I wonder if they cross next to my face one.

She thought they were cute.

Two minutes.

I was very low.

Self-destructive.

This is the first one, you know.

Okay.

That's a view of seven thirty-one.

Bill said he made a mistake.

Mr.

Chairman, the question.

It's three o'clock.

Is everybody ready?

Call the meeting to order.

And the uh first thing on the agenda is to approve the minutes from February fourth.

Can I have a motion to approve?

I'll make a motion.

All in favor.

Aye.

And under new business, uh Bill, will you present the uh or get sworn in and then present the first case?

The whole two thing must and nothing but the truth in front of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals.

I do.

Name and address.

So um members of the board, the first case um before you be AAV twenty-six fourteen is a request um for a variance from Town of Ocean City Code Section 3871A five minimum elevation requirements to reduce the minimum three-foot freeboard elevation above the AE5 flood zone by approximately one foot for substantial improvement of an existing single family house and to match um the existing lowest floor elevation of the primary structure.

This is locally known as 731 Laurel Avenue, parcel number one-one eight zero seven, sixty-eight B lot thirty-one in the town of Ocean City, Maryland.

Um the owner Alison and Michael DeMartin and the applicant's representative is here to Mirazat.

Um the staff report that we've put together, um, you're familiar with the format.

Um the information that's been submitted for the existing um house renovation in addition, uh, has been determined to be a substantial improvement.

Um, the improvements being more than fifty percent of the value of the existing structure.

Um the applicant did prepare and submit a current elevation certificate that identifies the uh lowest floor elevation of the existing structure um as point seven feet below the required um uh uh elevation of um base flood plus three foot of free board.

So we've proposed before um for the staff report and for your consideration um that the applicant is requesting up to one foot of variance um to allow the new construction to match the existing lowest floor, um and that the um substantial improvement of the existing structure would be able to continue um at the current elevation.

So um I think um again in your staff report we go through the the um code requirements and then the general note that we provide is um your responsibility is to decide if a variance will be granted with or without conditions or denied as allowed by town code, the variance um shall be approved only if it's determined to not be contrary to the public interest, and where owing to special conditions of the lot or parcel, a literal enforcement of the provisions of these regulations, an unnecessary hardship would result.

Um so in deciding on this variance request, uh there's a series of criteria that we typically review.

Um in this case, um staff uh didn't identify any particular concerns with the review criteria in terms of uh qualifying this proposal, and so we've recommended um that uh with the required review and satisfactory findings in fact.

Staff can support the requested variance application for up to one foot reduction of the required freeboard with the following conditions.

The first um that the applicant will submit a final elevation certificate with the completion of construction.

Second, the owner shall sign a non-conversion agreement for any enclosed area below the minimum floor elevation.

That would be the storage and exterior with an exterior access door that may be below elevation.

Um crawl space elevation shall be equal to or above the adjacent grade on one side of the structure.

All newer replacement mechanical equipment to be elevated to meet the full free board requirements, that would be up to eight feet in elevation, and the enclosed foundation area uh shall be improved with FEMA compliant flood openings or flood vents.

So we provided um several flood maps for your review.

Um as you can see, this is a uh small structure compared to the ones surrounding it, so they're expanding to essentially join the size and location of other homes adjacent.

This is why we felt like there was no um substantial difference uh for your consideration uh in this location.

Um a portion of the structure is in the AE5 flood zone, so that's the highest criteria that's being applied.

And I think here's some.

If I could zoom in a little bit, this is the site plan that was submitted for the building permit application, and it just highlights um the blue uh is the existing building, the yellow are the proposed additions.

Um a lot of the addition is um is uh additional deck area with a fairly small uh expansion of the house itself, and it is being constructed essentially on the on top of the existing foundation with some um extensions.

So I think that's um that's the end of my presentation.

I'd be glad to answer any questions, and again the applicants here if you'd like to speak with him.

Would the applicant like to come forward or the applicant's spokesman person?

You can go right there if you want, and you need to be sworn in.

You solemnly swear affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in front of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals.

I do and address Tamar EZ, 1047 Hollands Street, H O L L INS Street, based in Baltimore.

Okay.

Are there any questions you had um in terms of the application that I can answer for you in terms of garage on this?

Correct.

There's a front uh parking on the uh which is shown in the gray, dark gray is existing footpath and and parking.

Uh the proposed driveway is going to be widened to comply with uh current regulations uh in terms of width and access.

Okay, and as far as uh you're you're familiar with the staff recommendations that are enclosed.

Yes.