2026-09-17 - Board of Zoning Appeals

03:40We have a question for you.

03:44>> They should do something.

03:49I think they're trying to

03:56keep

04:10this corner and they're actually

04:11stepping down.

04:16So this is the north side facing.

04:19>> Yeah,

04:21they're this except this. So they're

04:23leaving

04:28and I think this actually goes to the

04:30right.

04:51Yeah, this building

04:55half of it is to be

04:57>> well

04:59they say the whole thing

05:02according to this this is

05:05new existing. So this goes to the corner

05:10right now.

05:11That's so they're removing.

05:17No, this is a this is a

05:20four story brick that faces

05:40>> between this one and that.

05:41>> Yeah, they do apply but only

05:49No,

05:51I think they're

05:54according to this. Here's the toilet

05:56building.

05:59So, this goes

06:03keeping this

06:26They're doing something.

06:34Okay, it's 10:03. We will call this

06:38meeting of the board of zoning appeals

06:39to order.

06:42Um, this meeting, the September 17th,

06:442026 meeting is now in session. The

06:46first order of business is to approve

06:47the minutes from the July 16th meeting.

06:49Has everybody had a chance to review

06:51those?

06:52Does somebody want to make a motion?

06:55>> Motion to approve?

06:57[snorts]

06:57>> Second.

06:57>> Second. All in favor? I

07:00>> I.

07:00>> Any abstensions? Any opposition? Okay,

07:04the minutes are passed.

07:10We will now move on to

07:12>> new business.

07:13>> Uh just one announcement. The on the

07:16agenda the first listed area variance

07:18has been postponed. So we apologize

07:20anybody that might be here or listening

07:24uh for V-2026-15

07:28for 111 Essex Street. Uh that project is

07:32postponed for now and uh we'll renotice

07:36it if it's back on a future agenda.

07:39Um that means our first item is

07:41V-20226-16

07:44an area variance to construct a

07:46two-story office building u which would

07:49be seeking relief for the [snorts]

07:51threetory minimum requirement. This is

07:53at 344 North Salina Street MX4 zone

07:56district for Helio Health Inc.

08:07Thank you. I'm Bob Siger with Shop for

08:09Architects here representing Helio

08:12Health along with Kathleen.

08:15>> Hi. Got to adjust that just a little.

08:17I'm Kathleen Gaffne Bab, president and

08:19CEO of Helio Health and I am here to

08:22talk about the proposed training

08:24institute located at 344 North. I think

08:27it's important to identify that it's a

08:30training center for the public. It's a

08:32workforce economic development

08:33initiative. It is not although Helio

08:36Health does operate programs and

08:37services for people with substance use

08:39and mental health, that's not the intent

08:42of this center. It is a training center

08:44specifically to train people to become

08:47credentialed to work in the behavioral

08:48health field or to get continuing

08:50education credits whether social work or

08:53mental health or doctors and nurses and

08:56such. So just wanted to clarify if there

08:58was any misunderstanding about the

09:00intent of this center.

09:05>> Thank you.

09:06>> Um where do you want me to start?

09:09[laughter]

09:10>> Is this already go ahead. Oh, I was

09:12going to say maybe since this board is

09:14really

09:16the area variance relief saw is maybe

09:19just kind of go through

09:20>> you know what the thought process is to

09:22to meet the the needs of this training

09:25center and kind of the design and okay

09:27get into that.

09:27>> Yeah, we I mean we started on this in

09:302021. Uh we worked very closely with the

09:33city and the landmark preservation board

09:36to over 18 months to develop this

09:40project.

09:41um to uh to be appropriate for the

09:44district because it is a historic

09:46district. Um it originally was going to

09:49be a one-story um we we made it into a

09:52twotory. That was the the compromise

09:54with the Landmark Preservation Board.

09:56That was the requirement at the time. Um

09:59we met with them a lot of times. Uh and

10:02you know, I think we came up with a

10:04design which is um which we're proud of

10:07and I think the preservation board is

10:09proud of also. uh is uh will fit within

10:13the historic district. Well, um we we we

10:18worked hard at it. Um the um

10:23the timeline was just such that by the

10:26time this got approved at the end of uh

10:292022,

10:31we started on working drawings for it

10:33and we finished them by the end of the

10:35year, but um the new ordinance had

10:38already taken effect. And so, um, we,

10:42uh, I don't know whether you have it in

10:44your comments, but we did get comments

10:46back from, uh, Kate Award, uh, with the

10:49preservation board saying that yes, this

10:52is exactly what they approved back in

10:542022, and they had no problems with it.

