[0:08] all right uh thank you for everyone um

[0:11] this is the board of appeals meeting uh

[0:13] 7 p.m september 8th of 2022

[0:16] uh during uh today's meeting we're going

[0:18] to start off

[0:19] uh by nominating a chair and vice chair

[0:22] for uh this board briefly um in which

[0:25] case we'll move on to

[0:26] case 2022-3

[0:29] from michael beverly former of 3905 27th

[0:33] street

[0:34] concerning a side yard variance request

[0:37] and we will finish up with a review

[0:40] of the rules and procedures

[0:42] for this board uh so as normal i would

[0:45] like to start

[0:46] uh with a roll call for who's attending

[0:49] on behalf of the board

[0:51] um my name is jody hoonstar uh as the

[0:54] chair of the board and i'll just go down

[0:55] the list and if you

[0:59] uh mr burch here oh

[1:02] uh mr dougherty here mr president

[1:05] all right uh we have a quorum and on

[1:08] hand our uh town clerk sharon hum

[1:12] and uh legal counsel fred sussman uh at

[1:14] this point i will pass it over

[1:16] for any information concerning postings

[1:19] and entries into the record

[1:23] oh yeah we're gonna uh yeah i guess that

[1:25] is part of the second so i guess i'll

[1:27] hold off on that

[1:29] um

[1:30] so first uh first bit of order is to

[1:33] nominate a board chair and vice chair

[1:36] um does anyone have a

[1:38] nominee they'd like to put forward for

[1:40] either position

[1:41] i'd like to make a nomination for mr

[1:44] moon star

[1:45] for chairman

[1:48] second there thank you uh i guess we can

[1:50] just go through and uh vote on that

[1:52] um anyone anyone opposed

[1:56] all right i will continue as chairman

[1:59] for this board um and i would like to uh

[2:02] nominate mr dougherty for the role of

[2:04] vice chair do i have a second on that a

[2:06] second there

[2:07] uh and do we have any objections

[2:11] all right um sir doherty uh is the vice

[2:14] chair

[2:14] of the board

[2:16] now uh with that business done i assume

[2:19] we don't need any paperwork

[2:21] um i will now pass it over to sharon for

[2:26] recording public postings

[2:33] and then

[2:35] the vice chair take over so i am uh

[2:38] refusing myself as these are uh my

[2:41] direct neighbors

[2:42] uh for this particular case and handing

[2:44] it over

[2:48] all right um so i'd like to ask uh the

[2:51] town clerk

[2:53] um

[2:54] if the uh

[2:57] case has been read into the uh

[3:00] uh

[3:02] announced in the proper forms

[3:04] proper uh

[3:07] areas

[3:08] yes um

[3:10] the hearing was published in the

[3:12] southern maryland newspaper on august

[3:14] 19th august 26 and september 2nd

[3:17] editions

[3:19] on august 5th

[3:20] 2022 the planning and zoning commission

[3:23] was notified of said hearing with

[3:25] application date and time

[3:28] on august 4th

[3:29] 2022 the applicant and adjoining

[3:32] property owners were sent by registered

[3:34] mail notification of said hearing

[3:38] and property 3905 27th street was posted

[3:42] by public works

[3:44] giving notice of time in place of public

[3:47] hearing

[3:50] all right thank you um

[3:52] we are here to

[3:57] discuss the case

[3:59] uh 2022-3

[4:02] consider an application from michael and

[4:04] beverly fulmer

[4:06] uh for of the real property known as

[4:08] 3905 27th street chesapeake beach

[4:11] for variance to section 290-19a

[4:16] of the

[4:17] town code

[4:18] by the construction um

[4:20] of an addition on their house

[4:24] which would be placed

[4:27] three four three and a half feet into

[4:29] the required

[4:30] eight foot side yard on the west side of

[4:32] the lot

[4:33] for a variance of four and a half feet

[4:36] and approximately four point eight feet

[4:37] into the required eight foot side yard

[4:40] on the east side of the lot

[4:42] or variance of 3.2 feet

[4:46] that is the case um

[4:49] and are the petitioners here

[4:51] ready to

[4:54] uh present their case

[4:58] yes

[5:06] all right so at this point uh

[5:08] um do i need a quote on that

[5:11] on this point uh we'll accept the

[5:12] application into the record

[5:17] and now hear from the applicants

[5:44] would you uh

[5:45] state your name address

[5:50] my name is michael former living at 496

[5:53] old mill road millersville maryland two

[5:55] one one zero eight

[5:59] child's blind

[6:00] living at 3106 barry road northeast

[6:03] washington dc

[6:09] if you both raise your right hands i'm

[6:11] going to swear you in

[6:13] do you both solemnly swear or affirm

[6:16] under the penalties of perjury that the

[6:18] testimony you were about to give and the

[6:20] responses and statements you are about

[6:22] to make will be the whole truth and

[6:24] nothing but the truth

[6:26] thank you

[6:31] all right so the uh which uh

[6:36] which person would like to get up and

[6:38] speak at the podium

[6:40] it doesn't matter you want to go special

[6:42] [Music]

[6:44] could you step up to the podium please

[6:54] [Music]

