Tax Map/Block/Parcel No. 74-9-309 Case 6485 OFFICIAL DECISION BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CARROLL COUNT,MARYLAND APPLICANT: Adam Carballo 1816 Aliceanna Street Baltimore, MD 21231 ATTORNEY: N/A REQUEST: A request for an expansion of a non-conforming use and one setback variance. LOCATION: The site is located at 2536 Arthur Avenue, Sykesville, Maryland on property zoned R-20,000" Residence District in Election District 5. BASIS: Code of Public Local Laws and Ordinances, Sections 158.033(A)(7) and 158.075.03(B)0). HEARING HELD: January 30, 2024 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION On January 30, 2024, the Board ofZoning Appeals (the Board) convened to hear the request for an expansion ofa non-conforming use and one setback variance. Based on the testimony and evidence presented, the Board made the following findings and conclusions. Adam Carballo testified as the architect of record in the matter. He is with the Carballo Architecture company. His company explored options with the property. One option was to tear down the house and move it toward the back. The house has an existing non-conforming setback in the front yard. The required setback is 40'. The house was built in the 1960s and the existing front setback is 23'. The house is one half of the size of the homes on the block. His plans would not be to change the front setback of23'. There is an abandoned drain field and septic system on the property. The benefit for the neighbors would be to have a home similar in size to the other homes on the block. A home with a similar size would be better for neighbors ifthere were comparisons of homes. The property has been vacant for some time. The house is on property a little less than one half acre. The septic system where it is now is the only place for it. The dwelling is now 30' by 30'. They will be adding a structure in the back and a second story to the home. The space would then be increased to 2500 square feet. Based on the existing septic system and water near the subject property, Mr. Carballo stated there was no place else to make the renovations. The property owner, Alexey Polenur, testified in the case. He stated that the dwelling was 30' by 30'. He purchased the property about one year ago. He intends to live on the property with his family. Bonnie Russell testified as a neighbor to the subject property. She moved to her property in 2021 and the subject property was vacant at that time. She stated that the last owners ofthe property were deceased and the property was then not cared for. A January 16, 2024 memorandum from the Department of Planning and Randolph Mitchell, Planning Technician, stated that the staff finding was that this request is consistent with the 2018 Freedom Comprehensive Plan, and would not have an adverse effect on the current use oft the property. The house was built in the 1960s. It was built before the current owner was born. So the setback of 23' in the front ofthe house was not something that he initiated or caused. He is dealing with the current status ofthe existing house which he purchased about one year ago. Mr. Polenur cannot undo a situation that was created before he was born. The house has been vacant for years because of the difficulty of having an owner live within 900 square feet. IfMr. Polenur could not renovate the house it would be a practical difficulty and an unreasonable hardship to the new homeowner. The Board was convinced that authorization of the request with regard to the expansion ofthe non-conforming use was consistent with the purpose ofthe zoning ordinance, would not unduly affect the residents of adjacent properties, the values of those properties, or public interests. The septic system was in the only place that it could be located. The additions to the house would enhance the appearance of the neighborhood and help with the property values of all properties. The Board approved the non-conforming use requested by the applicant and the requested variance. Fe12004 Avu EBDl Date Melvin E. Baile, Jr., Chairman Decisions ofthe Board of Zoning Appeals may be appealed to the Circuit Court for Carroll County within 30 days of the date ofthe decision pursuant to Land Use Article, Section 4-401 of the Annotated Code of Maryland. Pursuant to Section 158.132 (E) oft the County Code, this approval will become void one year after the date ofissuance if the construction or use for which the certificate was issued has not been started. Contact the Office of Zoning Administration at 410-386-2980 for specific compliance instructions. Pursuant to Section 158.133(H)(3) oft the County Code: (3) Approvals. (a) Ifthe application is approved by the BZA which does not require a site plan, the approval shall become void unless a building permit conforming to the plans for which the approval was granted is obtained within six months. (b) An approval for which a building permit is not required shall become void unless the use or variance is implemented within one year ofthe date ofthe written decision. (c) An approval for which a site plan is required shall become void unless the concept site plan has been submitted for distribution to the reviewing agencies and accepted by the Bureau of Development Review, or its success agency, within six months from the date of the written decision. An approval for which a site plan is required may become void if the property owner or developer fails to take action to secure an approval ofthe site plan from the Planning Commission in a timely manner, as determined by the Bureau of Development Review. YABZAIFORMSIDecison format. doc