10:57Um, so I mean as as I went through

11:01answering the I the the five questions

11:04or the five issues here, I think we

11:07established that this really is an

11:09improvement to to the neighborhood and I

11:12think it will be um a great addition to

11:15the historic district.

11:18>> Yep. Yeah.

11:19>> Again, um I know that when it was first

11:22brought up, there was several neighbors

11:23that came up and talked about their

11:25concerns with Helio Health. I did reach

11:27out and talk with each one of them and

11:29heard their concerns. Um, and there was

11:32was a misunderstanding that it was a

11:35treatment center, which as I said, it's

11:37not. It's a training center. And so, um,

11:40the ability to demolish the existing

11:42building, which not only is an isore,

11:45but a safety issue, but also put a

11:47workforce development building there,

11:49they thought was most everyone, not

11:51everyone to be fair, but most everyone

11:53thought that it was an improvement.

11:56Does anybody have any questions for the

11:58applicant?

12:04>> I don't

12:08>> Well, go.

12:09>> Yeah, I did have a comment. I know. So,

12:12[laughter]

12:12>> yeah.

12:13>> The MX4 district, is that correct?

12:15Requires a three story and all the

12:18buildings on North Salina are three or

12:22more stories. And back the building

12:25across the street is what? Five stories.

12:27The one in the back is four or five

12:30stories. So I was wondering why did you

12:32give any consideration to adding a third

12:35floor? Um especially at the corner

12:38that's sort of holding that whole block

12:40together.

12:41>> Um I noticed you stepped down as you're

12:43coming to the corner which usually the

12:46corner is celebrated with usually a more

12:48prominent

12:49>> part of the building. So just wondering

12:52about your thoughts on that.

12:53>> Yeah, we we looked at uh at the number

12:56of stories in the building, but I mean

12:59we really kind of pushed the envelope to

13:01get it to two and to get it to three, it

13:05creates all sorts of space that Helio

13:07Health doesn't need and they really

13:09don't want to be a landlord. Um, so we

13:12we looked at that but felt that this,

13:15you know, this was was good and and

13:17appropriate. And I realized it's not

13:20three or four or five stories like many

13:22of the adjacent buildings, but it's uh,

13:25you know, it at two stories and and it's

13:28a little taller, two stories. Um, I

13:31think I think it holds its own at this

13:33corner. We we you know we're very

13:35[clears throat] careful to put it at the

13:37property line which is you know where

13:40you know where all the buildings are

13:41typically. Uh and u so I I think we I

13:46think we address that as best we can.

13:50>> I mean I I realize there are no um

13:52there's an adjoining building is at the

13:54corner of State Street or

13:56>> on the other side that's quite a bit

13:57taller. So

13:58>> yes,

13:59>> um but I just you know across the street

14:01and I don't know if we can pull up

14:03Google maps but this same issue came

14:05about with you know that building on the

14:08corner.

14:08>> Yes.

14:09>> Across the street. So that's a two-story

14:11building and just the relationship with

14:13all the threetory buildings there. You

14:15can see

14:16>> you know it's anything.

14:18>> No I don't think I don't think so.

14:20>> Is that the restaurant?

14:22>> Yeah. Yes.

14:23>> Yeah. I mean that was built before

14:26reszone, right?

14:28>> Yeah. But it's just having a shorter

14:30building especially at a prominent

14:31corner I think is

14:32>> I I would agree with you at that point

14:35especially adjacent to the other, you

14:37know, the taller buildings that you that

14:39should have been a taller building

14:40there. I think ours uh I mean we're

14:43we're we're next to that one building on

14:45the corner of Laurel and State Street,

14:48but there's I mean there's kind of no

14:50way we can compete with that and its

14:52size and its height. Um so uh I felt

14:56that the the twotory will hold its own.

15:00>> Did you consider maybe even just portion

15:02of the building going up to three

15:04stories?

15:05>> Not not really. Not really.

15:07>> Is that something that's feasible? say

15:10we're also mindful one of the

15:12conversations I've had a couple

15:13conversations with neighbors is that

15:15they were concerned that if we didn't

15:17need all of the space that we would turn

15:19it into something else

15:22[laughter]

15:23that I assured them that it was a

15:25training center that would

15:26[clears throat] be intent of that

15:28building and they also asked you know

15:30you provide enough trainings is it going

15:32to be sustainable since 2020 training

15:35over 7,000 individuals we believe it's

15:37going to be sustainable but we also want

15:39to

15:40mindful of what it is and not

15:43overextend.

