This meeting is being transcribed and summarized.

Good evening, everyone.

Welcome to Kent County Board of Adjustment for the month of May.

Can you call roll, please?

Yes, sir.

Mr.

Simpson.

Here.

Mr.

Gallow.

Here.

Miss Denny?

Here.

Mr.

Jenkins.

Here.

Ms.

Hudson.

Here.

Mr.

Cusick.

Here.

Thank you.

That is six present.

Thank you with six present.

We have a quorum.

Introduction to staff, please.

Good evening, everyone.

My name is Jesse Lindenberg, and I will preside as the hearing officer tonight.

To my left is Mark Kennedy, R IT specialist, and down at the end we have Mr.

Fred Townsend, the legal counsel for the board.

Thank you.

At this time, everyone please rise for the pledge of allegiance.

Yes, sir.

One of our applicants um has asked to be moved down uh A twenty six thirteen to be heard last year's running late.

It's A twenty six-thirteen.

Correct.

Do you need to vote to adopt that?

Mr.

Townsend.

Mr.

Townsend, do we need a vote to move that?

Not to make that change in time.

Okay.

Okay, perfect.

Yeah, they'll just move to the last spot and to tonight's agenda.

Thank you.

Very good.

Um public hearing introduction.

Good evening, everyone.

My name is Jesse Lindenberg, and I will preside as the hearing officer for tonight's public hearing.

This hearing is being conducted for the purpose of providing the citizens of the county an opportunity to present testimony on these applications before the Kent County Board of Adjustment.

Everyone will have an opportunity to speak.

This will provide those who wish an opportunity to give their testimony.

If there is a group of interested citizens in favor or opposed to any of the applications, they may wish to elect one spokesperson among them to represent testimony to the board.

There is an official recording of these proceedings being made.

Therefore, we ask that only one person speak at a time and that they speak clearly.

Furthermore, there shall be no cross-examination of witnesses permitted during the public hearing.

But the board can ask the applicant questions after any opposition if necessary.

As a courtesy to other participants in this hearing, a maximum of three minutes will be allowed to any person who wishes to provide testimony.

The chairperson of the board has the discussion to allow additional time if deemed to be necessary.

To make statements when your application is called and for the record, please give your name, address, and allow our attorney to swear you in prior to providing testimony.

Copies of any written statements or exhibits used during the hearing should be presented for identification so that they may be included in the permanent record.

The procedure on each variant's application will be as follows.

The legal notice will be read on each case prior to the receipt of testimony.

There will be a brief explanation of the application by the staff.

Once those persons in favor and those in opposition have had an opportunity to speak, the hearing on that application will be declared closed.

Decisions on all applications heard this evening will be made by the board during the business meeting following the public hearing.

However, you are not required to remain after the public hearing once your request has been heard and closed.

During the business meeting, the board will consider all information of record.

A common vote of four members of the board shall be required to make a decision on each application.

If you do not wish to wait for the business meeting later this evening, you may call the Kent County Planning Department tomorrow between 8 and 5 at 744-2471 to learn of the board's ruling.

All applicants will receive written notification of the board's decision.

This notice may not be mailed until after the next scheduled meeting, but if approved, you are welcome to apply for any necessary permits prior to receiving this by mail.

Please keep this decision in your records for both you and all future property owners.

The public notice of this evening's hearing was published on May 1st, 2026 in the Delaware State News.

In addition, all of the subject properties were posted with a sign prior to the hearing to further notify the public of the nature of the applications.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jesse.

This time we'll have a statement by counsel.

Mr.

Townsend.

Thank you, Mr.

Cusick.

The standards for the granting of area variances are set forth by the Delaware Supreme Court in the case known as Board of Adjustment versus Quick Check Realty.

The standard applied to area variances considers whether a literal interpretation of zoning regulations results in exceptional practical difficulties of ownership.

And to make that determination, the board weighs the following four factors.

First, the nature of the zone where the property lies.

Second, the character and uses of the immediate vicinity.

Third, whether removal of the restriction on the applicant's property would seriously affect neighboring properties.

And fourth, lastly, whether failure to remove the restriction would create an exceptional practical difficulty for the owner in relation to the owner's efforts to make normal improvements to the property.

And this factor is satisfied only when the difficulties alleged are practical rather than theoretical and exceptional rather than routine.

In general, the board's not permitted to consider factors other than the four that I've listed.

So those speaking both in support of and in opposition to applications are urged to present only information bearing directly on the four factors, which restated briefly concern one the zoning district, two the character of the immediate vicinity, three, the effect on neighboring property owners, and four whether the applicant faces exceptional practical difficulties of ownership.

In particular, presenters are instructed to exclude from their presentations any discussion of personal disputes or acrimony between the applicant and neighboring property owners, as it is not the board's role to settle those types of disputes.

Presenters must limit their remarks to those issues the board can decide.

And Mr.

Qusick, that concludes my statement.

Thank you.

At this time we'll begin the public hearing starting with application A26-09.

All right.

Levy Court District is the third zoning district is RMH.

You can see here on the plot that we are looking to attach a carport here.

And it will be they are looking to be three feet six inches from the property line.

This is looking at the property.

A little bit to the side, looking up the driveways, up the road, and the other direction, the aerial, and further out.

There is someone here to represent the application.

Please step forward to the podium.

State your name and address and allow our attorney to swear you in.

You also can adjust the mic as needed, and if you want to tap on the screen, it'll be a good question.

I'm sorry, I can only my name is Anna Decker.

I live at 348 Rustic Lane, the property in question.

Okay.

Let our attorney swear you in.

I'm sorry, I you're hard to hear.

Let our attorneys wear you in.

Mr.

Ms.

Decker.

Oh, I'm sorry.

That's fine.

Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you give in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Yes.

You may proceed.

I'm sorry.

May proceed to present your case, please.

Why are you going to do the carport?

I want to I want to do a carport because I'm getting older.

I'm not in bad health, but I'm not in the best of health.

And last winter was very difficult for me to remove the ice and the snow from my car.

And I believe a carport will help with that.

What else can I say?

I'm not getting any younger.

Any questions from the board?

From Ms.

Decker?

So what you're supp what we need to know is in order to make a decision, is there an exceptional practical difficulty, which is kind of complicated why you need the variance on the side yard.

And um, and uh you did say you you're getting older and you need to be able to come into the house.

Correct.

Without and I I do have a handicapped tag.

Um so it was very difficult this past winter to clean the car off, and I do live alone.

Um does that answer your question.

Yeah, I think also just for the board's analysis, we're looking at this application just a little bit different.

Um I think because of because of the disability.

Um we're not looking at it for hardship.

We're we're looking at it, there's three criteria.

It must be reasonable, um, not altering the property or development, and then uh the accommodation to ability to address the person's disability.

So this application is a little bit different from the normal.

Okay.

Could you speak to why you would need the 24 foot compared to 22-foot wide carport?

I'm going for the size because I have a gate that goes to my backyard that I drive through.

And so if we made it any less than I think it's 21 feet, you can see the gate there.

And if it's any shorter, I would not be able to utilize that gate.

And I do utilize that gate.

Um, I have a couple of sheds in the back.

So if I have um if I have I have an air compressor if I need to put air in the tires, or if I have a mulch delivered, or whatever needs to go through, I need to go through that gate.

On the other side of that gate, you can see there's a concrete pad.

Um, so if it's any shorter, you wouldn't be able to get through there through the gate.

Thank you.

Any other comments, questions for the sticker?

So the so the car port, the core the back corner corner of the car port will be around where the hinge of the gate is.

Yes, it'll be about where that black trash can is.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Is the carport going to be a permanent structure or is it gonna be like um portable?

No, it's it's gonna be permanent.

It's gonna be attached to the house, so it'll match the roof.

It'll match the roof, um, the shingles and the roof line and everything will match the house.

Good.

Any other questions?

Question for staff.

Um the applicant is indicating that she holds a valid handicap permit.

I mean, is is that a reference to a parking permit or I believe so, yes.

Um, she did indicate that the reason that she is looking to build the carport is for accessibility.

So that's why, as Brian mentioned, we're doing it under the different criteria.

Okay.

So it is your testimony that you you you're disabled.

Is that right?

You don't have to tell me any in any reason why, um, but it is for the record um due to your disabilities that you're seeking this accommodation.

I do have limited mobility.

Um with a doctor's note.

That handicap tag came with the doctor's note.

So I think I think a uh handicap permit can be obtained by anyone who reaches a certain age.

80.

Okay.

Right.

I mean, so obviously you can get a handicap permit if you're younger than that, but you can also get one just by virtue of reaching the age of it.

Right.

And that's that's the purpose of my inquiry.

All right, thank you.

I I got a I have a question.

Um Ms.

Decker, isn't it true you had uh two knee surgeries?

Can you talk about that?

Two knee surgeries.

Um I've had right hip replacement as well, which I've had that done twice.

Umce in Dover, once in Wilmington.

Um actually it was the first hip replacement that I had that uh made me eligible for the handicap tag.

And it was issued by Dr.

Tues.

Okay.

And then there are other I've had other issues.

Okay, thank you.

That's qualified me.

Thank you.

I see that you have uh two letters in support.

Are these your direct neighbors?

No, one is my direct neighbor, and the other one is across the street.

Okay, thank you.

So the one note that I have is the other white car.

That's Nagy, Mrs.

Nagy.

Good.

All right.

Thank you, Ms.

Decker.

Thank you.

You can sit down.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else present that would like to speak in favor of the application?

Is there anyone online?

For our guests to join us online.

If you would like to speak in favor of application A twenty six oh nine, please indicate by raising electronic handle pressing star three if you're joining us by phone.

No hands raised online.

Thank you.

Is there anyone present who would like to speak in opposition?

Similarly, if you're online and would like to speak in opposition to A2609, please indicate by raising electronic hand.

Still no hands raised online.

Seeing none, we will close the application for A2609.

Our next application is A2610, William Leroy Myers and Tammy Giante McMackIntyre.

Apologies if I mispronounced that.

Uh seeking a variance from the 20-foot maximum height for a residential accessory structure to enable the construction of a pole building.

The property is located on the north side of Cedar Phill Road, approximately 0.59 miles east of Pentail Point Drive, northwest of Frederica.

Levy Court District is the fourth zoning district is AC.

Here you can see the drawings for the proposed building.

So the proposed total height or average height is 22 feet and five inches.

The plot plan showing where the structure will be placed on the property.

This is looking at the property from the private drive up the drive across the way down the other side.

Going up the driveway.

This is looking from the back of the property towards the front.

Closer up.

And then this is on the driveway looking towards the house.

So the building would be over here.

The aerials further out.

Sir, if you'd like to state your name and your address and allow our attorney to swear you in.

Hello, everyone.

Mr.

Myers, to solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you give in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Yes, sir.

First, I like to say thank you for all of you for hearing me.

Um this is my first time doing this, so please excuse me if I stammer a little bit.

Um Jesse, could you go to the for it's for later?

Could you go to the picture of the uh the e the what the side of the building would look like?

Uh you don't have that one.

Which picture?

Uh it's it's the one that actually shows the two different uh the two different um eaves or the two different the elevations.

Yeah, the two different elevations.

This is the only one we have on the PowerPoint.

I can see which ones was it one of the ones you submitted as your packet.

Okay.

Um it's just for it's uh this one.

Okay.

So you should have that in your packet.

Um part of them.

Yes.

So they they have that with that.

It's just not part of our PowerPoint.

All right, I'm sorry.

I don't mean to uh so um I'm building a shop for myself.

This is this new home that I bought in Delaware is my retirement home, and I want to build a wood shop.

It's something I've done my whole life and I've always wanted a shop.

I want to have room to make the projects I want to in my retirement.

And I designed the shop with a second floor so that I have space to lay out projects and and have things be able to drive up there and store materials and things of that nature.

And I really didn't want to make a um a very, very large building.

I wanted it to be two stories so I can utilize this the space that I have is as best I could and the best I can.

It's a agricultural conservation area.

It's as you could see it's very wooded, it's very nice.

Um what I want you all to know is that I I I want to stay within the regulations and specs of the county.

And um my building was designed um if you notice the the pitch that's on either side of the building is very sharp.

And and that is because that is within specs of of the of the regulations, because the the way the height is figured out is it's from the ground to the lowest part of the roof and from the ground to the highest part of the roof, and then they take the average, and that has to be less than 20 feet.

If I do that, it cuts off almost half of the entire second floor because of the pitch.

So what I'm what I was asking for is to change the pitch of the roof to be wider, to be longer so I can utilize the entire second floor.

The height of the building will be no different if I go with this pitch or this pitch.

So really that's what I'm asking for is to allow me to have that wider pitch so I can make use of the entire second floor.

Um it's it's no bigger than it would be if it was the smaller pitch.

Um I've I've checked with both of my neighbors, and I explained to them.

I showed them showed them these drawings, and um they have no issues with them whatsoever.

And to that, I'd like to introduce you my neighbor who is all shall leave my friend now.

So we'll have you come up after when we have um folks speak in favor.

But oh, okay.

Sorry.

Again, I don't know how these go.

Um that's all right.

But uh I have two options.

I can go with a steep pitch, but then I won't have the space that I need for the second floor.

I won't have the space for storage.

I could go and make a longer building.

Or two separate buildings.

But I think that would take away from the way the area it looks, you know, with all these buildings.

I I I just need I just need the room for the second floor.

And and I really don't want to make it longer.

And I do really don't want to have two buildings.

And uh I want to maintain the look of how it looks, and it's it's beautiful, it's quiet, it's tranquil, it's the perfect place to retire.

And uh lastly, uh I'd like to say that my property has been deemed a backyard wildlife habitat by the Delaware Nature Society.

I have the placard.

This was something that was done before I moved there.

And I think having a longer building or having two buildings will really take away from what is actually there, the habitat, the beauty of the place.

So that's everything I have.

Do you want to submit that picture as part of the evidence?

Yes, please.

It was my oh, by the way, Tammy Joanty McIntyre is now Tammy Myers.

So you don't have to worry about pronouncing that last name again.

So do you have any questions?

Yes.

Can you explain, Mr.

Myers, a little bit more about the nature and the intent of what will happen on that second floor and why is two and a half feet necessary, critical.

It's actually more than that, sir.

It's the the total width of the second floor is 32 feet.

To have the steeper pitch, uh the way the trusses would have to make would cut the room down to 18 feet wide.

I would go from 32 feet to only 18 because of the way the pit the pitch would be.

The reason why I need the space is because with woodworking, there's a lot of projects you start.

There's projects that need to dry, there's projects that need the glue and drying glue, there's materials to store.

Um again, like I said, this is my dream shop.

This is something I've wanted my whole life.

And I want to have room to be able to store materials and and hardware, and along with that, to be able to take projects up there to sit and dry and not be in the way on the first floor where my shop's gonna be.

I don't want to be bumping into things.

Um it's it's mainly for that, to get those things off the first floor onto the second floor so that I can enjoy the first floor for for what it's meant to be.

What type of uh items are you gonna be producing there?

Everything and anything.

Right now, my dream is to build something called a river table.

I don't know if you've ever seen or heard of a river table, but you take two pieces of wood um and you put them together and you pour an epoxy down in in the center of them and then on top of them.

And it you can do all kinds of different types of epoxies and when it's finished, it it looks magnificent.

It's something I've dreamed of making my whole life, but I've never had the space to be able to make something like that.

But the other things I'll be making are everything and anything that the wife wants.

Right now, she just already told me she wants uh uh a cabinet to be able to put her um cooking pans in, um tables, coffee tables, uh furniture.

I don't know.

I the list just goes on and on.

So this is private hobby.

This is not business, you're not doing this so that you can sell furniture or no one no, I I will give it away, but I will not sell it.

I I just that would be a you'd have to have a whole different there'd be a whole different meeting for that.

Okay.

I I just enjoy the relaxation it brings.

The I just it's just something I've enjoyed doing my whole life.

I started my career out as a cabinet maker and had to give it up because it was too heartbreaking to see the things that I made go to other people.

So the other questions.

I noticed that the distance between the the first and the second floor is two feet.

Um so what is the support there?

What is why is it that wide?

Because I didn't want to have center columns in in in the shop.

I to get rid of the center columns, it had to have a very large center beam so that I can have you know the saws out on the floor and uh the belt standers and and you know the the workbenches and things like that and to maneuver around, like if you're carrying a big sheet of plywood or wood and you got columns, it's really hard to navigate around things like that.

For any reason that the first floor can't be eight feet.

No, sir.

Well, yes.

Uh when you take a four by eight sheet of plywood and you try to flip it, at an eight feet you always hit the ceiling.

So I tend to.

I mean we do that with drywall though all the time.

