FNA Zoning Committee Meeting: Ice House Phase II

Tuesday, April 17, 2012 - 7:30pm to 8:00pm

A proposal for a multi-use dwelling. This meeting will be held at the Fishtown Rec Center, 1202 E. Montgomery Ave. All residents of Fishtown are eligible to vote. Please bring proof of residence or business ownership in the form of a driver's license or a photo ID and a lease, utility bill, or recent piece of mail addressed to your home or business.

Comments

zempf's picture

Wow, surprised this may actually be happening, thought this was totally dead.

stein's picture

zempf wrote:
Wow, surprised this may actually be happening, thought this was totally dead.

likewise.

roma258's picture

From what I remember, the entire project received approval, so the must be making significant changes to go back through the zoning process. Either way, good to see the moving forward.

Kenzo's picture

Just get rid of that pile of bricks and debris facing Hetzells already.

TLP's picture

roma258 wrote:
From what I remember, the entire project received approval, so the must be making significant changes to go back through the zoning process. Either way, good to see the moving forward.

As far as I know, the large lot along Thompson has been approved previously. This meeting next week is for a few lots in the rear of the development facing Moyer Street. I think it may technically be labeled "Phase 3" instead of 2.

fuzzybottoms's picture

Some more details based on the refusal: The current zoning is R10A and the proposed project (multi-use dwelling) is not permitted in R10A. Other variances being sought: (1) not meeting minimum open area requirements; (2) exceeding allowable maximum height; (3) not providing the required number of parking spaces; and (4) exceeding the maximum allowable number of stories (4 proposed, 3 are allowed).

fuzzybottoms's picture

TLP wrote:
roma258 wrote:
From what I remember, the entire project received approval, so the must be making significant changes to go back through the zoning process. Either way, good to see the moving forward.

As far as I know, the large lot along Thompson has been approved previously. This meeting next week is for a few lots in the rear of the development facing Moyer Street. I think it may technically be labeled "Phase 3" instead of 2.

Yeah, I wasn't really sure on the Phase II vs. Phase III portion of it. Phase >1 is definitely accurate, though.

Pure_Fishtown's picture

Kenzo wrote:
Just get rid of that pile of bricks and debris facing Hetzells already.

Remember he had that pavement blocked off for over three years, it took the a couple of phone calls and the city came out and made him make the pavement accessible again. Don't like this guy and never have. Met him - disliked him, met him again and still disliked him, met him again and disliked him more. Guess my feelings about him won't change.

Coder's picture

So do you like him?

Catphilly's picture

Jim - the developer - has done nothing but off everyone who lives around this never-ending development project. He has made promises that he has not kept and when crap hits the fan, he tends to disappear. I live behind behind it and, fortunately, was not AS tormented as other of my neighbors. Particularly, during times of construction, total disregard was paid to the trash, materials and damage done to neighboring backyards and property.

If Jim EVER attempts to develop elsewhere - PAY CLOSE ATTENTION! He is a LIAR!!!!

Pure_Fishtown's picture

Glad I'm not the only one who has been left with a bad taste.

Froman81's picture

From my personal experience as a resident, this Developer is bad news. He is very unprofessional, has very little integrity (if any) and will blame everybody but himself if there is a problem. I agree with Catphilly; beware of the sales pitch, in general beware of the Developer, beware of the promises he makes because they will likely not happen and you will be left to clean up his mess or pay for it yourself.

Ftowntruehead's picture

TLP wrote:
This meeting next week is for a few lots in the rear of the development facing Moyer Street. I think it may technically be labeled "Phase 3" instead of 2.

I never met the guy but every day I walk out my front door I despise him more and more when I see that fence, storage container and the giant trash pile of dirt, bricks and debris. This current proposal should be denied until he cleans up his mess on Thompson street. For the last couple of years this is what us the neighbors have had to look at every day.

Pure_Fishtown's picture

I wasn't going to go to the meeting but I do live within 500 feet of this dump and have changed my mind. See you there.

