Harrisburg City Zoning Hearing Board Meeting - 08/18/2025

Monday, August 18th, um 2025, and this

is the uh city of Harrisburg zoning

hearing board meeting. Um we have um

three items on the agenda this evening.

Um my name is Mike Posh. I'm the

solicitor of the board. Uh here from my

office with me is Michael O' Conor. Uh

and we have two board members present.

Um we have Claude Fipps uh who is the

chair and James Hobbs uh who is the vice

chair of the board. Um I uh just want to

announce that um we have a court

reporter here. Um, and we have a court

reporter here because the zoning hearing

board is uh more formal than the

planning commission. Um, it acts uh

similar to a court of law. Um, and and

when the zoning hearing board makes a

decision, it makes a decision based upon

the facts and the law, not what's uh

popular or unpopular or what may deem to

be a good project or a bad project. Uh

the applicant in each case uh has to

meet a legal burden of proof uh that uh

proves the elements of a variance or a

special exception. And the law uh that

the zoning hearing board uh will adhere

to is the uh city of Harrisburg zoning

code and the uh Pennsylvania

municipalities planning code.

And with that being said, uh I just want

to also mention that because there's a

court reporter here, we want to make

sure that we speak one at a time. Um we

won't don't want to talk over one

another. We want to make sure that court

reporter is able to take uh accurate um

word for word what is said uh during

these proceedings.

Um so the first matter before us is um a

matter of old business. It's application

number 2610. Uh this is a variance

application for 508 and 510 North 2nd

Street. Uh it was an application that

was filed by David Butcher with WCI

Partners LP. And I hear um I understand

uh Mr. Shudy, you're here representing

uh the applicant in that matter. Could

you introduce yourself and whoever may

be testifying on behalf of your client

and we'll swear

>> and we'll swear them in.

>> Great. My name is David

represent WCI partners. With me is Dave

who's the president partner WCI and Rich

Gibble who's the project architect by

design.

>> Mr. Butcher, Mr. Gibble, could you

please uh raise your right hand? Uh do

you swear or affirm that the testimony

you're about to give before this board

is the truth and nothing but the truth?

>> Yes. Yes.

>> Okay. Um I also want to announce that

from the city solicitor's office here,

we have uh attorney uh Tersa Cameron. Um

and then we also have uh Jeffrey Knight,

who is the planning uh director for the

city of Harrisburg. Um Mr. Knight. Uh

you will be giving testimony this

evening. I'm going to swear you in. And

by swearing you in, um would you agree

that you'll be sworn in for all the

hearings uh this evening?

>> I do.

>> Uh Mr. Knight, do you swear or affirm

that the testimony you're about to give

uh before this board is the truth and

nothing but the truth?

>> I do.

>> Okay. Mr. Knight, could you give us a uh

just a general uh outline of this

application?

>> Uh sure. Uh so the um project for case

number 2610

involves the uh conversion of two

buildings at 508 and 510 North Second

Street uh into a total of um 11 units.

Uh the applicants are proposing to uh

develop 208 North Second Street into

five units and five and sorry 508 North

Second Street into five units and 510

North Second Street into uh six units.

Um the uh properties uh were formerly

operating as a um as a law office uh and

uh became vacant. Uh and as with other

um similar properties in the downtown

where we have commercial uses and

specifically office uses whether those

are lobbyists or um or law firms. Um

there is a um you know decreased demand

uh for commercial in the downtown. So,

uh, as with many of these other, uh,

properties, uh, the applicants are

proposing a conversion and really a

reversion, uh, back to the original, uh,

residential use of these properties. Uh,

in this case, um, you know, they were

probably originally single family

dwellings, but, uh, as noted, the

applicants are proposing, uh, to have

them be converted back into uh, five and

six unit uh, buildings. Um in uh looking

at uh the required zoning relief uh the

applicants do require a variance uh for

relief from the density regulations in

section 7-307.3

of the zoning code which require 1,200

square ft of uh lot area per dwelling

unit. Um so for the combined uh lot

areas uh the property would be able to

uh the properties would be able to

provide uh three units uh by right uh

and again the applicants are requesting

11. Um in uh reviewing this application

um we looked at basically two factors.

Uh one is the structural layout of the

properties. Um, and if you saw in the uh

existing conditions photos included in

the case report, uh the interior of the

property uh is really not uh broken up

into a normal um floor arrangement where

there's a consistent uh floor elevation

across each of the buildings from the

front to the back. um they have a more

staggered floor uh uh situation uh

whereby um the second floor of the back

of the building is actually at a about

two or three feet lower than the second

floor of the front of the building. Um

and due to this configuration uh as well

as the thickness of the of the walls uh

around the properties um in a lot of

these older buildings uh you have the

original um building construct at the

front and then there's uh later

additions on at the back but because

that uh original building um was built

to be lived in on its footprint um it

had solid uh masonry walls uh or party

walls if it's a shared space. Um and so

the elevation difference between the

floors and the thickness of the walls.

It makes uh the consolidation of these

proposed units across the floors uh

infeasible um at least without perhaps

significant changes uh to the property,

maybe bumping out a section here. Um,

additionally, the internal staircase of

each uh property uh and the uh common

areas of the hallways uh pretty much

can't be changed from where there are

where they're at now, just given the

required uh widths and um uh uh access

to each of the floors. Um so it's not

something where you could close off a

portion of the hallway uh and um you

know create more space or create an

easier connection between that. Um so

for those physical reasons um and those

structural reasons of the building there

is a justification based on uh the

configuration of the property. Uh in

addition um as the applicants noted

pretty extensively in their supplemental

narrative uh there is a financial

justification which I know as the board

has heard before in the past uh has been

quoted as a um uh justification for

dimensional variances. Um, so the

applicants are also relying on the uh

cost of, you know, purchasing uh

converting the building uh in their

proposal and I think they'll be able to

speak a bit more to that uh in their um

testimony. So uh with all of that being

said, the uh planning commission has

recommended that the uh application the

zoning hearing board approved the

request uh with the following

conditions. If the applicant receives

approval of the requisite zoning relief

requests, they must secure city council

approval of the associated land

development plan for the proposed

conversion. Uh and that was submitted uh

concurrently with the zoning relief

request. So um that assuming approval at

tonight's meeting. Uh that application

would move on to city council review. Uh

any exterior alterations to the building

will receive approval from the historic

preservation specialist or if necessary

receive HARB approval of a certificate

of appropriateness application. Uh and

finally, the applicant will coordinate

with the department of public works to

ensure that the account billing reflects

the establishment of the proposed uses

on site. Uh and the planning commission

recommended the zoning hearing board

approve the request for the following

reasons. The adaptive reuse of vacant

and undesired office spaces compels

significant investment that requires

commensurate relief from the density

regulations of the zoning code as not as

noted in the financial evaluation

provided by the applicant in their

supplemental narrative and the unique

interior configuration of split level

floors and thick masonry party walls. uh

precludes combining proposed units.

Other conversions of former office

buildings in the surrounding

neighborhood have demonstrated the

proposed use will not adversely impact

the character of the neighborhood. And

the project will help retain existing

architecturally and historically

significant buildings endangered not

only by the threat of extended vacancy,

but by the deteriorating buildings to

the north. And finally, the proposed

reuse will add new residents to the

neighborhood to activate the street on

nights and weekends and grow a customer

base to support local businesses and

will provide additional housing units to

the downtown inventory.

Okay. Thank you, uh, Mr. Knight. Um, I

want to mention that anyone who resides

or owns property close to this, uh,

project, uh, would be able to, uh, uh,

participate in this hearing. So, I just

want to ask so we know, is there anybody

here uh, for this particular hearing?

We'll let the record show that nobody

indicated. As such, um, Mr. Shooty,

before you start, I want to mark some

exhibits so we have them uh of record.

