Board of Zoning Appeals

VARIANCE CASE NO. 002-17 OFFICIAL DECISION BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF POOLESVILLE, MARYLAND ************************ Applicant: Robert & Catherine Ouellette 17300 Chiswell Road Poolesville, Maryland 20837 APPLICANT Request: To grant a variance for the size of an existing shed located in the P- 1/3 acre zone under the Zoning Code of the Town of Poolesville. Location: 17300 Chiswell Avenue Poolesville, Maryland An application was filed by Robert and Catherine Ouellette, the owner of the subject parcel at 17300 Chiswell Road, for a variance of the allowable size of an existing shed located in the rear of the property. The Board of Appeals held a public hearing on April 27, 2017 at 7 p.m. on the application, and based on the record, in compliance with the State Open Meetings Act, the Board granted the request as set forth in the written Official Decision of the Board. Notice of the date, time and place of the hearing on the consideration of the variance request was sent to contiguous property owners and published in the appropriate newspaper of general circulation. Sitting for the Board were Chairwoman Pilar Garrett, Ralph Hitchens, and Patricia Wolford. SUMMARY At the public hearing on this application, the Chairwoman read the contents of the official file into the record of this matter and then called upon the Applicants to present their case. The Applicants stated that the shed in question is a prefabricated structure 1 which was delivered to their property and placed on a gravel foundation. This occurred in approximately June 1999. The Applicants testified that at the time they were not aware that they needed a permit for this structure and have had no issues since that time. However it was recently brought to their attention that a permit was needed for the structure and a variance as the size of the structure exceeds the size permitted by the zoning code. The shed was originally used and continues to be used as a workshop for household and family projects. The Applicants stated that they do not believe the structure is out of character with the community and due to the amount of time it has been there it is actually part of the character of the neighborhood. The location of the shed meets all required setbacks. There is a chimney/vent in the shed but it is not connected to any type of appliance. The Applicants state it would be a hardship to move the shed now that it has been a part of the property and community for so long. Kevin Schramm of the Poolesville Planning Commission was called upon to testify. He indicated that the Planning Commission had reviewed the application. They indicated they believed the shed fit into the character of the community, met the required setbacks, and functioned as a family workshop as described in the Applicant’s testimony. The Chairwoman then opened the hearing up to the public for comments in support or opposition. Although members of the public were present no one presented testimony. 2  After reviewing all of the information submitted and the testimony presented, the Board voted 3-0 to grant a variance to the size requirement of the zoning code to allow the existing shed as shown by the drawings submitted with the application. FINDING OF FACT The Board of Appeals met in public session, pursuant to the requirements of the Maryland Open Meetings Act, to deliberate upon the application immediately following the public hearing. In considering the criteria for granting a variance contained in Section 10 (D)(3) and Section 8 (F) of the Zoning Code, the Board deliberated on the testimony and evidence presented. The Board members each expressed their position on the proposed variance. The Board finds that the shed has existed for so many years without issue make this issue unique. Further Board finds that any impact of granting this variance will be trivial and inconsequential as the existing shed is and has been part of the character of the neighborhood and based on the undisputed testimony fits into the character thereof. The Board finds that the Applicant has met the burden of proof as required under the requirements of the Zoning Code for the granting of a variance. The application, testimony, and evidence comprising the record of this case are hereby included by reference in this decision. Ms. Wolford made a motion to grant the requested variance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hitchens and upon a vote by the Board the decision was three (3) in favor of the motion and zero (0) opposed. RESOLUTION 3  The Board is bound by the provisions of Section 10 (D)(3) X of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Poolesville, Maryland relative to the granting of a variance. This Board finds that the criteria necessary for granting a variance has been met. In accordance with the findings of fact, testimony and record of this case, and based on the applicable law and reasoning expressed herein, the Board of Appeals of the Town of Poolesville, Maryland, grants by the Resolution contained hereafter, by a decision of 3-0. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Appeals for the Town of Poolesville, Maryland that the Opinion stated above be adopted as the Resolution required by law as its decision in the above-entitled matter. The foregoing Resolution was approved on April 27, 2017 by unanimous vote. ______________________________ Pilar Garrett, Chairwoman 4