[6:56] good evening thank you for hearing now

[6:58] case

[6:59] the reason we're here for this verse

[7:02] we had no idea

[7:04] that the sidewalk

[7:07] the side on the east side and west side

[7:10] was in violation

[7:12] when mike bought the house

[7:15] it was there the structure when he

[7:18] purchased that property

[7:20] no one informed him

[7:22] that he was in violation

[7:24] and needed a verse we didn't learn

[7:27] that we needed the burns until we

[7:30] project the build extend the deck out

[7:34] two and a half feet

[7:36] and then we was uh we was under

[7:38] impression that

[7:40] why we need a variance when we're not

[7:42] doing no work on the side

[7:44] all our work is in the real

[7:47] wish we learned later

[7:49] that the deck was probably not

[7:52] i didn't know

[7:53] mike didn't know was no research that

[7:56] told us

[7:57] that the deck was

[7:59] built

[8:00] after the house was

[8:02] constructed he learned that afterward

[8:06] and this one of the reasons we hear

[8:08] requests and environs to bring the

[8:10] property and con

[8:12] to it

[8:15] with the um

[8:17] the current status

[8:28] so right now the way the house is

[8:30] situated

[8:31] um

[8:32] there isn't an eight foot

[8:35] on each side

[8:36] where the house is sitting

[8:38] um so basically we're looking to extend

[8:41] the kitchen out and then add the deck

[8:44] um

[8:45] and we weren't

[8:46] if it's a matter of us

[8:52] changing the width of the deck then

[8:55] you know we can certainly do that but we

[8:56] would prefer to keep the dimensions

[8:58] where they are

[9:00] um

[9:01] so that it's even with the house coming

[9:03] out

[9:14] so the main so the issue is the the deck

[9:17] i'm reading right here um

[9:19] it's going to be built out i said a

[9:21] canyon effect right

[9:23] yes they're gonna be built on the reel

[9:26] what is the canon effect like

[9:28] you break it down like what

[9:29] what exactly is that

[9:31] well what we're seeing here you have

[9:34] copy this yeah i'm looking at right now

[9:35] it says the canyon effect so there'd be

[9:37] nothing on the sides is that what

[9:39] nothing's going to be on this side okay

[9:40] so there's no dividers so no no no

[9:43] okay

[9:50] my understanding was that you were

[9:52] extending the house uh backwards by ten

[9:55] feet or so

[9:57] no we extended the house

[9:59] back was

[10:01] two additional fee plus today 10 foot a

[10:04] deck

[10:07] this will allow mike to have a larger

[10:09] kitchen yeah we were looking for a

[10:10] larger kitchen in the house

[10:13] so we wanted to expand the back of the

[10:15] house that additional amount was only a

[10:17] couple of feet three feet something two

[10:19] or three feet

[10:21] and uh

[10:23] that would provide us more room in the

[10:24] kitchen so that's basically what we were

[10:26] looking for there

[10:31] and we'd like to keep that the same you

[10:32] know the same width as the house

[10:38] yes

[10:39] yeah

[10:41] ask the witnesses some questions they've

[10:43] got to get a better feel for

[10:45] what they're

[10:47] actually proposing to do and how it

[10:49] compares to the exhibits that we have

[10:51] yes

[10:52] okay

[10:55] so

[10:56] i ask that

[10:58] you see this exhibit here this is the

[11:00] the architectural renderings for the

[11:02] project and it's the page it shows the

[11:04] existing

[11:06] right

[11:07] rear or side elevation and the proposed

[11:09] side elevation

[11:12] and if you look at the top you see that

[11:14] there are five windows towards the rear

[11:16] two standard windows and two long thin

[11:18] windows

[11:20] then if you look at the bottom the

[11:21] proposed you see the same pattern of

[11:23] windows plus two more windows that

[11:25] extend back

[11:27] so can you draw a line

[11:29] through this cross section of what is

[11:30] new

[11:31] what would be new on this new in this

[11:33] elevation

[11:40] this will renew

[11:43] existing

[11:47] right okay so are you telling us that

[11:49] that is only two feet

[11:51] no we're saying we're gonna extend this

[11:54] part out back two feet today

[11:57] and we're going close today

[12:00] okay very good so what exists today is

[12:03] where this new edition is going to be

[12:05] built is a deck today

[12:08] so you are in fact extending the house

[12:10] rearward that's correct and then adding

[12:13] a deck

[12:14] for another 10 foot of depth

[12:16] not another 10 foot we're just going

[12:18] back to the same footprint as you see

[12:20] right here this is 10 foot from the

[12:23] house to the edge of the

[12:25] edge of the deck

[12:26] so that that this would give us

[12:28] this would give us 10 foot on in our 12

[12:31] foot

[12:32] total

[12:34] 12 foot of new building space new

[12:37] building space

[12:38] yeah i uh thank you

[12:48] what sheet are you on i'm one sheet

[13:01] it's actually the same image that i

[13:02] included

[13:14] everything to the rear of that is new

[13:16] construction

[13:22] [Applause]

