Duplex variance still up in the air

WASHINGTON — The Board of Adjustment tabled an ordinance variation request for a duplex built on an undersized lot after a nearly 90-minute meeting Thursday night.

Board members said the decision put them in a difficult position that warranted legal consultation.

“We have to make sure that we, as a board, adhere to that legal compliance of our own,” board Chair Charla Howard said. “That’s why we need legal counsel before we can move any further.”

Without the variance or a way to expand the lot sizes, the duplex at the corner of West Fifth Street and North Avenue D would violate city code and not be legally habitable.

Matt Lepic, who owns the duplex, said he didn’t realize the severity of the problem until it was too late to correct.

“I was in the dark about not knowing that the building had setbacks and stuff like that until May,” he said. “At that point, it was already to drywall, and I think one side of it was already trimmed out and everything.”

When he did find out, Lepic sought solutions for the undersized lots, seeking an easement from the Washington County Conservation Board to make up the needed 2,800 square feet with land from the neighboring Kewash Nature Trail.

Lepic said he was surprised when the conservation board denied his request.

“I was under the impression that this would not be a big deal whatsoever,” Lepic said. “The whole time I thought it was just something that I’d need to do, pay the money to have it done, and they were fine with it, and then it didn’t pass, and now we’re at this point.”

Conservation board members said in their mid-July meeting that they didn’t want to set a precedent of selling land from the trail, and that they saw the issue as a mistake by the city, which was not the county organization’s responsibility to solve.

“I don’t want them to lose the house, I don’t want the contractor to have to tear half the house down for whatever reason,” Conservation Board President Craig Capps said. “I’d like to see the city take care of the flub.”

Board of Adjustment members expressed concern about the units’ hazy construction timeline, including the fact that a permit to build the property was not acquired before construction began.

“In July or August you guys were having conversations about how to begin this project,” Board of Adjustment Vice Chair Jim Zieglowsky said. “I wasn’t part of those conversations but struggle believing that there was no discussion about the necessity of a building permit when you’re talking about laying out the structure.”

Chris Linnenkamp, who was contracted to build the duplex, said he thought he had approval to build, just not in writing.

“I would never start a $300,000 project without knowing that it was OK,” Linnenkamp said. “To assume what you’re saying, that I would built it just because, that’s silly … I can go back years and show you projects that were halfway done before we had a permit from the city in hand.”

Building and zoning official Jeff Duwa, who grants building permits in the city, said there was a misunderstanding when he left town for military service in September without granting the permit.

“I never thought they were going to start the project before I got back,” he said.

Howard cautioned the group against making a hasty decision, citing the board’s quasi-judicial role for the city.

“We actually supersede the City Council on decisions we make, so if anybody wants to appeal our decisions, they have to go to the courts,” she said. “Our decisions are that important to be legally compliant … I don’t want this to sound like a lecture, but this board is not designed to or defined as cleaning up flubs or mistakes.”

Howard said she hesitated to blame the city for the incident.

“This could have been completely prevented if you had come to us with an application before you took a shovel to that ground, it’s that simple,” she said. “I feel like this ‘let’s do this now and beg for forgiveness later,’ I can’t support that mentality, and I cannot support ‘I didn’t know, I didn’t know, I didn’t know.’ When you’re in development, you know there are things you have to do.”

While they were frustrated with the position the incident put them in, board members said they hoped to find a positive outcome.

“We have a job to do and we have certain parameters,” Zieglowsky said. “It’s not our fault that you’re in the position you’re in. I want to help every way I possibly can, but I have to do it within the guidelines of what we as a board are set up and authorized to do.”

Howard agreed.

“I want to see new development in this town,” she said. “We have such a housing shortage in this town, and we have for decades … I support new housing, I very heavily do, but I also very heavily want to have the rules followed.”

Board of Adjustment rules require separate votes on a series of legal questions, each of which must be unanimous in order to grant the variance. The Board of Adjustment plans to reconvene, but an exact date will not be announced until 15 days beforehand.