St. Mary's County, MD Board of Appeals for St. Mary's County, 14 Jan 2021

Previous Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: 1/14/21 Board of Appeals for St. Mary's County

Description

No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).

A

Good evening, welcome to the january 14th 2021 meeting of the saint mary's county board of.

A

Appeals located in the commissioner's room, saint mary's, county meeting room.

A

Of the chesapeake building address is 41770 boulder street londontown maryland.

A

Let's see we have I'm acting chairman just for a few minutes here until we have our.

A

Vote for the new new year- and we have three other members here and then one via webex.

A

Due to the board of appeals, meeting not being open to the public, currently.

A

Applicants and or the representatives are participating through teleconference.

A

Or webex this meeting can be viewed on channel 95 of the county's youtube channel. Also, the.

A

Public may listen to the meeting on their phones, but not, but not speak to the board.

A

You may speak to the board by calling 1301-579-7236 and then use access code, 76343.

A

Followed by the pound side, if any members of the public would like to participate.

A

By talking to the board doing public testimony, please call the following number.

A

301-475-4200 extension 1234, when you call this number ms sherry young, recording secretary.

A

Will ask your name address phone and email.

A

In other words, this is a virtual sign-in sheet. Ms young will place you on the line on hold.

A

After I announce that I'm opening the hearing.

A

Up to the public testimony, I will open the meeting to public testimony after.

A

The presentations and testimonies, while the applicants and representatives have been completed.

A

When you're taken off hold, you will be asked to state your name address for the record. I will.

A

Swear you in you will have three minutes to ask your questions or make your comments directly to.

A

The board, your comments will be recorded and heard by those of us in the chesapeake building webex.

A

Participants, channeling channel 95 and on youtube after the public comments portion.

A

Of the meeting is over the case will return to the board for discussion in its decision.

A

Okay, I'd like to the members to introduce yourselves starting from my left good evening,.

B

Rich richardson dan igniewski lynn, delahay wayne madinsky good evening, steve scott board attorney.

C

Harry knight, department of land use growth management.

D

Stacy clements department of land use and growth management.

A

Okay, what do we got? Then? You go down to amy. You want to do that or you want me to do that.

D

I can do that for you, okay, the joint and in the adjoining media room is amy carter.

D

And sherry young is in the savage concerts, room manning the phones.

D

An attendance viatella conference is neil murphy. Our county attorney bill hunt, the director of lane.

D

Juice and growth management, okay and then we have our appellants and applicants for.

D

Our cases tonight, which will be introduced during their cases, okay, you go ahead and nominate okay,.

A

This is a new year, so our first order of business is to elect our new chairman, because mr hayden has.

A

Served his term, so we have to elect a new chairman and go from there nominations for.

A

A

Mr brown, no okay.

C

But now it's the vote, mr brown.

A

E

I got a vote or it doesn't matter. I guess no you're you're you're good you're number one.

F

You're in for better or for worse, here's hearing unopposed and a majority unanimous vote. Mr.

C

Ignowski is now the chairman, thank you, and we have one more to do, and that would be a vice chairman.

E

And uh I will take a nomination for the vice chairman, I'd like to nominate mr john brown.

B

As vice chairman on second and call for the vote? Yes, yes, yes, yes, john, congratulations!.

E

Thank you all for your for your nomination um and uh since it's relatively new for me,.

E

I would ask that we have keep your minds open, keep me straight and keep.

E

Me moving in the right direction. I would really appreciate that.

E

Tonight we have two public hearing cases on the agenda. This evening case number one is vaap 19.

E

For the callaway 7-eleven and the second case will be z-a-a-p-20.

E

1746 town, creek, marina, burkhart appeal before we start the hearing for the viewers at home.

E

You will be able to see the staff and the applicant presentations on channel 95 or youtube.

E

As these presentations are being shown, you can also see the documents that have been submitted.

E

In this case, by going to board docs, ms clements will now demonstrate how to go to board docs.

D

First, we need to go to st mary's, can't er.

D

S-T-M-A-R-Y-S-M-D.Com.

D

D

It's um yeah. Okay, um then we go to the board docs in the upper right hand, side.

D

And it takes a little bit of time to load. It's a large program running.

D

And once it gets loaded, we will look for the tonight's meeting. The january 14th meeting board.

D

Of appeals, which is right there and then on the left, hand, side you'll, see it at the top starred.

D

And down in the center you'll see view the agenda for tonight's meeting and then on the left hand.

D

Side, you will see everything. That's on the agenda number five and six are our public hearings.

D

You can open the public hearing and view all the exhibits and the attachments.

D

Was there any questions, nope? Okay, before we get to the first case, I'd like to.

E

Swear in miss clements and mr knight, so if you both stand.

E

um Raise your right hand, do you declare an affirm under the penalty of perjury, that the testimony.

E

Responses and statements you were about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

C

I do I do thank you. We will now hear the first case, which will be the 7-eleven.

E

And mr longmore, I expect you will be leading the charge. Oh, mr chairman, we would normally.

E

Okay- okay, um very good! We'll do that and now I guess we're ready for staff presentation.