[13:28] almost where that roof

[13:40] here's the line that he drew

[13:42] everything to the rear of that is new

[13:44] construction

[13:50] so happens that where the new house

[13:52] petition is proposed a deck exists today

[13:55] yes that's it

[14:00] so here's that line he drew everything

[14:02] to the rear of that is new

[14:04] completely

[14:07] you got it

[14:08] okay

[14:16] but you did make the point i think that

[14:18] a deck

[14:19] exists in that space now or did

[14:22] previously

[14:23] it is is we're going back with the same

[14:25] footprint we're not making it that in a

[14:28] larger just moving it back

[14:31] and we still will be worked in

[14:32] compliance

[14:33] of the real setback

[14:37] we have approximately 35 foot

[14:41] finale

[14:45] all right do we have any other questions

[14:48] the applicant

[14:51] all right with that i'd like to pass it

[14:53] to uh mr jakubiak for staff report okay

[14:56] thank you um

[15:02] so let me first

[15:04] orient

[15:05] everyone to the the property uh

[15:09] on first and also there's a staff report

[15:11] that i drafted dated september 2nd

[15:14] 2022 and i'd like to enter it into the

[15:16] record

[15:17] um

[15:20] that's acceptable

[15:21] we will enter that into the record that

[15:23] report

[15:25] this house on on uh 3905 according to

[15:29] the state department of assessments and

[15:31] taxation was built in 1945.

[15:33] the lot is small it's a 3 000 square

[15:36] foot lot it's one of the original

[15:39] cottage lots

[15:40] and that feel and character still

[15:43] evident along 27th street and that kind

[15:46] of pocket of town a lot of that fabric

[15:50] of you know small lots little cottages

[15:52] has changed over time but it still

[15:54] remains of somewhat intact in that area

[15:58] um the lot is 3 30 feet wide and 100

[16:02] feet deep and on page 2 you can see the

[16:05] subject property i put an arrow to it

[16:07] there's an exhibit there

[16:12] is hom is there an

[16:14] extra copy of the staff report

[16:16] i don't know that the applicants have a

[16:18] copy they'll have a copy i want to make

[16:20] sure they have copies oh thank you

[16:28] thank you

[16:37] um

[16:38] please take note of the the original

[16:40] platted lines in this part of the middle

[16:43] subdivision that's what it was called uh

[16:45] the subject properties of three thousand

[16:47] square foot lot it's really the mirror

[16:49] image of the

[16:50] the two or three lots in that area it so

[16:54] happens that the house to the right or

[16:55] to the east side is built

[16:58] on a combined six thousand square foot

[17:01] lot the lots are the three thousand plus

[17:03] three thousand combined to form one

[17:05] large lot larger lot uh the other two

[17:08] houses

[17:09] uh are still on the original three

[17:11] thousand

[17:12] as is the house at the intersection of

[17:14] the alley and 27th street that's your

[17:18] standard 3000 square foot lot too

[17:22] so that's a bit of a picture of the

[17:23] neighborhood this zoning district is

[17:25] called the residential village

[17:27] the minimum lot size under current law

[17:29] is 6 000 square feet so if you were

[17:32] creating a new lot today it couldn't be

[17:34] smaller than six thousand

[17:36] the applicants have a situation that's

[17:38] we call non-conforming the lots are

[17:41] legal lots of record platted well before

[17:44] the town ever had zoning ordinances

[17:47] and the fact that the house sits

[17:49] close to the side yard it doesn't make

[17:52] it in violation i just want to correct

[17:54] that it's not in violation it's just was

[17:57] built before the code was adopted

[18:01] violations happen when construction

[18:03] takes place without the proper permits

[18:05] or without the variances that are

[18:07] necessary so we have an eight foot

[18:10] setback required on each side yard

[18:13] because of the small lot and the

[18:15] existing house

[18:16] it would be perhaps rather difficult to

[18:18] get eight feet and how would you do that

[18:21] well you'd have to

[18:22] bump in the addition the addition would

[18:24] have to step inward into the center of

[18:26] the lot and and go back

[18:30] uh and if you did that

[18:31] that

[18:32] addition could only be 14 feet wide and

[18:35] i did a little math in this

[18:37] memo and i messed up and for some reason

[18:40] the end result was 12. but if you have

[18:42] 30 foot lot and 8 feet on both sides

[18:44] that's 16 feet you end up with 14.