I mean, well, I mean, drywall, I mean you're not always moving four by eight sheets of wood when you're putting up drywall.

Once it's up, it's up.

Me, I'll be dealing with four by eight sheets of wood all the time.

You know, stripping down pieces of plywood for backing or drawers or things like that.

Uh even large large boards, if I'm dealing with you know large lumber.

My whole life I've always had to spin it like this.

I just want to be able to flip it like this.

How far how far along are you with the design?

Is it has it been ordered, uh purchased, manufactured yet?

I I it's already been completely designed.

Um I had a drafts person design it.

It's already gone to my builder, he reviewed it, he's already priced it.

We've already got the spot laid out of where it's gonna go.

Um I'm ready to go.

If you approve this, I will have my permit tomorrow.

Well, I'll try to have my permit tomorrow.

He's buggy.

Like when did when did it come about that you're over the height restriction?

I didn't realize that until uh when I was getting quotes for the size of the building, and when I was talking to different contractors about building the building, one contract brought it to my attention that he said that this is going to be over the height restriction.

It was originally over the size restriction too.

It was a 40 by 60, so I reduced the overall size of it so I could get it within the tolerance of the of the size.

And he this contractor was also the one who said, well, if the first four feet are the sharp hitch, and then the rest of the roof is bigger, and then the last four feet is the sharp hitch, that should satisfy the height requirement, but obviously it didn't, because when I when I when we submitted it, it was denied.

So that's why I'm here for the variance.

But that's when I first learned about those those requirements.

I have a question for the staff.

Can you just describe what is the height requirement and how it's uh calculated?

Yes.

So we do the mean height between the eaves.

So we take the height from the ground level, and then we take the height.

Um halfway up.

So they add the each floor, and then you take the average from the truss.

So half of the trust for this is the two foot three, and then adding that to the first floor and the second floor and the between is what gives you the total of the two twenty-two and five.

Having the steeper pitches at the end helps him out as far as the the height requirement because it brings the the height down overall.

Correct.

Any exploration with So obviously this is actually looking at the elevation, these exterior walls drop in two feet and then doing like a scissor truss.

I'm sorry, I don't understand the question.

Just the there's uh there's options that get this thing down and still also get the necessary um head space that you need.

Um so so your exterior walls on your second floor.

Um you see it's eight foot one across the whole thing.

So on the exterior wall on the second floor, if we drop that down, I don't know, two feet it'll be six six something.

But then that truss, then you have the truss is like a scissor truss instead of uh just a flat ceiling truss.

It looks like the the truss doesn't go straight across and me being a five foot eleven, it it's so close.

Yeah, that's what that's why I mean it's so a scissor truss is it's it it art it's arch is angles up inside, right?

So then but wouldn't I hit my head if I was to the side?

Or I mean it's still coming.

Yeah, so I'm there's there's height restrictions on that size.

So you might say it's six eight um you still could drop it a foot and a half or something like that.

I didn't know if you explored that at all or uh I didn't, but from one my understanding is that that was that it I don't know much about trusses, so I just thought they always went like that.

I didn't know there was such thing as uh a truss that went like that.

Um these are the designs that that my my building person came up with.

And uh again, it's it's all about the space, you know, as far as me being six foot, and then if I'm carrying something in, you know, if it's only six foot high, um I I just just wanted it to be easy to be able to get in and out of there, you know, with with materials and things of that nature.

So Mr.

Myers, you indicated that the um headroom you wanted would be limited to 18 feet of width, is that right if you if you get your variance or am I mistaken?

Yeah, if I well, if I don't get the variance and I would have to go with this steep of a roof, I would only get f 18 feet wide.

You can eighteen eighteen feet wide over what distance?

What's the length of the roof?

52 feet.

52 by 18?

Well, 52, 52 less four, less four.

So that would be fifty-two, then would be uh 48, that would be 44, so it would be 44 by 18.

Okay.

And then the areas right and left, if you will, of the 18 feet are areas where you wouldn't have sufficient headroom to walk, but you would have sufficient headroom to store or sufficient area to store things, isn't that right?

You're talking about where the the sides would come down.

I don't know how hard that would be to actually, you know, if I'm taking something a dresser or something like that, and I don't know how hard that would be to get in there.

I mean, I would have to go in between two by fours, I think, or something.

Okay.

And so the down the downstairs is not used for this purpose at all.

This is strictly the upstairs.

Just strictly the downstairs is just strictly for for you know putting things together, making things.

The saws are down there, the the spindles standards are there, that all the tools are down there.

But the dresser you're talking about might be upstairs.

Well, yeah, after I got done building it and say I take it upstairs and maybe I slap some varnish on it or something like that and let it dry.

But the 18 feet of width is not sufficient for that.

I don't think it's going to be.

I don't.

Um I I want again, this is this is my last shot of having the shop that I've always wanted.

I want to make sure I have space that I don't need as opposed to needing space that I don't have, because that's been my whole life is needing space that I don't have.

Right now, I mean, I mean, my last house I had my my shop is was in my basement.

I had, you know, six foot six and a half foot ceilings.

It's it sufficed for like you know, five years and but this is far larger space than what you're accustomed to having.

I mean, you're gonna be a rich man in this space compared to being in that basement, right?

Yes, sir.

I am going to be.

So your challenge is to explain why it's an exceptional practical difficulty that you can't manage with the space that the code permits.

Um that that's the challenge that you have.

With without without bringing you into my shop and and uh my future shop and showing you, you know, how important it is to be able to be able to walk around pieces that you're working on and stuff like that, and and and storing them, it's space is just it's an integral part of having a a functional good workshop, a wood shop.

Uh I know it sounds big, but it's really not that big.

Now I want you got items sitting out drying, you're walking around things, you got drawers that are being assembled and glued and and stuff like that.

And you know, once I'm done working on stuff like that, I'm taking it up there, I'm storing it, letting it dry, you know, bringing maybe working on it a week or two later.

You know, I I'm not gonna be out there like like a machine working on it all the time.

I'm gonna be out there, I'm gonna do some, I'm gonna have some fun, I'm relax and tinker, and then when I'm done with it, and if I'm not completely finished with it, I'm gonna store it away.

I may come back to it later on.

I'm I may start something else.

Um The planner, the planners recommendation to us is that this application be denied.

I saw.

Okay.

But they also said that you should weigh public opinion heavily.

I believe they're well it's based yeah, we may hear something during the public hearing that would lead us to go against what the code says or to vary if that's what you're here for, a variance in the code.

Um which is not a book of suggestions, it's the county code.

Yeah, yeah, I would say.

So when we do that, we have to be very careful because somebody else could come and said, well, you did it for Mr.

Myers, or you did it on this application.

So we really there has to be what we call an exceptional practical difficulty.

Why?

Why and we have people who over the years I've seen people come in, and it's pretty much it's because that's what I want.

And like, well, that's not the code.

You know, so that's that's the dilemma, and that's what you're trying to explain to us.

I I understand.

It's just I just can't give you without you seeing the process and and realizing I know I know 18 feet sounds really wide, but it's really it's really not.

I mean, if I put this podium and that podium together, I'm already at like 10 feet.

So I I got eight feet to work with.

That's I mean that's 18 feet already.

It's really not that big.

And and I really really don't want to make a longer building.

Because if I can't if I can't have the full-size second floor, I'm not gonna build it.

Uh if if it's not possible.

It's just it's not it won't work for me.

It won't work for the shop.

But I really don't want to take away from the natural beauty of the area either by having something that looks like a a place where I raise chickens.

And again, it's when we talk about the height, I'm over the height restriction.

One peak versus this peak, it's the same height.

It's just this one's allowed and this one's not.

It's just it's the exact same height.

So and it's not higher than my own house.

My house is higher than this building.

And I would like to introduce my neighbor so he could give you his thoughts and feelings on that.

Yep, yep, you he'll have time.

Okay.

Any other questions?

No, not a question, but I just wanted to let Mr.

Myers note it.

We really appreciate your testimony, and we're asking you these questions because we're trying to ascertain just what remedy we can offer you and still be as close to the code as possible.

And we hope you appreciate what we're trying to do for you.

I I understand.

I I understand and I do appreciate you all taking the time.

I want to stay within regulations and boundaries.

I want to be a great new person in Kent County, and because this is now my home.

But I I think my only issue is not issue, my my only quandary is is that when we talk about a height requirement, I mean when I think of height, I think of the height of this building.

And the height of this building is the same whether it's the pitches like this or like this.

I so I don't understand how detrimental having a pitch like this is going to be to the county or to anybody, my neighbors or as opposed to a pitch like this.

It's the same height building.

And in reality, it's taller than that height because they're using uh the average height of the eaves.

So the building itself is actually taller than it's 24 feet, correct?

No, if you refer to this picture right here, you can see that the two pitches actually exist on this building.

This is this is the pitch that's within boundaries, and this is the pitch that is not.

It's the same height building.

What I'm saying is the the building itself is actually higher.

Okay.

I'm I I'm not much of a uh you must be have a construction background.

I because I I don't I don't I again I don't under I don't understand how the calculation works and that it's how how one peak is okay and one isn't.

Uh I don't apologize for that.

I could build you a cabinet, but I don't can't build your building.

I had to ask the chair to help me, and I do every time we have these because it's for me it's a little complicated.

It's close, I would say.

Like so that your regular A-frame um I'll say height is probably around twenty feet.

It's definitely close.

But it's not over the height restriction.

It's probably right pretty much right at the bottom of that roof truss there.

About a guess.

Did you guys calculate that at all?

Do you know?

Yeah, so um it seems kind of showing you on the elevations, there's two different pitches of the roof on the building.

So there is one that is pitched differently.

That one, because of the pitch, is directly at that 20 foot, but because of the pitch of the longer portion, the calculation comes out to the 22.

So I think that's what he's trying to indicate there.

Is that there's the two different pitches on the building.

Right.

And so what Mr.

Myers was saying if is that ridge is gonna stay the same no matter what.

Oh yes, sir.

Yes.

That ridge height is the same.

So it's these shed dormers that are just pushing that up.

So this is not fixed.

Correct.

But if it's if his ridge height was lower, he could then have more headroom.

Um he'd have a uh a wider angle instead of a steeper angle.

And he'd have more headroom.

So I mean, but but by raising the ridge a little higher, um he's he has this issue.

Um we don't you can't have the elevations at all.

You know what on the PowerPoint.

Um I can see if we could try to pull.

Yeah, there's there's one that side elevation is.

We can work on pulling that up.

Yes.

Give us one minute.

Yeah, there's one the side elevation pretty much tells the picture right.

Yep.

No, we didn't make it.

There it is.

Let's use our microphones.

So if he does that A that ridge stays the same height and he just keeps the regular A-frame without you see where the the big wall is on that.

Yeah, if he keeps that profile throughout the whole building, he's he's within code.

It's those shed dormers that's pushing pushing us above that.

So it's that building on the plans is out of code, correct?

Yes.

Because it we're going to the highest highest point of the roof.

So if the whole building was built with this portion of the pitch and you took that pitch all the way across, that would be in compliance.

But because we have the dormers that the pitch is higher there or lower, I'm not sure how that's ever do this portion of it calculates out differently because of the pitch.

So it's this section that would be above height while these sections here are at height.

So this is the plan that he wants.

Yes.

Okay.

I thought he was trying to get rid of the and to make the whole building.

No, this is the plan he wants.

No, yeah.

That that was actually to give the building a little it so it doesn't look like a block.

It gives it like a little bit of a nice look to it.

But also, I thought by the first four feet and the last four feet being at that pitch that that would surfice for passing code.

I thought it was just the ends that had to be.

I I don't know.

So I'm leaving it just like that because actually I like the way it looks.

Yeah, so I mean, if you keep the A frame, you just want to see a a lot more roof versus the how will you ask access the upstairs?

There are gonna be steps that go from there's a doorway right there on the right side, and there's steps will begin right there to go straight up and bring you right up almost into the center of the second floor.

And how wide are those steps gonna be?

Four feet.

It'll be four foot by four foot at the base, four feet going all the way up, and then when you turn it completely opens up.

Mr.

Myers, if you could just more into the microphone, please.

So to store furniture up there, it would be quite difficult to get a piece up there all by yourself.

No, people move furniture in and out of their houses all the time up and downstairs on four feet with wide steps.

Just single people.

Well, my wife would help me.

My new wife.

I mean, I guess when when I hear you talk you I'm I keep hearing for one, uh you make me think of my grandfather, God rest his soul.

He was 94 years old when he died, but he was avid woodworker his entire life, worked his whole like he built cabinets for my grandmother for for we still have pieces of furniture that he built, and he worked out of a 24 by 24 garage his whole entire life.

And I think that he would of love to have something like this, but you know, he may do with what he had, but at the same time, I'm just hoping that you will tell me a reason that it would be you know, give me a difficulty of why changing that roof pitch you know makes sense.

That's what I'm looking to hear from you.

And I'm hoping you can give me a really good reason.

I if uh well Mr.

Simpson just by the way, my grandfather too was a woodworker, and that's who I got it from.

Um if I have to go with the sharper pitch for the second floor, the building won't have a second floor because it's not going to provide me the space that I need.

I'm going to build either an 80-foot-long building.

Mr.

Myers, sorry, if you could just bring the microphone a little closer.

I I apologize.

Uh if if I can't if we can't uh agree on this, I this building won't have a second floor.

Instead, I'd rather build an 80-foot long building or two well two separate buildings.

Whatever is required to be able to get the space that I need to be able to do what I really have wanted to do my whole life.

Um is really going to doing so will make the area look not look as nice as it does now.

It's gonna look more commercial, uh having multiple buildings.

And again, as of right now, my property has that certification.

Oh, I gave it to Jesse.

Uh has that certification from the National Uh Nature Society.

I don't think I'll be able to have that anymore if I have buildings all over the place.

And all all I'm asking is just one building.

Just a little more space.

Mr.

Myers, I have another question for you.

Yes, sir.

Um let's just play devil's advocate here and let's say we didn't approve it.

How much money do you have in this design plan?

I've already spent $750 with a drafts person to uh have not only the designs done once but done twice, because this is my second go-around.

The first building was 40 by 60.

This one had to be smaller, so it's been designed twice.

I paid for the plans to have it designed twice.

If denied, I'll be investing more money to have a bigger building design that's single floor.

You have any idea what that new design plan might entail in terms of cost?

Just for the drafts person?

Probably is normal six hundred dollars.

He charged me six hundred dollars for the first one, then he charged me an additional, I think two fifty for the change for the smaller building.

But this we're we're I'm with him, I'm I'm done, we're paid up, we're we're good.

Um so it would be a whole new design, so it would probably be another six hundred dollars for him, and then then my builder has to go over it and and redo pricing uh for the cost of the building.

Wouldn't that be irrespective of one large building of 80 feet or two small buildings?

Would that cost that you've given me would that be irrespective of that or would that include that?

The drafting fee, I guess I I don't know.

I'd have to talk to the drafts person if he considers that two different jobs if he's designing.

Oh I guess if he designs one, then we could just build two of the same, but I really don't want to do that.

Um I would probably just build one long building.

I don't think I would build two separate buildings.

Again, it'll look like an industrial park.

Uh as much as I don't want to, I don't want to have an 80-foot building.

I'd rather just stick with this building and just make it a little taller.

But I'm not sure what the cost would be for probably around again, this is $600 charge for designing it.

And the plan is to put this building in the center of your five-acre lot.

No, sir, not in the center.

It's it's just off.

Jesse, could you go back to the plot plan?

It's right there.

The house.

Um, you can point on that screen next to you and it'll pull up an arrow.

Okay.

So this is this is not the property line.

The property line goes way back here.

This is the kind of this is where my house exists right now.

Try to still speak into the mic though, sorry.

I'm sorry.

This is still speaking to the mic though.

Thank you.

Hello, hello.

Okay.

So uh the property goes all the way back here.

You can't see where the end of the property is, but right over here is my house in the shed.

I mean, my shop would be located right over here on this side.

So it's more on one side of the property than the other.

This is my driveway coming in.

And then this is all wooded here, and this is all wooded back here.

And my neighbor, my neighbor's house actually sits up here, and my other neighbor's house kind of sits up here.

I hope I answered your question.

Yes, and these these same neighbors have about the same size lot.

I think that's a good thing.

Yeah, we all have the same size lot.

Yeah.

Yep.

Thank you.

Any other questions for Mr.

Myers?

Good.

Thank you.

May I introduce my neighbor?

Yep.

I will ask if you're not going to be able to do that.

Oh, sorry, Josh.

That's all right.

If there's anyone else present that would like to speak in favor.

Sir, please state your name and address and allow our attorney to swear you in.

Hubert Touchard 54 Cedarfield Road, Magnolia, Delaware.