MK's picture

Ditto

Catphilly's picture

I will be there .... as well as my one neighbor who has been affected the most by this (trust me - her wrath will be one for the books). Aside from the neglect, damage and complete disregard, this is what else we deal with:
- some of the people who moved into the current building flick their cigarettes off their balconies into our yards
- trash from the balconies from residents AND trash from workers are dumped into our yards
- there was supposed to be a different vehicle entrance and exit into the parking facility ... the exit has never been functional so traffic enters and exits on Columbia Ave
- not all occupants use their parking garage if it is more convenient to park on Thompson or Columbia
- the single property on Moyer that Jim also purchased has been a dumping ground since the he broke ground

This is a mess. When he originally started, he was applauded for giving money to Hetzell's to "support" the neighborhood. Note: I do not know what that amount was, but I hear that it was a pittance.

I agree that he should not be able to do anything until he acknowledges, accepts and rectifies his current MESS!

Pure_Fishtown's picture

Catphilly wrote:
I will be there .... as well as my one neighbor who has been affected the most by this (trust me - her wrath will be one for the books). Aside from the neglect, damage and complete disregard, this is what else we deal with:
- some of the people who moved into the current building flick their cigarettes off their balconies into our yards
- trash from the balconies from residents AND trash from workers are dumped into our yards
- there was supposed to be a different vehicle entrance and exit into the parking facility ... the exit has never been functional so traffic enters and exits on Columbia Ave
- not all occupants use their parking garage if it is more convenient to park on Thompson or Columbia
- the single property on Moyer that Jim also purchased has been a dumping ground since the he broke ground

This is a mess. When he originally started, he was applauded for giving money to Hetzell's to "support" the neighborhood. Note: I do not know what that amount was, but I hear that it was a pittance.

I agree that he should not be able to do anything until he acknowledges, accepts and rectifies his current MESS!

I heard the same thing about Hetzell's and his contractor supervisor is a mean man. One of my neighbors, a very sweet older woman, asked him when they were working on the first phase to please do something about the trash because it is blowing down the street; he started screaming and cursing at her about the people here being pains in the and he even used the F word to her.

I wish she would have told us as soon as this happened because there are enough good men around here that would have demanded he apologize.

I think the FNA might want to give more than a half hour to this project and I will make sure that the Councilman's office is present. As someone said earlier, don't give him the go ahead until he cleans up and makes the tenants already there whole.

fuzzybottoms's picture

Pure_Fishtown wrote:
Catphilly wrote:
I will be there .... as well as my one neighbor who has been affected the most by this (trust me - her wrath will be one for the books). Aside from the neglect, damage and complete disregard, this is what else we deal with:
- some of the people who moved into the current building flick their cigarettes off their balconies into our yards
- trash from the balconies from residents AND trash from workers are dumped into our yards
- there was supposed to be a different vehicle entrance and exit into the parking facility ... the exit has never been functional so traffic enters and exits on Columbia Ave
- not all occupants use their parking garage if it is more convenient to park on Thompson or Columbia
- the single property on Moyer that Jim also purchased has been a dumping ground since the he broke ground

This is a mess. When he originally started, he was applauded for giving money to Hetzell's to "support" the neighborhood. Note: I do not know what that amount was, but I hear that it was a pittance.

I agree that he should not be able to do anything until he acknowledges, accepts and rectifies his current MESS!

I heard the same thing about Hetzell's and his contractor supervisor is a mean man. One of my neighbors, a very sweet older woman, asked him when they were working on the first phase to please do something about the trash because it is blowing down the street; he started screaming and cursing at her about the people here being pains in the and he even used the F word to her.

I wish she would have told us as soon as this happened because there are enough good men around here that would have demanded he apologize.

I think the FNA might want to give more than a half hour to this project and I will make sure that the Councilman's office is present. As someone said earlier, don't give him the go ahead until he cleans up and makes the tenants already there whole.