15:44>> Yeah, that's that makes sense. Um

15:47>> they proposed a kind of false third

15:50story and the landmark preservation

15:52board didn't care for that

15:55>> or just an unfinished I mean is there

15:57any potential to build it out and then

15:59in the future it could be completed at

16:02least part of it?

16:03>> I suppose that's that's a possibility

16:05but um I mean I would say you know at

16:08this point we would build the twotory

16:10and if there's a need for another story,

16:13we we could uh we could address that at

16:15the time.

16:16>> Structurally, could this accept a third

16:18story in the future? If

16:19>> it it it it could. I mean, properly

16:22designed, you know, the you know, we we

16:25had to stop at a certain point where we

16:26realized that um okay, this isn't going

16:29to happen right now.

16:30>> So, um but yes, I mean, it's a it's a a

16:34long linear building. It it it wouldn't

16:36take a whole lot to uh design this to to

16:40take more stories.

16:46>> Anybody have any additional questions?

16:48>> Well, just a clarification. So, that

16:50existing building that you're retaining,

16:53>> but half of it you're rebuilding or

16:55>> No, we it's it's all coming down.

16:58>> Oh, it is.

16:59>> Yeah. Originally, we were trying to save

17:01that building, but um believe me, it it

17:03is deteriorated so badly. Um the the

17:06second floor deck is rusted out and um I

17:11mean the roof is pretty much shot. It it

17:14um so again, originally we wanted to

17:16salvage that building, but it it just

17:19doesn't make any sense. It's in it's in

17:21really bad shape. Do you remember your

17:25conversations with the LPB why the third

17:27story was rejected by them? I guess just

17:30to get

17:30>> No, it was it it wasn't a matter of

17:32third story. It was a matter of say a

17:34false a false story, you know, where you

17:36build the facade and you have window

17:38spaces, but it's it's open behind there.

17:41There's no building. And they just they

17:43felt that was disingenuous.

17:47>> Disneyland, I mean,

17:48>> they're the experts. Um, okay.

17:53Just for the record for uh the board to

17:55I think it's important to look at the

17:57comment from Anadaga County Planning

17:59Board where they state board commends

18:02the applicant for incorporating

18:03traditional architecture and highquality

18:05urban design features into the site and

18:08parking areas to help maintain a

18:10cohesive character with the existing and

18:12historic neighborhood. So

18:15>> just an additional board that that

18:17looked at what's being discussed right

18:19now.

18:20>> Thank you for that. Yeah, the design

18:22really does fit very nicely into the

18:23historic district.

18:28Any other questions from the board?

18:31All right. Uh, is there anybody here in

18:34to speak in favor of this proposal?

18:36[clears throat]

18:38Anybody here to speak in opposition to

18:40this proposal?

18:44All right. Hearing none, I suppose we

18:47should move on to our seeker. So that

18:49was conducted with planning commission.

18:51>> Oh okay.

18:52>> So uh they [laughter] issued a negative

18:54declaration. So that part is all set.

18:56Thank you.

18:57>> Uh you are free to deliberate and

18:59discuss. Just a reminder this is an area

19:01variance. So it's a balancing test.

19:03>> Uh you should go through the five

19:06criteria and kind of weigh those have

19:08some discussion on the record and then

19:11uh if somebody chooses you can make a

19:14motion. Uh, please note there are

19:16recommended conditions from staff on

19:18page 15, three of them. Um,

19:21>> if you make a motion, we recommend you

19:23incorporate those into your motion.

19:31>> I'm sorry, what page did you say that

19:32was on?

19:32>> 15.

19:33>> 15. Thank you.

19:36>> Uh, so would somebody like to walk

19:37through the five tests?

19:39>> Sure, I'll I'll walk through it. Uh, do

19:42I have to make a motion that we accept

19:44it or just walk through the five tasks?

19:47>> Oh, you can just talk through it.

