[0:00] ordinance

[0:27] yeah

[0:34] I thought about that

[0:37] we're ready to go

[0:42] thank you

[0:51] uh all right everybody I think we're

[0:54] going to get started here

[0:55] um this is the board of appeals meeting

[0:58] 7 PM July 31st 2023

[1:02] um as a first item on the agenda we do

[1:05] have a new member joining the board here

[1:07] uh Miss Amy Everett uh welcome is there

[1:11] anything you'd like to say

[1:12] hello hi welcome

[1:16] um okay and uh I guess as a kind of

[1:21] overview to what we do here particularly

[1:24] new member and for uh the applicant

[1:28] um my

[1:30] you know assessment of what we do or

[1:32] we're the people who allow you to bend

[1:34] the rules

[1:36] um there are uh

[1:38] there is a series of uh ordinances and

[1:41] rules that are followed for new

[1:43] constructions and we are your neighbors

[1:46] our goal here is not to

[1:48] say yes or no but to find a nice ground

[1:50] to to bending those rules so um do

[1:53] consider us as hopefully uh you know

[1:55] friends and and neighbors and not uh

[1:58] some board thumbs up or thumbs down

[2:01] um okay on with it uh we are here in

[2:04] case 2023-2 to consider an application

[2:07] from Mr Ronald muffley of property 4007

[2:10] 14th Street for our variants to allow

[2:12] for the construction of a deck a front

[2:14] porch extending eight feet into the

[2:16] required 15-foot front yard uh attended

[2:19] here today are um Can someone can you

[2:22] guys answer present uh Mr Paul Doherty

[2:24] uh present Miss Amy Everett president

[2:27] and Mr Stephen sharp present we are also

[2:30] joined by town clerk Sharon hum and

[2:33] legal counsel Fred Sussman at this point

[2:36] I'll pass to Sharon or confirmation of

[2:38] posting uh posting and documents entered

[2:40] into the record uh specifically the

[2:43] application made the staff report and

[2:46] letters of support

[2:48] a public hearing for the case

[2:52] 202302 was advertised in the southern

[2:55] Maryland news for three weeks July 14th

[2:57] 21st and the 28th notice was also posted

[3:01] on the town's website the hearing notice

[3:04] was transmitted to the Planning

[3:05] Commission on July 10 2023 also on July

[3:10] 10 2003 notice of the hearing was mailed

[3:13] by registered mail to the applicant and

[3:16] adjoining property owners and notice was

[3:18] posted on the property by the Department

[3:20] of Public Works on July 10 2003.