Regarding the time allotted for the meeting -- we did move this meeting to the 7:30 spot so there are no meetings following it. We fully anticipate that it will run longer than half an hour.

Pure_Fishtown's picture

fuzzybottoms wrote:
Pure_Fishtown wrote:
Catphilly wrote:
I will be there .... as well as my one neighbor who has been affected the most by this (trust me - her wrath will be one for the books). Aside from the neglect, damage and complete disregard, this is what else we deal with:
- some of the people who moved into the current building flick their cigarettes off their balconies into our yards
- trash from the balconies from residents AND trash from workers are dumped into our yards
- there was supposed to be a different vehicle entrance and exit into the parking facility ... the exit has never been functional so traffic enters and exits on Columbia Ave
- not all occupants use their parking garage if it is more convenient to park on Thompson or Columbia
- the single property on Moyer that Jim also purchased has been a dumping ground since the he broke ground

This is a mess. When he originally started, he was applauded for giving money to Hetzell's to "support" the neighborhood. Note: I do not know what that amount was, but I hear that it was a pittance.

I agree that he should not be able to do anything until he acknowledges, accepts and rectifies his current MESS!

I heard the same thing about Hetzell's and his contractor supervisor is a mean man. One of my neighbors, a very sweet older woman, asked him when they were working on the first phase to please do something about the trash because it is blowing down the street; he started screaming and cursing at her about the people here being pains in the and he even used the F word to her.

I wish she would have told us as soon as this happened because there are enough good men around here that would have demanded he apologize.

I think the FNA might want to give more than a half hour to this project and I will make sure that the Councilman's office is present. As someone said earlier, don't give him the go ahead until he cleans up and makes the tenants already there whole.

Regarding the time allotted for the meeting -- we did move this meeting to the 7:30 spot so there are no meetings following it. We fully anticipate that it will run longer than half an hour.

Good job, me thinks this is going to be a long one with reasonable questions and real answers by him.

Froman81's picture

$500 per unit was donated to Hetzells at time of purchase. Buyers were led to believe they would have free access to Hetzell which was not true at all. 8 units sold to actual people=$3,500 over 2 plus years. The other 5 units are owned by the Developer and his other companies, not sure if donation was ever made as they are being rented out.

Three parking spots in the garage are filled with Developers trash, scrap wood, etc for 2+years or they could be rented out as extra parking spots to owners who have the need.

Workers and renters ARE the smokers. Owners here do not smoke and we have also complained numerous times about cigarettes, trash, etc in and around the grounds with no action taken. Workers are disrespectful and it starts at the top which is where the example is being set.

Phase II should be heavily scutinized atleast until phase I sells complete and the management problems are corrected. Developer changed phase II to be more single units and plans to rent out the majority which would essentially turn the Icehouse into an apartment complex...

Catphilly's picture

Thank you Froman81!

roma258's picture

I don't question the issues that the immediate neighbors have had with the developer, but how is keeping it in permanent construction limbo going to make things better? Obviously your concerns are legitimate, I just hope it doesn't turn into a case of cutting the nose to spite the face.

Coder's picture

It's like telling your kids to clean up the first mess, before you start making another one.

Catphilly's picture

Our intent is not to keep it in permanent construction. In fact, exactly the opposite. I don't know what is going to be proposed at the zoning meeting, but the current situation needs to be resolved prior to ANYTHING new being started or changes from the original agreement are made. I would like nothing better than for the mess to be cleaned up - not remain at a stand still.

Pure_Fishtown's picture

Catphilly wrote:
Our intent is not to keep it in permanent construction. In fact, exactly the opposite. I don't know what is going to be proposed at the zoning meeting, but the current situation needs to be resolved prior to ANYTHING new being started or changes from the original agreement are made. I would like nothing better than for the mess to be cleaned up - not remain at a stand still.

