Zoning Board of Appeals - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everybody. This is a rescheduled July meeting of the City of Coraline Zoning Area Board. We call the meeting to order at 6.06 on Monday, August 3rd. Our first agenda item is for Otter Place and the Wedge Lab. I think what we're pronouncing that right, six area variances for purposes purpose of installing a 14x4 above ground pool. Due to the pre-ethically non-conformity of the applicant seeking variances for minimum lot size with front yard setbacks per section 300, additional variances are requested for the required four-foot vegetated strip and for the presence of an unpaved driveway. Is there somebody here to speak about this one?

Yeah.

both of us. Come on up to the podium there and just if you'll write your names down. I think there's a I think it's set up there for you.

It's a question. Right. What's that stuff yet, right? It's the pool of stones. I'm going to do your waiver.

It is August after all.

I think it was really hot that she came in, and I believe she filled out a waiver itself.

Give me one second.

Or could you just ask, is it invalid? The poll is there. It actually has been there for several years.

almost several years. Yeah. So the waiver was full. Okay.

We're, we're, I'm actually the owner. We're co-owners of six out of three blocks.

Okay. Okay. Okay. So our text here is a little misleading. So the pool is installed, so we're talking about a pre-existing action property, right?

No, this should, she told us, They take it up and put it down every year. OK. So he takes it up and takes it down.

Yeah. In the wintertime, they typically will take it down. There's a concrete pad there that they put it on. OK. All right.

A lot of work. It's a very strong tree. It's a lot of work.

But it goes up and down. And it's just consistent with the way I do everything. OK. All right. Good go. All right.

So I'm Steven Forney, senior. As I mentioned, my son and I are co-owners next door. We want to speak against allowing the variance. The number of reasons there, obviously, one of them is the neighborhood. Everything is a small lot there. And giving the variance is going to inflate kind of like everybody in the neighborhood. That kind of changed, wanted to change the character of the neighborhood. But on top of that, in this particular case, the pool is such that it creates a number of hazards for the community already. Whenever the pool is discharged in any way or water has to be taken out of it, it's flushed straight into Otter Creek.

Across the, down the driveway and across the road and then into the creek.

pumped into the creek. It's created a public health nuisance for our home anyways, and probably for Two Art of Creek, because the pool is a mosquito breeding ground. And, you know, especially when they put the cover on it, because it holds water, and you just get clouds of mosquitoes off of it. And because it's also never been permitted, they're basically running extension cords out there to run the pump. is hazardous in and of itself. And it's not secure. The fence is still locked around it, and the ladder is not secure. They take the ladder off, but they just leave it there. Any six or seven people pop that thing back up there and hop in.

That's pretty serious stuff. What kind of pool is this? Is it a Walmart rain pool?

If they're taking it down, it's got to be one of those final.

Do we all know what this pool, what it's up? It's all for a final inspection, yeah. Okay. Because if I'm not mistaken, if they're going to have a, you know, above ground pool, they had to do what I did, of course, put an underground line all the way out, 520 outlet. It's permanent, yeah. They still got to provide, I mean,

They theoretically can have an extension cord as long as it's plugged into a GFI outlet, but I don't know yet because you haven't even been called for it.

And I think this is, this is, you know, the implication is now everything that needs to be done.

Mr. Lewis is here. You guys are voting on the air barracks, not the relativity of the pool. It's not the safety of the pool. You guys are voting whether or not to give the air barracks over that. Keep in mind that this area of variance is the same when you're given a number of other properties in the city. So to, I mean, I'm, I'm, so I appreciate, let me know it's not safe and I will give you a list of it if I can. Thank you.

And you understand what he is saying, right?

Our job is only the variance itself. You've just got the area of variance. And I have already surmised from kind of going back through sort of previous minutes that this was a routinely granted

No, you're on the record and he's been notified of what is possibly an unsafe situation. So the variance that we will review is... asked the questions that's a good thing you got okay and if you see them dumping chemical water in the water's pretty good how do you recommend you call the dec because that's that's even out of mind and if you've seen it before call the ec so you can prep them for a call that may happen and that's because that is uh that's that's a brook trout stream yes yep native major drug dream so that's another level higher than uh like being moving further downstream

Good, good. I'm good.

