did replace the gas boiler system with some heat for the property, yes?

Uh I didn't replace the gas boiler, but I put uh baseboard heating uh entirely in the apartment uh that was occupied at the time, and that ran about four thousand dollars.

And I do have the bills for that.

And is that four thousand dollars that you spent for the electrical heating?

Is that a long-term fix or a short-term fix?

Uh it could be long-term.

The apartment itself is not that great, but the tenant had to have heat.

So I put in baseboard heating.

All right, is that the second floor or the third third floor tenant?

Uh well, th I guess you'd call it the third floor, uh, has partial baseboard heating.

Um, and it's it's also a one bedroom.

They're two one bedroom apartments.

Okay.

So the second floor that has a tenant in it that was a tenant over the winter time.

You said it's not so great.

Talk to me about it.

That was the one he just moved in.

So talk to me about the condition of that apartment.

Both apartments are, you know, they're good.

They're habitable.

The the gentleman upstairs on the third floor just moved in.

So he moved in at the end of the winter.

And there's some baseboard heating in there.

I would include more if it was necessary.

Okay, you know, for the next winter.

So for the first floor space, are you gonna have to provide a new heating source for the first floor space?

Uh I'm not sure what's gonna happen.

The the gas boiler had radiators, so the radiators uh are not in the greatest condition.

And that presents a problem for fixing the heating system.

Every radiator has to be in conjunction, they all have to work together, and everything's got to be bled together.

And by the way, it's very similar to what's going on in 142.

Yeah, we're gonna get to 142 in a second.

So I mean, we will deal with it if we have to deal with it.

You've got to do what you gotta do.

Okay.

Have in the ownership uh span that you've had for 138 North Ninth Street.

Have you reached a point where you're considering that you've put too much money in for the value of the property?

We've redone the roof uh a couple of years ago.

Uh large portions of the roof, because you can see the very you know, the building was built in 1880.

So I guess that was considered a cool roof in 1880.

Um, and we also had a redo the stucco on the side.

That was an enormous job.

And that was mandated by the city of Allentown, so we did it what we had to do.

However, it only houses two one bedroom apartments, and the first floor is not zoned for really living, it's it's a commercial little commercial spot.

How much rent are you getting for the the current two apartments?

Um I get 900 and 950.

All right.

And to increase the value of those apartments from 900 and 950 to something in the range of 1250 a month, what sort of work would you have to do uh to those apartments to get them to that space?

It's hard to explain.

I mean that the the building, like I said, was built in 1880, and essentially it was a one-family home.

That's what it was.

So let me let me ask it a slightly different way.

Uh do you think that there is a certain level of work that can be done to increase the value of those two apartments, or do you think you've maxed out the value?

I think it's maxed out the value because you just can't transform the whole building.

It's still a building from 1880.

And you can fix the roof as we've done.

You could put in baseboard heating, as I do, uh, so the tenants have heat, you can make sure the plumbing works, but you can't you just can't modernize it to the point that people are gonna pay you know any sort of of rate where you could make a profit and where they could have the services that they really want.

For example, uh washer dryers, if not in the units on the floor.

You know, if it was a building, there would be washer dryers on the floor.

Would it be your testimony that there's not a there's there's no amount of money that you could put into this project to make it a more profitable or more feasible apartment unit?

I would say no.

Okay, and with the first floor commercial space, is there a level of money that you could put in that would increase the value of the first floor commercial space that makes fiscal or financial sense?

We could you know we could fix it up.

You could put in probably $25,000 to $50,000, and and make the first floor uh, you know, business spot again.

Thank you.

So uh what I've handed out will have marked as A1, which is the harbor view.

Uh and I'm with this witness who was not at the HARP meeting.

I wanted to hand this out for photograph purposes as we start talking about this unit itself.

Um so Ruth, what is next door to 138 North North Ninth Street?

If as we look at the front of the building, what's to the what's immediately to the left?

Well are you talking about 140 North Ninth Street or to the topic?

As we look at this picture now, yeah, what is immediately to the left?

A parking lot.

All right, so it's a vacant space.

Uh it's a parking lot.

I think it's owned by the church.

I'm not certain.

Okay.

It's not a historical building there.

No, it's it's a parking lot.

Okay.

And uh on the other side of 142, what's next to the building?

Church.

All right.

Um and in the 10 plus years that you've owned 138 North Ninth Street.

Has the church been an active congregation?

Uh actually, no.

So it's uh uh it's an empty church?

At the moment, I believe so, yes.

Okay.

Do you know how tall it is?

What's that?

You know how tall it is.

Not, I'm sorry.

Okay.

Is it taller than the three-story buildings that are 138 to 142?

Uh actually it looks slightly taller in the picture.

Okay.

So next to 138, again switching sides again as a parking lot.

What's on the other side of that parking lot?

A smoke shop.

Okay.

Is it a old building?

Is it a brownstone?

What's the it's an older building?

I think it has white code on it.

Okay.

Uh not a brownstone, doesn't look like these.

No, I don't think so, no.

Okay.

Um as uh we look at this picture now uh that's on the screen from the aspect of who's taking this picture, what's directly across the street from 138 to 142 North Ninth Street?

Family dollar.

Family dollar.

Not a historic building?

Anything uh aesthetically pleasing at all to the family dollar there?

No.

Okay.

So in your in your ownership history of this of 138 North Ninth Street, has there been any uh similarly other than these three units here?

Are there anything in the immediate vicinity that's also historical in nature?

No, I'm not sure.

I I'm not really certain.

I I I don't know.

Okay.

So let's talk about you.

You wanted to talk about 142 that you just purchased.

So you know, it was interesting because I walked through 142 sometime after we closed on it.

So these three buildings comprise a fairly large area.