I live directly next door to Mr.

Mars.

Sir.

Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony given this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

I do.

Okay, so now you can tell us about the proximity of your house to live directly next door to Bill, as you see on that.

You can point on the screen if you'd like.

Yep.

It's a it's a combination of uh let's see what I'm okay.

The these lots here are all seven acres, and then when you get further back here, these are these are all five-acre lots.

I live in this lot right here.

I built a house here.

And uh you you can't even see his property, his house from my house.

Uh you may be able to see it in the fall when the leaves are off the trees, but it it's it's kind of a non-conforming neighborhood, if you will.

Um it's it's fully wooded.

Uh it's beautiful back there.

And the need I have no problem with it.

I, you know, I have a pole building myself.

Mine is probably not as high as his.

And I hope it's not an eyesore for him, but it's it's very private.

And nobody you none of this is even visible from the the one-lane gravel road that leads to the house.

You can't even you don't even know anything's back there.

So I have no issues with it.

Uh so for the record.

Very good.

Any other any questions?

Yes, I'll have one.

Um in respect to the neighbors in the area that have five-acre lots.

How many people also have accessory structures?

Uh most of them.

I I thought this was a Kent County thing.

I thought everybody had pole buildings.

So, yeah, pretty much everybody's back there.

It has at least one one out parcel, one out building.

Some of them have more than one.

Very good.

All good, thank you.

If there is anyone else present that would like to speak in opposition or in favor?

Is there anyone online?

We have no members from the general public online at this time.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else present that would like to speak in opposition?

Seeing none, we will close the public hearing for application A2610.

Our next application is A2611 for Nolt.

Seeing a variance from the requirement that a patio be set back 10 feet from the rear property line to enable the construction of a patio.

The property is located on the west side of Peacock Place, approximately 165 feet west of Leander Drive, being lot 470A in the villages of Noble Pond subdivision west of Cheswold.

Levy Court District is the third zoning district, is AR.

Here you can see a plot plan where they are proposing the patio behind the house to be 5.8 feet from the rear property line.

Looking at the property.

Up the side of the property towards the rear.

From the side looking in the opposite direction.

Back at the front, looking towards the back of the house.

Up the road, down the road.

The aerial further out.

I've also included this aerial with a bit more modern so you can see the existing houses.

Sir, if you'd please like to state your name and your address and allow our attorney to swear you in.

Uh Brunal Knoll Jr., my address is 327 Peacock Place, Dover, Delaware.

Sir, do you solemnly swear we're affirmed the testimony you give me this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

I do.

Thank you.

Um I've come before the Board of Adjustment at Kent County Levy Corps seeking a variance to the rear setback of my property at 327 Peacock Place in Dover.

I agree with the planning services on the first two responses.

The majority of the homes in this community have rear patios, many of which are uncovered and are mostly used for relaxing and enjoying of the outdoors.

In response to, there is a mention of an adjacent property that abuts my property.

However, there's only approximately 13 feet of that property that actually abuts mine.

If you see it, it is can I do this?

It's right in here.

Okay.

And that is uh that probably actually is 35 Monte Carlo Court.

Um it is not directly behind where I plan to put my patio.

Um and I've got a letter from them stating that they have no objection to me adding a patio to the back of the house.

Uh in reference to response number three, my partial also butts to a passive open space, which just doesn't show, but I do have a plot plan that shows all the surrounding houses and the open area.

That passive open area is approximately 50 feet of grass, and from there there's a 25-foot wetland buffer.

So it's all open grass behind the house with no possibility of any future homes being built behind me.

So there's really no homes that my patio would be facing.

Um the staff response of number four is true.

I don't have a hardship by not doing this.

However, a rear patio has become a very popular addition to many of the homes in our community, and most of them are uncovered and they are enjoyed.

This feature would allow me to fully enjoy the natural beauty that is behind my house, which is the wetland buffer we have back there.

Um the existing covered porch does offer me a lit a limited view, but here again it's very limited.

The the proposed patio would allow me to place a grill out there so it wouldn't be on my covered porch, and also enjoy more of the natural world.

Um I plan to have the patio at approximately ground level, so it shouldn't be obstructing any views from anywhere.

Um that's about all I have.

Any questions?

You plan on tying in that patio to the um the covered um slab that's uh adjacent to it?

It's gonna be approximately one step down.

It's gonna be a paver.

I'd like to make a paver patio so it wouldn't be directly tied into the existing, no.

Have you considered um making it a smaller the plan smaller so that it fits within the setbacks?

Well, if I go smaller, there's really not if I go smaller, the sit back allows me about five feet.

And there really isn't, in my opinion, that isn't sufficient to have put some chairs to be able to sit back and relax and to have my grill there.

So I have a question for the planners.

When I'm I'm looking at, I can't even tell you what it is, the side of the house that shows the concrete patio as it exists.

And my question is, is where it ends.

That's the limit.

Uh it would line up with the side of the house.

Um I I know I have enough space on the side of the house that I could do it, but I don't want it visible from the street.

I think it would just detract most of the houses in our community up there have them to the rear, not on the side.

I think it would detract from the up from the appearance of the whole nate neighborhood.

Well, when I'm looking at the picture I'm I'm seeing now, I I feel like what would happen if you just made it a little wider instead of I mean that's not that's not that's not the house.

Miss Denny, if I may, the so there's this is the house, and there's an existing cover deck here.

They would be allowed to go up to the green line in the rear.

They are looking to go here.

So that would put them at 5.8, they are allowed to go to 10.

Um, so I believe that like he is saying that would only allow five feet instead of the whole nine and a half that they're looking to do.

Okay, thank you.

I was on the wrong house here.

No problem.

Mr.

Noel, I have a question for you.

Sure.

Um did you want to build this in the location that you're trying to put it in because of privacy reasons?

Sorry.

We could you repeat that.

I didn't know if you wanted to put this in the rear location for privacy reasons with houses that are near you that would if you if you came away from the setback, you'd be too close to neighbors viewing you.

Um I had another drawing with this that showed the surrounding houses.

I have one right to the left of my property line, about the same distance as what my house is from the left side of the property line, and there's one to the right side.

That house has their patio on the opposite corner, so we don't see them at all.

The house on the left side does have a covered porch to the rear of the house, but it's it's about 30 feet away.

Um but being directly behind it.

It really wouldn't obstruct anybody's view or or hamper anybody else that's on their patios.

I have a question for staff.

And the in the photos um there um concrete slabs that are like five foot and four foot from the property line.

Were those done illegally without a permit from the county?

Is that what those photos are referring to?

So um I'm not sure which exhibit you're referring to.

Hold on.

Uh let's see here.

What I can say is that it is my understanding that if you are only six feet, you are six feet from grade, no higher than six feet from grade, you do not require a permit from the county in order to place a patio.

I don't know whether those adjacent properties patios are in compliance or not.

Like page 45 and 46.

Okay, let me check.

So you were saying if they are six inches above elevation, they don't need a permit, you were saying or six inches or lower above elevation, they do not require a permit.

That's my understanding.

Okay.

So like a driveway and you know something that's relatively flat, they're not gonna require a permit from us to come in.

So this based on our understandings of what they're looking to do, they wouldn't be required to pull a permit for it, but they would still need to meet the setback requirements for it.

So the setback is for pavers as well versus concrete?

Correct.

It's for a patio.

Okay.

So if it's for a patio, then it would have to comply with that 10-foot setback.

Mr.

Nolan, I had another question for you.

Um you consider Noble's pond, I believe it's pretty extensive.

The development is massive, large.

Yes, it is.

What phase or facet of that development are you in?

Are you in the front?

I'm toward I'm about a mile back in.

That what you see here, we're in like a little bit of a cold de sac.

There's 34 homes back in that section, and we're all surrounded by woods.

So Peacock Place comes back, and from my house back, that's uh almost like a little cul-de-sac.

So it's all and it's fair, it's fairly private, yes.

So you're not in the latter part of the development.

No.

Okay.

Thank you.

Miss Hudson, I did look at the pictures that you were referencing.

That was submitted by the applicant, so they very well could be.

Um we don't know for a fact.

Um I see you have uh number of letters in favor of the application.

And I believe we have one that's opposed to it.

Um it looks like it's uh when I was reading going through the package, it looks like that neighbor also agreed or was for it as well.

When I began this process, I was told I was required to have letters from neighbors within 200 feet.

So I went to each neighbor and talked to them personally, explained what I wanted to do, what I proposed, and asked them if they would give me a letter uh uh rec uh not recommending but okaying what I had in plu had in mind.

And that's I submitted with the packet on the I think what the date was I submitted it.

So 343 peacock place um is an opposition um stating that it's gonna affect their view of that wetlands um that passive open space.

This house here.

Okay.

And they do have a view that's somewhat restricted because of this has been a little bit more.

This house is 35 Monte Carlo.

And they are this house here has a restricted view, but that patio being at ground level really shouldn't restrict the view because if you can see it just shoots down through there.

Okay.

I just wanted to get your because if they do talk tonight, you won't have a chance to reply back.

So just want to get your thoughts on that one.

Okay.

Any other questions?

Seeing none.

General lady, thank you for your time.

Appreciate it.

Is there anyone else present who would like to speak in favor of the application?

Anyone online?

There are no members from the general public online at this time.

Thank you.

Is there anyone present that would like to speak in opposition to the application?

Ma'am, you may come up.

Please state your name and your address and allow our attorney to swear you in.

Uh good evening, uh the board of members and everyone here.

My name is Rowena Gillespie.

I'm here with my husband, Professor Angus Gillespie.

And fortunate I'm your address, please.

Okay, sorry.

Your address, please.

343 Peacock Place.

And do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you give in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Yes, sir.

Okay, you can continue now.

Yes.

We are in receipt of the Kent County's uh notice of Bernie and Don Knollt variance for a patio.

It is to be built at the rear of their house at 327 Peacock Place.

We have studied the details on uh the site map that was submitted.

It is clear and evident to us why Don and Bernie have submitted this request.

They presently already have a view of uh the wetlands, but clearly they would prefer a closer view of the wetlands buffer.

However, there is a problem uh here.

One house is at 343 Peacock Place, and that's ours, uh, which is next door to the applicants with a limited view and goal view of the wetlands.

We wish to oppose to the variance because the proposed patio will cause substantial harm to our properties value, use and enjoyment.

I wish to maintain a good relationship with my neighbors.

I wish to present my argument in a best possible respectful manner.

Uh preserving the scenic view enhance the beauty of the area.

It would maintain a consistent back view.

It would allow light and air to reach neighboring properties.

It would provide privacy, blocking the views and can diminish the quality of life for the surrounding properties.

Views of natural landscape contribute to mental well-being.

The proposed patio will impact our view of the same scenic passive uh upon uh open space and the wetlands.

We have photographs showing present cynic view and the property map, which shows the 10-foot setbacks for all properties from 315 to 359.

This setbacks are all identical and adhere to all the same standards.

We are not the only one whose view will be impacted.

Uh there are other neighbors with the same problem, the loss of view.

But we are the ones the most affected by the proposed variance.

That is why we are here.

Thus, we believe that the proposed variance is not warranted.

Uh I want to thank the board for listening to my opposition.

Thank you.

Any questions?

I have a letter here from 343 Peacock Place that says I have no objection.

Are they for or against it?

Right.

Yes.

So you have a letter that you're for it, and then we also got one that you're against it.

Right, because uh we are we don't know what the variance is.

I just learned it after the fact when we saw the uh letter from the Kent County.

Uh it was there for about 10 days.

I have not really said a word.

In fact, I said to them that you won't have any problem.

Uh, when it was presented to my husband, it was presented to my husband's with very little detail.

Thus the HOA manager says that if you if all the neighboring uh parties agreed, you know, um they're gonna approve it.

So uh I just realized we did not sign the uh we we just signed away our view.

So therefore it was after the fact that we learned that they're putting their patio in the back, which will then uh be intrusive of the view that we have.

So we all have uh the the back view is very very tight, and I'm 343 pickup place, which is right here.

And if everyone applies for the same variance that Mr.

Nolt, Mr.

and Mrs.

Nolt, I won't be able to apply because therefore I will be too close to 35 Monte Carlo just to gain the view that I've lost uh for reason of the approval of this variance.

So uh if I request a 10 uh the same variance that they're requesting, I will be touching the wall of the 35 pickup place.

So therefore uh my property from the site map is not elevated.

I'm sandwiched in between elevated, which is three uh which is three fifty-nine and three twenty-seven.

So if mr.

and Mrs.

Noll put a concrete patio there, they will have to elevate it because there's a down slope towards the wetlands.

So therefore, there will be much higher, and it will be very difficult for me to see that.

I only have the 10 o'clock angled view, and that will now be compromised.

It's unfortunate that the structure of the builder was built too close to each other.

I understand their position, but I I'm just uh here to for for for you to hear my side of the story.

Thank you.

I I first I want to ask Jesse a question.

So um you know look, um, would you put up uh I guess it's page 56.

I can pull it up on my computer, give me one second.

Are you looking for the plot?

Plan.

The photo that it's on page 56.

Okay, give me one second.

Thank you.

So when we're looking at 343.

And that is your 343 is your backyard.

327 is the applicant is the applicant.

Okay.

When I mentioned about the scenic view, this scenic view carries from 315 to 359.

There's also uh an angled view from 389.

I do not wish to drag all the neighbors to come here in my support, however, and this is the true testament of what I am actually trying to illustrate that that is I only have that view.

I cannot go forward because of the 35 Monte Carlo, which is at the corner at the corner lad.

That will be uh uh uh a fire.

If I were to apply for variance.

Yeah, it could I'm not certain, but you're you're right.

It could be something the fire marshal might object to, but uh.

So I don't know that.

I mean, but I do understand what you what you're trying to point out.

Yes, um, yeah.

No, I don't want to do that to the 35 Monte Carlo residents because they're very nice.

Ma'am, do you understand you understand that the patio is not uh not a covered structure?

I understand, but originally they submitted covered patio.

Covered patio?

Yes.

Covered patio, as what we were told by the HOA manager.

Uh I do get a conflicting message from uh Mrs.

Knollt, but apparently there it's been since revised.

But let's say for example, if the variance was approved, if it's really not covered patio, what's the likelihood if they sell the house and the new person, the new owner were to build a patio, then I would be faced with the same issue again and trying to kind of protect that.

Those would be two different things.

So patio is uncovered, so he's going for a variance for the five foot from the property line for his patio that's not covered.

If the next homeowner or if he wanted to put something that was enclosed, that would be a different permit altogether.

Correct, Jesse?

It yes.

So the if we were adding a roof um to it, and if we were connecting that roof to the house, then that would be considered part of the house.

So it would not only require a permit, it would also require a different variance because it would be a different code section.

In this photo here, is that the stake by the is that the stake by the P where that patio is coming out?

I'm sorry, what the question?

Um, there's a lot of pizza.

The uh I think there's a stake for that concrete pad, how far is coming out?

327 peacock, please.

Yeah, right there, yep.

Yeah, I mean, is that the stake?

I'm not sure.

I don't believe so.

I think it would be closer to here.

Yeah, okay.

Um with the way that it I've looked at it before on the computer.

Jesse.

Are fences allowed in this neighborhood?

We would allow a fence under county regulations.

I don't know what the HOA's regulations are.

We would allow them to put a fence up to seven feet high on their property lines.

So if so if he was to put a fence up seven foot high, that would completely take that whole view away.

Yeah, regardless.

I I would assume so, yes.

As you can see, uh over here, it's a down slope.

And I'm in the lower end.

I'm in between the lower, in between the elevated house.

Uh I have uh I have a uh a exhibit that I have submitted to Jesse exhibit exhibit D, where it shows the portion of the uh property 467 is elevated.

Mine is not Mr.

Dawn, Miss Mr.

Knowlton, Mrs.

Mr.

and Mrs.

Knold is elevated as well.

So I'm sandwiching between elevate elevated uh patio whether or not that would cause a I'm not sure.

I'm not an engineer.

I just wanted to explain that.

But but if my question was would a f if he was to erect a fence, that would totally take your view away, regardless if he put a seven foot privacy fence there versus just a patio.

Agreed.

But uh is the variance permanent?

Variance approval permanent.

Your your question is is the variance permanent?

Uh if if the proposal and it gets approved, the variance uh requests is that permanent?

Yes.

Yes.

So I'm just concerned if new owner, new owner comes in and they decide to then the new owner would have to come for another variance because it would be attaching it to the house, which I think would be like a 15-foot setback, not a 10-foot setback.

In this development, it is a 10-foot setback.

But this is directly in my I uh sight lines, which is uh already as it is.

It's kind of difficult.

We're so close to each other.

So everyone is adhering to the 10 put uh 10 foot BRL.