Absolutely! He cannot be allowed to start a second phase when the first phase has been for how many years now 4? 5? been a total pig sty with no regard to the neighbors who have had to put up this garbage heap 24/7!

ddddenis's picture

I have no opinion on this, one way or the other; I live close but not close enough to be impacted (except by eyesore & blocked sidewalk that was annoying for awhile). I wanted to raise 2 points:
1) Some neighbors recently argued against a proposal a few blocks away on Crease, and urged the builder to do a project in phases, to see if the market would support the number of units he eventually wanted to build. This project seems like a counterargument, because a phased project COULD lead to problems like this (pile o' bricks, visual blight, prolonged state of unfinished construction).
2) The storm drains across the street, at the NE corner of Thompson & Columbia, or the southwest corner of Hetzel's, were clogged with dirt/silt from this Icehouse project for years. Clearly not enough effort was made to prevent that hazard.

lilroja's picture

Froman81 wrote:
$500 per unit was donated to Hetzells at time of purchase. Buyers were led to believe they would have free access to Hetzell which was not true at all.

We all have free access to Hetzell's since it's a public park but that is a whole other issue.

roma258's picture

ddddenis wrote:
1) Some neighbors recently argued against a proposal a few blocks away on Crease, and urged the builder to do a project in phases, to see if the market would support the number of units he eventually wanted to build. This project seems like a counterargument, because a phased project COULD lead to problems like this (pile o' bricks, visual blight, prolonged state of unfinished construction).

Frankly, I don't get the original logic at all. How is a half-finished project better than a fully finished one? Even if the units don't sell right away, you're still gonna have a completed structure which I would think is better than a having a half-empty lot that invites debris or worse.

Froman81's picture

I personally will not support this Developer in any effort he makes to continue building when his first project is STILL so incomplete, misrepresented on many levels, and poorly managed all by him. He is the developer, the real estate agent, the marketer, the general contractor, the condo president, and the book keeper which = he thinks he can say and do anything with no accountability. He has burnt me and close friends several times and has refused to address very important issues inside and around the site even after legal action. He is not going to change, period. The thought of him continuing to develop in Fishtown is scary for all of us who want to make this place our home. Even scarier for us who have had the misfortune of first hand experiencing his shady if not illegal ways. I'll be at the meeting.

Kenzo's picture

I understand the unit donation to Hetzells. That's a buy-in bribe for support. But he shot himself in the foot with that Thompson St. dump.

I would make him feel his variance literally hangs in the balance unless that crap is cleaned up BEFORE the zoning meeting. His dump has alienated all the support he got the first time around. And he is asking for a lot of zoning exceptions.

Zoning is give and take. Get rid of that dump. Im sick of looking at it and I only have to look at when I take Thompson to cross through Fishtown. I can't imagine many 500' neighbors are going to vote for it if he burns his bridges.

Seriously. Someone get his phone number and tell him this. It's your neighborhood.

Kenzo's picture

roma258 wrote:
I don't question the issues that the immediate neighbors have had with the developer, but how is keeping it in permanent construction limbo going to make things better? Obviously your concerns are legitimate, I just hope it doesn't turn into a case of cutting the nose to spite the face.

There are clever ways to reframe the discussion. Screaming matches usually never end well. I would just put it this way: look, we let you go way out of character with the neighborhood so you could do your dense design. You've basically exploited everyone's goodwill because your site management sucks. You have left a dump that costs you less to clean up than what you're paying your lawyers and now we are left wondering if it's better to leave your dump and reject your expansion so you dont mess up even more adjacent properties and create another eyesore, or put up with more messy site work and possibly more dumps on the other side of your project that will cost us hard earned money to clean up because you aren't doing it.

Doing the right thing costs you less money, and your zoning variance wouldn't be in jeapordy right now if you had kept your site clean and managed. We don't need bribes. We need you to be a good neighbor. Is that too much to ask of you? I mean your dump has to be detracting from the property value your units fetch because it's been there for years now.

Feel free to print this out and just read it back to the guy at the zoning meeting.