And 142 North Ninth Street is also a two-family zone for a two-family with office space downstairs.

Is one third is one forty similarly zoned for an office space?

140 is is uh three family.

I have not been inside 140.

Okay, but 142 is owned as a two-family with office space downstairs.

Um it struck me when I was in there that uh these two buildings, 138 and 142, only have a total of four families in them.

Two families in 138 and two families in 142.

Is the first floor for 142 designed and maintained as a commercial space?

It is not.

What's in the first floor?

It looks to me like she had a tenants there.

Okay.

I don't know.

There's no one there now.

Um second and third floor of 142 that you recently purchased.

Can you describe the condition there?

What about it?

Is it good?

It's okay.

All right.

Is it habitable?

Is it rentable?

Yeah.

For at what value?

Uh about 1,300 a month, I'd say.

Okay.

One bedroom, two bedroom.

Um two bedrooms.

For both the second and third floor?

Yes.

So there's four bedrooms of the two units there?

Yes.

Okay.

Um you testified previously about 138 that there were some structural issues, some some gas boiler and some uh some some internal system issues.

Uh do you know of any other internal system issues at one for at 142?

Yes, the systems don't work.

Expound on that a little bit.

Uh the gas boiler doesn't work properly, and it's probably done, it it's also a radiator system, very similar to what 138 North Ninth has.

And it's never been properly maintained.

Could be brought up to speed.

That takes a lot of time, and it's uh about $5,000, between three and five thousand dollars, and I have the paperwork to document that.

Between three and five thousand dollars.

Just to bring the the the uh system up to speed.

Now, as to a new boiler, I don't know.

If it does need a new boiler, that's a whole other matter.

If it needs a new boiler, is that estimated cost above 25,000 dollars?

I'm not even sure how that will work because again, the 142 is built in 1890, so it has a system of radiators, so it's not even I'm not you know, I'd have to consult uh on that with the I don't know if we'd want to put radiators back or if there's another way that they handle gas heating, maybe forced air is one water is one forty-two's electrical system designed to be a th uh a three-unit, a two residential and a commercial?

And how so?

It's designed to be a two-unit.

So there's a meter for the commercial space and a meter for the residential space.

There's a meter for there's a meter for the house, the house, and then there's two other meters.

Serving what?

Um I think one is for the first floor, uh, that would be the commercial unit, and one is for the second floor.

All right.

Is there uh are there significant repair issues that would be required to make this uh electrical system up to code or up to up to value for you?

Yes.

I I only came to fully understand what what was happening there today when I talked to PP and L.

But if we need any new lines in there to bring it up to what it may need electrically, then I need to vacate the building.

I don't know if that's going to be necessary, but in such an instance where you have to bring in another line for PP and L, then you vacate the building.

When you bought the property and you discussed the current living situation with the tenants there, did the landlord tell you how they charge for electrical?

Um, she didn't actually mention it.

It's not it is there a situation in 142 where the landlord pays the entire electrical for the building because of the way it's set up?

Just kind of an odd way that she had it set up.

I mean, it could be I don't want to make a big deal out of it.

It it's just kind of odd the way it's set up, in that it's the first floor and only second floor.

That's all.

But it you know, I would do whatever I needed to do.

Okay.

So for 142 in the shape that it's in, do you think there's an amount of money that would be required to spend to make it uh to increase the rents past the level that they're currently at?

You know, to be in the to bring the building properly up to code and to have it pass inspection.

Um we need to spend some money.

Is it when you say some money?

Are we talking more than uh I'm assuming we're talking more than a nickel?

We're talking somewhere in the $15,000 range, or are we talking somewhere in the hundred thousand dollar range?

You know, I'm not certain because the issue mainly for me is the gas boiler.

So I need to have someone in there to look at the gas boiler and tell me what we can do besides radiators, because if I'm gonna bring in a new heating system, then it has to be all the way through the building.

And you learn from 138 that at least for one floor is roughly three to five thousand dollars?

Uh that's correct.

Well, we did uh I did the the first floor, whatever you call it, second floor, the first apartment uh that I had to put in, it ran about $3,900.

Okay.

So put in the extra baseboard heat.

So to put the extra baseboard heat in 142 if the gas boiler truly is done, we're talking maybe another 12 to 15,000 dollars.

It very much depends on can the electrical system handle it.

In 138, the electrical system was able to handle it.

I don't know about 142 to what extent uh it could be could be just done, like I had the electrician come in and install the baseboard heaters, there was no problems.

I don't know if that's would be the case in 142.

I have to have it looked at.

Let's suppose for the moment that the electrical system in 142 would handle the extra load.

Right.

Um would you be able based on improving the electrical system and improving the the heating system, would you be able to recoup that cost by increasing the rents that are currently out for the that space?

Probably not immediately.

It would take a little bit of time to do that.

So is it your opinion, and granted you've only owned the building for a couple of weeks, that the the rents are maxed out from the current condition of the building?

I would say so.

And that's based not only on the condition but also your experience in the area, especially as owning two floor, two two two houses down.

That's correct.

Okay.

Do you know a lot about the condition of 140 North Ninth Street?

Uh I have not been inside 140, but it does not look good to me.

What I see going in and out.

I also get reports from my other tenants.

It's not that great.

All right.

So when you say it doesn't look good or not that great, I need a little bit more detail from you.

Some landlords are not careful who they put in the buildings.

Many landlords in Allentown, particularly people that go elsewhere to home at night, don't care.

I live in Allentown and I care.

So I care who I put in the buildings.

People who put anyone in the buildings, and then you end up in landlord tenant court, there's also a lot of confusion and problems until you reach that point.

So based on uh what you've seen and based on uh what you know about 138 and 142, are you anticipating 140 to be in a similar condition as to those two buildings?