Uh these are all exhibits uh that uh the

zoning hearing board received um as part

of this application. I've marked them as

board exhibits. So board exhibit number

one is the um was the email of the

applicant requesting a continuence uh uh

to the August 18th, 2025 hearing. Board

exhibit number two is the proof of

publication. The time and place and

particular nature of this matter

appeared in the Patriot News on July 6th

and July 13, 2025. Patriot News being a

newspaper of general circulation in the

city of Harrisburg. Uh, exhibit B3 is a

letter dated August 12th, 2025 sent from

the planning director, Jeffrey Knight,

to the applicant notifying the applicant

of the time and place of the hearing.

Board exhibit number four B4 is the

hearing notice which was posted upon the

property and that was accomplished on

June 29th, 2025.

Exhibit B5 is the application's not

applicant's notification letters to

required neighbors. Exhibit B6 is the

application package with attached

narrative, letters of support, photos of

the exterior of the property and uh and

plans for the proposal. Board exhibit

number seven is the deed to the property

establishing the applicant standing to

pursue the requested zoning relief.

Board exhibit number eight is the

planning bureau case report and board

exhibit number nine is the city of

Harrisburg planning commission

resolution. So we have exhibits B1

through B9. And with that, Mr. Shudy, um

you could proceed.

Thanks.

>> I mentioned my name is David Shy. Uh we

represent uh WC WCI Partners LP

and with me is Dave Butcher and Rich

Gibble. Uh

I just provide each of you with an

exhibit booklet. Uh just walk through

these real quickly, the exhibits and

we'll refer back to them to the hearing.

Uh first exhibit is the deed to the

property

uh uh uh evidencing standing to bring

this matter. Uh exhibit two are the tax

cards to the two properties. Exhibit

three is

a uh proposed floor plan for the

property showing how the how the

property will be developed

and and

redeveloped. Exhibit four is a uh

financial proform developing property.

Exhibit five is a chart of past zoning

hearing board variances granted

uh for similar relief.

And exhibit six

uh is a collection of letters of support

that were received by Mr. Knight

prior to the planning commission

meeting.

As mentioned by Mr. Knight, Subject

property in this application is 508510

North Second Street which is owned by

the applicant. Uh the applicant acquired

title of the property earlier this year.

Subject property is currently approved

with a vacant three floor office

building uh which was most recently used

as the law office for Wswagner and

Widner.

According to the tax assessment records,

the building uh uh which has a demising

wall to make it uh two properties on two

lots uh was originally built probably

100 to 125 years ago. Uh property is

approximately

009 acres in total and the building in

total measures uh 7 7,341

square ft.

uh property is located in the CN zoning

district which permits by right the use

of the property as a multifamily

dwelling and the applicant is proposing

to develop property with 11 uh an 11

unit multif family project. The

applicant is also requesting a

dimensional variance from section 7-307A

of the zoning ordinance which limits

lots in the CN district to uh 1,200

square feet per residential unit. Uh

depending upon how this property is

measured, whether it's one lot or two

lots uh project under this ordinance is

limited to only two or three units. As I

mentioned before, the applicant is

proposing 11 total units.

This board is very familiar with the

necessary criteria to justify the grant

of a variance, including that the

applicant must demonstrate that

suffering from an necessary hardship. uh

Pennsylvania Supreme Court held in the

Herzburg versus zoning board of

adjustment case that the context of a

dimensional variance, zoning hearing

board may consider multiple factors

uh in determining if an applicant has

established an unnecessary hardship to

justify dimensional variance. Those

factors include the economic detriment

to the applicant if the variance is

denied,

financial hardship created by any work

necessary to bring the building strict

compiance with the zoning code and the

characteristics of the surrounding

neighborhood. Uh zoning hearing boards

and appellet courts often consider these

factors in urban adaptive reuse cases

similar to the instant application. Uh

the evidence presenting this will

demonstrate the subject property cannot

be reasonably developed without request

reduction

in density to allow for the proposed 11

units. And as Mr. Knight pointed out,

the planning commission has recommended

approval of this application very

reasonable conditions to the

background. I'll turn to uh Mr. Butcher

as first witness.

>> Uh Dave, can you provide your name,

company, and position?

>> Yep. David Butcher, uh WCI Partners

position is president.

And uh to the extent I said anything

factual in my background presentation,

do you adopt those? That's your own

testimony.

>> Yes.

>> And what's the history of WCI?

>> Yeah, we were founded in 2005.

developed

probably

some office build

up

and manage properties

and uh you're quite quite experienced

development. Yes. And you purchased

months ago.

>> Yep, that's right.

>> And what was the intent of the purchase?

>> Uh to do this project, convert it to

>> you know how long the property is?

>> Um I want to say six months. I don't

know if that's precise. That's

the price

I understand.

And did you retain?

>> We did by design represented by Rich

and the exhibit are those.

>> Yes. And just uh we'll ask to go deeper

into this.

Can you just uh kind of go through this

real quick? you're envisioning here.

>> Yeah. Uh so it's 11 units. Um

there are uh two buildings, two separate

lots. Uh so each building would have two

units per floor on the first floor and

then two units on each floor on the

second floor. One building, the third

floor doesn't go all the way back. So

one unit on the third floor and the

other building.

So that's the 11.

Do you intend to

retain the

>> Yes. Nothing will change on the exterior

>> and

uh keeping the existing doors and

existing interior staircases.

>> That's right. And I just my last

statement if anything does need to be

changed for our investigation

as

Can you describe some of the challenges?

Sure.

>> Yeah, there's there's a lot a lot of

these older buildings

building

there's a lot of challenges

and this building presents some of

those. It's representative of those

types of challenges

as I mentioned earlier.

>> Yeah, two reasons. The main reason is

that um the unique physical

circumstances

essentially um determine the envelope of

each department. So as uh Mr. Knight I

think very well described you have

different elements

the ability

strange without structural issues,

strange circulation.

Um so what it creates is 11 um is the

word logical envelopes for apartments

lays out nicely

and you prepare a

>> I did

>> that is yes

>> walk through

briefly how you calculated what the

cost.

>> Yeah, sure. So, total cost is determined

by essentially three main buckets. Uh

you have your acquisition cost, you have

your construction cost and soft cost.

So, um you want me to itemize each of

those?

>> No. Okay. But, uh the way I read this,

am I correct that your total uh total

cost for those three buckets is

million.

>> That's right.

>> And then uh you also calculated what you

think the value of the property would be

after. Can you go through how you

calculated that?

>> Sure. All commercial real estate um

whether it's office or residential is

valued essentially on what's called an

income capitalization approach. So you

take the uh income uh and you subtract

out the operating expenses of the

property. up with what's called the NOI

or net operating and buildings

appraisers typically apply what's called

a cap rate. Uh it's essentially a

dividend rate as if you as

cash for the property what would be the

return uh on that and that's cap rate or

dividend. Um so a building of this size

this vintage this number of units

7% cap rate

in line with

for this. So simply taking the net

operating income divide it by the cap

rate and that's how you arrive at the

value of 1 68. So then the cost in fact

is greater than your calculated value.

>> That's correct.

>> Okay. And if

say you did eight or nine units instead

of 11 units,

>> how would that

uh negatively because um the savings in

cost per unit uh would be uh lower than

the savings or than than the value lost.

Uh so there's disproportionate from the

savings to loss in value. Simpler way to

think about it is that um each producing

each unit's bathroom and kitchen might

Um, but you were losing about $150,000

per unit.

So you you came up with 11 units

first because it fits the building very

well and secondly because that is the

number that you almost break even at

just about hopefully.

And so I'm correct. The bar being

requested is not to maximize profits,

not to get as many units as you possibly

can maximize your profit, but instead

just

>> Yeah, that's we're trying to make the

project.

We call ourselves a patient company.

Yes.