[3:25] thank you

[3:28] at this point we will open up the floor

[3:30] for the petitioner to give their

[3:32] presentation

[3:33] Mr muscle

[3:37] hey thank you for all you for being here

[3:39] for this

[3:40] um I'm not a great public speaker so

[3:42] I'll try to do this as quick as I can

[3:44] um you did mention that the eight foot

[3:46] deck is what I petitioned my original

[3:49] application was for 12-foot deck to to

[3:52] replace the existing 12 foot so I would

[3:53] ask if you consider that 12 foot just

[3:55] since we're here why not

[3:58] um I've been in the house for three

[3:59] years part of buying the house was the

[4:01] selling point was the nice size deck was

[4:03] on the front of the house it gives me a

[4:04] nice view of the water

[4:06] it is falling down now whoever built it

[4:08] before use the wrong materials and it's

[4:11] rotten it's unsafe and it needs to be

[4:14] redone

[4:15] um I just ask that you consider you know

[4:18] the full 12 foot but obviously we can

[4:21] compromise where we need to

[4:25] yeah that's pretty much it I mean okay

[4:27] yeah uh we'll have some uh I guess uh

[4:31] we'll come back and ask you I think you

[4:33] can sit there okay

[4:35] um the board will ask you questions as

[4:37] we go through this okay um uh why don't

[4:39] you go ahead and have a seat and uh I

[4:41] will since uh our our Planning and

[4:43] Zoning administrator uh Mr Kubiak is not

[4:46] here

[4:47] um I will go ahead and read from some

[4:52] I guess a summary of his staff report to

[4:55] the board that he provided uh last

[4:57] weekend is in the record

[4:59] um and I do urge the board to please uh

[5:04] add in anything they think is important

[5:06] that I might have missed here

[5:08] um so please let me know if I have uh

[5:10] there's something important okay so this

[5:13] is from Mr jacobiak and is my summary of

[5:15] his report

[5:16] um Mr muffley applied for a zoning

[5:18] permit to replace the deck attached to

[5:19] the property as it is in a state of

[5:22] disrepair Mr Jakubiak denied the permits

[5:25] stating that only decks under 35 square

[5:27] foot are allowed to be in the front yard

[5:28] according to zoning

[5:30] um this deck pre-existed Mr muffley's

[5:32] ownership but the town has no record of

[5:34] a permit for the existing deck Mr

[5:37] muffley applied for a variance uh with

[5:39] the plan provided to the board

[5:42] um and there was a comment here um that

[5:44] there are there's an application for uh

[5:46] 12 foot variants and there's also some

[5:49] on paper for a us a deck that extends to

[5:52] seven foot of the front lot line which

[5:54] would be an eight foot variance

[5:56] um there's a requirement for a 15-foot

[5:59] space between the house and the property

[6:02] line

[6:03] um so and the um and finally the uh

[6:08] the eight foot variants would be uh four

[6:11] foot closer to the house than the

[6:13] existing deck so smaller and farther

[6:14] away from the street

[6:16] um some key points from the staff report

[6:18] by my reading is that there is a

[6:21] neighboring property Three Doors Down

[6:23] that extends about the same amount into

[6:25] the front yard of the uh

[6:27] this particular of the eight foot

[6:29] variants

[6:31] um Mr Jakubiak notes that standard

[6:33] number one uh is one we want to keep an

[6:35] eye on the one about being harmonious of

[6:37] the zoning ordinance

[6:39] um he states that the proposal as it

[6:41] stands isn't in harmony with the zoning

[6:43] ordinance as was as it would impact the

[6:45] character of the street due to the deck

[6:47] design

[6:48] he also notes that for standard number

[6:50] three the one on special circumstances

[6:53] the fact that an unpermitted deck

[6:55] already exists on this property is not a

[6:57] condition that we are to consider

[7:01] um and from my reading he seems uh to

[7:04] recommend to build a deck more like a

[7:06] front porch in style and size

[7:10] these recommendations from Mr Kubiak if

[7:13] the board approves them He suggests we

[7:15] add the following conditions

[7:17] to build a deck that includes decorative

[7:19] skirting through plant vegetation where