Catphilly's picture

Where do we find info on exactly what is being proposed at this meeting?

TLP's picture

Catphilly wrote:
Where do we find info on exactly what is being proposed at this meeting?

As I mentioned earlier, this proposal is for the "Phase 3" portion (or whatever the proper numbering is) along Moyer Street. The address of the current lot is 413-415 Moyer, I believe.

Some info about the refusals was mentioned upthread as well:

fuzzybottoms wrote:
Some more details based on the refusal: The current zoning is R10A and the proposed project (multi-use dwelling) is not permitted in R10A. Other variances being sought: (1) not meeting minimum open area requirements; (2) exceeding allowable maximum height; (3) not providing the required number of parking spaces; and (4) exceeding the maximum allowable number of stories (4 proposed, 3 are allowed).

Other than that, there isn't much other information than what the plans show and what the developed will explain, so come to the meeting! Flyers will be going out this weekend.

Catphilly's picture

I did read the previous posts ... I am asking if there is anything in writing about what is being proposed - other than posts on a forum - that can be reviewed prior to the meeting?
Thanks!

2014 york's picture

Catphilly wrote:
I did read the previous posts ... I am asking if there is anything in writing about what is being proposed - other than posts on a forum - that can be reviewed prior to the meeting?
Thanks!

But did you read the post before this post? The part at the bottom?

jbette01's picture

TLP wrote:
Catphilly wrote:
Where do we find info on exactly what is being proposed at this meeting?

As I mentioned earlier, this proposal is for the "Phase 3" portion (or whatever the proper numbering is) along Moyer Street. The address of the current lot is 413-415 Moyer, I believe.

Some info about the refusals was mentioned upthread as well:

fuzzybottoms wrote:
Some more details based on the refusal: The current zoning is R10A and the proposed project (multi-use dwelling) is not permitted in R10A. Other variances being sought: (1) not meeting minimum open area requirements; (2) exceeding allowable maximum height; (3) not providing the required number of parking spaces; and (4) exceeding the maximum allowable number of stories (4 proposed, 3 are allowed).

Other than that, there isn't much other information than what the plans show and what the developed will explain, so come to the meeting! Flyers will be going out this weekend.

Hey Tim --

Do you know what the minimum open air requirements are? I am unfamiliar with that one.

Also, can you talk about # of spots proposed v. # required? Are we talking about a huge disparity here or one spot. I will admit I am also unclear about spots being provided and residents not using them v. spots being provided and residents not being able to use them -- this point is a little muddy.

roma258's picture

Kenzo wrote:
roma258 wrote:
I don't question the issues that the immediate neighbors have had with the developer, but how is keeping it in permanent construction limbo going to make things better? Obviously your concerns are legitimate, I just hope it doesn't turn into a case of cutting the nose to spite the face.

There are clever ways to reframe the discussion. Screaming matches usually never end well. I would just put it this way: look, we let you go way out of character with the neighborhood so you could do your dense design. You've basically exploited everyone's goodwill because your site management sucks. You have left a dump that costs you less to clean up than what you're paying your lawyers and now we are left wondering if it's better to leave your dump and reject your expansion so you dont mess up even more adjacent properties and create another eyesore, or put up with more messy site work and possibly more dumps on the other side of your project that will cost us hard earned money to clean up because you aren't doing it.

Doing the right thing costs you less money, and your zoning variance wouldn't be in jeapordy right now if you had kept your site clean and managed. We don't need bribes. We need you to be a good neighbor. Is that too much to ask of you? I mean your dump has to be detracting from the property value your units fetch because it's been there for years now.

Feel free to print this out and just read it back to the guy at the zoning meeting.

If only the real world worked this rationally. What frustrated me about this project is that it is actually excellent urban planning design. High density, close to public transportation, lots of "green features", not overloaded with parking, etc... It even looks nice (to my eyes at least). This is just the sort of stuff I really want to support. It's just too bad that the developer appears to be real scum. Always gotta be something...

fuzzybottoms's picture

jbette01 wrote:
TLP wrote:
Catphilly wrote:
Where do we find info on exactly what is being proposed at this meeting?