Okay. And to be certain, is there any

vacant property to this property you

could acquire in order to

uh well there are vacant buildings to

their demolition that is not

and then

have you

on behalf of WCI

uh or other developers you're aware of

a similar variance by this in the past.

Yes.

Quick look at exhibit five

shows a handful of or more of variances

that have been granted

to

Taking a look at the uh proved density

from the right.

Is that is that the

uh resulting square footage per unit?

>> Uh that is the resulting square footage

of the per unit divided by the lot. And

and one thing I just want to point out

with this spreadsheet, this also

includes projects and zones that don't

require the density relief. So in the DC

and the INS um but it was just those are

included just to show um some

comparisons, but you don't have the

relief unit factor. But if you look at

the projects just in the CN zone um you

can so our project is at the very bottom

proposed our unit relief factor of five

and six which simply derived by taking

um the total number of uh units uh that

we're requesting and dividing it by

what's actuallyed. Um you see that we're

very much in line with other projects

that have been approved CN zone up

above. Um and then the approved density.

So the lower the number, the higher the

density that's been granted. So we are

requesting a density uh for 508 of 467

per unit and then 510 320 square feet

per just I just want to emphasize that

is not square footage of the units

square footage of the density for the

lot square foot

it's a little but that that's actually

the precise uh reduction from the 1200

>> correct

precise what what that 1200 becomes

comes as a result of the

right and is this project in line with

with some of these other projects that

that you mentioned that are district

>> in line and also less

calculated by

And also I just want to mention the

board that this although not on this

chart

last month I believe

but it's not

youware any support letters you've

received with respect to this

application?

>> Yes, we met with um downtown improvement

district historic Harrisburg association

um toward the project with them and then

I spoke with capital neighbors at their

monthly meeting. received unanimous vote

and it does.

>> Yes.

Okay.

What are the physical circumstances and

conditions?

>> Yeah. Uh so as described by Mr. Knight

and then earlier it is the um

differences in the floor elevation on

the second and third floor thick party

walls in between the areas of envelopes

of the units

just

affect

>> they effectively restrain and determine

the number of units and the layout

and and also as the hardship on would

you even be able to do the project

economically if

the building was

years ago and I purchased it two months

ago. Safe to say that the hardship was

not

describe the surrounding neighborhood.

>> Yeah. Uh the capital neighborhood is

really lovely

residential and commercial. Um it's been

shifting lately, particularly around the

State Street area where we are to more

resly.

If

project

is project

>> okay we'll ask uh the board if they have

any questions. But before we do, Mr.

Shy, um you had mentioned the 315 North

Second Street. I think that appears on

your list. It's uh on the uh the last

one in under approved other projects.

>> They've added it.

>> I just want to make sure for the record.

>> Okay. Yep. That's

>> Yeah, it is.

>> Okay.

Um, does anybody from the the board uh

Mr. Fipps or Mr. Hobbs, do you have any

questions of uh Mr. Butcher?

Thank you.

Also saw

Yeah.

>> Yeah.

And it's very similar to one of our most

popular properties.

Um those are about 4

pretty similarly designed very

basically

right

layout second

He says,

>> do you mean the like volume like the

height of the Yeah, I mean that's not

generally a consideration.

I did see something

by basically

That's right.

Well, there's ways to manage that. One

is to bring in finance

that will help um

uh I think I'm trying to think of a

succinct way to describe this. So, we

were our company was formed.

one of our main partners Alex that

company um partners took proceeds from

that sale and formed our company and the

goal was Harrisburg has been very good

to us let's form a company to go do

city our goal is not to make money

that's based don't dovelwhere but

Every project we've done has been

similar to this. Often low returns no

return cash hold them a long time. Um we

advertise out

every year I build a budget to break

even be able to pay staff pay maint

We call it patient capital,

social capital. Part of it

as part of

Yes.

Good evening. Um just a few questions.

So you mentioned uh well I guess so WCI

right in all your experience in

developing in the city I'm uh you've

been through the zoning process before

correct. Uh, so I'm just curious, uh,

was there a reason why you, uh, I guess

didn't finalize zoning request before

closing on the sale of the property?

Um, I think we felt

an urgency to close on the building

>> and they were moving out of the city and

they didn't they didn't want to wait a

long time for us to get

>> so much at risk based on our experience.

getting approvals for similar type

projects in the past.

>> This was in line with those types of

projects in the past.

>> Got you. Um is there thought on what

would be your option in the case of

you know thought about if the case or if

the sorry if the application wasn't

approved for zoning what would be your

use of the property?

>> Uh I think that would uh be a challenge

to figure out. I think leaving his

office would not By

work I mean just um

there's just not right now I think about

a million square feet of vacant office

space downtown.

So

without approval probably the best move

for us would be seller

maybe figure something out.

>> Okay. Thank you. Um so question someone

along lines of Mr. Paul had about the

hardship and what you just mentioned

about commercial space. Um and I

definitely like to get clarity on that

topic as well. um which is always an

interesting one with applications we

get. Um and there have been some like

you pointed out I think recently that

have passed but also ones that have been

denied where it was more of a commercial

use as opposed to residential use. Um

and so we do often get the comments um

about the cost of the redevelopment of

existing buildings especially some of

these older buildings but what is the

can you give additional insight on that

barometer right in terms of

ao apart from generally saying that it's

hard to lease out office space in

downtown Harrisburg like what specifics

have you evaluated you know if you do

have anything in terms of specific

figures or even you know something that

may be a little

general, but what exactly is being

evaluated to make that determination

that office space is not going to be a

viable option for this particular part?

>> So, we we own some office

time

>> just doing this for 20 years now

having a lot of conversations.

It's very difficult to get. It's very

difficult to find a tenant that wants

The term for these types of buildings is

class B, class C

>> not in demand.

>> And so it's very difficult to find a

tenant and if you do find the tenant

rent are so low um you're barely

covering

>> so let alone staff.

you're better off. We would be better

off even though we are a patient company

doesn't seek a return high return

it would not

got.

Um I think my last question was just

about I did see the uh letters of

support that were garnered for this

particular application. um they seem to

all I think 3B from organizations. I was

just wondering was there any dialogue

with residents in the area as opposed to

just representative representatives of

uh businesses?

>> Yeah. Um and I should clarify uh so

Capital Area Neighbors is a organization

of residents that area. Um so when I

went to the meeting they had their

monthly meeting. I want to say there was

about 30 to 35 neighborhood residents

there. I spoke to all of them, asked

questions about the project. Um,

and I just

explained everything for about an hour.

Um, and they took a vote. I don't know

the exact number of residents

that it was unanimous vote of the

members of

that I think that is the best way for us

to reach the neighborhood residents was

through that organization. Got

appreciate the clarification.

>> Sure.

>> Mr. Nut, I just had a quick question. Um

Mr. Butcher just talked about um the

amount of vacant um square footage of

office space in the city as being about

a million square feet. Does the city

have any records on that? Is that would

you think that that's about right or

>> uh it's I think it's difficult for me to

say. Um I maybe our tax enforcement

office would have some more information

on that because they'd know who's not

like reupping and renewing leases. Um I

do know I don't I don't have specifics

on that but I do know that um for

example I think the um state is

consolidate the state's obviously a

major purchaser uh leaser of of space

downtown and they're consolidating their

footprint um and uh so you know I know

if they're kind of contracting with with

regards to the amount of office space

they have it's similar for other

organizations downtown. So it's

definitely an overall trend. I can't say

what the um you know specific number is

though.

>> But is it your observation that there is

uh um more vacant commercial space in

the city than is being used?

>> Oh, absolutely.

>> Okay.

Okay.

building

question.

Let's say

first, second floor, third floor.

I think they would I think they would

only be able to have three total.

>> Yeah. Total per building.