[7:21] the old deck was positioned to modify

[7:24] the building plan to include something

[7:26] more along the style of a welcoming

[7:28] porch and prohibit placement of a roof

[7:31] or enclosure on the deck

[7:34] can't quite remember if he put size

[7:36] recommendations on his uh

[7:39] but like any deck sizing in his

[7:41] recommendation

[7:42] um but I assume that applies to his

[7:45] recommendations apply to the eight foot

[7:48] variants as listed in the documentation

[7:50] and not the 12 foot variants the

[7:53] applicant has asked

[7:56] um at this point I'll pause and see if

[7:59] there's anything

[8:01] any other board member or or the

[8:03] applicant wants to it uh

[8:06] income question

[8:09] what was advertised in the newspaper

[8:14] very specific deck size uh in the

[8:18] advertisements

[8:20] it was for the um

[8:23] eight foot into the required 15 foot

[8:25] before it would definitely was advertise

[8:28] something the word is constrained to

[8:31] fundamentally into consideration

[8:33] that the

[8:35] notice that was given okay

[8:43] thank you

[8:51] quick look at his actual

[8:54] the actual paperwork doesn't seem like

[8:56] he

[8:57] adds any additional size constraints on

[9:00] his recommendations

[9:02] sounds like those four suggestions are

[9:06] in addition to the eight foot bearings

[9:13] uh okay uh so that uh hearing no

[9:17] Corrections of my summary

[9:19] um we can move on to a section where we

[9:22] hear a testimony from proponents of this

[9:25] particular plan so if you're a neighbor

[9:27] or a friend or have any concerns on this

[9:30] case in a positive direction please do

[9:33] come up uh to the microphone in the

[9:35] front uh announce your name your address

[9:39] generally and uh if you represent

[9:41] anybody or if you're speaking on your

[9:43] own

[9:45] oh Mr Sussman is also pointing me out

[9:48] that I will also have to swear you in

[9:52] okay you can do it um

[9:56] okay in Massachusetts

[9:58] um so this will apply to everybody and

[10:00] when you step up just state that you

[10:03] agree with this uh do you solemnly swear

[10:05] or affirm under under the penalties of

[10:07] perjury that the testimony you're about

[10:08] to give and the responses and statements

[10:10] you're about to make will be the whole

[10:11] truth and nothing

[10:14] so uh whoever wishes to speak first

[10:17] please come on up

[10:23] um okay

[10:25] uh in that case uh seeing none we will

[10:28] take testimony for our opponents to this

[10:30] plan same rules please come up

[10:32] announce your name address

[10:35] you represent somebody or that you're

[10:37] speaking on your own path

[10:42] should we read it to the record to the

[10:44] letter that was written that's a good

[10:46] idea

[10:49] though there was one proponent of

[10:54] um this particular plan

[10:56] um this is a letter from Miss Patrick

[10:58] Mahoney

[10:59] I don't know

[11:00] um stating as an adjacent property owner

[11:03] I am writing to support the request for

[11:05] variants from Ronnie muffley case 2023-2

[11:08] uh we live across the street from Mr

[11:10] muffley he's a great neighbor and for

[11:11] the first time in 30 years we finally

[11:13] have a neighbor who's investing

[11:14] thousands of dollars to improve this

[11:16] property it's improving our neighborhood

[11:18] town and our property values regarding

[11:20] this variance his requests will keep uh

[11:22] the front deck of his in line with the

[11:24] other decks on his side of the street

[11:25] he's asking for nothing out of the

[11:27] ordinary here in the older part of the

[11:28] town the streets and older homes get

[11:30] complicated as we are not a cookie

[11:32] cutter development I feel it would be

[11:34] very prudent and a display of some

[11:35] neighborly quote small town charm for

[11:38] you all to look at the bigger pictures

[11:39] right this variance has requested thank

[11:41] you

[11:43] all right

[11:45] um

[11:46] is there anything anybody would like to

[11:48] say or any questions the board would

[11:50] like to ask

[11:52] can I add a couple things so in Mr