[18:47] so the question for the board when we

[18:49] review the criteria is is it a hardship

[18:52] to have to

[18:53] build a

[18:54] an addition that is only 14 foot wide

[18:56] that's a question that you may

[18:59] have to seek

[19:01] comments from the applicant about

[19:04] i don't have evidence about that

[19:06] i can't make a recommendation about

[19:07] whether this constitutes a hardship or

[19:09] not but but that's a issue for you to

[19:12] grapple with clearly there's a physical

[19:15] condition on this lot

[19:17] that creates a need for a variance if

[19:20] someone is going to build

[19:23] an addition off their house right so

[19:25] um the question for you is

[19:29] uh

[19:31] is it a reasonable proposal

[19:33] in light of the requirements uh

[19:36] does the

[19:38] does the requirements strictly applied

[19:40] create

[19:41] uh hardship

[19:42] uh and when i

[19:44] face these situations before i often

[19:46] think about

[19:47] the interior space

[19:49] i you know you you might say oh it's

[19:51] perfectly fine just bump it in comply

[19:53] with the law strictly have live with a

[19:54] 14 foot

[19:56] wide addition

[19:58] even though the house is 22 or 24 foot

[20:02] but how does this space flow if this is

[20:04] a bump out of the kitchen can you

[20:05] actually

[20:06] operate a kitchen that bumps out only a

[20:09] portion of the

[20:10] the width of it that's the kind of

[20:12] questions you might want to

[20:14] raise in

[20:15] in applying these standards

[20:18] so um

[20:20] i'm jumping around a bit in my remember

[20:23] on page three

[20:24] there is the the the exhibit is shown

[20:27] there the one that

[20:29] the architect just drew the line on

[20:31] and it confirms that in fact the

[20:33] applicant is proposing to build new

[20:36] house

[20:37] addition new construction to the rear of

[20:39] the lot in addition to a new deck

[20:44] and it's

[20:46] not material to me as the zoning

[20:47] administrator that in the deck exists

[20:50] existed on that site already this is a

[20:52] new

[20:53] construction

[20:54] um

[20:55] before we get into the standards i want

[20:57] to describe a little bit else about

[20:59] the site

[21:00] on the

[21:01] if you're looking at the property on the

[21:03] right side which would be the west side

[21:06] the side yard is a bit narrow and

[21:09] the house next to it is close to its

[21:12] side your two you can see that on that

[21:14] flat and it's tall it's a two and a half

[21:17] story building

[21:18] the tall structure

[21:20] on the

[21:22] left side of the farmer's house or the

[21:24] east side

[21:25] the yard is set back the house is set

[21:27] back a little bit further a little bit

[21:29] more space

[21:30] we're not talking about the difference

[21:32] about a foot or so

[21:34] but that the house

[21:35] the adjoining or the neighboring house

[21:38] because it's

[21:39] roughly centered on its 6 000 square

[21:41] foot lot it has a relatively wide yard

[21:45] and um it is

[21:48] a small cottage one and a half story

[21:49] cottage just like the farmer's house is

[21:52] so you can see that sort of compatible

[21:54] relationship on one side on the other

[21:57] side not so much because in the

[21:59] newer construction on the

[22:02] west side

[22:04] kind of towers over the existing cottage

[22:06] house

[22:10] so in order to grant the variance the

[22:13] board of appeals has to

[22:16] find that

[22:20] five standards are met

[22:23] and those standards are discussed on

[22:26] pages four

[22:27] five and six of this memo

[22:31] i provided some information i of course

[22:33] may not have all the information that

[22:35] you may feel is necessary and that's why

[22:37] we hold a public hearing

[22:38] to hear from the applicants

[22:41] and anyone in the public you might might

[22:43] want to speak about the matter

[22:46] but the first standard is it refers to

[22:50] states that the granting of variants

[22:52] shall be in harmony with the general

[22:54] purpose and intent of this chapter

[22:57] and by this chapter we mean the zoning

[22:58] ordinance

[22:59] and it shall not be injurious to the

[23:01] neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to

[23:04] the public welfare

[23:07] uh and in that

[23:09] paragraph there i provided

[23:12] some context for you to consider

[23:15] i mentioned that the addition would

[23:16] extend rear word and maintain the

[23:19] current narrow setbacks in other words

[23:21] it wouldn't get any closer to the side

[23:24] lots

[23:25] lines than

[23:27] the current house is the house on the

[23:29] west side is also quite close to the lot

[23:31] line so the distance between the two

[23:33] houses is quite small in keeping with

[23:35] the traditional pattern of cottage

[23:36] housing in this part of chesapeake beach

[23:41] which speaks to the nation the notion of

[23:43] harmony

[23:44] this addition in my view doesn't disrupt

[23:46] the harmony that's established out there

[23:49] it's also in the rear of the lot too so

[23:51] it's not even visible from the street it

[23:53] is important to note that the applicants

[23:55] are proposing a relatively modest

[23:57] addition and only the first story of the

[24:00] house is being extended

[24:02] further over half of the fully

[24:04] constructed extension would be the deck

[24:06] while this 10-foot deep deck would be

[24:09] covered by a roof extending from the

[24:11] main house

[24:13] it would otherwise be open in the sides

[24:15] on the sides and thus not present a

[24:17] solid wall to the neighbors on either

[24:19] side

[24:20] i mentioned this because this does not

[24:22] appear to create that canyon effect that

