Advisory Planning Commission

CITY OF COLLEGE PARK ADVISORY ADVISORY PLANNINGPLANNING COMMISSIONCOMMISSION 4500 KNOX ROAD COLLEGE PARK, MARYLAND 20740 TELEPHONE: (240) 487-3538  FACSIMILE: (301) 887-0558 ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION Approved Minutes of Meeting October 5, 2017 – 7:30 P.M. City Hall – Council Chambers Members Present Absent Lawrence Bleau x James McFadden x Rose Greene Colby x Christopher Gill, Chair x Kate Kennedy, Vice Chair x John Rigg x Denise Mitchell x Also Present: Planning Staff – Terry Schum, Miriam Bader and Theresheia Williams; Attorney – Sue Cook; Interpreter – Leslie Bilchick and Nina Lai I. Call to Order: Christopher Gill called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. II. Approval of Minutes: Denise Mitchell moved to adopt the minutes of September 7, 2017. James McFadden seconded. The motion carried 4-0-0. III. Amendments to Agenda: There were no Amendments to the Agenda. IV. Public Remarks on Non-Agenda Items: Raphael Degennaro, 4708 Indian Lane, thanked the Commissioners and staff for taking action at the September 7, 2017 meeting on the violation appeal for 4800 Indian Lane for condemnation of the property. The home owner has started the process of bringing the property into compliance. V. CPV-2017-08 Variance to Construct an Addition and Deck Applicant: Joaquin Torres Location: 5019 Nantucket Road Christopher Gill explained the hearing procedures and placed witnesses under oath. Miriam Bader summarized the staff report. The applicant is requesting a variance up to 11.3% to construct an addition and deck. The property is rectangular with an area of 5,500 square feet and is improved with a 1,394 square foot house, concrete driveway, covered porch and an addition under construction. A Stop Work Order was issued on August 18, 2017 since the addition was started without a County or City building permit. An open front porch was constructed with County and City building permits in 1984-1985. However, the front porch was roofed after 1988 and now is applied towards lot coverage. Also, a rear addition was constructed with County and City building permits in 1988-1989, after a 5% lot coverage variance was granted. Advisory Planning Commission Minutes October 5, 2017 – Page 2 Staff recommends denial of the lot coverage variance. Miriam Bader submitted the staff report, Exhibits 1-13 and the PowerPoint presentation into the record. Joaquin & Glenda Torres, applicants, testified through the interpreter, Leslie Belchick, that they did not own the house when the first variance was granted. He stated that he had no idea it was already over 5%. Ms. Torres stated that they want to add the addition for more common space for the family. She stated that when they have visitors, they need extra space because the house is small. Mr. Torres stated that he works in construction and carpentry and he made sure to take measurements. Kate Kennedy asked if the variance was up to 11%? Sue Cook stated that it is cumulative. Christopher Gill asked if the only issue is with lot coverage? Miriam Bader stated yes, there is no setback issue. Kate Kennedy asked the applicant if they considered building a second story? Joaquin Torres stated that it would be a good idea but it would be more expensive. James McFadden asked what year was the house purchased by the applicant? Joaquin Torres stated that it was purchased in 2004. James McFadden asked if the roof was on the porch when the home was purchased? Joaquin Torres stated yes. Christopher Gill asked if decks count as part of lot coverage even if they are not roofed? Miriam Bader stated no, only if they are roofed. Christopher Gill asked if the calculations on Exhibit 8 are correct, which include the addition plus the deck? Miriam Bader stated no, the deck should not have been included in the calculations on Exhibit 8. Lawrence Bleau asked how does that modify the figures? Terry Schum stated that it reduces it by 192 square feet. Christopher Gill asked how high off the ground is the deck? Joaquin Torres stated that it is 14” from the ground. Advisory Planning Commission Minutes October 5, 2017 – Page 3 Glenda Torres stated that they barely use the front porch. They never use if for grilling and no one sits out there. John Rigg stated that if the front porch was not covered, it would bring them under the 35% variance. Christopher Gill asked the applicant if he would consider removing the roof off the porch? Glenda Torres stated that even though they don’t use the porch, removing the roof would make it unattractive. Terry Schum asked what is the side yard setback? Miriam Bader stated that the side yard setback is 9.2. John Rigg stated that if he eliminates the shed it would be under 35%. Terry