>> No, for both buildings

>> based. Yes, it would be three total

based on the um square footage of the

lot on which the buildings sit. So um

you know the buildings obviously

themselves have a larger larger square

footage than what the lot is. I think I

when I did the calculations it was like

three and a half. Um so between three

and four

just

>> M. Cameron, do you have any questions of

Mr. Butcher?

>> Okay, Mr. Shitty, do you want to call

your next witness? The next witness is

Rich

>> Gri

for whom do you work?

>> Uh by design consultants architects

>> and are you a professional?

>> Yes, I am.

>> And are you lic?

>> Yes, I am.

>> And have you worked on projects in the

past in the city of Paris?

>> Yes, I have.

>> Have you worked on redevelopment

projects similar to this?

>> Yes.

Did you or did you oversee the designs

that are put in the exhibit?

>> Yes, I did.

>> Uh just generally

uh amplify

the things that Mr. Butcher testified

to. You

explain some of the challenges in

redeveloping

like this.

>> So the challenge is that the building

was built 100 years ago. I think that's

the first challenge. Um and these

buildings were, you know, back then

people live differently, right? Um and

this particular building has multiple

levels as as you've heard tonight,

multiple steps um throughout the space

uh which does make it tricky to develop

because obviously different floor

levels, different ceiling levels um and

how you access each of those spaces.

>> And the 11 unit

exhibit. Is that

the most practical and useful way to

develop the property?

>> Because of the way the building's um

again laid out as you've heard tonight

with the front and the back being at

different levels. That is the most

practical way to lay it out.

>> And uh

cost not an issue

if you were to cost or It's not an

issue. If you were to see this in front

of you and think, okay, what's the most

sensible way to use this space would be

how you have

uh based on um various other projects

that we've done um in the city. Uh

apartments that we know are um that rent

well in the city, apartments that lay

out well. Um absolutely agree with that.

Does the board have u any questions for

Mr.

>> Gribble?

Question

is

fire evacuation

building

escape or something.

>> Yes.

>> Yes. So the the building will be fully

sprinklered.

But there is the front uh exit, the

front stairway, but the back of the

units um uh the back of the units have

uh either back doors that exit out or uh

they exit onto balconies with um with

stairs or fire.

Mr.

>> Mr. Hobs, you have any questions, Mr.

Miss Cameron, do you have any questions

of this witness?

>> Seeing no more questions

first

of

>> they're admitted into evidence.

As I mentioned at the beginning, it's

dimensional variance has a relaxed

standard for determining whether an

unnecessary hardship

exists and as such board may consider

additional factors including the

economics of the project and the

possible economic detriment to the

applicant and the cost uh to meet the

requirements of the code.

that we presented to you after shows

if there are 11.

Uh the request is not an attempt to

maximize profits but instead just to

make the project so that it can be done

and that this property can be used again

for

viable use.

Certainly testified to the physical

characteristics of the property also

and the different elevations in the

building are part of the cause to this

and was not created by the applicant and

the project is harmonious with the

neighborhood without detriment to the

public welfare.

And finally the

necessary to move forward with the

project. Uh so we are requesting that

varants be granted subject to the

condition.

>> Okay. Thank you Mr. Shy. Um

okay. We're going to take a a uh few

minutes uh break and uh discuss some

legal uh issues with the board and then

we'll be right back pretty shortly. So,

we'll go off the record now.

you for your patience. Uh we'll go back

on the record. Um

is there a member of the board that

would uh like to make a motion in this

matter?

>> U I'd like to make a motion that we

approve

the variance request with the condition

set by the planning commission.

>> Okay. Moved. Is there a second?

>> Second.

>> Moved and second. Uh all those in favor

signify by saying I.

>> I.

>> Okay. Um unanimously passes. Uh we'll uh

issue a written decision within 45 days

of today's hearing. Um

and that's it. Thank you for your Thank

you for your time.

usually don't get

Okay, next we're going to move into the

first item on new business, uh,

application number 2611. This is a

variance and special exception

application for 1932 Forester Street.

Um,

it's uh a property located in the

residential medium density uh zone.

uh filed by

Ye is Yeer Martinez.

>> Yen

>> Yenfer Martinez. Um and the application

is to convert an existing single family

dwelling uh to a two-unit multi-family

dwelling. Um

Miss Martinez, uh are you um here on

your own? Do you have any other

witnesses?

>> Just

>> Okay. Uh, could you raise your right

hand, please?

Uh, do you swear or affirm that the

testimony you're about to give before

this board is the truth and nothing but

the truth?

>> I don't.

>> Okay. And Mr. Knight, you were sworn in

in a previous uh hearing and uh you

agree that you continue to be sworn in.

Is that correct?

>> I do.

>> I'm going to mark exhibits for this

matter. Um, I'm going to mark exhibits

that the board previously received. Uh,

they're all board exhibits.

Uh the first one is uh exhibit B1. It's

the proof of publication. Uh the time

and place and particular nature of this

matter was published in Patriot News,

which is a newspaper of general

circulation for the city of Harrisburg.

It appeared on July 6th and July 13,

2025.

Uh,

exhibit B2 is a letter dated August

12th, 2025 sent uh from the planning

director Jeffrey Knight to the applicant

notifying the applicant of the time and

place of the hearing. Uh, board exhibit

number three B3 is the hearing notice uh

posted upon the property and that was

accomplished on July 30th, 2025. Exhibit

B4 is the application package with the

attached narrative, photos of the

interior of the property, plans for

proposal, and documentation in support

of the application.

Uh, board exhibit number five is the

deed to the property establishing the

applicant standing to pursue the

requested zoning relief.

Uh, board exhibit number six is the

planning bureau case report. And board

exhibit number seven is the city of

Harrisburg planning commission

resolution. So they're exhibits B1

through B7.

Um Mr. Knight, would you like to give a

summary of the application, please?

>> Uh sure. Um so uh the issues inherent in

uh case number 2611

um for 1932 Forester Street uh are

fairly typical of um similar conversion

proposals that uh this board sees. and

and the city sees uh on a fairly regular

basis. Um in this case uh the property

is one half of a duplex. Um and uh being

in the residential medium density zoning

district and given the um size of the

building and the size of the lot, uh the

proposal requires two special

exceptions. One for the use uh in the uh

the multif family dwelling use in the RM

zoning district and another for uh

relief from off streetet parking.

Although uh per testimony at the

planning commission meeting uh the

applicant is able to provide uh two off-

streetet parking spaces at the rear of

the property accessible from York

Street. Um and then two variances as

well. uh one for relief from the density

regulations in section 7-307.3A

of the zoning code which require 1500

square feet of lot area per uh uh

dwelling unit and then one for relief

from the specific criteria in section

7-309.2V

of the zoning code uh which requires a

structure be 2500 square feet in order

to be a single family dwelling be 2500

square feet in order to be converted to

multiple units. Um with respect to the

variance the variances uh the uh

property itself is a 2200 foot lot. So

it would be 700 square f feet uh short

of um by right allowance of two units.

Um as noted uh at in the testimony at

the planning commission meeting. Uh the

applicant does own the adjacent um

vacant lot to the west at 13 at 1930 uha

uh for street. And um you know if they

were to combine consolidate those lots

through a block consolidation process

which is an administrative approval or

sorry an administrative process um they

would be in conformance with that aspect

of the zoning code. So they do have that

um existing uh lot um condition that

they own a vacant lot directly adjacent

to the subject property. Uh and with

respect to um the relief from the

specific criteria, uh the prop the

planning bureau notes that the county's

records lists the property as 2202

square feet. Um but the applicant has

noted in their application that it is uh

actually 2499

uh square feet. So that would be 1 foot

short of um being a byite allowance for

conversion of the property um and

therefore be a dimminimous uh variance.