[11:55] jacobiak's statement he said that about

[11:57] the skirting around the deck that is in

[11:59] the plan to do lattice underneath to you

[12:02] know so you can't see underneath it and

[12:04] also if you look at the picture of the

[12:05] house currently the front steps are

[12:06] narrow and those front steps are going

[12:09] to be widened to make it look more like

[12:11] a front porch would look rather than you

[12:13] know a deck I guess okay I don't know

[12:15] how you make a deck look like a porch

[12:18] yeah I have a copy of it too sounds good

[12:21] um is there anything that you he was a

[12:23] bit more precise language than I did

[12:26] um

[12:27] specifically with the leading of the

[12:29] stairs

[12:30] um I won't get into it but if you are

[12:32] you

[12:33] did you have any problems with the

[12:36] recommendations that Mr kubac made or is

[12:38] it is this the first time you're hearing

[12:39] of it oh no no I actually spoke with a

[12:41] phone last week sometime I think and we

[12:44] went over some of this stuff so yeah

[12:46] I've I had and he sent me the report as

[12:48] well so I read it yes okay so you don't

[12:49] like there's nothing you'd like the

[12:51] board did because he's making a

[12:52] recommendation we generally take his

[12:54] under advisement

[12:55] um but you're welcome to if there's

[12:56] anything in here that

[12:57] no I mean I don't I don't disagree with

[12:59] anything that he said I mean I just

[13:01] I would like you to consider the whole

[13:03] 12 foot and I understand it was

[13:04] advertisers would advertise I get that

[13:05] but I just yeah yeah I don't uh it

[13:08] sounds like we can't

[13:09] um but we can

[13:11] continue on uh this way and I believe

[13:14] you can always reappeal

[13:16] or ask for a different variance if you'd

[13:19] like to do that you can do this it's all

[13:21] over again

[13:22] um I

[13:24] uh as we haven't actually begun

[13:26] deliberations that looking at your

[13:30] the existing deck is very close to the

[13:32] front and we do we do try and take Mr

[13:35] jacobiak's recommendations

[13:38] are you serious he's been you know I I

[13:39] understand so I think this one it seemed

[13:43] like he came up with a nice reasonable

[13:44] conclusion and I think we'd

[13:47] it would be more difficult I think for

[13:48] the full 12-foot variants

[13:51] but okay

[13:53] okay if nobody has anything else to add

[13:55] at this point I will close the public

[13:58] hearing

[13:59] last call for statements before the

[14:01] board yeah

[14:02] so I'm just curious with some of the

[14:04] some of the recommendations that were

[14:06] made for this the front porch versus

[14:08] deck situation in the drawings to me it

[14:12] looks like there's actually two

[14:13] different variations of stairs being

[14:15] proposed one that goes out to the street

[14:18] kind of like right in front of your

[14:19] front door right the one that goes off

[14:21] to the side so is the side one just to

[14:25] your driveway and then there's a

[14:26] separate one that goes frontwards okay I

[14:29] just wanted to make sure that it's

[14:30] understanding the drawings

[14:32] one one

[14:37] wide like in the front it will have a I

[14:39] think it's almost six foot wide yeah

[14:46] all right uh with that

[14:49] um we are going to close the public

[14:50] hearing I make a motion to begin

[14:53] deliberations do I have a second

[14:55] a second then

[14:58] okay

[14:59] um so at this point the board will Talk

[15:00] Amongst ourselves and issue any opinions

[15:04] um

[15:05] and uh yeah so

[15:09] um

[15:11] I guess the question for the board is

[15:13] what do we think we have the original

[15:16] plan along with Mr jakubiak's

[15:19] recommendations which it sounds like

[15:21] uh that far outside of the proposed plan

[15:26] anybody have faults

[15:28] concerns yeah I'd like to

[15:31] um I read the report I agree with Mr

[15:33] kubiak's recommendations

[15:36] um

[15:36] the the ones that the one point that

[15:40] um I would make is even for a front

[15:43] front of the house even even eight put

[15:46] eight foot is pretty expansive

