do it with a revised plan so we have the revised proviso plan these are the things that we changed
we relocated electric uh the electric vehicle stalls and we'll show you that on the site plan
We did an addition of a one car share stall, which allows for reduction of four required parking stalls.
We reduced provided parking stalls by two from 40 to 38.
And we did an additional trash enclosure outside.
And again, this is where the electric stalls are.
This is where the trash is.
And this is where the landscaping is.
And this is where there, I believe, may be additional landscaping.
And then this is where the car share is.
And that's all reflected in our drawings.
That's the next page.
All right.
So nearby comparable apartment complexes.
So we're 2577 car width in.
We're here, right?
So there are seven other complexes, all numbered, which have a humongous amount of density in this area because it's ARM2.
So that's what we're trying to do as well.
So, again, what we're offering as part of this zoning appeal is not out of character in the neighborhood.
And it's been embraced by the community because they're excited about new housing in this area for multifamily.
all right we got a letter of support from the nearby neighbor 9122 dewey street and you'll
see from the site plan he is an l-shaped lot which basically hugs our property so if anyone's
He is an L-shaped lot, which basically hugs our property.
So if anyone's impacted by this project, it would be this property, and they're in support of this project.
And then the Philadelphia 2035 plan, as you can see here, right here is 2549-57 Corithen.
And as you can see, they're changing the zoning from what's RSA 3 to RM 2.
And then maps of the area, again, very strange, but this is all RM2 around here, but there's this little sliver of properties right here that's RSA3, which is, again, out of character.
I think that's why Planning Commission is trying to fix the zoning classification here, or at least proposing to.
And then, as you can see here, where we are, we're not far. Not only is there a lot of RM2, there's a commercial corridor here as well, which we would help support on Welsh Road if this project is granted by the ZBA by way of variance.
And then photographs of the property, that's literally the front of our property. It's all trees. We're in the forest.
and then this is the zoning hearing notice poster we tried to put it somewhere that was noticeable
from the street so we tried our best and then if you can see here this is an aerial view so you can
kind of see where we are so carwithin is this street that's right here that you don't even see
it's not even an open street by the city plan but as you can see here this is basically all
forest we're a sliver of that and then as you can see here there's a ton of parking all around here
So, again, if we were RM2, I don't think we'd have an issue in terms of parking, the existence of parking.
And then this is Dewey Street to the right of the property, Dewey Street to the left of the property, because we believe Dewey Street is really the street that's the only part that's developed.
Carwithan is literally a forest in there. It's on an open street. And then these are drawings that
are pictures from our architecture team at Harman Deutsch, who was the architecture team
as part of this project. But you can see an aerial map with the site plan, which I kind of showed you,
a view from the north showing, again, we're in the middle of this forest, a view from the east,
a view from the south, and a view from the west. And then, as you can see, it's a more
zoomed in view of this, but how our property is here and we're literally surrounded by RM2.
And then this is just our survey, which shows the consolidation of these properties. Again,
in total, it's over 22,400 square feet in lot size. And then this is just showing our parking lot.
and as you can actually let me just zoom out a little bit I can't oops
but you can see at least from here well this is Corinthian this is like the
wooded area and this is the part we're hoping to develop but as you can see
here 2 9122 deweys completely surrounds us over here so again if anyone's
impacted by this project would be 9122 deweys. And then in terms of the floor plans,
these are three-story structures, four-story structures. There's 10 units per floor.
The first floor units are bi-level units. And then the second, third, and fourth floors each
are just single floor units. There's a total of, let me just make sure I have this,
Correct. Three, three bedrooms and three baths, 17, two bedrooms and two baths, three, two bedrooms and one bath and 17, one bedrooms and one bath.
And if the board feels so inclined, we can walk through the actual floor plans themselves.
They're pretty straightforward. I don't believe there's a roof deck here.
I also believe let me just confirm this. I think it's built on grade.
I can't tell from there, but I think it's built on grade.