Um we're not quite sure where that uh

discrepancy is from. Although it may

relate to a 2017 U building permit for

work on the property uh which we believe

is the enclosure of the uh front porch

uh which added uh the additional um

space onto the building square footage

and an enclosed a porch itself would not

constitute square footage for the

purposes of a building measurement or

sales of a building. Um however an

enclosed uh front room such as the

existing condition uh existing property

features uh would be towards that. Um so

the relief is either for 298 square ft

or one square foot based on um you know

those two uh considerations. Um and uh

you know as noted it would be a

dimminimous uh variance uh if it were

the latter of those two. Uh the

applicant notes that they um purchased

the property last year, I believe in

April of 2024 um and purchase purchased

it directly from the previous owner. Uh

they did not use a realtor um but uh

were sold the property as is uh in the

two-unit configuration uh by that

individual. Uh the the codes bureau's

records and the plane bureau's records

um showed the property to be a single

unit. So um it was likely that this was

converted without the appropriate

permits and without the appropriate work

at some point in the past and again uh

this is a fairly common um uh situation

here in the city. Um although in many

cases I would say uh the circumstances

of the property are different. If you're

the center unit in a row, uh for

example, um or in a more denser

neighborhood, um you would not have the

same sight sort of conditions uh that

the subject property does where um you

have a larger lot, you have direct

access um to the rear of the property,

the lot is wide enough to provide two

unit or sorry, two off streetet parking

spaces on site. Um so uh you know even

though there is a uh this was um

illegally converted uh without permits

um we and we are not necessarily um you

know trying to uh authorize or formalize

that uh as a you know regular course of

doing business here in the planning

bureau. uh we do feel that the that this

particular property uh does uh have

conditions um inherent in it that do

support um not only uh the special

exception uh requests uh but the zoning

uh requests as well. Uh so that with

that being said uh the planning

commission recommended the zoning

hearing board approved the request with

the following conditions. If granted

zoning approval to move forward with the

project as proposed, the applicant shall

allow the codes bureau to perform a

comprehensive inspection to identify any

outstanding code violations and will

receive approval for all necessary city

permits prior to receiving a a

certificate of occupancy. As the

applicant testified to at the planning

commission meeting, um the code zero did

inspect the upper uh unit, but they were

not um they did not want to move forward

with inspection of the first floor unit

until the applicant was uh they could

confirm the applicant got approval of

the requisite zoning relief. Um so this

would uh require them to go back in and

check that uh floor out. And then the

applicant must provide a detailed site

plan developed by a professional

demonstrating how the rear yard will be

developed and whether off street parking

will be provided on site if that is the

intention. Any new development must be

in conformance with the applicable

zoning regulations. Uh and per some of

the informal documentation uh we have

seen um in coordination with the

applicant. Uh they uh are installing two

uh concrete channels uh for the off

street parking. So um we don't think

there's a concern about uh exceeding the

maximum purpose lot coverage. um that

there won't be any concerns about storm

water runoff. Uh they are permitted to

have the uh parking in the rear yard

setback um accessible from York Street.

Um so as a general rule, we do uh think

that they are able to provide this. We

would like to see still a detailed site

plan assuming they get approval from the

zoning hearing board. Uh the planning

commission recommends the zoning hearing

board approve the request for the

following reasons. While the planning

road does not believe that the existence

of illegally established units on site

on site creates a basis for the

establishment of a hardship or

justification for zoning relief requests

as that may only encourage such work. In

this instance, the subject property does

exhibit conditions that support the

granting of zoning relief including the

size of the structure, possibility to

create to construct all street parking

on site and the applicant's ownership of

the adjacent vacant lot which if

consolidated with the subject property

would obiate the need for a variance for

relief from the density regulations. Uh

the property can address the primary

concern of the public regarding such

conversions, specifically the impact on

parking available to existing residents

through the provision of the required

parking in a new parking area at the

rear of the property and due to the

availability of ample on street parking

along the front edge of the property

with Forester Street. And finally, the

existence of other such conversions in

the surrounding neighborhood

demonstrates the allowance of such new

of a new such conversion would not

adversely impact the community.

Thank you, Mr. Knight. Uh, I also want

to mention that uh um the city

solicitor's office is represented this

evening by attorney Tersa Cameron. Um,

and uh I just want to also uh ask uh if

there's anybody um here present this

evening uh that resides or owns property

next to this project

uh that would like to participate in

this matter. Um if there is please uh

let me know now.

Okay.

Okay. Um, what's your state your name,

please? You come up to the microphone.

>> My name is Manuel Maldonado.

>> Okay. And uh, are you a neighbor?

>> I actually lived at that property and

I'm a neighbor to the other one.

>> Okay. Um, do you want to make a comment

at the end or

>> the property is

>> well like not right now but are do you

want to at the at some time during the

hearing do you want to make a comment?

>> Yes.

>> Either for or against. Okay. Why don't

you take a seat right here right behind

uh the applicant. So you're there and

when we get to that po point I just

wanted to identify and then we'll we'll

uh we'll identify you for the record.

Okay. And then um Mr. night. Was the

applicant to provide um notification uh

to the n uh of the neighbors um of this

application?

>> Uh yes. Uh applicants are prov uh

required to provide uh the notification

letter to uh all applicant or all

property owners within 100 uh feet of

the subject property and proof of first

class mailing.

>> Okay. Was that completed? Miss, do you

have do you have that here?

>> No, I'm sorry.

But um Mr. Knight did provide me with

the list of everyone that needed to go

to.

>> Okay.

>> Okay. So, that's a requirement that uh

it's it's part of what the ordinance

provides. Um, you know, at this point in

time, um, you know, you're, if you want

to proceed, you could proceed at your

risk. Um, at some point in time, if

somebody should appeal this, uh, you

know, you're going to have to provide

that information. Um, you know, if if

there might be an appeal.

>> Absolutely.

>> Okay. Um, do you want to proceed with

your case then?

>> Yes.

>> Go ahead. You could go ahead.

Um, so the as Mr. Knight said, um, I

purchased the property over a year ago.

Um, I didn't buy with the realtor I

bought. I purchased it from the, um,

previous owner himself.

Um, he lived on the apartment

downstairs, the first floor, and he was

renting the upstairs. Um, I actually saw

that he had rental inspections done

before

uh which were for the upstairs unit. I

checked with the Dolphin County website.

Uh it's provided as as one of my

exhibits. Dolphin County website still

has it up until then because the issue

was brought up. Uh it's listed as a

multif family. So I did check that

before purchasing it. But um

Once it was brought up when I pulled the

permits, it was uh it was an issue with

Mr. G upstairs at our coat where he was

the one that stated, "Hey, this is a one

family and I was putting permits for it

as a two family." Once the issue was

brought up and I and I uh provided him

with the information from Dolphin

County, um it was I guess reached out to

them. It's been corrected as of 2025,

but the county website if you go to the

tax uh year the record it shows as a

multif family going back to as far back

as you're able to check. So I never knew

that it wasn't illegal to family until I

went to pull the permits.

Um at which point then once I found out

I was put in I was uh I contacted uh Mr.

Knight. I went to his office and started

the process uh for his uh zoning board.

The property has everything already

separate. It has two separate electrical

panels, two separate meters, two

separate water heaters. It even has uh

our wire fire alarms and it's two

different uh sets of fire alarms. So, in

case there was a fire, they would have

never went off together.

The first floor is wired together and

the second floor is wired separate from

the first floor. Uh the first floor is a

whole unit uh on its own and so is the

second uh floor and third floor. Um it

has its separate kitchen as you can see

from the exhibits. Uh the kitchens

separate bathrooms,

two uh

entrances, separate entrances. One is to

the front of the If you're going to the

first floor apartment, so apartment one,

you enter through the front of the

building, the second floor, you enter it

from the side where there's a very wide

um sidewalk to enter from the side. Then

they have two separate entrances also on

the rear of the property. So they each

have an entrance and exit uh downstairs

and upstairs. They function as two

um separate units and have been that way

for many years. Um as I stated before,

the owner lived in one unit and rented

the other one. I have already created

the two parking spaces in the rear of

the property.