19:48>> Okay. Um,

19:50neighborhood character. Uh, the criteria

19:53here was met. Uh, the proposed twostory

19:56helio health training center is

19:59compatible with the architectural

20:01character of the north salina street

20:04corridor. In addition,

20:08the project will replace uh deteriorated

20:11structures with a modern well

20:16uh decorated or deteriorated structures

20:19with a modern well-designed facility and

20:22will not produce any undesirable changes

20:25to the property. [snorts] Now, when we

20:27look at the uh uh feasibility of

20:30alternatives, uh the criteria was also

20:33met there. uh the additional floor would

20:38impose unnecessary

20:40construction cost and create

20:42nonfunctional space

20:44and uh based on that that's why I

20:48believe that they're going with the

20:49twotory and I definitely agree with that

20:54substantiality

20:55the criteria also was rent met there the

20:58building scale aligns with existing one

21:01and twotory structures along North

21:03Salina street and does not disrupt the

21:06corridor's visual continuity

21:10and uh any adverse effects. Uh there was

21:14uh no adverse effects to uh the

21:18neighborhood. The project significantly

21:22improves existing site conditions and

21:25contributes positively to the

21:28neighborhood. So based on that uh the

21:31criteria was also met and uh

21:33self-created difficulties uh in this uh

21:37category the criteria was not met and uh

21:41the applicant uh did not didn't apply

21:45for a building permit before the

21:46ordinance changed. So uh four out of the

21:50five criteria was met and as was stated

21:53earlier if the applicant uh

21:57continues with the recommended

21:58conditions if approved uh I believe that

22:03uh this project would be very

22:05successful.

22:07>> Anybody have any questions or discussion

22:09on the criteria?

22:11I just I I think it does say um

22:15that the majority of the buildings in

22:17the district are one or two stories.

22:20Didn't I read that? Which I don't think

22:22is is that accurate.

22:23>> Which section are

22:25>> um

22:27should have underlined it with ex the

22:30building scale lines with existing one

22:32and twotory structures along North

22:34Carolina Street.

22:35>> They're not one and two story.

22:38>> They're not what? They're not one or two

22:40story.

22:41>> Uhu.

22:41>> They're primarily three and four story

22:45and more.

22:46>> So is a 33% reduction in the required

22:49height substantial?

22:56My take on this is based on the fact

22:58that they've gone through the LPB LPB

23:00feels comfortable with it that the

23:03reduction is with understanding with the

23:07building across issue is two stories. So

23:10um I don't see an adverse effect on

23:12that.

23:12>> I'm also generally inclined to defer to

23:14them.

23:17>> They review it before the zoning. Not

23:19that they have to consider it, but

23:22>> before the resone. Yes,

23:23>> that review is be was done before

23:25>> there was.

23:27[clears throat]

23:30>> Any other questions or discussion on the

23:32criteria?

23:34>> Would anybody like to make a motion?

23:37>> I'll make a motion. I make a motion that

23:40uh we accept the area variance to

23:43construct a two-story office building

23:46relief from a three-story minimum

23:49requirement

23:51>> with the conditions listed on page 15.

23:53>> With the conditions listed on page 15,

23:57do I need to go through those

23:59conditions?

24:00>> Yeah, read them into the record if you

24:02>> Okay. uh the [clears throat] applicant

24:04shall comply with the general conditions

24:07for approval on the variance

24:09application.

24:11Number two, the applicant shall comply

24:14with the comments and recommendations of

24:16the Anandaga County Planning Board as

24:20incorporated into the companion major

24:23site plan MAP-2026-25.

24:32The third one, the proposed area

24:34variance only grants the construct

24:39twostory building in the 344

24:44North Salina Street.

24:47The applicant shall submit an additional

24:49variance application if they intend to

24:53further reduce the number of building

24:56story.

25:00>> Anybody like to second? I'll second. Um,

25:04>> any discussion?

25:06All in favor, please say I.

25:08>> I.

25:09>> I.

25:10>> Any opposed?

25:12>> One. Any extensions? There are none.

25:14With that, we can close this public

25:16hearing.

25:22>> We have one more item uh this afternoon.

25:25It's [clears throat] also an error

25:26variance. uh V-20226-18

25:30uh seeking relief from a minimum 30%

25:32ground floor [clears throat] window

25:34transparency in a 29 unit apartment uh

25:38building at 316 Delaware Street for the

25:41Spanish Action League of Anadaga County

25:43in the R5 zone district.

25:47>> What do you do when there's nobody here

25:48to present?

25:52>> You're not here to represent the Spanish

25:53Action League, are you?

25:56Oh,

25:56>> okay. I'm sorry. Go come on up.

25:59>> I'll be uh recusing myself from this

26:01application.

26:03>> Yes, if you could.

26:04>> My name is My name is Michael Harris and

26:06I own the house at 321 Kellogg.

26:09>> Oh, wait a minute. So, you're not

26:10representing the Spanish Action League.

26:11>> Oh, no. I'm sorry.

26:12>> Okay. Sorry. I was mistaken.

26:21>> I guess we can hold it if they didn't

26:23bother to show up. Yeah, we're gonna

26:24have to um I don't see anybody out in

26:27the hallway, so

26:29we

26:33>> we haven't

26:35>> Do you want to open a public hearing and

26:36then leave it open?

26:37>> Yeah, he's here. Okay. I would

26:39accommodate that.