I'm guessing, but you never know until you go inside and really take a look.

And are you anticipating that there would be a fairly significant financial investment to make 140 into a uh what we'll call a feasible landlord tenant situation for you?

Probably true.

Okay.

So let's take a step back then and talk about what we're trying to do here instead.

Uh you're proposing to this board tonight that you're gonna demolish all three of these buildings.

Right.

Uh, and what are you putting in its place?

Uh I believe we're putting in its place.

Well if that family apartment.

Well, we'll have to multifamily.

We'll have Mr.

Tover and Mr.

Wright.

So just what you understand it to be.

I guess 40 units is what you were telling me.

So a large-scale apartment building.

Exactly.

And there's a lot of space there.

There's also some parking.

Uh, there's space in the back of the building.

It's pretty good size.

Okay.

And the the intent here for this project would be to improve the community a little?

Yes.

Talk to me about how you envision this project improving the community on uh in that block of North Ninth Street.

Well, first, I think that it'll improve the block in general because what goes on at night there is not necessarily the greatest.

It's not the best part of 9th Street, but it is very close to center city.

Um I think the area would benefit from having in that space, in other words, right now, with 138 and 142, you're housing only four families.

And it's just not an economical use of the space.

How many families do you think are in 140?

Oh, I think 140 is a three-family.

So total between the three buildings, you think there's seven families living there?

Yes, I'd say that.

With one commercial space, that being the bottom space at 138.

Right.

And I I don't think 140 has a commercial space.

Excuse me.

Okay.

So you have the possibility to have something there where you can house, you know, very nicely in in newer building that would be virtually maintenance free with you know minor maintenance issues, uh, in a in a and completely improve the area.

Whereas now you would only have seven families living in, I wouldn't say squalor, but you know, not the best.

And again, just to be clear, to raise it from a condition of not the best to a condition that uh you expect for the properties that you own and maintain.

There's a significant financial cost to you for that.

Oh, you mean to maintain them to yes, it it takes money to to fix it.

And I spend the money.

When I need electricians, I call electricians.

I don't call a guy down the block to jerry-rig the wiring.

And when you're considering this project, you're considering, although they are three separate buildings, you're considering all three buildings as sort of one idea.

Right.

Uh, because they are three connected uh units.

Uh and again, there are no uh across the street, there are no similarly situated uh three connected units or any connected units across the street.

Family dollar.

Not a historical area.

There's nothing next door to 138 on the other side that the parking lot, there's nothing there that indicates that there's additional capacity for residential.

No.

Uh what about with the church?

What about the church?

Uh is there residential there?

Is it what?

Is it a residence?

No.

Is it the church is the same?

Does anybody occupy that space?

To my knowledge, it's vacant.

Okay.

So you think that uh adding density and adding new to this at this section of North Ninth Street would be a community uh a benefit to the community?

I think it would be great.

Okay.

And I think it I think they've planned for a variety of apartments.

Uh studio one and two bedrooms.

And so that would be really beneficial to people.

And the design and the idea of the apartments, that's something that you hand over to Alex?

I do hand it over to Alex.

And I'd like to see it well, not affordable housing.

I'd like to see it affordable, you know, to people in the community.

That doesn't mean affordable housing.

It means just market rate, but you know, easy on the market rate.

So you heard in the last hearing that we had that Mr.

Unger and I used the word accessible, but only to a financial point.

You want this to be accessible housing.

I'd like it to be accessible.

Of course, we have to answer to the bank, you know, and the mortgage and so forth.

I know Alex is always tuned to that.

And I'm also looking toward the tenants.

I like to make sure that they would be comfortable in decent, nice surroundings, and that you know, we have a nice in between.

Okay.

I don't think I have any other questions for Ms.

Green.

Ms.

Green, did I hear you say that you now are the fee title owner of all three properties?

No, just two of them.

138 and 142.

All right.

We haven't closed on 140 yet.

Okay.

I don't have any other questions.

Okay.

You can step down, thank you.

So next one would be Alex Wright, please.

Okay.

House, can you introduce yourself to the board and talk to about your relationship to 138 to 142 North Ninth Street, but yes, uh Alex Wright.

Uh 138 North Ninth Street.

We've uh owned and maintained for over the past 10 years.

And 142, we just recently acquired in the past few weeks.

And you're under agreement for the purchase of 140?

That's correct.

We're under agreement for purchase.

And when that occurs, all three properties will be under a unity of ownership.

This is correct.

Okay.

Um so you heard your mother.

Let me interrupt on that point.

I saw agreements.

And now the testimony indicates that the title has uh been transferred to the LLC for 142, but one of those two agreements, I think it was for 140 had expired.

No, that uh agreement of sale is to close on or by June 31st of this year.

June 30th.

There's no 30th.

No, nothing.

No.

That was that was the uh one we purchased 142, Mr.

Kenauer.

Okay.

Yes.

So the other one is June.

Is June.

Yes.

Okay, very good.

And those agreements, just to be clear, while they indicate the agreement to sale, have separate LLCs, the intention is once all owned, you're going to unify the ownership under a single entity.

Yes, correct.

Okay.

So with these units, you've you've been involved in the ownership group of 138 North Ninth Street for some time.

Uh you heard your mother talk about the condition of the property.

Uh I I want to talk to you a little bit about the stucco work that was done and what sort of expense had to go into that work.

Yeah.

So the problem with that is one of the previous owners, I guess they had a problem with the brick underneath, and instead of really repairing the heart of the problem and the brick, they decided to put a big plaster coat of it over it.

And the problem with that is now we get more leaks.

So every time the plaster cracks somewhere, the brick cracks inside, the way it was done, we fix one leak, but you know, six months later it's another leak.

So it's kind of like chasing your own tail, you fix one thing, but it never ends.