And it's um it's also has its own signs.

It says tenant parking

and it's uh the two separate parking

spaces uh with with separate signs and

all of that so that they're easily

differentiated that it's the two for the

two units.

The adjacent lot as Mr. Knight said I

own that one as well. Part of the

sidewalk the side of 1932 for

this property that I'm now

four feet of it goes actually into the

adjacent lot

which makes it

very wide

or seven feet wide in order to get to

the back and to the side of it. Not that

it's needed because this one has its

own, but it also has I guess the the

sidewalk from the previous from the

um as well. These uh codes officers went

there

June 6. Um officer and Williams, they

both went there. They inspected both

units.

both units um they were in compliance.

However, they stated that because the

because as for codes, it's only a one

family that they cannot

put that both apartments past

inspection. They can only say uh you

know, you know what I mean? Like they

can't say apartment one, these were

their exact words. We can't say

apartment one pass inspection and

apartment two passed inspection because

legally it's just one house. But they're

both up to code. They told me and I told

them that I was doing um going through

this process. So they said once this is

done uh call us, let us back in and then

we can put it in the system that

apartment one and apartment two will

pass inspection. Until then they can I

also called them after that because I

thought it was a um

that needed to be met before this board.

Once I went to the planning commission

and this was brought up, I thought I

needed to meet the conditions before

this hearing today. So, I did call the

officer again. I said and asked them if

they can call and do the inspection

before today because of this condition

and they were advised by Mr.

Okay.

Okay. Um, did you uh Miss Martinez, did

you uh take a look at the planning

bureau case report and uh the planning

bureau

they recommended approval and they had

uh two conditions. Are you agreeable to

those two conditions?

>> Absolutely. Yes.

>> Okay. Does the board have any questions

of Miss uh Martinez?

I have a question not necessarily M

Martinez but what so there was a

discrepancy mission right in terms of

the square footage of the lot which

value should we be using as the official

number for this application

>> that was uh I think the discrepancy was

in the unit uh the building not the lot

just for clarification.

>> Oh well yes but either I guess either

way then what should we be using?

I mean, I would say uh without I don't

know, I guess either an architect's uh

measurement of the building or another

county assessor going out. Um it's it's

tough to say exactly which is the which

is the correct number. It would be my

best guess that it would be closer to

the 2499 square footage because of that

enclosed front porch than the 22 um than

the 2200 uh referenced in the county's

reference.

And then just my other question is so

even though the city's records had as a

single unit,

>> I'm just wondering like the fact that

there is actually two separate um

electric meters. Is that what you state

correct?

>> Um wouldn't there have had to been some

type of approval through the city for

them to install

>> another meter for a second meter at that

property? So, uh, that act to my

knowledge that doesn't happen. If like

somebody calls out PPNL to come out and

put a second, um, uh, meter on, uh, PPNL

will not check with the city. And I

think this is because they're, um,

I believe this is the case that, uh, as

a public utility, they're not beholden

to the city's regulations. They're

managed by the state, uh, public utility

commission. So, like they don't have to

coordinate with the city when they do

stuff like that.

Can I answer that? Um, so when a when an

electrician goes to pull a permit with

the city,

um, if they pull the permit, it's

actually the electrician that calls

their um,

supervisor, which is the one with the

master

with the master license.

That person then sends a cutting card to

PPNL and PPNL just brings it out that

it's left to the between the city and

the electrician and the master

electrician to figure out all of that

once the cutting card is sended then

PPNL just brings it out and as far as

the square footage discrepancy of the

building as Mr. Knight said um what

happened is back in 2017

per for Coach's record permit was pulled

for them to enclose an area of the

house. So, there was an addition done.

Once it was completed in 2018, the

property was brought into compliance

with the new addition having been added.

So the addition it it was legally done

permits were pulled it was inspected

um by codes but it's just that the

county records which is not updated but

what's there was

in as far as installation.

>> Okay. Thank you.

>> Good evening.

I had a couple of questions and

talk with

Mr. Knight about this a little bit. Um,

when you bought this property,

you went out and you saw it before you

acquired it. So, you saw the fact that

there was two meters and everything

else. Okay.

When you closed on this Okay. You closed

on your What did you say? Did your deed

say single family?

>> The deed um

I believe it doesn't state uh that it's

a single family. I believe it just says

the properties.

But but um even if it did say one

family, by the time that I get to see

the deed, it's already been recorded

with the county and then it gets sent to

me by mail. So I don't really it would

have been too late anyways for me to say

no, I'm not purchasing it. Um, it was

already I I didn't have

I didn't I didn't have doubts. Like if I

if you see the property, you wouldn't

doubt that. I didn't question it.

>> So even if the deed say one family, I

wouldn't have noticed it and it would

have stood out to me like, hey, it's one

because everything of it was, you know,

a two family. Nothing.

>> That's like my next question. Um, so

when you went and bought this

And

did you intend it to be a single family

dwelling or multi or what was your

intent buying it? Multi family dwelling

or single?

>> Again, I just it never even crossed my

mind the one family, two family because

it was a two family. It looks like a two

family. The Cali says it's a two family.

>> It was just never.

>> So you made that assumption. So, you're

assumption you borrowed this because it

was a two it was a multi family dwelling

and that became

>> I I I went to the property. I saw it

multiple times before purchasing it. Um

there isn't even a way to get from the

first floor to the second floor from

inside. Um some some uh two families in

the city of Harrisburg, there's a front

door and then there's stairs to go up to

the second floor unit which is um like

the property where um Manuel lives. It's

a

1927 bricks. It's a two family. You go

in through the front door. The stairs

will take you to the There's two doors.

One door takes you to the second floor

unit and then the other door takes you

to the first floor. So that I could see

it if it was like that, but it's not

even like that. One door, the front door

takes you to the first floor and you

have to got to go around to the side and

go. So I never even said, "Am I going to

use this as a two family?" It's way too

big to be a two family and it has two

kitchens, two uh living rooms and

everything. So I never it never even

crossed my mind. Am I going to use this

as a one family? Uh it would be

very difficult to convert it to one to

make a way to get from one to the other

and eliminate kitchen.

>> Well, let me answer my one of my final

questions. So you looked at this. Okay.

So you make that assumption.

What did your insurance you've got

insurance on this property? What did

your

>> people tell you? What what was their

designation?

>> So they have it as a two family as well.

When it was uh insured before that it

was insured as a two family. There was

actually a fire at the property a few

years before and when they did the

insurance claim it was a two family. The

insurance um It's in my um narrative.

They also have it insurance companies

that they share information. So when I

called my insurance company, which isn't

I'm pretty sure it's not whoever they

had before. I don't know who they had

before, but there's a national record

and they said that they had it as a two

family and they paid it as a two family

when they put the fire.

And the neighbors also told me that it

was

two family like I said he's lived on

Brick Street nearby for many years and

he knew the man that lived on

and he knows that the man lived

downstairs and it was always rented

upstairs at some point his nephew

and then it was the city has

looking here. I'm looking at one of the

exhibits that you submitted. Your

business privilege acts. Okay. But the

issue I see is that they show the

address on street. This is false.

>> Um that's just my landlord license.

So that goes back to my intent question.

This almost implies that this is you're

recognizing this is two

multi.

>> I'm a landlord in the city of

Harrisburg. I own property. So that's my

license.

>> Okay.

>> Showing that I'm a landlord that I that

property is registered as a rental

property under my landlord license.

the u

the fees to have it as a rental.

>> Okay,

that's all questions. Thanks.

>> And Mr. Fipps, uh with regards to the

deed is um that was part of uh exhibit

B5.

the deed. Um the only mention I see on

here

um with regard to your question is it

says having erected there having thereon

erected a two and a half story brick

dwelling being known and numbered as

1932 Forester Street. It doesn't

designate Yeah.