26:40>> Okay. Um

26:42>> what do I need to say to actually open

26:44the public hearing? Just um you've

26:46you've introduced the item. Yeah, I

26:48would say the uh you know for the record

26:50the applicant's not here to walk through

26:52their application, but it's been

26:54introduced and you wish to open up the

26:56public hearing since we have a member of

26:57the public here.

27:00>> Agreed. Uh thank you, sir. So, we will

27:02open the public hearing and hear what

27:03you have to say about the project. Uh

27:05but we'll keep the hearing open. So, at

27:07our next meeting, hopefully the

27:08applicant will be here to present their

27:11version. Um so, please come on up and

27:13give your name and address for the

27:14record.

27:16My name is Michael Harrison. I own the

27:18house at 321 Kellogg, which is six feet

27:22away from the project that they're

27:24getting ready to build. I tried to get

27:26in touch with them since the last

27:27hearing, so we can kind of negotiate

27:30either you can have my house or we can

27:33work something out. Nobody's got in

27:35touch with me, but where they talking

27:37about building a building that's going

27:38to overtake my house within six feet all

27:41the way around. So, I would like to

27:44>> Yeah, I know they've had some staffing

27:45changes at the Spanish Action League.

27:48So, um I would you've tried going in

27:51person to their office as well?

27:53>> Uh not recently, but I just got a letter

27:56because we are through the Harris Family

27:59Trust.

28:00>> My that's that's me. So, I tried to get

28:02in touch with them before. Nobody got

28:04back in touch with me. So, if there's

28:05any way that I can get in touch with

28:07them, I would very be appreciative.

28:10Certainly. If you could leave your

28:11contact information, we can pass that

28:12along to the applicant.

28:13>> Okay. Okay. And at the next hearing,

28:16they would notify me again also.

28:19>> Uh, yes, we would we'll renotice it and

28:22advertise it.

28:23>> Yes.

28:24>> Okay. So, they send me another one of

28:26these.

28:26>> Yes.

28:27>> Okay. Very good. Thank you so much.

28:29>> Thank you. So, we'll leave this public

28:31hearing open until the next session.

28:35>> Yes. questions or wait until

28:36>> Thanks.

28:37>> Yeah, we can ask questions of staff.

28:39>> I was just curious about the 30%

28:41transparency. I mean, what's in essence

28:44why why was that included for

28:46residential districts on the ground

28:48floor? Do you know the thinking behind

28:49that?

28:52>> Yeah. I mean, it's a regulation that was

28:54included in mixeduse zone districts, but

28:56>> as far as this is only residential, is

28:59that right?

29:00>> Oh, yeah. Sorry.

29:02um

29:06what went into that uh for R5, you know,

29:09when drafting the language and kind of

29:11just everybody on this side of the table

29:13just kind of inherited what was

29:16so I don't know if there was discussion

29:18on that or not. Um

29:25>> sorry, I wish I had more to offer.

29:26>> That's all right. [laughter]

29:28Sometimes we get asked that you know why

29:30what was the intent of this but like we

29:32didn't draft

29:35actually none of us were involved with

29:37that. So

29:40>> and the A21 drawing is that's the front

29:43of it.

29:44It says front elevation. So that's

29:46>> that would be facing Delaware then if

29:48it's the front or which building are

29:51you?

29:52>> Yeah. So that's what we're talking about

29:54the the window transparency here.

29:57>> This looks like a large one on the 300

30:00block.

30:01>> Oh, there are two.

30:02>> There are several sites included on the

30:05100, 200, 300, and 400 block.

30:08>> Um, so that's the largest one on the 300

30:10block.

30:15>> In fact, here in the staff report, I see

30:18>> they've broken down what's the

30:19percentage transparency for each of

30:21>> for each. Okay,

30:25>> so we

30:27>> have the drawings of those other builds

30:28in this

30:31>> just to clarify is the variance just for

30:34316 Delaware Street, not for any of the

30:36other parcels.

30:38>> Okay, 316. So yes, that is the front

30:41facing Delaware.

30:48>> And I think it makes sense that uh the

30:51side streets

30:58We'll get some more information in the

31:01next session.

31:01>> Was it like I thought I read something

31:04about an energy efficiency component or

31:06something, but

31:09>> that could very well be part of their

31:11>> in Yeah, I I actually I don't have a

31:13question for him. So, luckily I have

31:15like another month to think on it.

31:17>> Okay.

31:18Um, anybody have anything else to

31:21discuss or would we like to make a

31:22motion to adjurnn?

31:25>> Motion to. Yeah, second.

31:27>> Okay, we are adjourned. [clears throat]

```*