And that's the stucco on the side, the outside of 138 had to be completely repaired recently?

Yes, that's the stucco on the side of the parking lot.

Correct.

And and how much of an expense was that?

So I believe that was approximately five to eight thousand dollars to fix it that one time, but every time that happens, it's a reoccurring expense.

And with the five to eight thousand dollars that you spent recently to fix it, are you able to recoup that amount with increased rents due to the repair that was made?

No.

Why is that?

Because the rents that we're able to get are just enough to you know barely stay afloat, meaning to take care of the mortgage, the taxes, you know, trash.

There's really no profit, and it's just enough to keep the building.

And what sort of work would need to be done to the units at 138, for example, to be able to increase the rents from their current value?

Yes, very similar to H you need to incorporate a new HVAC system, because right now in the summertime tenants are only able to, you know, put the ACs in the window.

So you'd have to, you know, put in a brand new HVAC system, upgrade all the units.

You know, there's there's a lot of things that would need to be done.

And with the HVAC system, have you gotten a cost estimate to to increase the H to redo the HVAC system just in 138?

Well I'm a contractor, you know, I deal with these sort of things all the time.

So I know just from general knowledge, the HVAC system alone, you're looking at probably between $25,000 and $50,000.

And that's just for $138?

That's just for the one building.

Uh and for $140 and $142, would you similarly need to increase or uh uh reinstall or uh renovate the HVAC system in those buildings as well to be looking at the same cost for the central system.

All right.

So the for all three for a central system for all three units separated as they are, we're looking at a cost, in your professional opinion, of somewhere between 75 and 150,000.

Yes, sir, that's correct.

Uh other than the HVAC systems that need to be renovated, in order to increase the rent for any of these three properties, is there other work that would need to be done?

Uh yes, there's other work.

Um the flooring would need to uh be we've repaired it over the years, but I would almost you know say uh changed uh the walls, the appliances, um, sprinkler systems.

I mean there's a lot of work that would have to go into these things.

With the current condition of any of these properties from 138 to 142 North Ninth Street, is it is it the sort of thing, Alex, that as a contractor, if you fixed one thing, you're gonna need to fix all of them to make sure it all matches together?

Yeah, you would need to make all the fixes.

Uh particularly electric too is a big concern with these buildings because what I've seen in 138, you have the old KT, meaning knob and tube wiring, and that stuff's a fire hazard, right?

So, you know, to update that alone, you're looking at, you know, 25 to $50,000, getting the correct panels in there, the correct wiring.

There's a lot of work.

So that electrical cost that you and your uh as a as a contractor estimate between 25 and $50,000 is just for one of the three buildings.

Just for one of the buildings to, you know, bring it up to snub from K and T to uh regular roll mix that's required now.

And so we're talking about additionally trying to bring these to a condition where they are uh they're an improvement from the current condition.

You think that to improve all three units together from their current condition to a level that you could increase the rents and make them more valuable would be somewhere between 150 and 300,000 dollars?

This is correct.

Not only habitable, but more safe from to get rid of that old KT.

And if you spent as the owner of the three properties somewhere between 150 and 300,000 on these three units, would you be able to increase the rents in a manner that would be financially viable for the expense?

I don't think so, no.

I don't even know where we get the money to make some of those fixes.

Okay.

Um 138.

Have you had difficulty maintaining long-term tenants in that property?

Yeah, uh, especially the commercial space, just the way it's configured, you know, and a lot of the work that needs to be done.

It's it's it's been hard to you know get somebody in the case.

Well, your mom talked about there was a long-term tenant there for a long time.

They they were paying like $500 a month.

Okay.

So to to to get a greater value than five hundred dollars a month is a difficult task there.

Yeah, we weren't able to cover the cover the bills, but that's all.

All right.

So let's talk about what you're intending for these three properties.

What's the goal here?

The goal here is to uh you know create some new housing that's accessible, you know, uh safe, uh activate the community, the streetscape, you know, and uh you know bring some life to this area.

Okay.

And what what kind of what's the the level of housing you're proposing?

How how tall, how many units, what kind of units uh forty units, seven stories.

It'll have some amenities in this building, uh, it'll have some retail, which would hopefully bring some life to the street, some streetscape, uh, you know, maybe a nice cafe, bagel shop, you know, bring some life to an area that's pretty much there's not much right there going on now.

Okay, you heard your mom testify about the church in your experience, is that church also vacant?

Yeah, it's it's vacant.

Okay.

Have they approached you about a any any part of this project?

They have.

They'd like to uh demolish the church as well and make it part of this development.

I mean talks with the pastor and the church board now.

Okay.

And you understand that if that were to occur, we're definitely having to come back and talk to this board about demolishing another structure, yeah.

Of course.

Okay.

Um but your intention is to create something that is uh an uh uh uh an ad to this community uh on on North Ninth Street.

Yes, we'd like to bring this, you know, back to life, uh similar to 8th Street.

It's still pretty dicey.

Dangerous around here.

You have the family dollar across the street.

Um you have a smoke shop next door with empty parking lot.

There's a lot of nefarious activities that go on there at night, and people just don't really feel safe there right now.

So our hope is to, you know, connect this to downtown and make the streets walkable again and you know bring some life to this area.

So with the proposed seven-story structure and and piggybacking on conversation we've had earlier tonight, is there uh is there concern or would there be some issue with the height of the building relative to the surrounding area?

I don't think so.

I mean you have the church, which is might be higher than 80 feet right next door.

You have a building which is very high next door where the smoke shop is, and you have the PPL building, which is I think 19 or 20 stores stories, you know, not far away at all, within a you know, a few thousand feet, maybe.

And you think that a seven-story building in this area would be consistent with generally consistent with what the area could be.

I do.

Okay.