I don't know what that means, but um just trying to be consistent in the law that required for us to be in compliance with good.

Anyone have little questions?

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else present that would like to speak in opposition?

Do we have anyone online?

Still no members from the general public online at this time.

Thank you.

One more question.

When when was this section built?

Oh gosh.

Um I could look that up for you.

Is there a specific reason you're asking?

As they are.

Okay.

Um give me one moment and I can pull that up.

So the plot plan for this section was recorded in 2022.

Um I can look up when the applicant's house is built if that's what you're looking for, or when the adjacent properties houses were built.

It was generally the that area is built around 2022.

2022 is when the record plan, so after that is when they would have been constructed.

You're welcome.

Are we good board?

All right.

With that, we will close the public hearing for application a 2611.

Our next application is A2612 for Violet Fisher co-trustee, Monica Fisher Co-Trustee, and Ronald Fisher co-trustee seeking a variance from the required 15-foot side principal structure that setback to enable an existing building to be utilized for a place of worship.

The property is located on the east side of Enns Road, approximately 90 feet east of Strauss Ave, southwest of Hartley.

Levy Court District is the sixth zoning district is AR.

So here you can see the plot plan.

They're requesting the variance for the building in the rear outlined in yellow.

Um it is existing, it is six feet from the side setback in order to use it for the place of worship.

It is required to be 15 feet.

Um they are proposing in addition and parking for the future use if approved.

This is looking at the property up the road, down the other way.

This is the back portion of the property.

This is the building in question.

This is kind of at the side looking towards the side.

Um looking up the drive there, looking at the building from the side from the front of the building, looking towards the rear.

Again, kind of showing from the in front of the building, the rear.

This is the neighbor's property there.

Looking from the rear of the building forward along the side of the building between the properties, and then back towards the front of the property.

Is the aerial further out?

So if you'd like to state your name and your address and allow our attorney to swear you in.

Sure.

I'm uh Kevin Minick, uh 870 Greenwood Road, Greenwood, Delaware.

Mr.

Minnick, do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you give me this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth in the house?

I do.

Uh my name is Kevin Minick.

I'm from Minnik Engineering.

I'd like to uh say uh good evening to all the members.

Um I'm here representing Bishop Fisher and his congregation for uh this variance.

And I have to say it's it's kind of I was sitting there thinking, and you know, it's a little bit different because all the other variances that we had tonight were being imposed by either extending or building whereas this is not.

Um this building is not moving.

This building is six feet from the line.

Uh and because we're proposing to change the use, the setback is moving, not the building.

Uh so the building, just just before I really kind of go through some of the stuff, the building is not getting any closer to the neighbor.

Uh it's still going to be six feet.

Um there's four things that that have to uh be met when we submit an application for uh a variance.

Um the first two uh the nature of the property is it's um it's residential in nature, it's a rural area.

Um as staff recommend, as they note as staff notes under number one, the place of worship is permitted as a conditional use with site plan approval.

Um a place of worship doesn't have its own district, it's always a conditional use in any of the districts.

So it seems like no matter where you put a place of worship, it's never a good place.

Um but because somebody always seems to have some type of problem with it.

But number one uh kind of stands on its own, it's it's a residential area.

Uh number two is the character and use of the vicinity, which is basically residential and what's not residential is is in a wooded area.

Um the removal number three, the removal of the restriction and how that would affect the neighboring properties.

Um I think one of the main things that I just mentioned is important that uh the it's a nine foot reduction, but it's not like it's getting nine feet closer to the property of the adjoiner.

Uh it's still going to be six foot.

Um so we're not moving the existing building.

The staff is staff's response to number three was to provide landscape screening and buffering along that property line.

And I'm pretty sure that I'm sure Mr.

Bishop Fisher is going to want to speak to this too, but I'm sure they're in agreement with doing that to provide a buffer along, but I don't know if I can move these pictures back.

Which one are you looking for?

There's already a substantial buffer of trees, but you know, we could put we could put a fence along there.

Um I mean that's those were a couple of the things, and I know there was one.

There was one letter of opposition from Stephen and Patricia.

Um, which they say they're neither for nor against, so we're back to what you're saying.

It's kind of on the fence, but um they're saying that uh the property is that building is 26 yards, which is approximately 80 feet away from their pool, which I'm not sure if you could see on the aerial view, but I don't know how you would see it through the woods line, but maybe you can, I guess from the back.

Yeah, I don't know.

Um because it looks like there's a fence right here.

Um anyway, the couple of the things they had in here.

One thing that I noticed was they mentioned that should the variance be approved, then they decide to sell the property, that the property could be utilized by any commercial business, further inflicting harm on us and our neighbors, which that is not a true statement.

Um if they sold this, if it's a conditional use, it would still be a residential property.

So I don't know where that statement came from, but I do want to point that.

I don't think that's really a true statement to say that if they sold the property, um they could put any commercial business in there because that's that's not true.

And then they mentioned the same example that uh that staff does is to to do some landscaping and shield the property, which I think we would be in agreement with that.

Um they also mentioned that they had concerns regarding the septic system.

And I don't know if you go back to our site plan.

We would be putting in a new septic system for the church.

It would go in this area.

Right now there's an existing septic system here for the existing dwelling.

And actually, I'm sorry, the septic would go up here in this green shaded area.

So probably on the other side of that parking lot.

That would serve this building.

So I mean they would have to do a little bit of uh fidangling with the driveway and stuff, but I didn't want to get too much into site plan requirements because that's uh that's a different board altogether.

So any questions anybody has.

I mean, that's that's basically what I see.

I mean, I think with buffering and whatnot, if you would be so kind to approve the request, uh we could do the buffering that that the adjoiner needs.

They have uh about 40 members.

It's not Calvary Church from route eight.

So they have about 40 members, and I think they could be neighborly.

Uh they have services on Sundays and Wednesdays, and then one hour on Saturday morning.

So I mean I don't think it's excessive.

I think they could be good neighbors.

So that's that's all I have on it.

Um I'm sure Ms.

uh Bishop Fisher would probably like to talk a little bit about it too.

Any questions for uh sit down?

What's your role, Mr.

Minnik?

I'm sorry, what's your role?

Um the engineer.

I had a couple questions for you.

So currently um the building that's there, is there any utilities going to it?

Uh I don't know.

If there are, I don't think there are.

Yeah.

Just electric.

And although we're not discussing the plot plan today.

The plan is that section in front of the yellow, the highlighted area, will be a new building.

Yes.

That's the intent.

Yes.

Okay.

The intent is to is to expand that.

In other words, take the front wall off and expand that and that'll be that 1,500 square feet will be included in the 20 in the 2,000.

Why why at this location?

That may be better asked or answered by Bishop Fisher.

I'm not 100% sure.

So landscape buffer.

Um, where the staff recommended that landscape buffer be is already heavily wooded.

Um, well, that's that was my point.

And hey, if if it uh I mean if if there's a gap somewhere along here in the fence.

Um can you put the aerial back up, Jesse?

I can't zoom in.

It's not my phone.

Um I don't know if there's a gap where that fence angles over, but you know, we could certainly there's an existing fence there now.

There you go.

Yeah.

And there's a side door right there.

Do they use that building for church right now?

Or no.

What's that?

Do they use that building for a congregation now?

I don't think they're able to.

All right.

No.

Um, because there's a side door off that building.

I think that is I think the letter that was uh this door here.

Yeah, yep.

So that view there, people coming in and out of that door.

Um that door may go away with the final plan.

Right.

I don't know.

So you're going to add on to the this pole shed.

That's the plan.

Okay.

So why would you have to add on to the back?

Why couldn't you add on to the front of the building or to the side?

Well, that is.

When you look at it, we're adding on to where that gravel area is here.

We're adding on to the front.

And everything on our view of like everything in gray is Macadam, right?

Is that pretty much?

Yeah, this here.

Yeah.

That's not Macadam.

It's it's stone.

Yeah.

Yeah.

But it's stone.

Whatever it is.

Okay.

So they're adding on to this side right here.

Me personally would like to see that landscape buffer extend farther down just for noise and privacy from that neighboring.

I'm not sure how we try to address that.

When you say not further down, do you mean like that?

Labor and property.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah.

There was an image before where it said staff recommended buffer, but that's on the opposite side of the building from the complainant, if you will.

Yes.

No, that's that's where the neighboring property is here.

Right.

So the staff was recommending it along the building itself.

But I believe, Mr.

Cusick, you're saying continue that this way.

I thought the use of the green was indicating the buffer was in the back.

I'm sorry.

Oh no, that's for the site plan portion.

The green area is where the pre-septic area is at.

And that was my next question was can you have a septic system in a landscape buffer?

And I think the answer is no.

So I understand now.

Yeah.

So just are we uh when we're mentioning this buffer, are we thinking down to about where the like the 15 foot side stepback line is something like that?

Yeah, that makes the most sense just for for noise and privacy for that neighboring property.

Um just extend that landscape buffer farther down, not just the rear of the building, which is already heavily wooded anyway.

I think it it would it would be more money better well spent if it was down like in here.

It's exactly what I'm asking, suggesting if we have if we knew it came back to that 15-foot line or even to the bottom, but uh where it says side setback, I was thinking the 15-foot, because it would buffer even like if they're out on what looks like a little patio where you would picnic or something if they had a gathering after church.

Something like that.

Mr.

Minich, I had a question about the yellow existing building.

The yellow building.

What is the nature of that yellow building and what was its uses or I think it was just storage.

As far as I know.

I mean uh the front end of it has garage doors, so I don't think it was just storage.

Just a garage.

But like I said, if uh Bishop Fisher could answer some of that, I don't want to speak for him on that because I'm not 100% sure.

So Mr.

Minnick, just from the engineering part.

Anything that would be like below that red line that defines the I don't know, the whole of the whole area.

That is their property, but it's just undeveloped or it's open space.

Oh, the area up here.

No, down um below go right go up now, up a little bit.

Now right there.

Is that just like an opening?

That's where the existing septic's at.

It's it's right in here for the house.

All right.

So essentially that's the same.

It's green area.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Good.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

Is there anyone else present that would like to speak in favor?

Sir, please state your name and your address and allow our attorney to sort you in.

You can adjust the mic as you need.

Ronald Fisher 104, Deal Track Lane, Dover Delaware.

Your title again?

Was it um Bishop?

Bishop Bishop Fisher, do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony given this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

I do.

Good afternoon, uh members of uh the Board of Advisory.

It's an honor to be here with you tonight.

And to share with you our requests uh for this particular variance.

Just to go back a little bit.

Just to go back a little bit, uh we are a ministry that uh is transitioning from uh Maryland to Delaware.

In fact, this year is 50 years of my serving uh in this particular capacity uh for this ministry uh out of the town of Chestertown, where I've actually went through three mayors, three Chestertown police department chiefs, uh had the City of Chestertown honor us in having a day in our name because our emphasis has always been to extend an arm to our community, and we are service-oriented because we believe that we can make an impact on our community.

So I'm delighted to be here uh on tonight to talk about uh our request for a variance at 270 inch road.

I think someone asked why choose that particular spot, because where we are transitioning from uh is a lot smaller.

This is much more property than what we ever dreamed of.

Our congregation actually consists of half booners, old timers, and half young folks, which we're excited about since we see that there are a number of ministries that don't have much in the regard of young people.

So we're delighted to uh actually see that uh within our congregation.

Our main objective is very simple.

Uh it is really uh the mission of uh sharing hope uh to hurting people uh and to share the simple gospel message and to connect people to the greatest man that history has ever known.

That is our goal, that is our aim.

Uh even the concern, and certainly I have had the opportunity to read the letter that was uh in opposition.

Uh and I do uh I am very much concerned about the neighbor and the neighborhood uh because we want to build bridges and not fences.

It is our aim to do whatever uh we can uh to fit into the neighborhood, to enhance the neighborhood.

It is our goal that if we can't do you any good, we won't do you any harm.

That's been our motto.

That's been our history.

We've been small enough to know you, but big enough to serve you.

And so it is with that desire uh that we hope to be a positive impact.

What we've done since we've been there is we've actually went to the surrounding uh neighborhood, all of the neighbors within the uh close proximity, and uh we actually extended a care basket to that uh those homes to introduce ourselves, to let them know who we were, what we're about, what our vision was for uh the surrounding area.

Thank you.

Any questions?

Yes.

Uh Bishop Fisher, obviously.

Yes, sir.

I have a question for you.

Well, if you think about where you're going to, what is your short-term and long-term vision for that location?

And I'm asking that because there's a concern about traffic and events, or if you think about your current pattern for worship, do you see that changing because most ministries want to grow?

So, and I know that would be a concern of the neighbor.

What the traffic pattern looks like.

Cars coming in, how often?

Would that increase?

Can you address that?

Yes, excellent qu excellent question.

Uh, when you look at the existing road, that road has no lines to it.

Uh it is a uh single-lane uh road that's not more than a mile long uh in its distance.

After having been there for a year now, uh we've noticed that there is very little traffic as far as congestion is concerned.

The neighbor does have a RV, and I think they mentioned something about that in the letter, and they used the example of a bus.

Well, if a bus and an R V comes down that road, somebody had need had better be courteous and allow someone to pass because they just won't get by.

Uh we're not there that often, and we have not seen uh at any time that we've ever been there, whether it's been to maintain the property.

We've never seen any traffic where there actually was congestion to speak of at all.

In fact, it's a rather quiet uh neighborhood.

And most of our parishioners, even if they come from different ways, they've got at least three options of the direction that they come in.

So they're not all coming in at the same uh in the same direction.

And let's say that there was some special day that was a bigger day than normal.

I again I would presume that that would be in such a way that the traffic would be so quick to get in because of the short distance that it wouldn't be uh a concern or uh a hardship on the neighborhood.

And the growth piece, yes, uh all ministries want to grow.

We want to reach more people, and I've often envisioned what the church would be like uh if it grew.

If it grew to the size, let's just say it doubled.

That's 80 people.

Let's say uh we were very uh uh rambox about our vision and it was 300 people, I can assure you we would not want to stay there.

It wouldn't fit, it wouldn't work, and it would create a hardship on our neighbors.

I am really concerned that we make sure that we fit into the neighborhood and that we add value to the neighborhood and not disrupt what's already been there.

I get it.

I get it.

If I'm a new kid on the block, I get it as an existing person.

I want to know who's coming, what are they doing, what are they about?

And again, we promise to do people good and not to do them harm.

And if we grow to that level, uh we're in that we're at 200 or 300, we'll be moving out, I can assure you.

Is there someone always on property?

So does someone live in that dwelling?

Uh there's security that's always on the property.

There is no one never there 24-7.

Bishop uh Fisher, other than the other than the convenience of that building that's present now.

What is to prevent you from building the church elsewhere on that parcel?

And then that is no longer an issue as regard in regard to the uh the setback.

Can you restate your question again?

Why is it necessary to put the new building attach it to the current building?

Okay.

Uh that building is a 30 by 50, and 40 people would not adequately uh fit where you have to put in restrooms and at least some means for um a study or an office before you know it, it's just just not enough room and just not adequate enough.

That addition would allow us an ideal size to work from uh and again allow uh us the flexibility to do the things that we do.

And most of it is more of an outreach component uh as opposed to trying to grow the church numerically, but if that happens, we'll take it and we'll be looking to do greater things that may end up moving us from where we are to greater places, and that would be a great story as well.

Can I add one thing to that?

I think what you were at a building use that leave that the way it is, we discussed that.

Uh, Mr.

Minet, can you move the mic towards here?

We did I'm sorry.

We discussed that at at the meeting with with staff.

And even if we put another building on here and left that building as an accessory, it would still have the encroachment of the of the 15-foot setback on it, so it would still have to be either demolished or moved.

We could do it, but either way, it it does kind of put a hardship on them.

That's all.

Right.

Um I don't understand why that would be the case.

Staff just in lately.

Sure.

So if they are applying to use the property for a church, all buildings that are used for that use would have to meet the setback.

So even if they decided to build um like a completely new church here, if they intend to leave that building, it would still be considered part of the use and would have to meet the setback.

So if you don't approve it, they would have to build a new building and then remove that building in order to get approval for a church.

Thank you.

I can tell you that, and I'll just speak from the heart.

Should the board choose to decide, you're gonna need to demolish that building.

At a 40-member congregation, our pockets are just not that deep to be able to handle that.

And it would force us to give up the entire property and turn it back to sell it and look for a new place.

It will be just that difficult.

There's something else with regard to, and again, I'm very concerned about uh our neighbors.

I've had an opportunity to speak to them twice.

And this is before the letter.

So I was somewhat taken aback.

Uh because they mentioned something about seeing over uh into their property or their pool.

That's impossible.