C

Yeah yeah, we would normally do the staff presentation right. Okay, I'm sorry! Thank you.

D

Let's see, let me pull up the powerpoint.

D

Let's see, share screen microsoft, powerpoint.

G

D

Okay, there we go.

D

Let's get here, okay tonight we're here for the public hearing of january 14th, 2021.

D

We're here to hear case v a ap 19-132-001 callaway 7-eleven they're, asking for.

D

A variance to reduce the required 65-foot type b buffer yard along maryland's route, 5 and 249.

D

And to reduce the required 30-foot type-c buffer yard along the east side of the property.

D

Okay, the legal ads were printed in the local.

D

Southern maryland news on december 25th and january 1st and the property was posted.

D

For notification to the neighbor and notifications, the neighbors were mailed on december 29th.

D

Okay, the owners are george and lorie ann bowles. Mr longmore will be their acting agent tonight.

D

The location of the property is at 20915 point lookout, road and 20744 piney point road.

D

Both in callaway the land uses mixed use, low intensity, its zoning is village mixed used and its.

D

Acreage is 1.11 acres combined. They currently on the property is an existing single family dwelling.

D

They're proposing to remove the existing house and redevelop the property with a 3500 square.

D

Foot convenience store with a 33 183 square foot canopy or the petroleum fuel dispensers.

D

The planning commission approved the concept site plan on august 17th 2020 on the condition.

D

The the variance approval for the buffer yard or the reduction of the buffer yards.

D

Okay, the property is located at the intersection of.

D

Maryland route 5 and maryland route 249. all right excuse yeah 249.. um If zoning is bmx.

D

Land juice once again is mixed use, low intensity and the adjoining surrounders is also that.

D

Okay, we are the existing conditions. This has an existing house on the back portion and open.

D

Grass area in the front we've got the gas station here and a gas station over here with a fast food.

D

And then we've got the retail behind that: okay, the site plan.

D

There's the existing conditions sheet the site plan development. There is their landscaping plan.

D

Their landscaping details the buffer yard standards.

D

The sea buffer yard, or the b buffer yard requires 65 feet.

D

Let's see there, we go see.

D

And here we have, this is the proposed landscaping plan with the required 65.

D

And 30 foot buffer yards, as shown in the green ride with the red dimension, location, notations,.

D

And the red property lines, so what we have here is the red property lines. Okay, right here in.

D

The green would show what the buffer yards, if it was built according to standards, would look like.

D

Okay- and this is the proposed landscaping plan with the reduced buffer yards.

D

As shown with the green buffer line and then the red property lines set off.

D

Okay, the standards for granting and variance except is provided in sections 24.3.

D

And 24.4 and 24.5, the board of appeals shall not vary the regulations of the ordinance unless it.

D

Makes these findings based upon evidence presented to it that one because of the particular physical.

D

Surroundings such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness size, shape or topographical conditions.

D

Of the property involved, strict enforcement of the ordinance will result in practical difficulty.

D

Number two: the conditions created creating the difficulty are not applicable generally to other.

D

Properties within the same zoning classification, three, the purpose of the variance- is not based.

D

Exclusively upon reasons of convenience, profit or caprice, it is understood that any development.

D

Necessary increases the property value and that alone shall not constitute an exclusive finding.

D

Number four: the alleged difficulty has not been created by the property owner or the.

D

Owner's predecessors entitled number five: the granting of the variants will not be.

D

Detrimental to the public, welfare or injuries to other property or improvements.

D

In the neighborhood and the character of the district will not be changed by the variance.

D

Number six: the proposed variance will not substantially increase the congestion of.

D

The public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or.

D

Substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood and, lastly, number seven.

D

The variance complies with as nearly as possible with the spirit, intent and purpose of the.

D

Comprehensive plan and board members, I I'd like to add that the powerpoint presentation followed the.

C

Legal ad, however, as the staff report pointed out, there was a there was an error in the legal ad.

C

Stating that they needed a variance for the 30-foot foot side, buffer yard- and that was.

C

Not correct, it was a misinterpretation of the um concept site, planned staff report where.

C

It described that the 30 foot is allowed to be reduced to 15, on the condition that the property.

C

Adjacent is vacant and it is vacant, and um so I just want to let you know. I want to point out that.

C

While the powerpoint talked about a 30-foot, buffy yard being reduced, because we advertised that.

C

And, of course, the 65-foot um along the highways being reduced, the only variance, that's actually.

C

Required tonight, and that you should only be considering is the reduction of the 65 foot.

C

Any questions, mr chairman, go ahead guys. I had trouble understanding just what the variance was.

B

So I called mr knight this morning and found out what it was reduced from the 65 and the 30.

B

What is reduced to it's really not clear at all what it's reduced to. Could you explain.

B

What it is reduced to yes, and so I do apologize if the staff report was not explicit enough.

C

um So the but it's an excellent question and it does need to be clarified to fully understand.

C

The scope of the variance request, so we've got a required 65-foot buffer.

C

Buffer yard, along maryland route 5 and maryland route 249. the um could you go back to that slide.