>> Most of my questions are geared towards

their conversions of property in the

city from single family dwelling to

multif family dwellings and the records

necessary to record that. So it's

represented properly by the city and the

county because they both got to be

>> I found out with this property that Mr.

and Bruce were like, "Never go off of

the county record. We've been trying for

years to get it just

Cameron, do you have any questions?"

>> No, I don't. And I would just like to

say to Chairman Fipps that right her

landlord license would show her address

or any company that she would be using

to represent her as a landlord. So that

wouldn't be indicative of what is taking

place at the residence.

>> Is there anything else? Oh. So, um,

sir, could you, uh, come to the mic and

just tell us your name and spell your

last name so the court reporter could

have it?

>> My first name is Manuel. M A N U L. Last

name Mald Donado. M A L D O N A D O.

>> Okay. And um, do you live close by to

this unit?

>> Yes, I do.

>> Okay. How close?

>> Next door.

>> Okay. Go ahead. Do you want to tell us

>> um the property the property it's always

been known as a two as a you know two

family unit

>> and my friend used to actually live

upstairs from the previous owner that

had it and that was four years ago.

>> Okay. And I think uh Miss uh Martinez

had indicated that do do you have any

knowledge that there were two separate

units and two separate individuals

living in those units?

>> Yes.

>> Okay.

Okay. Is there anything else?

>> No.

>> Okay. Thank you.

Okay, we'll do the same as the last

case. We'll go off the record and we'll

return shortly.

Silence all your communication devices.

It's going to help us

Okay, we're going to go back on the

record. Um, is there a member of the

board that would like to make a motion

in this matter?

>> Yes. I'd like to make a motion to uh

vote to approve the application 2611

with the condition set forth by the

planning commission.

>> Uh, moved by Mr. Hobbs. Is there a

second?

>> I second.

moved and seconded. All those in favor

signify by saying I.

>> I.

>> Okay. Uh motion carries. Uh Miss

Martinez, you'll receive a written

decision uh of the decision made this

evening within 45 days of this hearing.

>> Thank you.

Yeah.

>> Were we here?

>> Oh, really?

Okay. Um, the last item on the agenda

this evening is application number 2612.

This is a special exception uh

application for 2609 North Front Street.

Uh, this is a property

uh which is in the riverfront uh zoning

district. It was filed by Noah Parsons

of uh TripleP Fitness.

Um and it's to replace existing

front yard grass with astroturf.

Uh so

Mr. uh

Mr. Parsons.

>> Yeah, that's you. Um and who's with you

this evening?

Um, my name is Chris Braun. I'm the

synthetic turf representative.

>> Uh, what's your last name again?

>> Braun. B R A N.

>> B R A U N.

>> I'm the one that worked with them for

the proposal. Not Astro Turf, synthetic

turf.

>> Okay.

Um

Um, Mr. Mr. uh Parsons and Mr. Brun,

could you please raise your right hand?

Do you swear or affirm that the

testimony you're about to give before

this board will be the truth and nothing

but the truth?

>> Yes.

>> Okay. Uh Mr. Knight, you're already

sworn in. Um I'm just going to go over

the exhibits uh in this matter and then

uh we'll go to uh Mr. Knight. Um I have

pre-marked exhibits that the zoning

hearing board had previously received in

this matter. Uh they are exhibit B1

which is the proof of publication. The

time and place and particular nature of

this matter was advertised in the

Patriot News which is a newspaper of

general circulation for the city of

Harrisburg. It appeared in publication

on July 6th and July 13th, 2025. Exhibit

B2 is a letter dated August 12, 2025,

sent from the planning director, Jeffrey

Knight, to the applicant notifying the

applicant of the time and place of this

hearing. Board exhibit number three is

the hearing notice posted upon the

property in question which was

accomplished on July 30th, 2025. Exhibit

uh B4 is the uh notification letters to

the required neighbors and certificate

of mailing. Uh board exhibit number five

is the application picket packet with

attached narrative, photos of the

existing condition of the property,

plans for the proposal, and petition of

community support for the proposal.

Board exhibit number six is the deed to

the property. Board exhibit number seven

is the planning bureau case report. And

board exhibit number eight is the city

of Harrisburg planning commission

resolution.

Uh Mr. Knight, do you want to give a uh

synopsis? Oh, just for the record again

uh because each one of these is a

separate record. We have uh tier Cameron

uh from the city of uh solicitor's

office here. Um and then Mr. Knight, if

you want to give us a a summary of the

application, please.

>> Uh sure. So, um, with respect to, uh,

case number 2612, uh, 42609 North Front

Street, uh, is a special exception, uh,

request, um, effectively for development

within the front, uh, yard setback of a

property along Front Street. Uh, bit of

a unique, uh, situation, um, and a

unique request. uh we don't get kind of

a lot of these along Front Street and

just due to the nature of the request

where there's not really a new structure

or a thing like a parking pad uh it

doesn't maybe spring to mind as um you

know kind of a

a sensible like why are we here kind of

thing. Um but uh because the front yard

will be dug up and uh the underlying

substrate below the proposed um uh

synthetic turf uh will have to be

engineered. It'll have to be compacted

soil um and uh uh gravel for uh

infiltration of storm water. Uh it does

constitute development um which is

prohibited in the 50 foot yard uh sorry

50 foot front yard setback uh of our

riverfront zone properties north of um

Riley Street. Um in this case um because

normally this would require a variance

application for encroachment into a

setback. Uh but because there is already

an existing um uh accessory parking lot

at the north side of the front lawn,

there's already uh encroachment into a

majority of the front of the front yard

setback except for about two or three

feet uh along the sidewalk. Um and as

such, this represents an expansion of an

existing non-conforming aspect of the

site. And because of that, uh it

requires a special exception uh and not

a um variance application. Uh and um for

that reason uh the planning bureau uh

eventually um recommended support. Um it

was our uh initial um kind of approach

to the project that um we were concerned

about the precedent it would set um of

having uh synthetic turf be replacing

front yard uh grass. Um not just because

Riverfront Park is a uh you know

probably one of our higher profile and

more conspicuous corridors here in the

city. Um, but somebody else could say

like maybe I just don't want to mow my

lawn anymore and it would be preferable

to have synthetic turf here and that

would certainly uh I would say have an

adverse impact um on uh the character of

the Front Street corridor. Um,

additionally, while we certainly

appreciate the um uh uh utility of this

proposal to the applicant, they will not

be the owner of this property or user of

this property, you know, in perpetuity.

And so whomever comes after this, it may

have less utility for them or um they

may use it in a different way. So for

that we were a bit um uh kind of

hesitant um uh in our approach to the

development. But uh in the fact that it

was a special exception and not a

variance and uh because of that the

standard of proof and the burden of

proof on the applicant is lower. Uh we

eventually felt that uh the proposal uh

did merit um a recommendation of

approval uh from the bureau um with of

course the conditions outlined in the um

planning bureau's case report and which

were adopted by the planning commission

uh which include the following. Uh the

proposed turf may be installed no

further into the setback than the

existing parking surface and the

applicant must reinstall the landscape

screening along the parking area which

was recently removed in violation of the

parking facility design standards and

install landscape screening along the

frontage with the sidewalk. Um and so if

uh you've been by the property, you'll

note that there's the tambar between the

parking area and the sidewalk. We'd like

to see that u the landscape screening

replaced there and also extended along

the frontage of the property uh with the

sidewalk there. Uh the applicant should

relocate the pedestrian connection to

the public sidewalk to the southern

frontage of the parking area to retain a

direct pedestrian connection to the

building and ensure that pedestrians are

not required to intermingle with

vehicular traffic to access the

building. Uh in uh the testimony at the

planning commission meeting, uh the

applicant noted that the uh proposed ADA

ramp um will which will run along the

building instead of the existing uh

pathway that runs out to the sidewalk

will basically run into the parking area

and uh it was agreed at least by with

the planning uh bureau uh that the

applicant could just stripe the existing

concrete like they wouldn't have to pave

pay uh pave a new concrete um walkway.

they could just strike the existing

asphalt, pardon me, uh as a pedestrian

connection, but we did feel it was

important to retain that connection so

that there was a direct way for

pedestrians to walk up to the property

and go to the front door. Again, you

know, in consideration of the future

users and the future businesses that

might be there and the fact that they

are along riverfront park where the

where the uh green belt is and he may

have um uh clients uh coming via that

way instead of driving to the property.