The fence is six foot.

The building inside that great room that's here.

Um we arrived, we literally put what's called a frost glass cover so that you can't see out and you can't see in.

So it's impossible that we were seeing the pool, and I'm not that tall.

I'm only five six.

Um by the way, that fence that runs down from the uh road to the uh pole barn in the building.

The neighbor has a another fence that looks like a Y.

So from that door that you see, you can't even see the pool there.

So that the end of that fence, there's another fence that has a Y like that you can't see his pool.

I just wanted to share that that point.

I'll even add there's a a concern about being on the property.

We did.

I can remember the day that that happened.

I have a photo on my phone right now where we stepped inside the woods edge to take a picture with a little boy.

The neighbor has a sign on the other side of a path that goes back that says private property.

You can see it.

It's very clear.

We weren't on that, we weren't near it.

We were on the edge and took the photo.

We discovered though that actually where we were literally standing, that really is the neighbor's property.

Our property turns further down before it goes behind the neighbor's property.

So that one, uh we have to own that.

That day we took a photo at the edge of the property that was on the neighbor's property.

I've since uh seeing that letter, I have addressed the entire congregation, especially the young people who just want to be outside and have fun and they don't really know boundaries that well, but I've asked them uh to remember the neighbor's property, and I've set a request for them not to go near it.

In fact, where I've requested them not to go is nowhere near.

It's almost like in front of the building of the pole barn, anything towards us as you look at that photo, I've asked them just to stay away, just to keep peace because we don't want our neighbors to be troubled by us.

Very good.

Any other questions?

Appreciate it.

Thanks for your time.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else present that would like to speak in favor?

Sir, please state your name and your address and allow our attorney to swear you in.

Good evening.

My name is Daryl Jeffers.

My I reside at 1492, Fast Landing Road, Dover, Delaware, 19901.

Very good, Mr.

Jefferson.

Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you give me in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

I do.

Um as again, my name is Daryl Jeffers.

I'm one of the longest standing members of Faith Life Church, and I'm only 64.

My father and mother were once the long-standing members.

They passed over the past couple years.

And uh now I have children and grandchildren that are part of Faith Life.

So I'm indeed happy for that.

And um I'm standing uh if if I could, a letter from our members, if I could have an opportunity to read it to you all.

Yes.

We will try to keep it to five minutes or less if that's possible.

Yes, yes, yes.

Uh, dear members of Levy Court, I and we respectfully submit this statement of support of the various requests associated with the proposed conversion and expansion of the existing pole barn located on the church's recently purchased property into a sanctuary and a place of worship for the congregation.

This project represents an investment in both the property and the surrounding community.

Rather than constructing an entire new structure, the congregation seeks to thoughtfully repurpose, repurpose an existing building already located on the site.

The proposed improvements will allow the church to establish a permanent home while maintaining the residential character of the area and making productive use of the property.

The congregation itself is relatively small, consisting of approximately 40 members.

As a result, the overall intensity of use is expected to remain modest and manageable, particularly when compared to a larger institutional or commercial developments.

This smaller scale should help alleviate concerns regarding traffic volume, parking demand, noise, and overall impact on our neighboring properties.

It is understandable that nearby residents have questions and concerns regarding issues such as lighting, traffic, noise, septic capacity, and setbacks.

Those concerns are deserved to be heard and addressed through the county review process.

However, those concerns should not overshadow the many safeguards already built into the land use and permitting process, nor should a represent nor should they prevent reasonable communities serving development from moving forward.

The issue of the existing buildings of proximity to the neighboring property should also be considered in content.

The structure already exists on the property, and the requested variance appears intended to allow improvements and the adaptive reuse rather than construct it of an entirely new encroachment structure.

Granting the variants will allow the property to be improved responsibly while avoiding unnecessary demolition or underutilization.

Places of worship have long served as as stabilizing institutions within communities by providing spiritual support, charitable outreach, youth programs, counseling, volunteer service, and opportunities for fellowship.

This congregation seeks to become a positive and respectful neighbor while contributing to the broader community.

For these reasons, I respectfully encourage you, the levy court, to approve the required variants subject to any reasonable conditions deemed appropriate by this by your staff and applicable agencies.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thank you.

Any questions?

Seeing none.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else present that would like to speak in favor of the application?

Anyone online?

Still no members from the general public online at this time.

Thank you.

Is there anyone present that would like to speak in opposition to the application?

Seeing none, we will close the public hearing for application A2612.

Next application is A2614 for Gribinski.

Okay, thank you.

They are seeking a variance from the requirement that a fence may not exceed four feet in height in the front setback to enable the construction of a six-foot fence.

The property is located on the southeast corner of Quail's Nest Drive and Checker Crossing, being lot 83 in Quail's Nest Subdivision west of Dover.

Levy Court District is the sixth zoning district is a C.

Here you can see the plot plan showing the proposed fence along the rear portion of the property going up towards the house and then a portion there.

This is the portion that requires the variance here.

Um they are allowed to go up to four feet height within the 30-foot front setback and are looking for the six-foot height.

This is looking at the property from Checker Crossing, looking up.

Up trucker crossing viewing the side of the property towards the side of the property, the house.

From the further up on Quest Nest Drive, looking back towards the house.

And along the rear property line there.

Further out.

Sir, if you'd like to please state your name and address and allow our attorney to swear you in.

Good evening.

James Grabinski, 18 Chucker Crossing, Dover, Delaware.

Sir, do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you give in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Yes, sir.

First, um Ms.

Denny, you made a uh a comment earlier when Mr.

Myers was stating his case and you referenced the planning committee's decision to um deny the application based on code.

Um I'll say within learning how to do this, uh my wife and I, family first-time home buyers.

Um learning how to do this and apply for a variance.

Um, you know, when when asking questions, you know, and just briefly looking at summarizing the case to them, the planning committee or the planning team, you know, kind of just told me just looking at it most likely it will get denied.

So I I would hope that I say that because I I would imagine, you know, because I can come up here and explain why I believe something is a exceptional um what is it practical difficulty.

Thank you.

Exceptional practical difficulty.

I can I can explain why I believe that, but I would hope that it is in good public order um and right, everybody doing their home homework and it's contingent on that.

So it that just stuck with me because that we're applying for a variance for um a six-foot fence versus a four-foot fence up to the 10-foot setback.

Um that's because in receiving a couple quotes, what we got um different information from two different fencing companies.

Um told me that, oh, you can't you cannot do the the the six-foot fence up to the 10-foot setback.

You know, you you can apply for or you can have it up to the 30-foot setback.

And so I was like, okay, let me reach out to the county and try to figure this out.

Um not knowing that I I could have gone to my HOA.

Um, but yeah, we after doing it and talking about it and and just figuring this out and navigating the process.

Um we definitely we have four kids ranging from the ages of 12, 11, uh six, and newborn.

Uh my wife and I both serve um and really is to maximize you know security and safety of our family and children.

And we and we have a 90-pound dog who can most likely easily clear a four-foot fence.

Um, and some of the neighbors already know he's a runner, he's gonna get out.

Um, yeah, and in in some of the pictures that I took um that are in the boa packet, um, you know, me standing up here, you can see that um from the intersection, I think the primary concern based on the staff's the planning staff was the us being on a corner lot and and the view of oncoming uh traffic from either direction.

Um you could clearly see that a six-foot fence would not impair, rather uh the trees, you could see the trees um would impair the vision of the uh the traffic coming down the street uh more so than the fence would, and that's going in both directions from the tree line.

I took the other picture from the tree line and still you know, cars can see both, you know, traffic coming either way from that intersection.

Um I think I covered everything.

I uh additionally, I I have received HOA approval to have um you know the construction of the fence put up.

Um I think that's it for my thank you.

Any questions?

Yes, Mr.

Grubinski.

First of all, I'd like to thank you for your service to this country.

Yes.

But I think when I was looking through the packet, I think you're grappling with uh two fronts because you got a corner lot.

Yes, sir.

And you had a discussion with the staff, I think, about other neighbors that have interior lots.

You want to talk about that a little bit?

Oh, yes.

So right, it because even though it's my backyard, you know, it's considered front facing.

And therefore, right, um I am not, you know, we my wife and I um we do not have the same um abilities that those inner lots do in putting up a to utilize their full property um to the capacity that you know right those inside lots have.

Like right, you could see the neighbor next to me, um Mr.

David and Nikita, they have a six foot privacy fence all around their lot.

Um, but because of the setback, I cannot um.

And uh, you know, one of the things I thought about too is is right, I I think I don't know.

We're both I got ten years left, my wife has three.

Um there's still very much likelihood that you know we could PCS and we have to sell the house.

Um I would love to stay.

Um, but right, um it could, you know, not being able to maximize the the the fence and and the the lawn, the the the the full lot, um it could definitely create an economic hardship uh possibly um but um if for me and my wife um it's more so about family and just security and you know having you utilizing the entire space that you know I I feel like you know we are afforded since we you know bought the land and um yeah purchase the home so I have a question for the staff.

So if it was if the fence was built on the 30 foot setback, it could be six feet, correct?

Correct.

But um where Mr.

Grimin Grabinski wants to put it, um it's it's now uh required because it's a uh corner lot, so both both sides are there are front facing.

It needs to be four feet per the code, correct?

Just because of the double-sided lot.

That's always the same.

Right.

And and you know, because I I had I inquired about that, and right, you know, right, the ten foot set back is there because it's the counties if there's electricity, plumbing, whatever that's which understood, right?

And so at first I thought maybe it'd be the post in the grounds, but the post is regardless if it's a four-foot fence or a six-foot fence, the posts are gonna be the same.

So the only clear, which is why I took the pictures, like I had my daughter out there, I was in the car, I was doing measurements, I was like, you know, because the only con other concern was the visibility factor, and right, which is why I went all the way to the tree line and uh took the pictures in my car.

So, you know, I stood there, you know, because I'm 6'4, and uh you could clearly see I look pretty small from the corner of the um and then again, right from the driveway.

If my driveway was packed, that would impede that uh that um that um incoming traffic more so than the fence would.

And then again, the tree line, those two trees there that um come to find out you can plant trees anywhere, even in the 10-foot setback, I guess.

I don't know if that's true, but um you know, impede the the vision and the fence would um and it and um yeah.

That's all I have.

Yeah, appreciate the uh due diligence you did on that the visuals were great, um very effective.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Very much I tried my best.

That's good enough for government work, right?

Um but we already have a problem too um with uh speeding in our development too.

Um we are definitely one of the younger families.

And so again, just trying to take care of our little piece here in Quail's Nest because yeah, so we're we PCS here two years ago from Germany, and uh we really enjoy the neighborhood.

It's a nice neighborhood.

Um yeah, we just like to take care of it and you know, if right, if we do have to move on, then you know it's either another family or someone else can have the the full capacity and and of the lawn that the lot allows.

And I think, you know, based on my belief, again, you know, what I think is you know exceptional, you know, practical, you know, I I don't think it's um you know, a um outside the ask, I guess.

I have a question here.

Um It looks like over on the opposite side of your property, um where you referred to a neighbor, I think that's got a fence there.

Are you proposing to tie your fence into your neighbor's fence?

Uh yes, and they already gave me verbal confirmation um that that is um they're okay with that.

Um like the section, the 16 foot section of blue fence that you have at the top.

Is that gonna be on your neighbor's property?

Negative.

Um it will be on the uh on the on the line or yeah.

No, it will be on my property.

Is their property on or is their fence on the line or is it inside the line?

Um so it it looks it their fence is on our line because that last post in the corner um is where um our lines meet um in that upper right corner looking.

You can play on the screen if you'd like.

Right.

So that that post, his post, that that post right there is where um my property line.

And um and that it goes straight down.

Okay.

So if if his if that neighbor's fence was on the neighbor's property by a few inches, then you might not be able to tie in.

But because it's on the line, according to you, you you can tie in.

You can't you you're not gonna be able to put you're not gonna be able to pull a permit to put any part of your fence on your neighbor's property.

But if your neighbor's fence is right on the line, then you can be on the line as well.

That's just something I wanted to point out.

Copy.

Yeah.

No, it's it's right on the line.

Um and I just had an inbound survey did um because it's not something we did when we bought the house.

Um and so I do have an updated one of where the true lines are at.

Um we actually had all those trees because some of those trees are actually on my line.

The the neighbor um that's he uh that's technically behind me planted those trees when they first got here, and they've grown immensely.

And so it's like the first four trees or three trees are on his line, but then they start going over to my line and majority of them.

So but we like the aesthetics um and so but they've overgrown and the ice storm did a lot of damage.

So we actually had those just trend back.

Um so we cleared it so we can have a six foot to eight foot fence, or excuse me, a six foot fence and had them cleared up to about eight feet, eight, ten feet.

So um so it would look nice.

Okay.

So if your variance was denied and you put a six foot fence along the area where you're permitted to, you won't you wouldn't have a safety concern or an issue with your dog.

You would you would j just have lost this the 110 feet of depth and 31 feet of width of square footage.

That's that would be that that's your difficulty.

Yes, sir.

I'd l I'd lose a a good percentage of the yard yet.

Um let's see.

So I don't know if the um staff uh wants to comment on this or not, but the the there's a there's an additional um public policy justification for limiting the heights of fences along front yards, and that is to um discourage a canyon effect that would be created if you had tall fences running down um streets.

Uh so there's an aesthetic element to it as well.

Um I just thought I would mention that because you mentioned what other justifications might be for limiting the height of a fence and it and it not having any effect on utilities, for instance.

Um it does it does raise an aesthetic concern, and that's part of why the prohibition exists.

And you said you did have HOA approval, correct?

That is correct, sir.

And and actually to add to that, I um I did speak to the you know Dave and Nikita, right?

Because it's every it's the the notification goes out to neighbors that are 200 meters in the in deniam diameter, but um I've gotten three verbal confirmations.

They said they would generate me some uh write me something, but you know, I just too busy to go, you know, backtrack, but they have given me verbal confirmation that they don't have a problem with it.

And that's three neighbors that's uh one directly across the street.

Um facing Quail's Nest, uh the other one directly across the street from Chucker Crossing, and then my neighbor Dave and Nikita there that uh we our fences would have joined.

Is your neighbor's fence a solid privacy fence?

Yes, sir.

And is that what you're proposing?

Yes, sir.

Would um would you entertain any type of um reduction in the amount of I'll call it an encroachment that the defense of that height would create.

So you want 31 feet.

Would you look with as far as like bringing it in just uh Yeah, I would entertain it, you know, a couple feet.

Um I'm gonna ask for the most and hope for the best.

Um yeah, I would not um So I have a question when we're looking at that what's in front of us on the board.

That what appears to be like lot 74, is that their driveway?

Is that a driveway there?

Yes, ma'am.

It is a driveway.

And so it well, you already have trees there, but there's it's still they could back out, let's say back out of their driveway.

And the vision doesn't seem to be a problem with it.

I mean, like your left, you know, your left right vision.

Okay.

Um I just want to say um I I appreciate your service.

I I have two deceased husbands in the veteran cemetery, so I I fully understand your life and your wife's life, and I do appreciate your service.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Any other questions?

Good.

Thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Is there anyone else present that would like to speak in favor of the application?

Yes.

Ma'am, please say your name and address and allow our attorney to sort you in.

You can adjust the mic as needed.

Yes.

My name.

My name is Sheila Copeland.

Um I live at 67 Flickr Court, and I'm the board president for the colon.

Let him throw you in, please.

Do you solemnly uh Ms.

Coughlin, do you um solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you give in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

I do.

You may proceed.

Well, first and foremost, thank you for allowing me to speak.

Secondly, I brought our architectural review committee um bylaws uh from uh that's filed between a court, and it does state that we allowed uh six feet.

This is dated back long before I came here.

I had to serve 30 years in the military, and I understand what he's asking for, and I know a little bit more about the community than he does.

We've had uh and this was something that I had to keep until coming to a court.

We've had some occurring uh occasions in the community where they felt one corner away from his where there may have been potential drug activity.

I reported it, and the law law enforcement took care of that.

The same thing happened in my call de sac where a builder left a what do you call it, uh porta party, and every five minutes on Saturdays they were showing up.

Uh back uh last fall.

No, this is spring.

Okay, yes, last fall, one uh member that's on the board had an occasion where level three, to the best of our knowledge, to make it into her gate and had been circling and walking through in and out of the neighborhood.

That's why Mr.

Kravinsky was deployed.

And uh we have been keeping uh eye on that, knowing that his children are as young as they are, and on the corner, uh a six-foot person could reach over, and his ki uh children play quite often in the yard with other children, uh, could possibly lean in and get them.

So doing a risk analysis and just looking at what happens, I'm also uh have been a certified domestic violence sexual assault representative.