Thank you. Thank you for everyone. So just for the question, would I, would it be relevant to the board here to talk about, we already talked about how she drained the home. Yeah, but then she transferred. I guess that's right. As we said before, the variances you know that's the part we own on, but of course everything that was mentioned here is also noted. Okay, thank you. Now, if I recall correctly, there was also a variance request for.

That's consistent with the way it's up here.

It's consistent with where you guys have been. Yeah, we have a lot of those. Okay. That's fine. Thank you. All right.

Any other questions for any of the neighbors? I'll take a motion to close the public hearing. Motion's been made. I'll look for a second. Second has been made. All in favor? Aye. Public hearing is closed. I'm going to go through Our questions, number one, whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variances, area variants, that is plural, I guess. And we didn't really address that with the neighbors there, let's put the... pre-existing non-conformities, as Roy has mentioned, is something that we address in many different cases. And there's concern, you guys will agree with, is primarily with the structure of the pool itself, and the service lines to the pool. And- Form regulations protect the insecure. And co-regulations. associated with that. So when I look at the variances, I would have to say that an undesirable change by granting is going to be no. I'm looking specifically at what the area variances are being sought. The lot size lot with front yard setbacks and the paved driveway and vegetative strip, I think are not, are something that are pretty insignificant compared to the other issues there. So I'm gonna say no on that one. Number two, whether the benefits sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area of variance. And again, I think no is a right of intent. Whether the requested area of variance is substantial. There's half a dozen different items there. But I think they're all fairly commonplace in what we encounter. Some just take no on that one as well. So we have a disagreement in whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Sticking to the variances themselves, I don't think so. However, because of what our district Neighbors brought up tonight, I think it's very important to talk about in particular the physical environmental conditions. If discharge is taking place as something that as we've gone on the record here, advising the neighbors that that be advanced to New York D.C. office and our codes office as well in terms of that, as well as any safety issues with the structure itself. I'm going to say no on that one. And then again, number five, whether the alleged difficulty was so created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the board, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the variance. And I think the answer to that one is, of course, yes. It is probably existed as due to the ownership of that particular property. So I'm We haven't discussed anything about granting the variances. In specific to the variances, I think we're agreeing that they're something that it's the separation, and just so you guys are understanding that too, that the structure itself has to be safe. We're granting variances that have pre-existed, and that's one of the things that we encounter quite a bit here. I'll repeat the motion on that. Just to clarify, to sort of answer just those five questions, we're no less except for the last one. Four no's and a yes. One through four and then five is yes. I'm going to repeat the motion. If not, I will, yes, kind of read. I can go and say, well, the motion has written and with the condition of the paved driveway within two years of the condition, because it's paved or concrete, You know, impervious structure, impervious drive, or? Driveway. Driveway. And a satisfactory result of inspection by Cohen's office? Is that?

Yeah, I mean, it's all part of the building permit. You guys are going to do it.

Gotcha. All right. Uh so motion uh is for us to approve the uh area variances uh with the condition that the driveway be uh be paved.

Impervious. Impervious. That's right. I agree with that. Just say impervious. Yeah.

The driveway be surfaced uh within two years time. So that would be by the summer of uh 2028. And that's the only condition we're setting on granting the variance. So second. And second has been made. All in favor? Seeing none, I say aye. Aye. Motion carries. Number two, 26 Hamlin Street. Can you do 28 Ern next?

Ern?

Yeah. Yep. Yep.

He's here, and if he's the only one. OK. We need to. we're going to have to change the agenda from chair here.

Um, um, and substitute, uh, Roger and number 3, 28 Kern Avenue, Matthew Guerrero, states an area variance to install four foot chain link fence in front and side yards. Chain link fences are not permitted in front yards, residential districts. So, uh, are you Mr. Guerrero? Yes, sir. Okay, good. Yeah, you just. write your name down on there and we're good to go. So, Paul, is there anything you need to know about this?

Yeah, so there's about 15 feet from the front of my house to the sidewalk. So, without the variance, I would lose a pretty big portion of my yard. Yeah. And I'd like to secure as much of it as possible. Yeah. I believe Mr. Ferrell says three-foot yards because he's got a little as well. Yeah. Yeah, so the main one's directly on the side of my house. There'd be no fence directly in front of the residential structure.

Yeah. No fence in front of

The structure. Besides the side deck.

Yeah, right here. Nice. The height is four feet.