[24:25] mr sharp just mentioned

[24:27] if this were a two-story addition a

[24:29] blank wall maybe there's an evaluation

[24:31] that needs to take place about whether

[24:33] it creates a situation where it

[24:36] blocks the air and the light movement

[24:38] onto the adjoining house

[24:40] and that's not the case in my view

[24:43] um

[24:44] so the second standard

[24:46] says that the granting the variance will

[24:48] not permit the existence within the

[24:50] district of any use which is not

[24:52] permitted

[24:54] in the district this is the residential

[24:56] village district single-family house is

[24:58] permitted use and the variance doesn't

[25:00] change the intended use

[25:03] this will remain a single family house

[25:07] number three that

[25:08] there are special circumstances or

[25:10] conditions

[25:12] applying to the land or buildings for

[25:15] which the variance is sought

[25:17] which circumstances or conditions are

[25:19] peculiar to such land or buildings and

[25:22] do not apply generally to land or

[25:25] buildings in the neighborhood

[25:27] and that such condition circumstances or

[25:29] conditions are such that strict

[25:30] interpretation

[25:32] of the provisions of this chapter would

[25:34] deprive the applicant the reasonable use

[25:36] of such building

[25:38] land and building

[25:40] so i've showed you on this

[25:42] exhibit um this property tax map that

[25:45] that pattern of little lots 3 000 square

[25:49] foot lots is a dominant pattern on this

[25:51] block okay on the adjoining lots however

[25:55] it's not the dominant pattern within the

[25:56] general neighborhood they've been

[25:58] consolidated over time many cases

[26:00] they've the lot lines have been adjusted

[26:02] to formally create larger lots the

[26:04] houses are much larger and wider as you

[26:06] know the neighborhood so this cottage

[26:09] pattern what was the dominant pattern

[26:11] when this subdivision was planted uh in

[26:14] the 30s and 40s

[26:16] 20s 30s and 40s it's not that way

[26:18] anymore so in

[26:20] my view it seems like a relatively

[26:22] unique situation that we have here

[26:25] by virtue of passage of time

[26:27] but that's something that the board

[26:29] would have to establish that this is a

[26:30] unique situation

[26:33] and

[26:34] not only that the situation presents

[26:37] a um

[26:39] is a physical condition

[26:41] so that

[26:42] obviously the the physical condition

[26:44] here is a very narrow lot

[26:46] and a house that pre-existed the zoning

[26:49] it is where it is

[26:53] and

[26:54] if you strictly interpreted the

[26:57] provisions of the court the chapter the

[26:59] zoning ordinance

[27:00] would these with these uh strict

[27:02] setbacks deprive the applicant of the

[27:04] reasonable use of the land

[27:07] so the question is is reasonable to

[27:09] build a small addition off the rear and

[27:11] a new deck

[27:13] maybe compare that with some other types

[27:15] of construction that an applicant might

[27:19] this is a value judgment and this is why

[27:21] we have citizen

[27:22] board of appeal members

[27:24] making those judgments

[27:26] um

[27:28] now you have to say establish if there's

[27:30] a unnecessary hardship if the hardship

[27:33] is just a general hardship that is

[27:35] shared generally by land and buildings

[27:37] in the neighborhood

[27:38] then the relief shall properly be

[27:40] obtained

[27:41] by

[27:41] legislative action or court review

[27:45] in other words if this is a problem that

[27:47] everybody experiences we shouldn't

[27:49] change the ordinance or change the

[27:53] how the ordinance is applied just for

[27:54] one case

[27:57] the town council should change the

[27:58] zoning

[27:59] change the law so that everyone is

[28:02] treated fairly and you have a new regime

[28:04] there

[28:06] so

[28:09] the question is

[28:11] in your your mind is this a general

[28:13] hardship or is it kind of particular to

[28:15] that particular property and the

[28:16] applicants

[28:18] i would tend to think on balance is

[28:19] particular to this particular location

[28:24] for the reasons i mentioned earlier but

[28:26] the lot size and

[28:28] the older house

[28:31] that the granting the variants is number

[28:33] five necessary for the reasonable use of

[28:35] the land and building

[28:37] and that the variance as granted by the

[28:40] board is the minimum variance

[28:42] that will accomplish this purpose

[28:46] maybe you need to ask them

[28:48] the applicant can they live with

[28:49] something smaller than what they're

[28:51] actually asking for

[28:52] it's a reasonable request to ask every

[28:55] applicant that comes before you if they

[28:57] say there's no way i could build an

[28:58] addition uh conforming to the code or

[29:01] even less than what it is because

[29:04] naturally the law the walls have to

[29:06] extend naturally a roof has to extend

[29:08] off of its current plane you know

[29:10] there's a real practical and if you make

[29:12] the determination based on your

[29:13] questions then i think you've

[29:14] established findings that would support

[29:16] this type of criteria

[29:18] if the applicant says well honestly

[29:21] technically speaking we could build a

[29:22] smaller edition then you'd have to say

[29:24] well maybe you should

[29:26] just because our job is to apply this

[29:28] these criteria

[29:30] and

[29:30] as faithfully as possible towards

[29:32] towards implementing the purposes of the

[29:34] zoning ordinance

[29:35] and in this respect the purpose of the

[29:37] zoning ordinance is to keep the side

[29:38] yards open to extend possibly

[29:41] so