Schum asked what are the dimensions of the shed? Christopher Gill stated 8x8. Glenda Torres asked what are some ways they could remove or reduce the driveway? Christopher Gill stated that staff would be willing to work with them on that, but anything that is paved or that you can park on counts toward lot coverage. If there is a section of the driveway you don’t use, you can remove that and it would reduce the amount of coverage. Joaquin Torress decided that he would like more time to consider the different alternatives and requested that the hearing be continued until the November APC meeting. Lawrence Bleau moved to postpone the hearing until the November meeting to give the applicant the opportunity to explore the options discussed with staff. John Rigg seconded. Motion carried 7-0-0. VI. CPV-2017-09 Variance to Construct a Deck Applicant: Lan F. Wong Location: 8909 34th Avenue Christopher Gill explained the hearing procedures and placed witnesses under oath. Miriam Bader summarized the staff report. The applicant is requesting a variance up to 15.54% from the maximum allowable lot coverage and a variance up to 3.5 feet from the minimum rear yard setback of 20 feet to construct a deck. The property is rectangular with an area of 5,070 square feet. The property is improved with a house, shed, driveway and an addition under construction. A Stop Work Order was issued on April 12, 2017 since the addition was started without a County or City building permit. The applicant is replacing an existing deck with a similar sized deck but no building permits were found for the existing deck. Advisory Planning Commission Minutes October 5, 2017 – Page 4 Staff recommends denial of the lot coverage and rear yard setback variances. Commissioners reviewed the calculations in the staff report and determined that the lot coverage variance should be amended to 6.8% or 345 square feet. There was no change with the setback variance. Miriam Bader submitted the staff report as amended, Exhibits 1-9 and the PowerPoint presentation into the record. Lawrence Bleau asked if the deck or patio is not counted, how much is the property over lot coverage? Miriam Bader stated 404 square feet over. John Rigg asked was there any record of permits for the expansion of the driveway? Miriam Bader stated no. Rose Green-Colby asked what took so long for the case to come before the APC when the Stop Work Order was issued in April? Miriam Bader stated that she met with the applicant, but he did not submit a readable site plan, so he had to come back with a correct one. Rose Green-Colby asked if the deck has been unfinished since April? Miriam Bader stated yes. Christopher Gill asked if the lot size being smaller than 5,100 square feet is typical of this area. Miriam Bader stated yes. Lan Wong, applicant, testified through the interpreter, Nina Lai, that the driveway was that way when she purchased the house. The parking lot was for two parking spaces. She stated that she is wheel-chair bound and has been diagnosed with cancer. Her doctor recommends that she go out and get fresh air. She needs a bigger deck so that the wheel chair can go out onto the deck. James McFadden asked how long has the applicant owned the house? Lan Wong stated since 1992. Jose Ugalde, contractor, testified that when he started the work back in July or August, there was a deck already there. He stated that when he went to the County to get the permit, that’s when they told him a Stop Work Order was issued for the property. He stated that he talked to Miriam and she asked him to verify some of the measurements on the site plan because they were incorrect. The size of the driveway is based on the measurements he provided to Miriam. He stated that the lot is supposed to be 93.5 feet deep by 60 feet deep but Miriam is going by 84.3 feet x 60 feet. Advisory Planning Commission Minutes October 5, 2017 – Page 5 Christopher Gill asked if the measurements he is referring to are from Exhibit 2? Jose Ugalde stated yes. those were revised by him. Miriam Bader stated that she took the numbers from the survey that was stamped by the surveyor, which was 84.3 feet as indicated on Exhibit 2. She stated that what Mr. Ugalde submitted showed a much smaller driveway. Christopher Gill asked if she used the surveyor dimensions for the lot coverage and Mr. Ugalde dimensions for the driveway? Miriam Bader stated yes. Jose Ugalde stated that a part of the driveway goes over the property line, so only 5.88 square feet should be considered. Pauline Tallerico, 8911 34th Avenue, testified that she is speaking on behalf of her daughter Heather. They own the lot to the left of the applicant, which is just a grassy patch at the moment. She stated that Ms. Wong is a