Four feet. Yeah, you don't want to see four feet. Usually it has to be a one-to-one ratio so you can see through it. But a chain-link fence, you can see through it just like you do. You can probably see through it better than a thick fence.

Okay. Any other questions for Mr. Guerrero? Any other things? Any questions for Roy or anything? I think I look at it as pretty straightforward. Thank you. Thank you. I'll make a motion to close the public hearing. And it's been seconded. All in favor say aye. Aye. All righty. Again, we'll look at the questions. Whether undesirable change will be produced from character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variance. I think no. Whether the benefits sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area variance. And again, I think no. This is a proper method for an improvement such as that. Whether the requested area variance is substantial You know, it's pretty commonplace. It's a different, you know, it's a unique, unique situation there. And again, number four, so no on that one. Number four, whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on physical environmental conditions in a neighborhood district. And that's the floodplain area. I don't think there's anything to do with that. It's pretty straightforward. And whether the Number five, whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the board, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the variance? Again, I think the answer is yes on that. So, Andy, I'm having four no's. Any yes? And any other questions we have amongst ourselves here, or of Roy? Hearing none, I'm going to move to grant the area variance as described in the application package for 28 Kern Avenue. I'll seek a second. Seconded by me. All in favor, 25 to say aye. Aye. Motion carries. I hope you can get with Andy on anything we need there. Yeah, I'll have to. We've got to generate the decision sheets still. All right. Okay. Moving on. We're going to get on to 26 Hamlin Street as our next agenda item. Moving to agenda number three. Patricia Crawford seeks area variances for the purpose of enlarging the concrete patio due to the pre-existing non-incorporation. The applicant is seeking area variances for minimum lot size, lot width, front area setbacks, the required four foot vegetative strip and for parking located in the front yard per statute. Is anybody here to speak on that one? Other than Roy?

So there's no front yard parking. So table 313 lot size, lot width or width as the guy that typed Yeah, she's not asking for the front. So the front yard, no. So 314 foot note that the test garage is 1.5 off the, off the, not required for it, but 3.75 at the safe strip and 384 C6. All right. Because she just finished the entire driveway part.

Yeah, the driveway. Almost that. Yep. Way through the line, right to the bottom.

Yeah.

yeah the problem with this house is is that the line for the neighbor is right after something yeah that's all right okay yeah okay yeah and she knows it's very specified there they're quite a bit of video stuff i'll show you yeah that would be that's it and that's you know so street all the way in the garage and it's right along but what she's asking for is this part right here yeah but That also should be C7, not C6. Sorry. What should be what? The variance. There's no photo of it. That's right.

All that means is parking the range like most single-family homes, so they're stacked. Yeah. Just go to paragraph seven, but it's access to the C 70. Yeah. Mine was the same way when I first bought it.

So these are all just a large shirt. They had a couple of feet. Yeah. She's done a great job. Is there a fence between her and the neighbor? There is. It's a privacy fence. It goes for the entire length. It's actually one of the biggest properties in Portland. Oh. The next door. Yeah. Yeah. And there's an entire fence around the whole property.

All right. Any other questions amongst us at all, guys? I don't know where you're going. Have I gone through your questions? No. All right. And I hold all the hearing. I make a motion to close public hearings. I will second. And all in favor signify by saying aye. All righty. Whether, you know, go through their questions. Number one, whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variance. I think no. pretty minimal, whether the benefits sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area variance. And the answer there is no, this is the way to do that kind of thing for pre-existing and new construction. Number three, whether the requested area variance is substantial. And again, I think no, that's a pretty common thing we encounter in a, City laws, number four, whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical, environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Again, I think no, because of its scale, its scope and size, it's not very large. Then number five, whether the alleged difficulty was self-graded, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the board, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of variance. And again, the answer is yes. Another one of those similar questions, Andy. So there's four. One through four is no. Number five is yes. I'll entertain a motion. The motion's been made to approve the area variances, or the request for area variances according to the application for 26 Hamlin Street. I'll look for a second. Second's been made. All in favor seem to be saying aye. Aye. And the motion carries. Moving on to agenda item number four is 87 North Main Street. Waba Bones seeks area variances to convert the residential structure in R3 into a bed and breakfast. Due to pre-existing non-conformities, the app is seeking variances for minimum front yard setbacks. side yard setback and detached garage setback per section 300. An additional area of variance is requested for the four-foot vegetation strip also per appropriate section in the clause in section 300. The Planning Commission will consider an application for a special use permit for the change in use per Okay, that's for them as well as the proposed parking plan. According to the table, so good. All right. We're just. On the area variances that you have to.