[29:43] that's an overall review and um and uh i

[29:46] hope i i didn't draw it out too long but

[29:48] i wanted to give a little more context

[29:51] if you have any questions for me please

[29:53] ask

[29:55] does the board have any questions

[29:58] react on the report

[30:05] give me one moment

[30:21] all right um

[30:22] does the board have any questions

[30:25] of the applicant

[30:27] pertaining to the staff report

[30:33] i don't

[30:37] and does the applicant have any comments

[30:39] on the staff report

[30:41] no we just um

[30:43] would like to keep the house the way the

[30:46] plans are if that's all possible

[30:49] um

[30:50] in order to keep things

[30:52] how we wanted to it to look we

[30:55] purchased a home it's pretty derelict

[30:57] we're having it repaired from top to

[30:59] bottom we want to improve the

[31:01] neighborhood we want to prove

[31:03] our house it's going to be our

[31:05] retirement home

[31:06] we're in the process now of trying to

[31:08] sell our other house

[31:11] these delays are

[31:13] we're taking those into consideration

[31:15] but i want to thank the board

[31:17] for hearing our case

[31:19] and

[31:21] i hope that you will

[31:25] be in our favor

[31:28] thank you

[31:30] at this point uh i'd like to uh

[31:33] open up the public comments do we have

[31:36] to do we have a sign-in sheet

[31:38] all the comments

[31:40] there's a sheet up there if anyone

[31:42] wants to comment

[31:44] i did get a written comment today

[31:48] the uh

[31:57] work i think the written comment you

[31:58] received today should be made part of

[32:00] the record

[32:08] hello my name is jody hoonstar

[32:10] and i am the

[32:12] neighbor to the tall house to the side

[32:14] um

[32:15] and i wanted to speak my support uh for

[32:19] this plan

[32:20] um in in my neighborhood i've lived here

[32:22] since 2017. i've seen

[32:24] a fair number of houses of this style

[32:27] um get some form of attention some have

[32:29] pre-existed some of them have been

[32:30] remodeled since then um it's this kind

[32:33] of old style cottage roof that you see

[32:35] in the plans

[32:36] but it seems like people moving into the

[32:38] neighborhood find that it's just a

[32:40] little bit a little bit too little um in

[32:42] terms of what maybe a house we expect to

[32:45] live in

[32:46] uh in these days so

[32:47] a lot of the other renovations typically

[32:49] move sideways um

[32:51] there have been a couple that tried to

[32:53] go up and then ended up just going

[32:56] sideways anyway i assume because it

[32:57] caused concerns so um but in this case

[33:00] um they're very close to the the

[33:02] neighbor lot lines and there's no way to

[33:05] extend sideways on this particular

[33:06] property um the house is already set

[33:09] pretty far forward in the lot

[33:11] um and so from from my neighborly

[33:14] perspective uh the only reasonable thing

[33:16] to do is build back they're kind of

[33:18] taking the house and building back into

[33:19] the property that they own

[33:21] um

[33:22] and uh there's some some mix of house

[33:24] and deck there um

[33:26] but i think that's uh pretty reasonable

[33:28] for what

[33:29] uh all the other people in our

[33:30] neighborhood who have a similar lot and

[33:31] similar stop house have been doing over

[33:33] the past couple years

[33:34] um

[33:36] and uh and it does uh improve the

[33:38] neighborhood um it is a a net

[33:40] improvement from when i've moved in

[33:42] these uh the renovations of this old

[33:43] style housing

[33:45] um

[33:46] and uh

[33:47] yeah i i think in this case uh if the

[33:50] zoning purpose is is to keep the side

[33:51] yard open um

[33:53] bringing the house back in alignment

[33:55] with the currently existing side yard

[33:57] and you know avoiding building a huge

[33:58] wall next to your neighbors um it sounds

[34:01] like that's all been

[34:03] taken care of from

[34:04] from my perspective

[34:06] so that's all i had to say opinions uh

[34:09] appreciate the time thank you

[34:11] all right thank you

[34:14] um and we did as uh was mentioned we did

[34:17] get one written public comment

[34:21] has the applicant seen that public

[34:23] comment no we have it

[34:26] that just came in today at four o'clock

[34:29] bought a copy

[34:30] i'll provide a copy of it all right

[34:32] thank you

[35:14] refrigerator

[35:42] right

[35:43] and and just summarizing the written

[35:45] comment

[35:46] uh from from susan webster page

[35:49] of 3907 27th street

[35:52] who expressed the concern about

[35:54] stormwater drainage

[35:57] we can go back

[35:59] and i discussed it shortly let me oh i'm

[36:01] retired i thought we would hold off

[36:03] please are there any other public

[36:04] comments

[36:06] those comments

[36:10] hearing none i would close public

[36:13] comments and ask the applicant if uh

[36:16] they have any rebuttal or any additional

[36:18] comments on

[36:20] anything that's been said

[36:21] based on what i'm looking at

[36:24] if we go back and put a french drain

[36:28] with a water roll backwards

[36:30] then we're in violation of the virus

[36:36] that's what you said

[36:39] we applying for variants on both sides

[36:42] and then we

[36:43] and

[36:44] neighbors complain about a storm water

[36:46] management

[36:47] if we go back and put a fresh drain

[36:51] that will pitch the water backwards and

[36:53] when

[36:54] you don't hurt properly then we're in

[36:56] violation of the virus

[37:03] because there's an eight foot

[37:04] requirement and we only have three we

[37:07] requested three info

[37:10] you follow me

[37:12] um running along the side of the house