As I mentioned earlier, this proposal is for the "Phase 3" portion (or whatever the proper numbering is) along Moyer Street. The address of the current lot is 413-415 Moyer, I believe.

Some info about the refusals was mentioned upthread as well:

fuzzybottoms wrote:
Some more details based on the refusal: The current zoning is R10A and the proposed project (multi-use dwelling) is not permitted in R10A. Other variances being sought: (1) not meeting minimum open area requirements; (2) exceeding allowable maximum height; (3) not providing the required number of parking spaces; and (4) exceeding the maximum allowable number of stories (4 proposed, 3 are allowed).

Other than that, there isn't much other information than what the plans show and what the developed will explain, so come to the meeting! Flyers will be going out this weekend.

Hey Tim --

Do you know what the minimum open air requirements are? I am unfamiliar with that one.

Also, can you talk about # of spots proposed v. # required? Are we talking about a huge disparity here or one spot. I will admit I am also unclear about spots being provided and residents not using them v. spots being provided and residents not being able to use them -- this point is a little muddy.

I have the refusal in front of me. Here's what is says:
Open area -- 30% required, 2.2% proposed
Parking spaces -- 35 required, 32 proposed
Maximum height -- 35 feet allowed, 49 ft 4 inches proposed
Number of stories -- 3 allowed, 4 proposed

TLP's picture

jbette01 wrote:
TLP wrote:
Catphilly wrote:
Where do we find info on exactly what is being proposed at this meeting?

As I mentioned earlier, this proposal is for the "Phase 3" portion (or whatever the proper numbering is) along Moyer Street. The address of the current lot is 413-415 Moyer, I believe.

Some info about the refusals was mentioned upthread as well:

fuzzybottoms wrote:
Some more details based on the refusal: The current zoning is R10A and the proposed project (multi-use dwelling) is not permitted in R10A. Other variances being sought: (1) not meeting minimum open area requirements; (2) exceeding allowable maximum height; (3) not providing the required number of parking spaces; and (4) exceeding the maximum allowable number of stories (4 proposed, 3 are allowed).

Other than that, there isn't much other information than what the plans show and what the developed will explain, so come to the meeting! Flyers will be going out this weekend.

Hey Tim --

Do you know what the minimum open air requirements are? I am unfamiliar with that one.

Also, can you talk about # of spots proposed v. # required? Are we talking about a huge disparity here or one spot. I will admit I am also unclear about spots being provided and residents not using them v. spots being provided and residents not being able to use them -- this point is a little muddy.

In terms of open area, the requirement is 30% of the lot for R10A. (It would be 30% even if this were an R10 and multi-family was allowed under the code.) The current proposal has much much less than that - 2 to 3%, I believe. I want to note though that the percentage is a just a simple calculation, and doesn't take into account decks, balconies, and any other common outdoor space this project would have. I'll leave it to everyone to make their own opinion of whether the developer is providing a reasonable amount of outdoor space to warrant the variance.

In terms of parking, the overall project totals are 32 spaces for 35 units (Tuesday's proposal is 9 of these units.) 35 spaces (1:1) would required under the code for 35 dwelling units. This is the final buildout plan after Phase 2 (the empty site along Thompson) and Phase 3 (this proposal) are completed. I can't really speak to how many of the current spaces are being used / occupied with building materials, but the plan is to have 32 spaces constructed in the end.

EDIT: Nicole is much more concise.

Catphilly's picture

Just saw it ... thank you!

meaty's picture

I totally agree with Kenzo, that doing the right thing costs you less money. The developer seems to rely on his lawyers and bullying tactics to get what he wants, almost to purely satisfy his ego. He sees how much he can get away with, and then comes back and does as little as possible to solve the problem. The way he deals with things is shady, untrustworthy and unethical. The only thing he has been consistent with is being a liar and acting irrational. He has a way of making you think you are the one who is wrong, not him. The Icehouse is an illusion/oasis. It looks good on paper, but inside, it's a mess, with the developer as king of the hill.