Grant, if you so wish, it is 3 and 84. Uh, no, where's the line.

Three 323 323 384 is the parking lot page that line okay that's right, so the give me one second. We have to specify the word yes it's basically conforms itself for.

See.

Well, actually there is up to that. But they're using it as that. So it says the 384C2 all parking spaces except those that accommodate single year residential dwellings shall be delineated with a painted line. That was mentioned in the meeting, the planning board meeting prior to this. And they noted that the parking lot was not lined. Okay. So I would recommend that If you guys see fit the issue that variance for that parking lot. How many spots are we talking? Three. Three for the rooms that are going to be granted. Okay. That's a large enough lot in the back. It's just that line.

Yeah.

And I'm sure if I ask Mrs. Bones to put some lines back there, I don't think she'd have a problem with it. It's just

The other stuff is pre-existing back in Florida.

The line thing was not solved with that. I mean, normally it wouldn't require a single family home, but because she's upgraded it now to a bed and breakfast, it does require one spot per room. She's running three.

Pretty good. So she's got to have three plus two herself.

That's what the grass. So the grass-based. So they they're like, this is a large mass of five or three being for the rooms and the two.

And then they already.

Yeah, they would start that before you guys stipulated that. Okay. Okay.

Well, I'm inclined to know that they're not required. I sometimes have to think that people that insurance companies might want to have you do that. But, you know, if I'm telling her, then I'm kind of inclined to let her know.

Because it's the only thing I have questions that if something needs to be accessible, either it may or it may not be something that would be required to .

If that kind of legislation ever gets advanced, if you do a property like this size or something like that. Well, I guess they didn't find that out at the time. We haven't had the publics. And the motion closed. I wish you had this motion made. I will second that. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Hearing portion is closed.

Do you have to know if it has to be on a small label? Do we really need it? No.

It's essentially just one single-unit residential home that they're using as the They're running out of time. All right.

I'll move to our questions. Number one, whether an undesirable change will be produced in the characters of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby property will be created by the granting of the area variance? The answer is no. Number two, whether the benefits sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue other than an area variance. And the answer to that is no, it's the proper way. Number three, whether the requested area variance is substantial. And I think no, it's a pretty small area proportional to the lot. or other structures there. Number four, whether the proposed variance would have an adverse effect or impact on the physical and environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. The answer no is that simply because of size and scale. And number five, whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. Which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the board, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of variance. I think the answer there is all, especially in the cases, yes. So four nos, one through four no, and number five, yes, me and Andy. Okay. And then I think, I'm inclined to not have any conditions, just if you're not on the parking, despite what the Planning Commission might have indicated, I think the three vehicles, I don't think you, is something that could happen. That's something that I think that landlord and tenants can arrange for themselves and designate something. Well, she's going to provide valet parking for them. Something.

Okay. Something that would allow for... She's going to park the vehicles herself. Oh, okay.

So it's going to be an Airbnb-like thing? Yes, that's what it is. Oh, okay. Well, then I think you're... I don't think, yeah.

As long as you keep in mind... Everything but that is pre-existing, right? That 384C2 is not pre-existing. It's created by herd egg therapy.

Yes, so therefore we're doing the other setbacks. And then none of the pre-existing ones are not unusual in an area that's that close to downtown. So I'm inclined to We will treat those that we have with others. And according to what was produced in the application package. Any other comments on Kyle or anything like that? I'm going to, I think I will move to approve the area of variance that was described in the application package. and allow the new area of parking as also described in the application package without any additional requirements at this time. That being the motion, I'll look for a second. Second has been made. All in favor seem to be saying aye. Aye. Motion carries. Number five, agenda item 26, Allen Avenue. Floyd added, seeks area variances for the purpose of installing a 10 by 12 shed side yard. With the pre-existing non-conformities, the applicant is seeking area variances for minimum lot size, lot width, front, side, and rear yard setbacks per section 323. And the applicant is also seeking an area variance for parking located in the front yard. for Section 384A-51. And the applicant will require a floodplain development permit from the Planning Commission. Which was granted. Which was granted by the... That was tonight.