[37:14] basically yes i follow you um now is

[37:17] that a is that something we need to get

[37:19] a

[37:20] face damage

[37:27] if there were

[37:29] a storm water or drainage issue

[37:31] it's afraid

[37:32] i mean we don't i don't know if that's a

[37:34] fact or not right we don't either um

[37:36] okay you don't know you're just

[37:38] responding like hypothetically

[37:40] um

[37:41] one possible approach would be due to do

[37:43] a french drain that would run parallel

[37:45] to the lot line escape yes

[37:48] and um you can do that that's not a

[37:50] structure that doesn't violate the

[37:53] setbacks

[37:54] uh that is a

[37:56] reasonable approach and it's allowed

[37:58] within

[37:58] the side yard yeah

[38:01] the um

[38:03] but we would look at that as part of the

[38:05] site plan we just have to review your

[38:06] plan

[38:07] the applicant's property is also within

[38:09] the chesapeake bay critical area

[38:12] so there is a requirement to mitigate

[38:15] for the additional lot coverage that is

[38:17] being proposed here

[38:19] and the way that we typically do it

[38:20] under state guidance is to require

[38:23] additional tree or

[38:26] shrub plantings

[38:27] and if there are any specific

[38:30] instances of water being visible leaving

[38:32] the site we fix that

[38:35] as

[38:35] you suggested but the one

[38:38] way that many people also do that is

[38:40] through i think i heard you mention a

[38:41] rain barrel

[38:42] which

[38:43] slows the

[38:44] release of the water

[38:46] onto the ground so we would address that

[38:49] issue at site plan approval

[38:51] unless it was a issue of such concern

[38:53] that you needed to address

[38:55] tonight

[39:01] that also be the case um with the

[39:04] french drain

[39:05] it would be addressed at

[39:07] site approval

[39:09] yes if it was

[39:10] if if we determined that drainage was an

[39:12] issue or potentially was an issue

[39:14] that's something we could require we

[39:16] wouldn't require it unless there was

[39:18] clear evidence that it was necessary and

[39:20] the french drain was necessary to solve

[39:22] the problem

[39:26] all right if uh are there any other

[39:28] comments

[39:30] hearing none closing the public hearing

[39:33] and entertain i will entertain a motion

[39:35] to uh

[39:37] board to begin deliberation on the

[39:39] application

[39:42] your emotions

[39:45] liberation

[39:48] second a second

[39:52] so um

[39:55] do either of the other board members

[39:56] have any comments

[39:58] i have one um i'm sorry

[40:00] um yeah i agree with this with the the

[40:03] storm water drainage system that's

[40:06] very vague i mean

[40:08] you need some kind of proof to say that

[40:10] the water is

[40:11] dumping down on your property i mean

[40:13] that's just i understand the concerns i

[40:15] get this is the bay there's water coming

[40:16] from everywhere

[40:18] but you just haven't have to have

[40:19] something more and just assuming it's

[40:21] going to be your property that's going

[40:23] to damage it so i mean

[40:24] i get the concerns but i mean if you had

[40:26] some type of

[40:28] evidence as mr kubiak said like

[40:31] um

[40:33] i mean i don't

[40:35] really see an issue with

[40:36] going

[40:41] so i think

[40:43] this variance kind of makes sense

[40:46] because it's going rearward

[40:48] to follow the house

[40:52] um my comments i i guess um

[40:56] given that the uh

[40:58] any potential drainage issues would be

[41:00] addressed

[41:03] during the approval of the site plan

[41:07] i think the

[41:11] of a comment received

[41:13] would take care of that

[41:16] that owner's concern

[41:19] i do believe that that the

[41:22] five criteria

[41:24] for branding of variance has been met

[41:28] that uh

[41:29] the uh

[41:34] plan that the applicant has is

[41:36] has a relatively small impact

[41:40] on the lot and on the area

[41:47] i have no additional

[41:49] comments

[41:53] uh at this point uh i'd like to call for

[41:56] a vote on the application from the board

[41:58] members

[42:02] i think the appropriate

[42:04] way to proceed would be to entertain a

[42:07] motion from a member of the board to

[42:10] either

[42:11] approve

[42:12] uh

[42:14] to directly council to the board to

[42:17] either approve or deny the application

[42:21] and as we did with the last one i'll

[42:23] prepare a resolution to approve or deny

[42:27] give it to you all you and then you'll

[42:29] come

[42:33] it'll change your mind until you make

[42:35] the final approval

[42:39] right

[42:40] so we hear a motion

[42:41] to approve the application

[42:48] motion would be

[42:49] to

[42:50] directly counsel to the board to prepare

[42:52] a resolution to

[42:55] prove or deny

[43:08] to prepare resolutions

[43:16] one favor of that motion

[43:21] so yeah

[43:24] emotions motion's been approved

[43:31] so uh uh mr sussman our town attorney

[43:34] will prepare draft resolution

[43:37] right now attorneys for

[43:39] counsel to the board of justice i will

[43:41] prepare a draft resolution

[43:43] circulated to you with

[43:45] comments to come back to me

[43:51] notified

[44:03] just a point of clarification and then

[44:06] and only then could i issue a zoning

[44:08] permit to authorize the construction so

[44:11] we still have to wait for

[44:13] this board to sign their official

[44:15] decision before you can start

[44:16] construction again oh yes you did yeah

[44:19] always get that question and um

[44:21] fortunately i have to disappoint people

[44:23] so i wanted the board to disappoint you

[44:25] this time

[44:29] is hurting us financially

[44:31] waiting

[44:34] says

[45:03] thank the board very much thank you very