So we look at all things because the Department of Justice tells us to make sure that we assess what people are asking for, why they are asking, and then go with their best answer.

And since we had it in our documents, we felt that this would be the one that we would try to stand for, at least with the board, and to include that Mr.

Gabinsky actually followed your rules by keeping his post.

Uh whatever you put in his yard, it stayed there, still there today.

And that means that he knows how to follow good order and discipline.

And the board just voted and he has a signed copy of the ARC approval in his possession.

Um so if there's any variance that you can give to protect the children because we notify the people to uh letters, what has happened, the safety and all of those issues.

The only one I couldn't talk about was the drug issue.

So from that standpoint, um, when he asked, and I actually was there when the surveyor was there, and I test drive drove today to see just literally based on where the markers were, and had someone else to meet me to make the turn in to Chuck A Crossing, I could see both ways.

And even with the trees being there currently, right now.

So it's more of safety and keeping children safe in Kent County.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Any questions?

Oh.

I'm seeing none.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else present that would like to speak in favor of the application?

Still no members online?

Still no members from the general public online.

Thank you.

Anyone present that would like to speak in opposition to the application.

Seeing none, we will close the application the hearing for application A2614.

Last application tonight is A 2613 for Saunders.

Seeking a variance from the required 30-foot rear principal structure setback to enable the construction of an addition.

The property is located on the west side of Quail's Nest Drive, approximately 180 feet north of Coward Court, being lot 21 in Quail's Nest Subdivision west of Dover.

Looking at the property, up the road, down the road.

From the driveway, looking to the rear from the side, looking to the opposite side in the rear.

Another view of rear side, from the rear towards the house, opposite side.

Aerial further out.

Sir, if you'd like to state your name and your address and allow our attorney to swear you in.

Clint Saunders, addresses 475 Quelsness Drive, Dover Delaware 19904.

Mr.

Saunders, do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you give in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth?

Yes.

You may present.

First, thank you for your time.

I know it's late.

I won't hold y'all, I won't be long-winded, although I can be, but I won't.

I'm here with my wife.

She's in the back.

Um it's a property, and we live in the same, I guess the previous um applicant, we live in the same neighborhood with just CrossNest, which is a great neighborhood.

We have a great board, um, a great HOA president, um, and a lot of members that are trying to make our community great.

Before I even get into mine, I will speak on the last one and deal.

I've been guilty of speeding in my neighborhood.

I apologize at times if I'm just late a lot.

I've been working on it.

I ride past his house every day.

I even one time when I wasn't speeding, the dog and did run in the street, and one of the children ran towards the street to chase a ball.

So it is definitely fundamental that he has a fence there because of where his house is located.

Back to what I'm here for.

Um I'm asking for a variance on the on the setback in the back of my house.

So while I did see the answers from staff and the reasons for their answers and denying the or recommending to denial, um, there was a couple of things that happened when we purchased a house.

Wilkerson built our home.

We didn't go in and sign a contract with Wilkerson originally, someone else was building on that property, and we were looking at another separate property.

Seller takes us to this property, say, look, you can have this and look at the land and look how great it is in back of it and blase blah, and we do it, and this is your square footage.

It says square footage was 48, 4200.

Getting through that process, once you sign a contract and you're doing all those things, you're told that okay, the true value, the true square footage of your house is 3800 because the second floor is not counted because it's the open second floor within that room.

Okay.

Me, this is our third home, our third home.

We lived in Smyrna and we lived in Maryland.

We understand square footage means a lot when you're going to resell your house or refinance your house.

So at that time we played a pretty penny for our house, but once you've put down 50,000 or 300,000, whatever you're putting down, you can't get it back.

You can fight it all you want when you have lawyers and do all those things.

But at that time we came into our house, pretty much feeling like we were taking advantage of like 600 square feet of our house because we couldn't carry count that square footage.

We pay seven over 700,000 for our house.

House across the street, 500 and something thousand for their square footage to be just if you if you look at our house and you look at the house, you can see it's it it looks expoundably bigger, easily bigger.

But because our grape room doesn't have a second floor, it took away that square footage.

So when you're looking at comps in the area, if we look at cops that two doors down from my house, a person has the same layout, but their square footage is counted, they don't have a a second floor.

It doesn't have two foot ceiling.

I don't know what is that called.

Um vaulted ceiling.

So they don't have a vaulted ceiling.

The house appraises for 60,000 more than my house.

Same house, they just have another room up there.

I don't.

The next thing that came was my yard.

So when it came to my backyard, and we held our closing up for three days because when they showed us the house, they said this is your backyard.

All this into the wood line.

When we got to the first closing, that's the first time we seen our our uh plot plan.

The uh survey.

We saw that closing.

And we said, wait a minute, that's not our the tree line is where our line is.

And they said, No, there was a stick there.

And we're like, no, it was no stick there, it was dirt there.

And they're like, no, it was a stick there.

We're like, okay.

So we held our closing off for that day.

Go back and look.

And it was like, hmm.

We put a substantial amount of money down because we sold our house in Maryland, so we came and we use our money we had as a negotiation.

So we put down 300,000 as an earnest deposit on our own.

Sir, Mr.

Sanders.

So this is your home, right?

This is your residence.

Yes.

Correct.

It's not like you're not running a business there or no, this is this is my home, my wife and my my three kids.

Because this is a residential neighborhood, right?

Yes.

So if you could focus on what your difficulties are with respect to occupying the house as a as a residence, I think you'll further your application a little a little better.

Okay.

So I'm looking to come off with a setback.

I'm looking to build an addition on the back half of my kitchen.

The addition I'm trying to go back is 22 feet.

It goes within six feet of the 30-foot setback.

I'm looking to build an addition because I have a family member who's currently in a wheelchair, and she probably will have to come live with me eventually.

Um I'm not sure when or if so, but it could happen.

I have a first floor reason that my house is more susceptible to anybody else.

I have a first floor full bathroom that she can utilize and access.

Um that's what I'm asking for for the variance for the setback.

The reason that I'm asking for the square footage to go from 16 feet instead of 12, which is allowed, is because it costs the same much in lumber.

But it changes the value of the house by the square footage.

It gives me another 200 square feet.

That's pretty much all I can say from that standpoint.

Do you have any plans, John, of this addition?

Um, just the ones that you see here.

I didn't I didn't call an architect or anything like that.

I call a deputy came out and looked and said I can do this, and uh he said you might want to see if you get a various clearance before I even do anything.

But I'll build it myself.

So you're at the very beginning stages of of planning an addition.

Yes.

You have very minimal monies out of pocket at this point.

Absolutely.

Okay.

Is there a reason why you're going six feet back versus just going longer with the width of your house?

Just that you could still achieve your square footage if you did the width of your house versus going deep.

Well, right here, I can tap this right.

So right here, there's a door.

So I can't come past that door.

It's the basement door that walks out right there.

So I'm on this side, so if I come across right here.

Let me see the slide.

Look I'm right here.

To go to width.

Then there's uh another door here, and then there's windows here.

So I can't kind of go.

I would have to knock this wall down too, which is my my family room.

Is that what you're asking?

So with this, the reason that this in this area is also like uh a four-window, like almost like knee length to like right here.

So is it a bedroom that you're proposing?

It's no, it's not a bedroom because I wasn't gonna put a closet in there.

It would just be an additional room.

Additional space.

But it's off your kitchen?

Yes.

So theoretically, it probably would be a dining area.

It would give me an option to make that a dining area and turn my right here.

Is where the bathroom is, the full bathroom.

It would give me an option to make that a dining area and then take this dining area out and make a bedroom here if I needed to.

But I can't build off of this side because of the size setbacks.

And right out here is this um a peat moss system.

You're familiar with a peat moss system.

So I can't do anything up the front.

They put our house that far back because of the peat moss system.

And the rain table.

What about the right rear corner behind the driveway?

This is even this is shorter because our what is it?

Our well is right here.

So the well is 10 foot off of the property line.

Touching that area.

There you go.

It's the mic is here, and then you go over here.

So there's a well right here that sits 10 feet off the corner.

So in order to put something here, I actually have a shed here.

But Mr.

Gallo, I think meant at the end of the driveway.

Back right corner.

Yeah.

That whole space there where it says um it shows there's quite a bit of area, buildable.

Well, it looks like buildable area.

What's there that um anything preventing you from adding in on that side?

Everything.

The uh the gas comes in on that side, the gas line is there, the um the fans for the AV AC unit.

Um the main water line from the well comes on that side.

So you can't build I wouldn't be able to do anything on that side.

And it will be shorter than because of the setback, the side setbacks is shorter.

I think it's like 10 feet.

Am I correct in that?

Just I believe it is 15, actually.

Fifteen.

15 and 15.

Is this a one-story addition?

Yes.

Mr.

Saunders, you mentioned a relative that could possibly come and stay with you.

Were you also thinking they would possibly stay in this addition or no?

Yes, they would it would be primarily for them.

Like what I meant is like if I was to take out the dining room over here to make that a bedroom, then that's the area they would stay, but then this would be the dining room.

Because I think from the notes I read you were wanting to do that because of the wheelchair as well.

The wheelchair in the bed.

So she she has a bed that what inclines like the size of a queen size, and she has a wheelchair, which is a scooter wheelchair, it's not the kind like this.

So it plugs in.

I do have a letter that I left in the back, but I'll email it out to the board so y'all have that.

Her name is uh Ruth Brooks.

So she currently stays in a family property in Wilmington now, and she really can't stay there.

I paid for her to get a chair lift to go from her first floor to the second floor.

Now, this doesn't have nothing to do with any of that, but I'm considered the educated one in my family and the one that can do a little bit more for the ones who can't.

But she's my only living aunt left.

So I'm I can call on the phone now.

Y'all hear a whole story about how uh good that she probably would say I was, but if it's up to me, it uh it she would probably have to come stay with me because her son, her grandson, who was her caretaker, because her son doesn't really do much, he just joined the army, so he's uh I don't know where Baron is, but he just joined the Army because he wanted to get out of Wilmington because it just was it was no good for there, and he didn't want to go to college.

Yeah, Mr.

Saunders, you don't understand what he was trying to do.

So the existing dining room and existing the existing house now, his plan would be to turn that into the bedroom next to the full bath there.

And Mr.

Sanders, just for the record, the area behind your house, the area that would be most impacted by this encroachment is open space, right?

You don't have a neighbor there, is that correct?

It's no neighbor, it's it's actually the HOA's property.

I even on learning on this, I even had like a little brief conversation of what it would cost to probably buy some of that, and I was told it'd probably be impossible.

So that's it.

Like I'm a person that understand rules.

I'm not sitting up here like, oh, I want you guys to get it to me, and I deserve it because it's what I want.

I get it.

I understand that, I understand the process, and I just will go through the process.

Like if it's at night, I'll probably try to figure out another way because it's just you know, it's not something that I'm here trying to buck a system.

Like rules are there for a reason.

Now I could sit up here and be like, and which when I came in, I I explained it's another 30 feet before the wood lines and and property that already take care of an HOA knows, and we cut it and do all those other things.

But I understand when it comes to a structure that there are certain rules and parameters that need to be had.

So I I'm totally in agreement in that.

If I see on the streets, hey, how you doing?

If you deny it on there, it's it's a part of life, so I I totally get that part.

And I appreciate your time being here so late.

So I wasn't.

Very good.

Any other questions?

Awesome, thank you.

Appreciate it.

Is there anyone else present that would like to speak in favor of the application?

No one online?

Still more members from the general public online at this time.

Thank you.

Anyone present that would like to speak in opposition to the application.

I don't know if it's opposition.

You are under oath.

Remind us of of your name, please.

My name is Sheila Copeland, President of Quail's Nest HOA.

Very good.

We have yet to get what you have.

Uh that's the first thing.

Uh the second thing is we do have a water table that runs on the behind.

And at our meeting last Thursday, the question came up about the impact of the contractors, because we've had contractors in there that left the house and it's still there after my five and a half years of being here.

And we've had trash and all of that.

So we're asking the member of our uh community to come come and converse with us because we did have members to come to the board meeting with the concerns of how close would that impact the trees, one, and two, um what is the rules of engagements for the wetland?

See, we had to we had did have a tree company come in and take a look for us, and there is a stream that's back there, the water table is low.

Not sure if it would disrupt the water flow based on what I'm learning tonight.

Uh so those are just some concerns that was brought forth at our meeting, and I thought I'd make it a matter of public records so he would know uh that those concerns are out there.

So can't say that we oppose, but we just don't have enough right now to walk along with him.

Thank you.

I mean, is there is there a swale that runs down the middle of that property line?

Um, I'm not sure if there's a swale.

Um, I do know that there is woodlands behind it, as was stated.

There is wetlands, but it's further back.

So I was looking at the pot plan earlier today.

Um, and the wetlands, I believe, are like back here ish.

Um, I can pull it up again briefly, though, to double check if there's a swale.

The wetlands are behind here, they kind of come back this way.

Um, so we would have the buffer from them twenty-five feet, but based on the plot plan, it does not look like that twenty-five foot buffer would hit the subject property.

Um, as for this, and and no part of the rear of the subject property is surface water um management or anything.

Uh, like storm water.

Stormwater management is what yeah.

I do not believe so.

Not that I'm seeing indicated on the plot plan.

Um let me get one second for my map here.

And based on the lidar, it doesn't look like there is a swale along the rear.

There might be some type of um drainage and drainage kind of going this way.

Um, but there's nothing that I see specifically.

Thank you.

Wanted something on the record after the line of questioning that we got from anything else.

To close application A twenty six thirteen.

Thank you.

That ends the uh public hearing.

Does anyone take a break?

Good.

Take a quick break.

Quick five minute break.

And then we'll uh proceed with our business meeting and we'll go in order who's here, so I think you'll be first.

All right.

I think we're ready to do the business meeting.

You want a roll call, please.

Yes, sir.

Mr.

Mr.

Simpson.

Here.

Mr.

Gallo.

Here.

Mr.

Jenkins.

Here.

Ms.

Hudson.

Here.

Miss Dunny.

Here.

Mr.

Cusick.

Here.

That is six present.

Thank you.

Um meet and minutes.

We need approval of the business meeting meeting minutes from the April sixteenth meeting.

I'll make a motion to approve the business meeting minutes for the April sixteenth, twenty twenty-six meeting.

Second.

We have a motion and second.

All in favor.

I'll make a motion to approve the following notices of decision A twenty six.

Second.

Got a motion and a second.

All in favor.

Yes.

I I think it's a very reasonable request.

And I always think when you have double-sided so that you have these two front setbacks, it always makes it makes things more difficult because you're losing your you know, your setbacks, you're already losing, like double.

So I really I don't think this is such a difficult request.

And I do think there's an exceptional practical difficulty because it's like on the main street, and you know, some somebody walks into the neighborhood, you just walk up the sidewalk right past the that whole side yard with kids in the backyard.

So I mean I I I agree, along with the fact that the safety issue alone is worth uh trying to resolve as much as possible.

I mean, with the children and the dog and the location.

You know, it's a reasonable request.

In which case I would like to make a motion that we approve.

On the wrong page, so I can't move my thing.

It's a application A 2614.

Um I do see an exceptional practical difficulty that's created with the double-sided uh front frontage and um the fact that this whole side of the yard, it abuts a main street through the neighborhood.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

Mr.

Simpson.

I vote in favor of the motion based on the public testimony we heard tonight and uh safety factor that is the uh safety difficulty that is at hand.

Thank you, Mr.

Gallow.

I'm gonna vote against the motion.

I respectfully disagree.

I don't see a corner lot as being um exceptionally different.

They're found on almost every corner.

Um and I do have a concern regarding having a six-foot fence along the property line because I do think it creates an aesthetic issue.

Um for those reasons um I'm gonna vote against the motion.

Thank you, Mr.

Jenkins.

Uh vote in support of the motion for application A twenty-six-14 based on not only the safety of the children, but just the fact that uh the six-foot fence provides uh a level of security that he he needs, and he's at a disadvantage.

He can't do technically what interior lots can do without getting a variance from us.

Thank you, Ms.

Stenny.

I vote yes, um, in keeping with the comments I made when I made my motion.

Thank you, Ms.

Hudson.

I'm gonna vote in favor of the motion.

Um I believe having two fronts is an exceptional practical difficulty on the applicant from having to normally improve his property as his neighbors and I believe removing the restriction does not seriously affect the neighboring properties.

Thank you, Mr.

Kusick.

Yeah, I vote in favor of the motion.

Um as the exceptional practical difficulty.

There's the two front lots there and and the not the applicant not be able to able to make normal home improvements um to the thing.

And then big thing is these sight lines when we look at this um six-foot fence and the applicant uh testimony and what he submitted did a due diligence um the so the safety um at that intersection there is not a factor.