So, again, while not ADA accessible, it will be helpful for the more elderly members of this community by having those first floor units.
Oh, there it is.
It is.
Here's a rendering, a mix of brick and composite metal.
And then this is more of a sketch of what it looked like conceptually before it was put into a colored rendering.
and then again we met with the community on december 20th at the 6 p.m this is
And then again, we met with the community on December 20th at 6 p.m.
This is proof of email to the members of the RCO, as well as the district council members, zoning aid.
We do that two weeks before the meeting when we mailed them out.
16 addresses were notified in the meeting.
These are listed in the addresses, proof of mailing to those addresses.
Our application for appeal that we filed on behalf of Topline Properties, Inc. with the zoning board of adjustment.
the notice of refusal
and then the project information and then the deed
of the property showing that top line properties Inc. is the owner of the property
and then the
certificates of tax clearance. The only reason why money is owed is just showing
that that's for the 2024 tax year which are not due yet
but for each property it's the same.
All right. With that being said, I would ask that Dimitri virtually raise his hand.
Alan, did you say you had to cancel support from this?
City council?
So we got the letter so late. I have not heard from them that they're against it. So I don't know. But again, yeah.
Okay. Thank you.
So I can't say they're supportive of it because I don't know. I don't think they would be against it, though.
All right, good.
Thank you.
Your client has been allowed to speak.
Sir, could you state your name, please, and spell it for the court stenographer?
Yes, Dmitry Majewicz, D-Z-M-I-T-R-Y, and the last name M-I-A-Z-H-E-V-I-C-H.
Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
Please proceed, counsel.
Oh, yes.
Dmitry, you heard everything I had to state today about your zoning matter.
Yes, I did.
Is it true or correct?
And do you adopt it as your own testimony?
Thank you.
Questions from the board?
No, Mr. Chairman.
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
No, Chair.
Thank you.
Questions or comments from our attorney, Hillary Emerson?
Not at this time, Mr. Chair.
Questions or comments from the virtual audience?
I see no hands, Chair.
Planning Commission?
Thank you, Chair Bergman. Sarah Bond with the Philadelphia City Planning Commission.
The comprehensive plan recommends no change to the existing residential single-family zoning.
The City Planning Commission also recommends that the granting of the special exception
for the removal of the heritage tree as well as granting the use of the dimensional variances.
In terms of landscaping refusal, the code allows appellants to apply for waivers
for landscaping requirements to avoid generating refusals.
There was no waiver application included in this case.
The City Planning Commission recommends
that the Zoning Board deny the landscaping variance.
Okay, okay.
MI 2023, 006, 086, 2557 Carworthson Street.
I vote yes.
Proviso, revised plan, one page, stamped by ZBA on January 24, 2024.
Thomas Holliman, my vote is yes with provisos.
James Snell, my vote is yes with provisos.
Ishmael Shahid, my vote is yes with provisos.
Thank you, counsel.
Thank you.
Number five, MI-2023-005-997, 4433 Wayne Avenue.
Joseph Consul is the attorney.
Letter of support from the 13th Ward RCO with one enforceable proviso.
Limited signs and illuminated signs to be installed on the two sides of the building that do not face residential structures.
Good afternoon, Ward.
Mr. Consul, you've already been sworn. Could you just state your name for the record?
Joseph Consul.
And could you identify your client and the relationship to the property?
Yeah, my client is Joanne Pelletere. She's representative for StoreSpaceQR, Philadelphia LP, the owner of the building.
Okay, and our vice chair has a few questions, sir.
Good afternoon, counsel. Do you agree to weigh the reading of the refusal or stipulating to its accuracy?
Have you emailed in all the required documents and exhibits five days in advance of this hearing?
I have.
Thank you.
Please proceed and share your screen.
Right.
Let me share my screen.
All right.
I'm here on 4433 Wayne Avenue.
This property is a storage space owned by a national company called StoreSpace.