[45:04] much i'd like to make a motion uh would

[45:06] like to hear a motion uh to adjourn the

[45:09] meeting

[45:09] we still have more on the agenda last

[45:12] time josh all right

[45:14] again thank you thank you

[45:30] how long are these a week or two mr

[45:32] sussman gets the paperwork schedule a

[45:33] meeting it's posted

[45:35] we all get back together

[45:47] i think the

[45:49] uh you don't mind mr doherty

[45:52] last thing i think we want to take a

[45:53] look at is uh

[45:55] board rules and procedures um

[45:58] everyone had a chance i know we had a

[46:00] copy emailed and there's a copy here in

[46:02] front of us

[46:03] um

[46:04] or the

[46:05] uh board of appeals rules and procedures

[46:08] um

[46:09] as far as i'm aware one of the the only

[46:11] changes we were

[46:14] considering was whether or not to extend

[46:16] the term for the chair and the vice

[46:18] chair considering we only meet

[46:20] a handful of times a year

[46:22] and whether or not we want it right now

[46:24] i think it's every year

[46:25] whether we wanted to bump that up to two

[46:27] years

[46:31] it seems reasonable to me

[46:34] i'm happy to

[46:36] leave it or entertain other suggestions

[46:38] or any other other rule changes that

[46:40] kind of

[46:44] aaron uh you

[46:48] if i may ask sharon is the

[46:51] term of office

[46:53] of the chair and the vice year in the

[46:55] zoning ordinance as well as the rules of

[46:57] procedure just the rules procedure if

[46:59] you know i know it's in the zoning

[47:01] ordinance

[47:03] so it would have to be a

[47:06] ordinance change if we did anything so

[47:08] if it's the sense of the if that's

[47:10] correct and if it's the sense of the

[47:13] members of the board that they would

[47:15] like to see uh the term of office of the

[47:18] chair of vice chair at two or three

[47:20] years or something other than one year

[47:23] then i think it would be appropriate for

[47:24] the board to

[47:27] adopt a motion to recommend to the mayor

[47:31] and council a

[47:33] change

[47:35] in the

[47:36] town code to that term and then if the

[47:40] mayor and council uh adopt an ordinance

[47:43] to

[47:44] make that change then we'd come back and

[47:46] amend the rules of procedure accordingly

[47:50] uh that sounds good um

[47:52] does anyone have thoughts or opinions on

[47:54] that before

[47:57] um i i would be in favor of extending

[47:59] the term

[48:01] uh in that case then i think we'll just

[48:03] go ahead and

[48:04] um put up a vote to adopt a motion to uh

[48:08] send a uh notice to the mayor of the

[48:10] council to

[48:11] make a change to the

[48:13] zoning warden

[48:16] the zoning ordinance to extend the term

[48:18] for um board of appeals

[48:20] chair and vice chair and nominees

[48:27] so

[48:28] how did we find

[48:32] i guess are we ready to vote on

[48:34] emotion

[48:41] all right let's uh let's put on a vote

[48:44] uh all in favor

[48:47] hi

[48:48] hi uh unanimously approved so

[48:51] at the co-see mr sussman for

[48:54] graphing motion or you're graphing the

[48:58] how do we get the paperwork to the

[49:00] yeah sarah what would you recommend

[49:03] sarah what would you recommend uh that

[49:06] the motion be reflected in a minute and

[49:09] that you as clerk uh send the

[49:11] communication to the mayor uh that the

[49:14] board adopted this motion

[49:16] and

[49:18] leave it up to the mayor and council to

[49:20] decide how they would like to proceed on

[49:22] the motion as a request to the board

[49:26] yeah i can do that

[49:28] what did you want to extend the term to

[49:31] two years three years let's do two years

[49:34] two years it's not overly burdensome to

[49:36] do this every year but uh

[49:38] okay

[49:41] thank you uh

[49:43] are there any other

[49:45] objections changes considerations we

[49:47] want to make to

[49:49] yeah rules and procedures

[49:56] i did receive i did read the uh

[49:58] procedures and i have no comments on

[50:03] but

[50:04] uh the only thing that this is probably

[50:06] more administrative than rules but it

[50:08] would

[50:08] it would be nice if i know things have

[50:10] to be posted publicly for a certain

[50:12] amount of time and it takes time for

[50:13] staff to prepare paperwork

[50:16] um

[50:17] if there's any way that uh

[50:19] we can squeeze the time between

[50:22] someone filing and us meeting i mean we

[50:25] might be

[50:26] we might be meeting as quickly as as

[50:28] humanly possible

[50:29] but

[50:31] if there's any any way that we can uh

[50:34] having seen how long it took the

[50:36] neighbors when the softwork order went

[50:37] down to when we finally actually got to

[50:39] hear from him it was uh it was a fairly

[50:41] long

[50:42] amount of time from someone who's

[50:43] actually having the work done so

[50:45] um i don't think there's anything the

[50:46] rules directly for that so maybe

[50:49] if there's nothing we can do

[50:51] um

[50:52] well in the zoning code it does

[50:55] have the procedure as to you know the

[50:58] time the length of posting yeah and all

[51:00] of that

[51:02] um

[51:05] but i mean as long as i can get the uh

[51:07] advertisement in

[51:10] and the posting

[51:12] you know

[51:15] we maybe could do it in 30 days

[51:18] you know if everything is

[51:25] yeah we'll just we'll just try our best

[51:26] and if anything needs to change

[51:31] okay um

[51:33] any other business before the board

[51:38] case i make a motion

[51:40] to adjourn do i have a second i'll

[51:42] second it all right meeting adjourned

[51:44] thank you everybody

[51:57] so

[52:04] um

September 8, 2022 Board of Appeals

Transcript