Uh the applicant must remove the

unmitted penetent signs along the front

edge of the property. Uh given the

location within the AE flood plane, the

applicant must ensure that any

investments to the property are

submitted to the planning bureau for

consideration and review against the

flood plane regulations and best

practices before work can commence. Uh

the turf and ramp as well as an

unrelated fence project submitted

separately from the zoning relief

request must be included in that flood

plane development submission. Um and

then the applicant will coordinate with

and receive approvals from Capitol

Region Water regarding all drainage and

storm water management issues. Uh and

then finally um no parking will be

permitted on the front yard area

impacted by the project. Uh the planning

commission recommends that the zoning

hearing board approved the request for

the following reasons. Although the

plane bureau is skeptical the proposed

turf will replicate the appearance or

functionality of natural grass and is

concerned about the proposal

establishing a precedent for other front

street property owners. The project must

only receive approval of a special

exception application threshold for

which is lower than four varants. Uh the

project could function as something of a

test case to determine how well the

proposed project integrates both

aesthetically and functionally into the

front street corridor. And then finally,

if the conditions of approval are

adopted by the zoning code or by the

zoning hearing board, the project could

result in an overall benefit to the

viability and utility of the property

while addressing various zoning

violations on site.

Okay.

at this point. Um, as we did in the

other hearings,

um,

and there's a there's a number of people

here. Um, is there anybody here that

resides or owns property close to this

application,

uh, this project that, uh, would want to

speak uh, in this matter?

Okay. Um, Mr. Parsons, do you want to

proceed with your case?

>> Go ahead.

>> So, we are seeking zoning relief

as mentioned for sports. It's natural

grass

soft barefoot comfort.

This turf will be used solely for

supervising

brought in by

the project improves storm water

conditions

and adding a small

175.

at over 600 integers

and support both from local residents

and our clients and community

safe

and visually appealing.

believe in our property with the city's

goals for wellness and small business

growth.

>> Okay. Um

is there any questions of uh Mr.

Parsons?

>> Mr. Parsons.

Um

I only have a couple questions you've

answered.

and you basically

talked to capital region water

and how this would be

sub

we have not submitted a plan to them as

that was just a condition

however I know Chris has just tested it

recently

One of the requirements is that

this has to be reviewed by capital

region.

>> I think the director

she gave us a lot of

>> us to contact.

>> You should again it was stated that you

would basically

require review the replacement of the

grass with this

temporary replace

that way

>> and and presuming zoning hearing board

approval I would put them in contact

with uh representatives from capital

region water tomorrow.

>> Okay.

Good evening, Mr. Parsons. Uh, just one

question. So, like what is can you

describe like what is your main I guess

need for the turf or like what is the

the benefit that you're trying to garner

through the installation of this

material?

>> Uh, yeah. So, primarily an extended

training space for for our clients and

our business. However, also we recognize

that as Mr. It's a unique situation. So

for us to create something.

>> Okay. I just think my other question is

I'm assuming it's minimal, but what is

are there any um I guess special

considerations or anything specific

required for maintenance of that type of

material once it's installed?

>> I guess it's for Mr. Brown. I guess

>> I mean They're super low maintenance.

Okay.

>> Could we come by and brush it every once

in a while?

>> Yes. Okay. He just needs to keep it

clean and keep the debris off. But

that's basically all you really need to

do. And it's a lifetime warranty.

Proated, but lifetime.

>> Got you. All right. Thank you.

Mr. Parson, what type of training will

be performed on on the on this turf?

>> Okay. Are you going to have any um

equipment out on this uh surface?

>> Okay. Was the city aware of of that?

>> Yeah, they they've uh been clear

throughout the process that they intend

on, you know, basically bringing the

inside out as part of this. Um and

they'll be taking everything in at the

end of the day. So, it's not like weight

benches or I don't know, uh, sleds or

something like that that'll be out there

overnight,

like a temporary Venice Beach, right?

Um,

and I I just want to I think uh note for

the record that um you were here and you

were granted relief originally back in

2023

for your facility. Do you recall that?

Right.

Okay. And then um Mr. Bronn um

say in the future uh some sub subsequent

owner

uh or even sometime in the future Mr.

Parson should decide, hey, I'm going to

remove this uh turf, for lack of a

better word. Um

what's entailed to do that if if

somebody wants to replant grass?

>> Um I mean part of the process,

you know, with the water is we're going

to put a drainage system underneath.

Basically, it's a few of

that just have to be removed.

Okay.

And could you bring one of those pieces

up here so the board could see like

Yeah.

>> They were intrigued last time.

>> I was just curious just to

We have our little piece.

Miss Cameron, do you have any questions

of uh either of the two witnesses?

Is there is there anything more that

you'd like to present.

>> Okay.

>> Well, u just want to note I don't know

if you want to ask for comments from the

public. There's a lot of them here. So,

>> yeah, I think we talked that nobody

>> Yeah, we asked that and they indicated

they they didn't want to.

>> They're like supporters, I believe, of

the applicant.

Okay, we're going to take a a short

break again. Um, so we'll go off the

record and we'll be back shortly.

Okay. Uh we're going to go back on the

record. Um this is uh again for

application number 2612.

Um special exception application for

2609 North Front Street. Um is there a a

motion?

>> Yes, I would like to make a motion uh

for the special exception application

2612

um with the conditions set forth by the

planning commission.

>> So um is that Mr. Hobs? Is that a a a

motion to approve?

>> Yes. Motion to approve.

>> Okay. With the uh conditions set forth

by the planning commission. Uh is there

a second?

Moved and seconded. All those in favor

signify by saying I.

>> I.

>> Okay. Congratulations. is you'll get a

written

>> you'll get a you'll get a written

decision within 45 days of today's

hearing. Thank you. Yep.

>> Here's your grass.

So make a hello. So I'll make a motion

that meeting you'll be ajourned.

>> Second.

>> I'll send you guys an email tomorrow

include the contacts.

sometimes

down.

>> We're gonna go

>> Jeff. We're going to go on a record one

more time. Just one extra piece of

business for the record.

Um,

previously um because of a um an issue

um with one of the board members not

being able to be here um we uh we

designated uh the other in this case Mr.

Fipps to be the hearing officer in one

of the cases. And I just wanted to put

on record um if uh from now until the

end of the year um I wanted to see if

there would be a motion that if uh any

one of the two of you should not be able

to appear for a hearing that the other

who does appear will be designated as

the hearing officer for the board to

hear uh any application uh before the

for that particular month.

Would would somebody make that motion?

>> I make a motion that um going forth

announced to the end of the year um that

um in cases where both of our board

members are not available some uh person

the board member that is available would

be appointed the hearing officer to

allow the uh I guess allow the zoning

session to continue. Okay.

>> Okay. Yeah. So, as I indicated, if one

of you is missing, the other one will be

the hearing officer in that situation.

So, there's a motion from Mr. Fipps. Is

there a second?

>> So, move.

>> Moved and second. All those in favor

signify by saying I.

>> I.

>> Okay. Thanks. I just wanted to cover

that just in case. Okay. Thank you.

>> Hi, everyone.

I don't know.

>> Well, you want to make a request for

So if the city will

I could

not

say the last