[15:49] um and I think a six foot would be more

[15:52] reasonable

[15:54] front of the house you know to make it

[15:57] more porch bike

[15:59] um other than that I had no other

[16:01] comments

[16:04] you know I think the standards have been

[16:06] met

[16:11] a variance would be called for it's just

[16:14] a matter of uh

[16:15] how much the variant should be

[16:26] oh did we go around

[16:28] open open open floor I mean six to eight

[16:32] feet

[16:33] two feet that's not really

[16:35] that

[16:37] it's not we're not talking like five

[16:38] foot ten feet

[16:56] you're stacking decks thank you as well

[16:59] too yeah and so yeah so I think that

[17:03] eight feet would allow him to have what

[17:05] his neighbors have correct well the

[17:07] question is whether his neighbor's deck

[17:09] has been permitted

[17:11] yeah permitted or was there a bootleg

[17:13] deck I don't think we know and I'm not

[17:15] sure if we're allowed to open that uh

[17:17] particular

[17:20] you know the fact the fact that a

[17:22] neighbor has it is less relevant than

[17:26] does it conform to the standards to the

[17:28] to the zoning

[17:30] ordinance

[17:32] you know should we Grant a variance

[17:34] against the zoning ordinance not not

[17:37] should we Grant it based on what

[17:39] somebody else has done

[17:44] my own personal opinion I'm I'm not the

[17:47] size isn't that large of an issue to me

[17:49] my read on

[17:51] Mr jacobiak's recommendations were

[17:53] mostly stylistic that it it appear like

[17:56] a front deck rather than a back deck

[17:59] place on the front of the house and

[18:02] um

[18:03] he seems to be a fairly

[18:05] based on his like historical work of

[18:07] Fairly conservative

[18:08] uh administrator and and makes

[18:11] recommendations that that follow in

[18:13] uh the guidelines as he sees them

[18:16] um I'm specifically remember what we

[18:17] just talked about with the uh

[18:20] back shed that was too close to the back

[18:21] lot line

[18:23] um and I think if he had a problem with

[18:26] the eight foot size he would have said

[18:28] so

[18:30] um

[18:32] well the pictures the examples of

[18:34] porches

[18:36] that were in the report

[18:40] um

[18:41] I remember correctly

[18:44] they looked smaller to me than eight

[18:46] foot

[18:51] I'm not exactly sure what

[18:53] what the standard is for a porch

[18:56] but if you're looking for a front

[18:57] entrance way

[19:00] it it

[19:03] there needs to be some size restrictions

[19:05] on a front entrance way

[19:08] that's why I say that's why I

[19:09] recommended six foot instead of eight

[19:12] looking at the plans that he has too

[19:14] um

[19:15] the way that architect or the contractor

[19:17] has it mapped out it looks

[19:20] familiar to a front board I would have

[19:22] to say I mean it doesn't look like a big

[19:24] massive deck you'd have in your house or

[19:26] something like that it looks it's got

[19:28] the curb appeal

[19:30] um

[19:31] and it doesn't look unreasonable

[20:02] so

[20:08] yeah I guess that falls that discussion

[20:10] falls under the minimum necessary

[20:12] variance this is one of those

[20:14] those gray areas here six or six or

[20:17] eight feet

[20:18] um

[20:19] I think at this point we could probably

[20:23] just go with an up or down when we get

[20:25] to it on

[20:26] on size of the uh of the variants here

[20:33] okay uh so it's uh six foot or eight

[20:36] foot is an issue

[20:39] any other concerns

[20:42] on either the plan or the

[20:44] recommendations

[20:51] and we're fine with the uh prohibition

[20:53] on the the uh no no enclosed decks

[20:57] doesn't look good if that's in the plan

[20:58] anyway

[21:03] all right

[21:04] um so for the standards for the board to

[21:07] hold our five-fold

[21:09] um

[21:10] first that this change is harmonious

[21:12] with the intent of the ordinance

[21:15] um that this particular application is

[21:18] permitted within the Zone which it is

[21:21] um

[21:22] is this a special circumstance and

[21:24] reasonable use for uh the lot

[21:28] um is there unnecessary hardship

[21:30] for this particular plot as opposed to