Thank you.

That is five in favor, one opposed.

Thank you.

Five in favor, application A26-14 is approved.

Next application is a-26-13 for Saunders.

They're looking for a variance from the 30-foot rear principal structure setback to enable construction of an addition 24.4 feet from the rear property line.

Discussion or motion.

Yeah, discussion.

Um yes, I I can respect and appreciate the fact that uh he's actually come to us to discuss his plans before he started as opposed to there's been numerous times where the individual has bought all of supplies, done half the construction, and now they're coming in and asking us for forgiveness.

I agree.

Again, I've never been a big fan of that don't ask apologize mentality that so many people have.

And um I especially respect the fact that the reason he's even bringing this forward and trying considering it is so that he can house a handicapped relative you know, as need provides, and I think that's uh a very important part of this application for me.

I do want to point out though, in the response uh from the applicant, um it says number four, failure to remove the restriction would not create an unnecessary hardship, but does not make it easy to add a rear jack to the property in the future.

Um and then mentions the reason why they do want to um make this addition uh onto the property.

However, um I still don't see exceptional practical difficulty on it.

No, when uh he was when he was testifying, uh, I think we asked him numerous times about alternative locations, and he seemed to have a very legitimate and valid reason each on each case when we ask.

So I know we were trying to come up with another possibility as a location for the addition.

And it seemed like he had it thought about and he has a plan and some intentions for what he would like to try to do.

And then he made it clear before he he walked away from us that he's not here to break rules, but he's here to support.

I do appreciate that.

He's here to support what's in place.

So I respect that.

He certainly did his homework.

Yes.

I I do appreciate that.

Um for me though, I I feel like I know it's a little bit of money out of pocket for him, but seeing some type of plans to what you know is going to go there would be more beneficial than you know, just giving us a dimension uh of an area that he would like to use.

And I'm not seeing you know the exceptional difficulty there without seeing some type of plan.

I first thought of that, but he did have a good comment about the so it exists in dining room where the full bath is um will get moved to that addition and then the bed the bedroom.

I mean, I think it all comes down to the disability um about is the hardship here of whether you agree or not.

I mean, that's that's the hardship.

I I get what you're saying with Ethan, but my view of him coming to us first is if you come and you spend the the money to get your variance application first and you get denied, that's incredibly cheaper than having an architect draw up plans and then get denied.

So that's where I was looking at is like he took it as let me see if I can actually get this approved.

If I can't get it approved, then I can work and see not waste the three, five thousand dollars on the drawings.

That's how I took that.

And I agree with that, and I also think at this point he's adding a room, he's adding square footage to his house so that he can when need be, if it sounds like it may even be now, accommodate a handicapped person in that house.

And um, of course, I live in a house that's 135 years old, and I have no intention of building on, but what I which rooms I use for what inside that house, as long as there's legal uses shouldn't matter to my next door neighbors or or anybody.

I mean those rooms are I mean that doesn't matter.

You know, if it's my kids' bedroom, if we use it for a den, if my it's my husband's me room for all my trophies, it doesn't matter.

It's it's an addition to the house.

The re his exceptional practical difficulty is he needs the square footage in order to accommodate a handicapped family member.

I think I know how I would feel because we have another applicant that we're gonna be discussing later that has between six and seven hundred dollars in uh fees for a design.

And if we deny it, I I know how I would feel if I got denied and I've spent seven hundred dollars on my plans and now the county is saying no.

I I think I know where I'm where I'm at.

I I can see that.

Um it was never clarified at any point in time how many bedrooms are currently in the house, you know, how many bedrooms are on the first floor, how many bedrooms are on the second floor.

I just don't know if I'm sold on there actually being a you know practical difficulty.

All right.

For A twenty six thirteen, I make a motion to approve.

I believe um allowing the six-foot variants, so that the 18 by 22 addition to be 24.4 from the rear property line does not seriously affect neighboring properties.

I believe that it would be kind of in characteristic of the area.

These are larger homes in the area, and I believe from the public testimony that we heard tonight, the applicant is trying to accommodate a family member that is disabled, and I believe that in itself is an exceptional practical difficulty.

I'll second that motion.

Motion and second.

Thank you.

Mr.

Jenkins.

I'll vote in support of the motion for application A twenty six thirteen uh based based upon the fact that the applicant, in my opinion, made made every effort to um discuss with us why he picked the location that he picked and any other alternative to solve that or to rectify that just didn't fit because they were either sewer there or the well was there, or something was going on with the uniqueness of that lot.

Thank you, Mr.

Gallow.

Based on the discussion we had and um the case that was just made about there not being an alternative place to build an addition.

Um that said it could have been a smaller addition.

Uh but I will vote in favor of the motion.

Thank you, Mr.

Simpson.

I will vote in favor of the motion based on the discussion that we just had.

Um there not being any other location feasible of having an addition.

Thank you.

Ms.

Stunny.

I vote yes.

I do see an exceptional practical difficulty.

Um in just the whole lay of the land with this lot, there wasn't any other place really to put an addition.

And I think as far as the uh square footage of this room, if you're talking about a room for handicapped person, although he has discussed moving it to the other side.

Um, but if you were going to make it a dining room or if we were going to use it for a room for handicapped person with a wheelchair and a bed and all the other accessories, either way, I think it's in a reasonable size addition.

So yes.

Thank you, Ms.

Hudson.

I vote in favor for my motion.

Thank you, Mr.

Kusick.

I vote in favor of the motion.

Um I think it checks all four criteria here.

Um I don't think it has any impact on our neighboring properties, fits within the surrounding areas and and then the hardship um as discussed with the wheelchair accessibility and then the additional square footage needed for that, and then the location, um, the other locations we discussed.

Um this is the only spot that uh that could really go.

Thank you.

That is six in favor.

I think it was six in favor application 826-13 is approved.

Okay, back to the top.

You guys don't need to stick around if it's getting late.

I know that we've got to go through all the other applications.

If I forgot to bring the sign that I was doing right now.

Application A 2609, our deputy and sun builder is for Decker.

Uh, they are seeking a variance from the required five-foot side principal structure setback to enable the construction of an attached carport.

That would be three feet six inches.

I know I just wanted a little clarification why we had different standards on this one on this particular uh application.

So we have been instructed in the past that any time a disability is brought up that we have to provide these criteria.

Um I know Mr.

Townsend brought up the questions regarding the handicap portion.

They the applicant is my understanding I was not the one speaking with the applicant when they initially came in.

Is that they claimed it was for disability, that they had a disability and that that was part of why they needed this carport.

Um so that is why we provided those other criteria.

If we're gonna if there's different criteria regarding disability, then the discussions we have about people having wheelchairs and stuff, then does that fall under different criteria at that point, or is it are we still working with quick check?

Because I feel like things are kind of moving around a little bit from the four um the four criteria that we usually speak about.

Yes, I understand um your concern.

I from my understanding there was a previous variance in the past where disability was brought up and we did not have these types of criteria, and there was an issue with that legally, and we were um I don't know, I guess reprimanded what have you, um, to some extent, and this was the solution that was provided was in the future when a disability is brought up that we have to provide these criteria.

Um in no way trying to minimize any of the handicap or health issues if you're no I understand.

Yeah.

Very good point.

Is it to us or up to you who decides who what who what way we follow?

That's a great question.

It's uh have as I have been instructed when applicants are seeking a variance and we are handling the application, we as staff have to provide them with all options, and if a disability is brought up, that is what we have been told to provide them.

I think it and I can't it's been a long time, and it may have been even before you were here that we had um we had a a case and it just um I wasn't chair then, and and this is many, many years.

I wasn't even here maybe four years.

And um we kind of got dinged uh, you know, because of the Americans with Disability Act.

I mean, we really got um scolded, let's just say.

So could you just move your makeup a little bit?

Yeah, so I mean I so I really do try.

I mean, I if that's what I see, I I mention it just so that's my maybe my fault.

That's why.

Well, I'll make a motion for A twenty-six oh nine.

I think Mr.

Townsend wants to display the wall.

So I I probably incumbent upon me to chime in on the subject since it's really a legal question.

And I I wish I had a more definite answer for you, but it is in fact the Americans with Disabilities Act that requires of many different types of entities to allow for accommodations for for people with disabilities, and then very much limits your ability as a board to inquire as to the nature of the disability.

So the disabled person can assert it, and there's a limit really to to the degree to which it's appropriate for you to quiz.

I mean, in and you know, what qualifications do we have sitting here to assess someone's um disability.

We actually have somebody here who who might be in a better stead to do that than others, but it's not a requirement of board members that they have a background in in uh health and health care and the like.

So the Americans with Disabilities Act uh does indicate that for someone who's disabled um that if a reasonable accommodation can be made, um that but for that they would be unable to enjoy um a property like a non-disabled person, then they should be given that accommodation.

There's not a whole lot of law around it that I'm familiar with.

So I don't I I can't be as helpful as I'd like to be in terms of saying the threshold has been met here.

I wasn't around I've been in and out of this role for many years with the county, and I don't I I know we've we've applied the accommodation standard under the ADA before, but I don't remember um us being um dinged, if you will um for not having done it.

Um but I don't doubt that that happened.

So um so there it's clear as mud.

Discussion, more discussion.

The quick check standards are quite the opposite, right?

I mean, you're really not supposed to focus so much on the on the transient conditions of the owners.

You're supposed to focus on whatever characteristics of the property require um or put you in a position where one one size fits all doesn't work for this particular property.

I mean, that's why boards of adjustment exist, not because of you know certain people not being in a position to use their property um given their particular characteristics.

With or without a disability in this particular application.

Um I think a car port to allow you to get out of your car in different types of weather and get into your house under a cover.

I mean, she's not asking for a full-fledged garage or just something because the older we get, believe it or not, we can't run as fast.

So there we go.

Any more discussion?

Nope.

I'll make a motion for A twenty-six oh nine.

I vote to approve based off the staff staff recommendation, the public testimony that we heard tonight.

A second.

Motion a second.

Thank you.

Miss Denny.

I vote, yes.

I do think that it is a reasonable request to have a car port at the end of your driveway that allows you shelter um as you exit your car and get into your home.

And I do believe in this particular instance that the testimony given by the applicant was that she was had a handicap, which would uh lend itself more to my wanting to accommodate this.

Thank you, Mr.

Jenkins.

Yes, I vote in support of the motion for application A twenty-six-09.

Um I believe providing this variance will allow her to enjoy a quality of life that other individuals without this condition enjoy.

Thank you, Mr.

Gallo.

I vote in favor of the motion and that the uh applicant met the criteria uh presented to us on this application.

Thank you, Mr.

Simpson.

I vote in favor of the motion based off the staff recommendation.

Thank you, Ms.

Hudson.

I vote in favor for my motion.

Thank you, Mr.

Cusick.

I vote in favor um pro staff recommendation.

It's reasonable.

It's uh necessary accommodation to address this applicant's uh disability to enjoy the to live in that community, um, enjoy the and be able to enjoy their equal opportunity, and then I don't think it's altering altering the plan of that development.

Thank you.

That is six in favor.

Six in favor, application A26-09 is approved.

Next application is A26-10 Myers.

They are seeking a variance from the 20-foot maximum height for a residential accessory structure to enable construction of a pool building that will be 22 feet and five inches high.

Any discussion or motion?

I do not think he made the case of an exceptional practic practical difficulty.

I think he made the case that that's what he wanted and wouldn't.

But um I as uh one of the board members uh indicated people have done a lot with a lot less.

Um I think he that he could meet the uh criteria necessary and still have quite an impressive shop to work on.

I totally agree with Mr.

Gaylow.

Yeah, I think he's asking for the moon here myself.

I mean, but he to his own admission.

Yeah.

I mean, it's his law lifelong dream, and that's not an exceptional practical difficulty to me.

It's a pretty easy fix.

Um I could fix it for them in about an hour, draw it up for them.

As we're talking, I'm trying to find the the recommendation, the staff's recommendation.

Because I think that they said made comments about the staff recommended denial of the.

No, no.

Take that back.

I was looking at it from the standpoint that you got a five-acre lot.

That's extremely wooded.

Except for when the leaves are off during the winter, you might would see the pitch part.

But I'm thinking it's pretty gonna be pretty secluded and obscure from view.

Um five acres, he's on I don't know if he said the west northwest corner is where he was going to put it.

I thought it was in the middle, but I didn't look at that twenty that two feet five inches, six inches as being that far or exceptional out of the code to not approve it.

That's just my take.

Yeah, I agree.

I agree with that.

Uh that's one thing that this property has it.

I mean, you're not seeing this thing at all.

Um it's very secluded.

And as we discussed in the testimony, I mean that ridge line, that ridgeline is a ridgeline.

It's that thing, I mean that ridgeline is staying where it's where it's at either, which way we get that total roof height is staying the same.

It's just a shed dormer that's getting us over that code, which it's pretty easy adjustments to make.

Um just by lowering lowering both sides, creating a different truss.

Um But yeah, I mean it's probably more it is probably have to pay a little bit of money out of his pocket to make revisions to those drones.

And then we gotta remember everybody in King County has a pole building.

I don't have a pole building.

But you're right.

There, I mean the the hardship is he has none and he just he's asking he wants he's asking for it.

And it's not for sale.

I I mean it at what point though do you draw the line and say, well, you're you're just far enough back and just out of sight you can do it, or nah, you're not quite far enough out of sight, uh we can't do it.

I mean, we're where is that line at the R.

I mean two feet six inches, just in my opinion, depending on the distance that you're from, if if you could see it, if no trees were there.

And the neighbor, I think, said he has a accessory building, and several neighbors have accessory buildings.

It's is two feet six inches.

This is how I look at it.

It's two feet six inches that far out to cause my neck my neck to break.

Two feet two feet six inches.

But I think he has to make the case why we should change it.

And I don't think he did.

I don't think he made the case to change it.

Because that number, I mean 20 feet is arbitrary, right?

I mean, somebody got another exactly, exactly.

I I couldn't tell if it was 21 or 20 or 19.

But the plan he submitted is over over the code uh limit.

And I don't think he made the case that we should make any uh adjustment for him.

Well, in keeping with Mr.

Galla's comments, I just want to say that um it's not just the ordinances, it's the comprehensive plan and uh as well as the code, the ordinances and those I have been here and lived through with Connie Holland, whom I love.

Um the development of these because I managed the town of Camden and we were we mirrored them so that we wouldn't have all this moving in and out competition and chain annexing and DNSing and stuff.

So I I agree with what you're saying.

And um and that's why they have to prove an exceptional practical difficulty.

And I can tell you, I looked at that this afternoon, and I it I couldn't wait for Brian to get here so I could say, I don't understand this.

And I do it ever right anytime there's a roof.

And this has been I mean, again, I think I've been doing this like 20 some years.

But I that roofs it, you know, it's like some of the surgeries and stuff that I've stood in wouldn't make sense to you.

Well that roof line thing does not I I just cannot get my brain to absorb it.

So I I agree.

It's uh um it's like the it's this is one of those cases like, well, yeah, but I want it this way.

Well, otherwise I have to build two buildings.

Or if I can't, if I my favorite part of the testimony here was if I can't have that extra space, then I just won't do it.

Which I mean, that's not demonstrating exceptional practical difficulty in any way, shape, or form to me.

Well, he he did say if if we didn't grant what he was asking, he could build an 80-foot building, or he could build two other buildings, but then he also said after that, I don't think I want to do that because it's gonna affect the appearance of the landscaping and the certification that he had about the about the land.

So he was kind of like to me, he wasn't a spoiled brat to say I'm not gonna do it if you don't approve it.

I have other options.

One is I'll just build an 80-foot building.

But he said that look too commercial, and it would change the nature of the wooded lot, the five five-acre lot that he has.

And he showed us his uh no notion or yeah, that from the habitat, you know, the nature, natural habitat or acknowledgement, I guess it's an award.

But um and um which I think is really lovely.

I mean, I think that's great.

Um but again I'm not seeing I I sometimes I think we kind of veer the other way more than we should.

So I'm just and I I probably am as equally as guilty.

I'm also wondering, I'm also wondering what would we do because this is interesting.

Uh this is another case where he's coming to us before he's built it.

I'm kind of wondering what will we do had the building the building is done, it's completed two-thirds, and and you got to 20 22.5 or six-inch pitch, and now he's coming to us saying, um, I wasn't aware of this county code, and would you guys consider approving me?

Making this making this legal?

Because I've already done it.

But that see, and I agree.

I mean, I I really don't like the don't ask apologize with join things.

But frankly he asked because he knew we could go either way.

And and uh and again two feet six inches.

I I get what you're saying, but I it's uh it's a it's a hard one for me.