Because at this point there's not a lot around this building to compare it to, right?

No.

Okay.

And across the street with the family dollar, you're looking to improve the nature of the neighborhood such that it's not just a dollar store, but it's now a walkable, breathable community.

Correct.

Maybe a cafe, bagel shop, you know, bring some some life and people come in there, you know, and walk in the street.

Okay.

And the intention would be to have this 100 block of North Ninth Street serve as a connector between the blocks around it rather than a uh a a vacuum in the area.

Yes, correct.

Okay.

Um I don't think I have any other questions for Mr.

Wright.

40 well, you use 70 feet.

Yes, sir.

Seven stories.

I don't know.

We'll have the architect testify as to the specific dimensions.

What's that?

Yes.

Thank you.

Much like we did with the last project at this point, I'd like the board to take public notice, uh, I guess of our judicial notice to the extent of the judicial body of the sections of the comprehensive plan that we previously marked as A2 and have those enters on the record today.

We previously did A1, and with Mr.

Tovar coming up, who'll be the next witness, I'll I'll hand out A3 at the same time.

So, Carlos Carlos, can you introduce yourself to the board again, please?

My name is Carlos Tovar, the architect of the project.

So uh Carlos, when we were uh when we talked about when when did you first get hired to do this project at 138 to 142 North Ninth Street?

That was uh six months ago.

Okay.

And in doing so, did you did you go through a process before you made a design for this for this project?

That's correct.

I typically um go leave the neighborhood, walk around.

Um what I said before, usually I take my coffee around the neighborhood.

I really gotta really understand the neighborhood.

All right, so I'm talking to the people.

I understand those are private projects, but I really worthy projects, the public project where I have community engagement.

Okay.

And and you did that with this project, you walked the neighborhood?

Yes, I did.

Okay.

Um talk to me about as an architect what you felt about the surrounding neighborhood here for 138 to 142 North Ninth Street.

Yeah, it's definitely a residential neighborhood, but when you are in these in this part of the block, you are really, I feel personally that was very connected to Hamilton Street.

I feel the energy of the city.

I see the other hotels that they have in the area, the other multi-family buildings, and I feel the this block is it could be a nice connection to that energy that is happening on Hamilton Street.

And you uh create a design for the for the potential project here that match that energy that you felt?

Uh that's correct.

Okay.

So let's talk a little bit about what you what you did.

How how many stories are we talking about here, Carlos?

The building is seven stories.

And do you know how tall that is in feet?

80 feet.

Okay.

Um 40 units?

Uh that's correct, 40 units, and we have a nice mix.

We have studios, we have uh studios with them, which they are one bedroom, plus also we have one bedroom.

So if we can, I believe it's uh it's it's the page after uh the building elevations in A3, the the design packet that we have, or the front east elevation and the east elevation view of this project.

Uh you previously testified to this board about a project at 112 to 114 North A Street.

Is it fair for me to characterize this design as a little bit more modern forward?

Uh that's correct.

It's more modern forward for what I say before.

It's just the connections that I have when I got this uh this feeling of let's move forward, let's bring something new, let's bring something excitement to to the neighborhood.

Um maybe somebody else on the open lot, maybe they feel to to bring that or even across the street, they're free to to bring the energy, which is in other cities.

You see the in some packets of the neighborhood, you can create like a R area or ADIS area when you know RIS come here and you have some type of artist engagement.

So that's that's what I I feel that could happen in this block.

So when you designed this project as as as pursuant to A3, you weren't feeling that you needed to connect it to any surrounding building or surrounding concept?

Not really.

No, not really, not really in this area.

Not really in this.

And I don't have to say because what I saw across the street or what I go, it's just it's more open, buildings are taller here.

Um, and definitely I feel the the something new, something broken uh uh needs to happen.

Okay, and you were with us when we appeared before the historical architecture review board months and a half ago.

And you heard some of their comments about their concerns about the the fairly modern approach to the building that you took?

That's correct.

Uh and you've been engaged and you're continuing to engage in in some redesigns of the of the facade of the building to sort of match what the ideas of the harb were to you.

Uh that's correct.

And that's to add some more historical connection to the facade, you know, the the three-story line, the cornices and those sort of approaches, and potentially removing some of the uh the more modern feel of the building.

That's correct on the on the ground floors.

Okay, and in and in doing so, you've worked with Alex uh Wright, who's one of the owners of the project, and and you've gotten no resistance to the idea of making a more traditional design.

That's correct.

Okay.

So while the the design that's in A3 is the current application, there are conversations and work going in to make a more we'll call a traditional historical approach to the building facade.

That's correct.

And as an architect and as the architect on this project, you're comfortable with that approach?

Yes, and I'm comfortable.

I always um everybody knows me here in the board too, and I'm always a person that I'm willing to work with the city and and I always um I feel that the projects are not really about me.

It's more about the community and the feedback that you get from everybody, and at the end of the day, you can have uh a better product.

Okay.

And this building has some first floor commercial space to it?

Yes, we do.

Actually, it's a wider building, so we had the opportunity to have some small commercial spaces, really, really small, small commercial.

Okay, and you think that uh is an added feature that would add to the community approach to this building?

Uh definitely, especially for the community and some of the residents, but really when you open um, you know, a small shopping, you cannot be thinking the the residents you're gonna survive of the 40 units.

You have to survive of be open to the community.

So so definitely um any of the retail space down there, it will be a feature for the community.

A feature for the residents, but also increase the walkability component of this block of 9th Street, yes?

That's correct.

All right.

And when you were sort of getting a feel of the neighborhood uh before you made the design choices that you did, did you get a sense that this was a truly walkable neighborhood?

Uh definitely.

Definitely the sidewall is wider than the area, and then you again you have in this neighborhood you had that connection with Hamilton.