This property is a storage space owned by a national...
It was previously owned by a company called Extra Space Storage and functioned as the exact same thing.
My clients purchased it, improved the building, and are now seeking to put up three signs.
We have a refusal because, as you'll see in the pictures, the building's quite tall. Zone CMX3. You are not permitted above the second floor windowsill of the structure to install signs.
Now, what I think is important to note here is we'll show you the photographs of the signs as they had existed on the extra storage space property for as far back, at least as we can see, at least to 2008.
And we're replacing these signs with smaller signs. So we're hopeful that the fact that we are replacing signs with other replacing old signs with new signs will allow for the board to grant the variance.
The RCOs in support, their one caveat, as you mentioned, is one of the signs faces residential properties, and it always has, and we'll get to that in a second, but they are asking for that one not to be illuminated, but everything else they approved.
So, as mentioned, there's the letter we got, proof of mailing, the photos and plans.
So, I'll show you each of the three signs individually.
This is a photo of the extra space storage sign.
The sign that faces the residential properties is the one that you see on your screen now.
It's this sign at the top that says extra space storage.
That is the one that we are seeking to replace with a store space sign, which is smaller and illuminated to the exact extent that this extra space storage sign was illuminated.
If you look on Google, you can go back all the way to 2008, their first picture.
You can see that sign's there.
It's illuminated.
It's at the top of the building because that is the piece of the building that faces the highway, obviously.
So it's a good spot to market that particular building.
Um, we, uh, are cognizant of the neighbor's lack of a desire for a new illuminated sign are put our argument against that would be the reason the sign is not permitted is, is because it's above the second floor.
We could put an illuminated sign on the first floor or the second floor. It doesn't seem like it would be any better to have a sign lower down, like actually at level with the residential properties.
Second of all, no one that came to the RCO seemed to mind the sign as it had been. And so we're hoping that we can just replace it and continue moving on.
So here's what we're attempting to replace that particular sign with, which is this store space sign here.
Again, that's just the newer version of the two that I already showed you.
And that was the one that the RCO was seeking a potential proviso on.
However, we don't believe that's necessary.
The other two signs, this is how the sign looked previously.
this is our proposed store space self-storage sign so replacing just that banner sign with
this store space self-storage sign and then the third sign is this one here below this billboard
which obviously the billboard rights are not related to what we're seeking seeking to replace
that one with this store space sign up there again this is not one that faces the residential
properties and there was no um no proviso sought related to that particular sign so
here's the rest of my packet we included in the packet a lot of the photos that i just showed you
i just tried to break them out into a way that made sense again here's the here's the one sign
that has some level of controversy but again we're replacing an illuminated sign with an illuminated
sign there's the second sign and there's the third sign also included where the plans that
were drawn up required for the installation of the signs and some other photos of the property
as you can see it's only one side of the building that actually faces any units there's a train
station there on the highway over there okay then my other documents round out the packet
i will call joanne to raise her virtual hand
Joanne to raise her virtual hand if she's in if she's in the audience she's been allowed to speak
I could you state your name please and spell for the court stenographer
yes my name is Joanne Pelletier Joanne j-o-a-n-n Pelletier p-e-l-l-e-t-i-e-r
go ahead i'm sorry no go ahead do you swear or firm to tell the truth the whole truth nothing
but the truth i do i swear hi please proceed okay good afternoon joanne did you hear my testimony
just now regarding the the sign installation yes i did sir do you adopt it as it was as if it was
your own yes i do um briefly would you because you and i were speaking earlier would you speak
about the potential concessions you can make regarding the one illuminated sign that the RCO
had some potential qualms about? Yes. So for the sign that the RCO had some qualms about,
what we could do is instead of the sign being illuminated from dusk to dawn, we could put the
sign on a timer and turn it off at 10 p.m. so that the sign would no longer be illuminated
10 p.m. on. The other thing that I'd like to bring to your attention is that the sign is on