They actually granted that. So the only stipulation, I think, was they need to be anchored down. Yeah, they need to be anchored.

I mean, well, that's been made by them. That's the situation. They've made their approval. Is that something that has to go to us as well? I think it does. What are the variances?

Yeah, any variance. So anchoring. What? Yeah. No, not that part. This is part of what's right here. Yeah. Those are what we're looking at. Yep. All right.

Anything we need to... So it's mostly normal stuff, except for 384 and 382. So at some point they expanded their parking. Parking front guard. Yeah, so at some point they expanded their parking with no variances.

If you can see the picture here. Yes. Yes, I'll get a look at it here. I looked it up on my phone.

There was a permit issued for it, but for some reason the former zoning officer decided the area variance wasn't needed for that. So I'm not going to penalize the guy for something that was missed. The city should have noticed. And so that's also 65% of the front yard is not green space. Yeah. There we go. So that's why the 84 C1.

Yeah, just put an extra slide there. Okay.

So if anything in front of the house is front yard.

Yeah.

Does that, did he go all the way back to it?

I don't know. Just based on a picture. Okay.

I'm just saying, I don't want to penalize the guy for something that's a decision, but before we put it in.

Okay. And I must decide here, this is a, I think that's one of those book things. Yeah. Okay. So it's probably neighbor there. All right. Uh, anything to, uh, uh, kind of reminds me of that place on Kennedy Parkway.

So A1 and A2 are 3 and 8. Yeah. A1 and A2, uh, 2 and 8 floors can't park, you know, they should have got grants because front end parking and, uh, off-seat parking has to be a minimum of 10 feet behind the front facade, which is not that house. And like I said, he was granted a permit. Back in 21, 20, I don't remember right now. And none of this was done correctly. So I'm trying to fix that now.

Can you resurface the existing and then just add it? Yeah, that's what I did.

Yeah, because you can see in the photograph.

Yeah, that's what I thought it looked like when you showed the one air filter. Yeah, that's it. So in 22, it was finally completed, the job. Yeah. All right. Any other questions on anything? Anybody here to speak about that, I should ask first. All right. Any questions, Kyle, or anything like that? It's pretty straightforward. Nothing we have to address for what the... If we grant it, it's just granted. You don't have to...

This is... Essentially, it's the same thing you're doing with the exception of that.

With the exception that he was told that he was able to go out or something. Okay. Well, I'm back in there. I'm going to entertain a motion to close. Motion to the hearing. Motion to the name. I will second. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. All right, number one question whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby property will be created by the brand new the area variance no. Whether the benefits of the applicant can be achieved by some of the feasible for the applicant to pursue other than the variance. plural actually know whether the requested area variance is substantial. It builds this parking area, but I don't think an aggregate on the entire property is substantial. So I'm going to say no on that. Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical environmental conditions in the neighborhood district. And the answer there again, I think is no. And number five, whether the alleged difficulty was self-created. which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the board that shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the area variance. And there, again, I think if there was the one, only the one issue that Roy brought up where he was told he was okay, but it is, it does address numerous other, five other non-informant rates. So again, I just did an S on that one. So four Ls, any Yes, Andy? All right. I'll entertain a motion on this one from the guys. What? Motion has been made to approve the area variances as described in the application for 26 Helen Avenue. Look for a second. Second. Second has been made. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye. Motion carries. And that will do us for our regular agenda items. Did we have anything else? Andy, I didn't bring a... No, you have completed your business. That was our special unavoidable rescheduled meeting. Go over reading minutes, which I didn't hear. I didn't see any changes. I didn't notice anything, I think, Any time I see it, I just look mainly for the new category. I don't think it's specifically important that the grantor, but you have to write that down. I know Andy, so everything looked good to me in terms of the discussion. So I'll entertain a motion to accept the meeting minutes of, I think a motion, or June, those are June meetings. The motion's been made and seconded. All in favor? Seeing none, say none. Aye. Aye. Do it. Okay, great. Meeting minutes are accepted for June. Next meeting. Next meeting is August, August meeting, which will be the 24th.

24th. And we're going to have a lengthy agenda of what? 15.

15, I think Caleb was saying. Okay. Go eat your dinner before.