Okay, but did you see a lot of people walking the area currently?

Not really, not really right now.

You know, it's like happening in all those audiences.

It's not really happening right now.

So do you think architecturally the conversion of these three buildings from their current state to a 40-unit structure would be a net positive for the community?

Definitely.

I'm also part of what we do in the lobby.

Um we have uh a small sitting area, small lounge.

So we want people to to probably go downstairs, revue, work from there.

Um, and you want to create that connection sign on the building when when the pedestrian, so yeah.

Okay.

That's I don't think I have any more questions, Mr.

Tabar.

Do you have a question?

When you were considering different designs for this site, did you ever consider a design that might incorporate the facades of the existing brownstones?

I know the the building at the end 138 might be a little hard.

The facade was already compromised a little bit with the conversion of the storefront.

But especially those two brownstones.

You know, I've I'm not an architect, but I I've seen in travels and stuff where there are opportunities to maintain the facade and kind of as the shell, and then you know, do a renovation or new build in the back.

Um, was that considered?

So uh yes, that's always the very consideration that we're in just a building, but you know, it becomes the project is not really that large to support that because when you maintain a facade, you have to support it, people have to wheel around there, it create your economy impact on the development.

So that was something that definitely we consider that, but I think it's not feasible because the building is not that tall, it's not so many units.

So that's number one.

But my honest opinion to you is no, that was not a project that I approach it that way.

I was more approached, they want more about the fund, they'd be connected to the community, they create a new neighborhood in the area, and hopefully send a message to to a new development.

So that was that was really the whole concept.

Thank you.

No other questions, I think, from this witness.

Okay, I did I need to recall Mr.

Wright one more time.

I gotta ask him a couple other questions if that's okay.

Okay.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you Carlos.

Sorry to bring you back, Alex.

Uh the 40 units uh feature of this of this of this unit that we're proposing.

Can you talk to the board about how you settled on 40 units and uh whether it can be something smaller or whether it need really needs to be something bigger?

How did we get to 40?

Worked with Carlos, you know, obviously you have to make the uh project, you know, uh economically feasible.

Uh 40 units was the best and greatest use that we could get, you know, with the building, and that's something I worked with with Carlos on.

If you downsed this, if you downscaled it to five floors and 28 units, for example, is it as a project that would be financially viable to you?

No.

All right.

So in order to make it work, you needed the size and the scope that we're proposing.

Yes.

Um, and if you remove these three buildings from the neighborhood, uh, is it your opinion, having been in that area as the owner of 138 for more than 10 years, that there are any historical features left in the neighborhood?

No.

Other than maybe the church.

Not much.

Okay.

All right, that's all I have.

So other than moving in exhibits A1, two, and three, uh, I and the opportunity to cross-examine or add other questions for you.

I don't have anything else right now.

Okay, thank you.

Mr.

Horror.

You ready?

So actually, I need to be considered an opposing party here.

Not just a party of interest.

Go ahead.

Um, so unanimous opposition.

Hang on a second.

Okay, thank you.

So if we flip back and forth between what is there now and what is proposed, you don't have to know anything about architecture to know that this is a step in the right in the wrong direction.

Um, are we really gonna go from circa 1890s Brownstones to 1990s Rotterdam and click the dark antherside motif generated by AI?

This is not architecture, it's engineering with an afterthought of aesthetics.

But the problem does not originate with this highly stylized box.

It originates with the proposal of demolishing three fine examples of what we actually want more of.

I'm sure this project has numerous virtues in other areas, but I've not been asked to comment on those.

I've been asked to render our discernment and expertise in its architecture and its effect on the architectural impact of removal, and it is not good.

Is my understanding that the gentleman representing the contractor and the owner here for this project has owned these buildings, I think just one for more than 10 years as a strategic move.

And bravo.

I I salute you on that.

It's a great strategic move.

I am sure you have poured many wheelbarrows of cash, energy, time, sweat equity, and patience to maintain it at this point.

And you have quality clients living there.

So thank you for your commitment of a decade long.

It's not just these buildings that we need to preserve, it's this narrative.

On the contrary, it was noted in the presentation to the board that this new box would contain numerous other services, making it thus more of a self-contained live work play environment, an island.

Again, we shape our buildings and our buildings shape us.

This building is at a hinge point and destroying these three buildings.

I'm sorry, this block is at a hinge point and destroying these three buildings, which are absolutely character defining and are serving their purposes exactly as originally designed.

Destroying these three buildings and devaluing the skyline from the old Allentown cemetery will decimate this block very possibly to a point of no return.

From an architectural vantage point and how architecture necessarily affects the places and people around it.

This project has a detrimental impact on the immediate surroundings and sets precedent for more of these hard features and soft qualities of culture that the city has a city, we really actually do not want.

Okay, thank you.

Um Mr.

Fleischaker may have some questions.

Yeah, I do.

Um you'll agree with me that that on this particular block of 9th Street, these three buildings sort of stand alone.

They're they're an island at this point, as far as historical buildings there, historical residences.

I believe five or six doors uh south to the left, there's a pretty beautiful mason masonry building.

Is that a residence or is that just an old commercial building?

I don't know.

It appears to be more of a commercial building, but of definite architectural validity and agreed.

And then next to the 138 that we're looking at there, there's just a vacant, it's a parking slot, it's a parking lot.

Correct.

And across the street is a uh a fairly unimaginative dollar general.

I think during our HARB meeting, I said, why don't you put your building there instead?

I'm sorry.

I think during the Harb meeting, I referenced the the family dollar and said, could you put the building there instead?

Right?

That would be an additive feature to the community.

So is it fair to say that as we look in the immediate surroundings here that these sort of just they're not connected to any other historical features in the immediate surrounding of these three buildings?