Ftowntruehead's picture

For those who think were trying to stall or stop this project, guess what, were not. We just want him to do the right thing and clean up his dump. Take a look at the photos I posted above. We have been living with that dump for four or five years now. Do you really think that increases the property values here. He has no regard for the people who live here. This guy should not get the go ahead to do anything until he cleans up his dump and makes the neighbors and tenants living there whole.

Pure_Fishtown's picture

I'm so surprised that there hasn't been an influx of folks here exalting his deeds. When he had his first meeting with the community, he tried to stack the deck.

Kenzo's picture

Who wants to support this guy when he's left that ugly dump on Thompson everyone has to look at every day?

And you know his folks are reading this thread. And it's still not touched as of this morning. I don't care what his proposal is; he's a bad neighbor.

DISAPPROVE his zoning request and force him to spend more money on his lawyer. If he's not going to even hire illegals at the Home-Depot to come help clean, then he can pay for more billable hours to his attorney he loves so much.

The Hetzell's bribe (that's what it is... admit it, it wasn't even a CBA it was a bribe)... that's all wasted money because he's ticked everyone off.

Coder's picture

I beg to differ. The people who manage Hetzells were not "bribed", as they had nothing to offer in exchange for the money. You forget where you are. We'll take your money, any day of the week, to help our causes, but we are not loyal to anyone because of it. Don't underestimate the folks who have a goal or vision for Hetzells. It would have got done with him or without him. They cannot be bought. And that, my friend, is why it was wasted money. If he thought it would curry him favor, he was uninformed.

jbette01's picture

To those with general gripes about the democracy of the FNA zoning process --

This is a perfect example of a project that on paper, fits in moderately well with the in-fill character of Fishtown and will consume a vacant lot. However, the community has a right to vote in opposition based on their opinions, which may include the developer history. Not sure it would be so with different models.

Kenzo's picture

Coder wrote:
I beg to differ. The people who manage Hetzells were not "bribed", as they had nothing to offer in exchange for the money. You forget where you are. We'll take your money, any day of the week, to help our causes, but we are not loyal to anyone because of it. Don't underestimate the folks who have a goal or vision for Hetzells. It would have got done with him or without him. They cannot be bought. And that, my friend, is why it was wasted money. If he thought it would curry him favor, he was uninformed.

I like that.

Pure_Fishtown's picture

Is this project already scheduled for a ZBA Hearing? If so, please provide the following:

Date & Time of Hearing
Calendar Number
Appl. No.
Applicant
Owner
Attorney
Number of Permits

Thank you.

TLP's picture

Pure_Fishtown wrote:
Is this project already scheduled for a ZBA Hearing? If so, please provide the following:

Date & Time of Hearing
Calendar Number
Appl. No.
Applicant
Owner
Attorney
Number of Permits

Thank you.

I don't have this info handy - The orange ZBA placard at the site should have it.

TLP's picture

jbette01 wrote:
To those with general gripes about the democracy of the FNA zoning process --

This is a perfect example of a project that on paper, fits in moderately well with the in-fill character of Fishtown and will consume a vacant lot. However, the community has a right to vote in opposition based on their opinions, which may include the developer history. Not sure it would be so with different models.

Jill, I would still encourage people to consider the specific variances being requested as well as the overall nature of the project and whether it's a good fit when deciding how to vote. That's not to say that the developer's site managment abilities for a large construction project shouldn't be on the table, but the variances should be the focus.

Pure_Fishtown's picture

It would be a lot easier than walking on broken pavements to read a sign that may or not be accessible from Thompson or Columbia Avenue (I haven't noticed them) to have it posted and it would only take a cut & paste to copy the information.