But he could just change the trust, right?

And then the we wouldn't be in the situation, right?

Is that what you're saying, Brian?

Yeah, it's a pretty pretty easy fix.

Um other than paying paying the desire to make another revision.

Well, other than that, it you could get that thing down to 20 feet really easily.

I I just dealt with this situation in real life this week on a piling home in Sussex County where the client wanted eight feet underneath the structure, but because of the height of the roof, it was only allowed to have seven because of the base float elevation.

I mean I know that's Sussex County and they have different rules, but you know, if that was in Kent County, and I mean that person only needed another foot.

This is two times as much height they're asking for here.

So I mean that's kind of where I'm at.

And in Sussex County, the answer was no, right?

Yeah.

These people had to build it, and they got seven foot.

So do we know in general why the 20-foot number is in the code?

Do we have any idea what that history is, what that history is.

I don't know the history of it.

I would say that the intent is for accessory structures to be less visually impactful than the primary.

Um primary is allowed to go up to 35 square feet.

Um that's the best that I know.

Yeah.

And and I think that's a little bit of a day, I mean, I understand why it's being asked, and I appreciate the question, but it's a little bit dangerous um, I think for the board to then substitute it's I mean you're going down a in a line of inquiry where it's as if the board might want to pass judgment on whether the law is was wise or unwise, and that is not the board's function.

Yeah, we don't make it.

I guess for me, he's already paid $600 and some dollars for these drawings.

So where do we try to meet what type of remedy do we try at all?

Or do we just say, hey, you're done, this is over, you better come back to the drawing board, pay another 250.

You got six you got six fifty, let's say in two fifty in the hearing.

He has to come back.

That's another two fifty for another, and another fee for more drawings.

Well, I think um Brian said I mean or see the engineer, I and I get what he's saying because he explained it to me three times and beat it into my head.

But honestly, I think that Brian has a solution, and we certainly can apply that solution.

I mean, you know, we we're having discussion now, and there's an answer.

There's a structural answer.

Um and we can do that.

No?

Okay.

Well, we're not gonna tell him how to build the the the structure, but there is some reason to believe that he doesn't need a variance um at all if he would consider some other yeah, we don't we don't know for certain, but um we have reason to believe that, and that impacts the quality of his application, certainly.

So if we obviously when he reads the minutes, he'll understand what we said, and then he'll know that he's he could go back and um build it without or whatever.

So I think I think the message was delivered to him that uh he may not need a variance, that he may be able to redesign this, and maybe the trust system is more expensive to construct than the one he wants.

But that's yeah, I think the location of this thing is the driving force for me.

Um you're not going you're not seeing this two feet for an that's the driving force for me.

That's where I'm at.

So, Mr.

Chairman, you may want to call for a motion one way or the other.

And I'll make a motion.

I'll make a m I will make a motion to uh deny the request from the applicant based on the staff recommendation and based on not enough evidence of uh exceptional practical difficulty of the applicant uh 26-10.

I second it.

Got a motion and second.

Thank you.

Um Ms.

Hudson.

I'm gonna go with a vote.

Um skip me right fast.

Can we can we do that?

Can we come back?

I think we already got a week.

What was he having a word?

Not voting.

Mr.

Jenkins.

I disagree uh with the motion to deny application A twenty-six-10 for a couple of reasons.

First, um it's it's not visible because of the wooded area.

And the two foot six inches is a very minimal encroachment, in my opinion.

So I vote in that way.

Thank you, Ms.

Dunny.

This is very hard for me because I I think I'm going to vote to deny because I don't see any exceptional practical difficulty.

Um that's why.

Thank you, Mr.

Gallo.

I vote in favor of the motion.

Um I don't think the applicant demonstrated an exceptional practical difficulty that relates to the property.

Thank you, Mr.

Simpson.

I vote to deny promotion.

Thank you, Mr.

Cusick.

I'm going to disagree with the motion.

Um I just think the location of this thing, the wooded surroundings is a driving factor for me here.

You're not seeing that two and a half feet difference.

Um then the hardship is I just have to redesign the build-in um more financial um impact on the applicant.

I'm gonna vote against the motion.

I believe that the two foot and a half height doesn't make a difference that being in the middle of the five acres.

I believe removing the restriction doesn't seriously affect the neighboring properties.

And from the testimony that we heard tonight, it sounds like it would be in the characteristic for the surrounding neighbors with their pole sheds.

The motion, the motion to deny failed.

So now we really need a motion to approve um in order to determine where we are, because everyone who files an application is entitled to some kind of a resolution and a denied motion to or a failed motion to deny is not a resolution.

Gotcha.

So we need a motion to so even if if the vote is if people don't change their votes, then you would interpret a failed motion to approve.

We need a motion to approve, and then once that goes through, then the application fails gotcha.

Declare the motion failed for lack of a uh um lack of a fourth fourth vote.

Yeah, for the record that mo the motion to not approve application a twenty-six-10 has failed.

And then I'll make a motion for A twenty-six and make a motion to approve.

Moving the restrictions and the two point five foot does not seriously affect neighboring properties.

I believe that the property being five acres of wooded land that would not be seen from other properties is unique situation, and I believe that the pole shed height and the pole sheds would be in characteristic of the surrounding neighbors with their pole sheds.

A second motion.

Got a motion a second.

Thank you.

Uh Mr.

Gallo.

I vote against the motion uh as stated before.

I don't believe in exceptional practical practical difficulty was um supported by the uh applicant's testimony.

Thank you, Mr.

Simpson.

I vote against the motion.

Uh don't believe there was any evidence of exceptional practical difficulty uh given in the uh applicant's testimony.

Thank you, Ms.

Dunny.

I'm gonna vote to approve based on the comments that were just made in our discussion, uh or in uh particularly um this is very hard for me because I am gonna vote to support the motion.

I I do um I do realize that this you know two point two point five or whatever it is inches.

Um I just want to be very clear that my concern here as it you know I'm always very concerned about setting of precedence and so I don't want a precedence set.

Well, that if it's only this or it's only that so many, you know what we should approve it.

Um it is the nature of the property, where the building is located on the property.

Um literally cannot be seen from the ro either any of the roads.

So I will vote yes, but no precedence set.

Thank you, Ms.

Hudson.

I vote in favor for my motion.

Thank you.

Mr.

Jenkins.

I'll vote in support of the motion for application A twenty-six-10 based upon the reasons stated in the motion.

Thank you, Mr.

Cusick.

I vote in favor of the motion as stated previously.

I think the like location of this thing is a driving factor for me.

Um the wooded area, you're not see not affecting any neighboring properties.

Um the two and a half feet from that distance is unnoticeable, and then to have applicant redesign is a financial hardship um out of his pocket.

Thank you.

That is four in favor.

Thank you.

With four in favor, application A26-10 is approved.

Our next application is application A 26-11.

For Nolt, they are seeking a variance from the requirement that a patio is set back is 10 feet from the rear property line to enable the construction of a patio that would be five feet eight inches.

5.8 feet, sorry.

For this one, I found it hard for the exceptional property.

I couldn't find an exceptional practical difficulty.

I don't know.

Did he did he give us an answer for why he had to be so close?

Was it like a not really this testimony?

Said he wanted to better enjoy the the um yeah, from his yeah, from his angle once sitting on that deck, um, just that angle there.

He's I guess how the furniture is situated and stuff, you're not getting a view of that.

And he wants to.

I mean, it's as far as I'm concerned, there really isn't much open space there to begin with that we're talking about here.

I mean, the way they talk, you would be looking across 50 acres of farmland and looking at white-tailed deer running across there, they're looking at four or five trees.

Well, you know, um we did have uh uh we did have um a lady, a neighbor, the nate next door neighbor, um, who came um and objected to this because of the and when we s and which is why I asked to bring that photo up again, because I can see where um it would it what little they have left of a view can be obstructed, and there is a difference between green grass and white concrete, and um and he said, well, he wants it to be you know, so he can put up a barbecue grill.

Well, that too is not like it's not like a little tiny something.

It you know, it's can be obstructive, just a beautiful natural view, and that's what the neighbor was objecting to that being disruptive.

And and she's got to be standing in her backyard to look at that view because if she looks out her window, she's staring right at a house.

He said you have to have an an angle, and I that's why I asked to pull it up because I was trying to say, well, how can you where do you see it?

But if she's out on her patio, her the little patios that are already there, that's as close as she is, she should have asked him if she could sit on his patio.

But did he also would this be a second patio if it was granted?

He already had one, right?

Yeah, he has one.

Well, that's what I couldn't he couldn't tell us why he needed to go the in total length to get the request the variance were you could what what could you have, like five foot, six foot right there from the house without a variance?

Well, that was too small.

That is a that is a small patio, five foot, I would think.

But if he it already has the one right there and it's attached to it, then that's a 15-foot patio coming out.

He said it would be like a step down.

Oh, step down.

I like the staff recommendations, like have it.

I mean, you could always like wrap it around, you know, that that patter just wrap it around.

He didn't ask for that.

Can't just bring it up right.

No, I mean that's the there's definitely gonna have to be some some type of grade adjustment there with the the grade of that yard.

I mean, you're not just gonna pour a slab of concrete.

That's what I and it'd be level.

I mean, there's it's either you're gonna either gonna have to excavate soil or bring soil in.

I would try to ask Brian, like it because of the Sandy, could you kind of speak into the mic more?

Sorry, I can't hear you.

I was trying to if because of the lay of the land, if they bu if he went out, then there'd have to be they'd they'd have to either build the like a little bulkhead to hold it or dig deeper and put steps on the back of his house to get to the patio or something because the aesthetics of doing the other way, or just I guess the flow of waters and everything else wouldn't just wouldn't work.

Sorry, anybody else anything?

Oh yeah, I'll make a motion for A twenty six eleven to deny.

I just don't see that there's an exceptional practical difficulty, and I believe that if we remove the restrictions, it could seriously affect the neighboring properties.

Uh second it.

Motion and second.

Uh Mr.

Gallow.

I vote in favor of the motion.

I'm in agreement that the uh installation of that patio would affect the neighboring properties.

Thank you, Mr.

Jenkins.

I'll vote in support of the motion to deny on application A twenty-six dash eleven.

His request to me is excessive, doesn't rise to level of an exceptional practical difficulty.

He already has one patio.

He's asking for a second excessive.

Thank you.

Uh Ms.

Denny I vote to support the motion um by his own admission.

Uh there really is no exceptional practical difficulty here.

Thank you, Mr.

Simpson.

I vote in support of the motion based on the uh staff recommendation and the public testimony we heard tonight.

Thank you, Ms.

Hudson.

I vote in favor of my motion.

Thank you, Mr.

Cusick.

I vote in favor of the motion.

Um per the testimony, um, there's no hardship that are stated there.

And um, I think there's alternate solutions to be able to get within within the setbacks.

Thank you that a seven in favor.

Thank you.

With seven in favor to deny application A twenty six eleven.

Application A twenty six eleven is not approved.

Okay.

For Fisher.

Uh they are seeking a variance from the required fifteen-foot side setback for a church.

Looking to be six feet from the side setback to utilize the existing building as a place of worship.

Thank you.

Any uh discussion here.

Um as we were looking at this, I do think that the that there should be some type of a screening um uh uh to a landscape buffer and that extends further.

And my thoughts are if looking at that map as we see it, um that buffer in order to preserve the privacy of the neighboring property and the people are the people who are more concerned.

I believe that if we um have a uh a landscape buffer that comes down a minimum to where that says where the 15-foot required side setback line it is and just in order to describe it, I think we there should be a minimum of a landscape buffer to that to at to at least that extent to help protect the privacy of the neighbor.

Can you pull up the uh aerial for me, please?

Yes, sir.

I also, you know, uh uh there you go, thank you.

I I also just want to, as we're having discussion, say I do understand um the narrowness of the actual that little road that brings you back to the church.

Um at this point what the bishop said was that it's just what once or twice a week.

But that's not the substance of what we're that's yeah, because they have to submit my understanding is they have to submit a plan, right, to the county.

If they get okay on this, they still have to submit all kinds of paperwork that has to get approved.

Exactly.

Correct.

They would still have to submit a conditional use approval.

Um so they would have to follow all the conditions of code for that.

It would not restrict the number of services that they have or things like that, but they would have to show us where the I mean it they could, I suppose.

Um I should say that the conditions in code do not.

However, through the conditional use process, levy court may decide to enact further conditions to limit those types of things.

Um but yes, they would have to submit a plan to show us where the parking would be and that they are meeting the conditions that are in code.

Isn't the buffer required?

There is a buffer required for non-residential uses from residential properties.

So they would be have to provide a buffer through that um staff recommendation was to add on to that buffer.

So um that the space between the building and the other buffer would have more trees.

Yes.

No, the there is a there's so there's gonna be a buffer along that whole property line for the conditional use plan.

Correct.

Yeah.

When they when they get downstairs.

Yes, that would be a requirement in code unless they sought a waiver from that section.

I'm fine with not including any buffer then on in ours.

I mean, where they're requesting it, I don't think we need an additional buffer.

Um where they're requesting it is just it's already wooded anyway.

So we're getting we're there's gonna be a buffer along that whole property line for the conditional use plan.

I mean my biggest concern about this was and they answered it was why don't you just build I'm looking at this huge lot, we'll build it somewhere else, and then the building can stay, and it's but apparently that's not the case once it's it's deemed a a place of worship, that building would have to come out.

And that would create an exceptional practical difficulty.

All right, any more discussion.

Okay, so I would like to make a motion to approve application A 2612.

Um I think there are there's more than one exceptional practical difficulty.

Um just by the lay of the land and during our discussion, we now realize that we don't have to address the buffer because that will happen when they get uh that when they get to the plan to the actual design and plan the conditional use hearing.

Yeah, I just want to be clear.

So that is a conditioning code.

They do have the option to seek a waiver.

Levy court could choose to approve that waiver.

But yes, there is a condition in code that non-residential uses be screened from residential adjacent properties.

So that's my motion.

I make a motion that we approve application A2612.

The motion currently on the table is that it is approved and that we are not requiring a buffer, correct?

Correct.

And and the reason being that it will happen during a conditional use hearing is if it's necessary.

Well, I think um what Jesse said was that the applicant could in fact ask for a waiver and could get one.

So if you if you want to prevent that possibility, you could make your variance conditional upon the the uh so can we the buffer?

Can we dictate how far down we that goes?

So like 50 feet planned south of that existing building.

Yeah, I believe that's up to the board if you feel that the condition is relevant um to make your motion as such.

Yeah, I think we should address it and make sure it's addressed, yeah.

I agree.

Okay, so I'm going to um revise actually my motion.

I make a motion that we approve application A twenty six twelve with the condition that they extend the the um losing the buffer um for fifty feet.

For fifty feet on uh on the side of the property that that on the south side of the property, sorry.

And that's fifty feet past that existing building, correct?

Yeah, from fifty feet from the building.

Fifty feet gonna be enough.

I mean that's yeah, because looking at theirs, it looks like they that aerial that has screen they have screening on on theirs, and it and that pretty much blocks any view like if they're coming around here into that property line.

Based on the survey, this is forty, so fifty would put you another ten feet about past that line, it looks like and originally I said to Brian, well, what if we just do it down to where it says side set back?

So that's I think fifty it but better I think to give a number.

So that's why I'm saying fifty feet.

From the corner of the from the corner of the edition.

Is there a better way to say it?

From the corner of the existing building.

Uh from the red corner of the existing building.

Perfect.

Okay.

Just want to make sure we get it right in the NOD.

Thank you.

I needed to help.

Do we have a second?

I'll second it.

I'm sorry, I didn't catch you seconded.

Um I second it.

Perfect, thank you.

Okay.

Um Mr.

Jenkins.

I'll vote in support of the motion for application A twenty-six-twelve based on the testimony tonight and the reasons stated in the motion by Ms.

Denning.

Thank you, Mr.

Gallow.

Vote in favor of the motion uh based on testimony, staff recommendation, and the demonstration that there would be uh an exceptional practical difficulty for the applicant in improving that property.

Thank you, Ms.

Dunny.

I vote yes in keeping with the reasoning I gave when I made my motion.

Thank you, Mr.

Simpson.

I vote in favor of the motion per the um staff recommendation and the testimony we heard tonight.

Thank you, Ms.

Hudson.

I vote in favor of the motion based off the staff recommendation recommendation that we heard tonight and the testimony that we heard tonight as well.

Thank you, Mr.

Kusick.

I vote in favor of the motion per staff recommendation and then the testimony given tonight.

Thank you.

That is seven in favor.

I mean six in favor, sorry.

Six in favor, application A twenty-six dash twelve is approved.

Motion adjourned.

Second.

Motion and second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Okay.

So did I see you again?