I think they are character defining, and that they're the only ones left that are keeping the community architecturally grounded.

I and I think we're speaking to the same point, but they're also they're character defining, but they're on an island here.

Correct, which is why we need to add other spaces instead of tape that one away.

Right.

Um, and you heard the testimony about the massive amount of work that we require to get these buildings to be uh continue to be used where it's not just sort of a where they have extra additional value to the community.

Yeah, agreed, and it also takes a lot of work to build a new building.

And the church next door, vacant church as well.

To your knowledge, if you know.

I I don't know.

Okay, but it is pretty pretty nice looking.

It looks like you can use a little cleanup, but it's also not something that would normally be desired to take down.

No, and we're not we're not we're not offering to take that down today.

But just from the HARP support, understanding the HAP's position, and I was at that meeting, and it didn't take a genius to realize that we weren't going to be convincing anyone to take down brownstones there, but understanding that these three buildings look historically significant but also sit in the abstract everything else.

Uh, is it fair to say that the this block, this neighborhood, does not have the same sort of historical significant significance of other blocks on North Ninth Street?

I would say that the significance has been degraded over time because the proper attention to those buildings has not been given.

And so this would be the last thing standing, keeping this block significant at all.

It would be a shame to lose it.

And so we have a great opportunity to keep and expand this.

But it takes someone willing to throw a significant amount of money to keep and expand this use.

It keeps a commitment to quality architecture and to the community.

An investment that you guys want to make with the community, but the preservation, as we're kind of talking about, is equally valid, especially since it is in this uh demolition overlay.

Okay.

And we did talk at the at the HARP meeting that the applicant would commit to, if permitted to demolish these structures, that uh architectural scavenger uh salvager would be able to go through the property, identifying whatever pieces and the that were of significance.

The applicant agreed to that.

I think we did yeah, I have no problem with that.

All right, I don't have anything else.

Thank you.

Thanks.

I appreciate that.

Okay, Scott, you want to say something I can see.

No, I just clarifying it, Mr.

Grasacci indicated he he I'm assuming you have similar uh comments about this as you did on the previous one.

And you don't have to, you could just say yes, or if you have more to never I never give up an opportunity in front of a microphone.

So um but uh yeah, those all apply, but uh I just want to address this comment about the island.

Um it looks like an island on the picture, and even if you think about the the uh the parking lot and the and the smoke shop building that's adjacent to all this, but if you look across the street and you have all the those properties on Turner, those are all architecturally significant on both corners.

So uh and then I think Turner as we head up towards 10th, I mean the old Allentown office is there within a historically significant facility, plus all those buildings on 10th, the the short ones, the small ones that uh like the colonial looking fronts on them.

I mean, those are all historically significant.

So it's while it looks like an island on this picture, it's not so much an island if you get up into the sky and you look at it from a broader perspective.

And also it's I mean, this church uh has uh fencing around it, looking like there's some work being done.

Because I know they're building on the church's property on 10th, they're doing they're renovating the school building there.

So there's there's activity going on.

I I don't know that Edwards is ready to Reverend Edwards is ready to run out of that building, but I I don't go to his congregation, so I don't know.

But uh it it's not just the island that it looks like on this picture is the the point.

Okay.

Thank you.

I think that's all the testimony we're gonna have tonight.

Mr.

Flying?

Uh just just some closing remarks.

Um if I'm being honest, uh and I and I believe in that, and I have before this board many times, and I believe I have to acknowledge that it's these three buildings are much different than the two that we previously approved.

They are two true brownstones and uh a building that reflects a bit more of a historical character than the other two buildings.

And I think if we're being honest about it, we have to acknowledge that first and foremost.

Um and I I appreciate what Mr.

Hart had to say and what the HARP's function here is, which is to work very hard and diligently to protect historical areas.

That said, um, if you look in the greater neighborhood, the character, the historical character of this neighborhood has been sacrificed already.

Whether by hook or by crook or by other parties, we have a I don't know if we can get a picture of it, but the Dollar General across the street is really rather hideous.

Um and it's uh essentially an old warehouse building, one story brown that says Dollar General on the front.

Um we have a vacant lot that's a parking lot next door.

We have an ab uh what has been an unused church immediately next door.

Uh and while there are some significantly architecturally valuable neighborhoods nearby, we are evaluating this neighborhood for what it is, which is another transitional zone uh that has been treated as a transitional zone not well over the past several years.

Uh these properties have uh have somehow maintained in a block where others have been torn down, most likely because this overlay district was not in place when certain uh decisions were made.

Um and the applicant has bought these properties and with 138 North Ninth Street uh taking great care to keep it for the last 10 years.

Uh I don't necessarily love the idea of calling it a strategic purchase, but it's theirs and they've worked very diligently to make sure it houses people uh and is up to code and is the best it can be.

Uh with most things in life, sometimes uh we run our course.

Uh and I think the testimony here today from Mr.

Wright and Miss Green was that these three properties have run their course.

Uh the significant upgrades necessary to maintain them as historical looking features for this neighborhood is high.

Um, and it's a neighborhood that clearly has devalued uh the significance of connectivity here.

Um understanding again in an honest approach, and then Mr.

Tovar was honest about it, and I was with the board.

The proposed design here is different.

Um he was aggressive with a bit more of a modern approach.

Uh we acknowledged at the HARB and acknowledge here today that that design can be conditioned and changed, something more historically call back a more conservative historical approach, if that's the board's concern.

Um but again, the board today, it's it's it's an improvement to add more units, new units, more rentable units, and and a property that will not be a just there, but will add to this community.

These three properties right now are just sitting there.

They have low levels of use.

The commercial spaces on the first floor are not vibrant.

What the applicant's looking to do is an ad.

Uh and while these three buildings have some historical features to them that it are obvious to the open eye.