Word verification is baaaack

jbette01's picture

TLP wrote:
jbette01 wrote:
To those with general gripes about the democracy of the FNA zoning process --

This is a perfect example of a project that on paper, fits in moderately well with the in-fill character of Fishtown and will consume a vacant lot. However, the community has a right to vote in opposition based on their opinions, which may include the developer history. Not sure it would be so with different models.

Jill, I would still encourage people to consider the specific variances being requested as well as the overall nature of the project and whether it's a good fit when deciding how to vote. That's not to say that the developer's site managment abilities for a large construction project shouldn't be on the table, but the variances should be the focus.

I apologize Tim, I should have mentioned that. You are totally correct, the project should be evaluated on its suitability with respect to the variances.

I was just trying to illustrate that the pendulum swings both ways, if you know what I mean.

TLP's picture

jbette01 wrote:
TLP wrote:
jbette01 wrote:
To those with general gripes about the democracy of the FNA zoning process --

This is a perfect example of a project that on paper, fits in moderately well with the in-fill character of Fishtown and will consume a vacant lot. However, the community has a right to vote in opposition based on their opinions, which may include the developer history. Not sure it would be so with different models.

Jill, I would still encourage people to consider the specific variances being requested as well as the overall nature of the project and whether it's a good fit when deciding how to vote. That's not to say that the developer's site managment abilities for a large construction project shouldn't be on the table, but the variances should be the focus.

I apologize Tim, I should have mentioned that. You are totally correct, the project should be evaluated on its suitability with respect to the variances.

I was just trying to illustrate that the pendulum swings both ways, if you know what I mean.

No worries, I know that you and most people know that. I just like to remind that in the end we get to provide input to the ZBA on a given project, not a developer. The same developer, or any developer the neighbors don't like, can always come back and build something by right (which under this code tends to be giant boxy three story row homes with garage fronts...)

fuzzybottoms's picture

BUMP -- this is tomorrow. Also come out at 7 pm to hear about a single family home proposed at 2314 Mercer Street.

Honeymoe's picture

Developer will come to the meeting with a big smile and try to befriend all with some last minute promises and perhaps alittle empathy for what hasnt happened... None of which is his fault (of course).

Catphilly's picture

Developer has been hanging out on Columbia and Thompson all day (early evening) trying to smile and befriend people ... we're not buying it

Kenzo's picture

Smile back and tell him to clean up his Fracking dump.

Honeymoe's picture

Approving this variance will reinforce he can walk on the neighboorhood and residents. Can anyone name something he did for the community besides the small donation to Hetzells? Why not send him away with a list of things to fix inside and outside the complex (sounds like both need work) so he can come back when those things are complete and we can all feel good about giving approval.

Ftowntruehead's picture

What happened? I couldn't make it.

Jordan's picture

Variance was approved subject to certain conditions. Like doing something about the pile of bricks.

TLP's picture

Final vote was 23 to 14 in favor among local voters (within 500 feet), 17 to 5 in favor among communtiy voters.

Catphilly's picture

There is still concern from the people who live directly in the vicinity of the construction on Moyer about a 4 story structure. That didn't seem to be of much concern. I was surprised.

Pure_Fishtown's picture

Catphilly, I was so surprised that there were so many attending that live within 500' of the project and recognized so few people.

Catphilly's picture

I agree.

Coder's picture

Were they the folks who are flipping the cigarette butts into your yard? Just sayin....

MK's picture

The mountain of bricks is gone and the lot has been cleaned!

Kenzo's picture

MK wrote:
The mountain of bricks is gone and the lot has been cleaned!

jbette01's picture

http://articles.philly.com/2013-08-11/news/41292163_1_mortgage-delinquencies-household-debt-credit-score

Tangential to the spirit of the article, but supposedly there is a waiting list to get into the ice house units.

A WAITING LIST? REALLY?

roma258's picture

Did they legitimately break ground, or just move some their dumpsters around or something?