lovely neighbor and they have had no problem with her. Their property is lower than Ms. Wong’s and they are concerned about water run-off onto their property. They would like to start a garden on the property and she doesn’t want the property to get flooded when it rains. She stated that if the water starts to build up, then mosquitoes will come. Sue Cook stated that when the applicant goes through the permitting process with the County the engineer will make sure that no water is directed onto the neighbor’s property because it is against the law to construct something on their property that would direct water unnaturally onto someone else’s property. John Rigg asked Ms. Tallerico if she is concerned about the large driveway or the patio and deck? Pauline Tallerico stated that the front driveway is higher and water runs down the street towards the storm drain, so she is not concerned. She stated that her concern is in the back where water would come off the roof where the patio and deck is. She stated that if it is not graded correctly, it will flood her property. John Rigg asked the applicant if rear decks are typical in the neighborhood? Lan Wong stated that there are a few. Kate Kennedy asked if they would consider removing part of the driveway to build the deck? Lan Wong stated that it depends on how much because there would have to be enough space for the wheel chair and the accessible van. James McFadden moved to approve the lot coverage variance of 6.8% or 345 square feet because the request meets the criteria for granting the variance for the reasons stated above. Rose Green Colby seconded. Motion carried 5-2-0, with John and Larry voting nay. Advisory Planning Commission Minutes October 5, 2017 – Page 6 John Rigg moved to approve the setback variance of 3.5 feet from the minimum rear yard setback of 20 feet because the request meets the criteria for granting the variance for the reasons stated above. Kate Kennedy seconded. Motion carried 7-0-0 VII. CPV-2017-10 Variance to Replace an Addition Applicant: Unique Modern Homes LLC Location: 5017 Indian Lane Christopher Gill explained the hearing procedures and placed witnesses under oath. Miriam Bader summarized the staff report. The applicant is requesting a variance of up to 3.12% or 205.56 square feet from the maximum allowable lot coverage to replace an addition that was destroyed by a fallen tree. The property is rectangular with an area of 6,574 square feet. The property is improved with a house, front porch, driveway, shed and addition that is under construction. A Stop Work Order was issued on July 10, 2017 since the addition was started without a County or City building permit. The applicant states that he is replacing an existing sunroom that was completely destroyed by a tree with a similar-sized addition. Both County and City permits for the 190 square foot sunroom were issued in 1998. Staff recommends approval of the lot coverage variance. Miriam Bader submitted the staff report, Exhibits 1-9 and the PowerPoint presentation into the record. Lawrence Bleau asked was there a variance granted for the original sunroom? Miriam Bader stated no, because he did not need it at that time. John Rigg asked when did the tree fall on the property? Wilson Crespo Iglesias, contractor, stated about 8 months ago. John Rigg asked how narrow is the lot? Miriam Bader stated that the lot is 50’ x 130’. Kate Kennedy moved to approve the variance because the request meets the criteria for granting the variance for the reasons stated above. John Rigg seconded. Motion carried 7-0-0. X. Update on Development Activity Terry Schum reported on the following: Gilbane Project - The College Park Metro Station Apartments was presented to the City Council on October 4 for a Preliminary Plan of Subdivision. WMATA owns the commuter parking lot, the station area and the parking garage. They are creating three new parcels, which will consist of the WMATA facilities, apartments, and drainage. There is a fourth parcel for the purple line station. Construction on the Purple Line is making progress. Advisory Planning Commission Minutes October 5, 2017 – Page 7 Bozzuto – This is the redevelopment project for the Quality Inn and Plato’s site. The hotel closed this week. Official applications should be submitted within a couple of days. The developer has requested Tax Increment Financing from the City. XI. Other Business: On October 24, 2017, Holiday Inn Express will be before the Mayor and Council for reconsideration of their decision. On November 14, 2017, Robert Davis is scheduled for Oral Argument before the Mayor and Council on his case. X. Adjourn: There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Minutes prepared by Theresheia Williams