[21:33] the neighbors and is the variance

[21:35] granted by this board the minimum

[21:37] necessary

[21:42] does anybody else on the board have any

[21:45] concerns

[21:48] in these standards at all

[21:54] right

[21:56] um in that case I will go ahead and call

[21:59] for I'm going to call for two votes

[22:03] uh one for a eight foot variance and one

[22:06] foot is

[22:08] and that will be for the directory

[22:12] did I get that right six foot length uh

[22:15] six uh the deck would be six feet

[22:17] towards the lot line

[22:19] or um sorry yeah

[22:21] yeah away from that yes

[22:24] um yeah and

[22:27] um

[22:28] and once we call that vote will be to

[22:30] have Mr Sussman draft resolution uh

[22:33] continuing so

[22:35] uh I will start with

[22:39] six

[22:40] um six feet so I'm going to call for a

[22:42] vote so the vote is to allow for a

[22:44] variance uh admitting all of Mr

[22:48] jacobiak's recommendations as noted

[22:52] or a six foot variance

[22:55] um

[22:59] the variance is from So it's 15 feet

[23:01] from the street to the house and the

[23:04] variance would be the distance from

[23:07] house into that 15 foot so it would be a

[23:10] variance

[23:12] am I getting that right oh it's a

[23:14] variance um six foot variance would be

[23:16] six minus 15 so the variance would be

[23:21] that okay

[23:23] uh

[23:26] fine foot and since the house is right

[23:28] on the 15 foot line

[23:32] the other one will be a seven foot

[23:33] mirror

[23:36] either nine yeah nine foot four to seven

[23:38] yeah I'm not quite sure which direction

[23:40] the other okay we'll figure it out

[23:42] um

[23:43] okay so uh let's go around so this would

[23:47] be the six foot deck

[23:50] um

[23:50] and I'll just go around and ask whether

[23:52] you

[23:54] yay or nay on on six feet uh Mr

[23:57] Dougherty yay

[23:59] Ms Everett yeah okay Mr Sharp no no all

[24:03] right so we have two

[24:05] uh I guess that would be me too

[24:09] so are we only voting on one or you can

[24:12] vote on both I mean but ultimately like

[24:13] it switches oh so we could vote

[24:16] I guess it could I mean

[24:19] uh I kind of figured it was either one

[24:21] or the other but yeah well if you can

[24:23] clarify that I might have to reboot okay

[24:24] let's go ahead and do that again so I uh

[24:27] I think it's either six or eight so

[24:29] let's vote on six first if you intend

[24:31] to

[24:32] um allow for the eight vote no on six

[24:36] okay let's do it again uh Mr Doherty

[24:38] yeah Miss Everett nay Mr Charles

[24:42] resolution does not pass

[24:46] um

[24:46] let's do a second one for the eight foot

[24:48] depth on the deck

[24:50] um along with the same contingencies

[24:53] that Mr jacobiak noted in a staff report

[24:57] um

[24:59] okay uh Mr Doherty I will abstain on

[25:02] that one okay uh Miss Everett yeah Mr

[25:05] Sharp yeah and I will also vote yay

[25:10] that motion passes and that is a motion

[25:12] for an eighth foot uh eight foot deck

[25:16] um along with the contingencies from Mr

[25:18] Jakubiak and we will uh have Mr Sussman

[25:22] here draft a resolution containing this

[25:24] decision

[25:25] uh unless there's anything I miss here

[25:30] um in that case that is the oh okay so

[25:33] for the uh for the applicant what

[25:35] happens here is Mr Sussman will draft up

[25:37] the legalese we will get back together

[25:39] and maybe a couple weeks a month from

[25:42] now

[25:44] um depending on how quickly we can get

[25:45] back in here we will vote on the actual

[25:47] final language and once that's done the

[25:49] actual application is

[25:51] late and approved

[25:52] um

[25:54] and that is all on the agenda for this

[25:57] meeting here today so without

[26:01] further Ado I move we adjourn do I have

[26:04] a second

[26:05] all right thank you

[26:07] uh that's it thanks everybody

[26:15] I see your uh

[26:17] in the paper you have with these

[26:20] the swearing in the scoring paper that's

[26:23] going to write it down

[26:28] I know a lot of people named Franklin

[26:30] releases as well as well too I think

[26:34] Lisa's wife Frank

July 31, 2023 Board of Appeals

Transcript