Uh at some point we have to acknowledge that time has come uh to move past what they look like and move to what we can be.

And that's what the applicant's proposing for this neighborhood and for these three lots.

We've provided a enough testimony for the record to establish that current currently these have reached their their life end uh as currently configured.

Uh, and uh a renovation in the form of a new more dense use uh with with better spaces necessary for this community, it would be contiguous and and an add to the area, it's consistent with the comprehensive plan, and appreciate the concern and and the care that this board takes on projects like this.

Uh, and I I thank you for your time today.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Are we ready for discussion?

Yes.

Go ahead, Sculah.

I think um well, in many aspects, I agree with uh attorney Fleischaker's comments.

Um but I think that there's just no doubt that this is different than and it's in some ways it's a shame that the two buildings uh on 8th Street weren't here and these were on 8th Street, it would be a lot easier decision.

But um I think in this particular case, um a couple couple observations.

Here I think it's it's more critical that we have um true you know written documentation to support the testimony of we really can't fix this, it's there's no viability in renovating it.

Um to be able to even look at that.

I mean, I don't know, you know, I I haven't looked.

Maybe the agreements of sale, I didn't know if they were redacted or not, you know, what the purchase prices were.

I mean, because all of those, all of those data points are necessary um to meet some of the the requirements of this section because answer your question, they were redacted, yes.

Yeah.

Um because the the next page where you get into the the five criteria of which you need to only prove one, um, I have a hard time finding any of those that I'm satisfied were were wholly met.

And then you know, on the previous page, you know, we we don't have any testimony except um some kind of disconnected verbal um speculation as to costs of of different um components um and but nothing holistic.

Um and and again, I don't know.

I mean, the floor plans, um I I agree uh with the architect that saving facades is extraordinarily challenging.

Um but many of these buildings are are essentially a wider part in the front and then a narrow tail in the back.

I mean, I don't know if there's a contemplation about a partial demolition where just the the tails were the original dining rooms and and so forth could the tails be demolished and then a larger structure built be built behind them.

Um I don't know, that's not what's before us today, but I think um you know I I am not satisfied that um there's there's wording here it says the applicant shall provide sufficient credible evidence um uh in terms of estimation cost rehabilitation on the second page says the existing building cannot feasibly or reasonably be reused, and that such situation is not the result of intentional neglect.

Again, I just don't think we've been provided any substantive evidence to um that's quantifiable other than and some disconnected opinions about certain sub-projects within bringing these buildings.

Admittedly biased opinions.

I mean, you're dealing with the owner who wants to do this, so there's an inherent bias in what he's he believes.

Um yeah, I I think the only thing I also want to add is uh it's unclear to me too.

I know uh we heard testimony that it was quote unquote zoned for two family, zoned for three family.

evidence to um it's quantifiable other than and some some disconnected opinions about certain sub projects within bringing these these buildings back and admittedly biased opinions I mean you're dealing with the owner who wants to do this so there's an inherent bias in what he's he believes um anything to add yeah I I think the only thing I also want to add is uh it's unclear to me too I know I we heard testimony that it was quote unquote zoned for two family zoned for three family I think maybe that terminology it might be it might be used the existing land use is a two family the existing land use is a three family but under the the new code like would it be possible to get more units in here and then potentially you know have it be more economically viable to make those upgrades because you have more units or and so that's something I would also have wanted to hear um just kind of an examination of um looking within the existing building football too um and what can be done um just not continuing the use as is I agree with that and I think the other piece is there was discussion about this being an island and I you know having been familiar with the neighborhood for a very long period of time uh and there was some dialogue about it I think there are some other the family dollar by absolutely I think I I agree with Mr.

Hart like it'd be nice if you could put this project there but um I know that that's not uh that's not what's before us but um that's an obvious one um there's a vacant lot next to it but I feel like uh there are other historic structures on this on this side of the block uh and then there's some row homes on the other side closer to to Hamilton Street that you know quite honestly I don't recall them being without historic evidence but I don't know that they were remarkable but again there was no evidence presented there was just discussion um saying oh the family dollar there's really nothing here this is an island but like there's no evidence there's no uh they're relying the applicant whose burden it is is relying entirely on city acquired photographs and presented no uh contextual relevant photos of the entire block of the the 100 block of north ninth street or any of the adjacencies so we're just we're stuck with hearing them versus testimony of of other parties uh and my sense is that that it's not an island um uh and I think if it if it were entirely so maybe that would be different maybe not um but I think contextually it it it is not segregated entirely um or beyond um correction um to the rest of the architectural fabric of of this block and the historic district to its immediate north um yeah do I have a motion I'll make a motion the application be denied for the reasons stated do I have a second I would second all in favor aye aye aye okay for the sake of clerical clarity there is an open land development application that's also associated with this demolition would the would the board wish to deny this application with or without prejudice should the applicant choose to to continue pursuing their project or continue to refine their concept in any way I'm okay with out prejudice meaning that we may we'll have to hear it again in our revised context.

I I think that would be standard in any zoning application if we came with a different application with a different context we wouldn't be it's only if we presented the same thing that we'd be in trouble.

Well you want a demolition again it would be the same general frame but if there's if there's material difference in the application I think by law we're allowed to bring something back to the zoning are but you want us to say uh without confidence if the only change is the aesthetics of the building that because that's not what we denied it on.

Understanding the conversation tonight there would be some there'd be some material differences and and and we'd have to come back with some material differences and I can discuss with a client of that but okay yeah I would appreciate so we'll just say denied all right I just want to say thank you for your time tonight I appreciate the attention thank you have a good evening do we have a meeting scheduled for upcoming weeks May 11th is the next calendar date after that likely nothing until June 11th all right very good all right there being no no further business right no further business for the board the meetings adjourned