C

The the one that chose the required buffer yards yep so you'll see that the green line um comes.

C

Quite far it it almost touches the side of the convenience store and it actually cuts through.

C

The gas canopy so um the proposed store and the proposed gas canopy and the associated parking.

C

Cannot accommodate a 65-foot buffer yard, so the dimension they're, going down to what mr.

C

Richardson wanted me to clarify they're dropping from 65 feet down to 19 feet generally and the.

C

Reason, I say generally is because they they are able to strike two very clear 19-foot lines.

C

But when the property turns the corner, that 19-foot varies a little bit, so, oh I'm sorry! I.

C

Normally, I think, I'm loud enough so anyway, the um the 65 foot, the variance request, is to reduce the.

C

65 foot to a um general 19 foot, thus making the buffer yard 29 of the minimum required buffer yard.

B

Thank you uh harry along the south. Part of the property line is the buffer. There.

E

Adequate and meets requirements. Yes, it does um it. It would require a 30-foot buffer yard.

C

If well, depending on the development on the property next door, so, for instance,.

C

On the um we'll say the west side of the property, where there's a house, that's why that requires a.

C

30-Foot buffer and they're providing a 30-foot buffer there on the south side of the property.

C

If the land was not vacant, they would be required to provide a larger buffer yard, but because the.

C

Land is vacant, they can provide half of the 30-foot buffer yard. So the only variance before.

C

Us tonight is the 65 foot dropping down to 19 foot along the highways. Thank you any other questions.

E

At this time, yeah drop down to 19 foot, but what type of buffer are we talking about? It is a b.

C

Buffer is it not, you can go to that slide, not a 19 foot b buffer, yes, okay and and.

C

This yeah that's the b on the top, and so now can you go back to the landscaping plan.

C

And go to the one that shows the proposed so that we yeah so see now the green line.

C

And um you can see the quantity of landscaping that they're planning to plant, including outside.

C

The buffer, but inside the you know, called the landscape on the right side of the screen. There.

A

Only other question: is there any fence involved at all? There is um yes, there's a six foot. There's.

D

A six foot fence along the south side. But I don't believe the one that was reduced to.

C

Well, but that's not no, not not alone, 249.

C

The 65 foot buffer, reducing to 19, will not include a fence correct.

C

Okay, okay, but but no, where on the property at all defense, they do on the um south side.

C

Well and then they would also require that on the other side there, I don't believe so, because.

C

They were both required to be the same type of buffer. Let me let me open the plan and see okay.

C

I do see what appears to be.

A

I see a 3.5 three and a half foot wood fence.

A

Is that it is, do you see that there I'm looking yeah it's on there? Oh yeah, that's existing.

D

Proposed six foot uh high fence, also on the west side,.

D

It's in your attachments, it's on the on the.

C

South and west side, because both of those correct require the same sea buffer.

A

South and west, yes,.

C

Yes, proposed six foot high fence and proposed six foot high fence. I put my eyes on it.

C

Okay: okay, thank you. What type of fence is it it would be the.

C

Type, that's described in the buffer yard standard. Do you want to go to that slide?.

C

Yep, so do we name it there? No fences, a six foot tall fence or a six foot tall masonry wall.

C

So now you'd have to go to, and stacy can do that um to the detail page where they would.

C

Potentially show us the fence: let's see it's not jumping off the page. At me, there.

C

I got the buffer, I guess where I'm coming from, is it stockade or chain link or what.

D

That might be a question for the applicant okay, yes, okay, because.

C

It does not appear to be illness, it does not appear to be illustrated on the plan.

A

No all right, thank you. It's labeled on the plan um meeting the minimum height.

G

Okay, any other questions, john, mr. I have a couple questions, but ms lay may have one.

H

First, I think we're finished here. You can go ahead. John.

H

Okay and it's kind of like for the record, the prop the third property- I guess headed down, piney.

H

Point road: what and also the property behind this that field? uh What is you don't show it on your.

H

Slide, but what is the zoning of those two properties? uh She actually does if you go back.

C

To the year zoning slide, okay, I guess I missed it, but anyway it's in other words, I understand the.

H

Ones involved, but I'm thinking about the adjacent property to this they're, all vmx good.

H

And I forgot my next question so roll on okay. Thank you all mr longmore.

I

Yes, mr chairman, um how about I administer the oath and then I'll call off the names of those that I.

E

Have listed will be participating on your side and have them agree.

E

And if I miss any, you can fill me in on the end. That sounds great, mr chairman. Okay, yes,.

E

If they would raise the right hand to themselves, do you declare and affirm.

E

Under the penalty of perjury and the testimony responses and statements you may give will be.

E

The whole truth and nothing but the truth and first on the list I have is brianna wilson.

E

Speech I do mike leonhardt.

E

And he's not around yet is that correct, yeah, it's nick uh driving for leonhard traffic tonight, okay,.

E

Nick dribbon, I do chris williams, curtis williams and mr longbow, it's yours. Unless I forgot somebody.

I

Thank you. I think that uh I think that covers our team and members of the board. We appreciate.

I

Being here tonight, um it's a pleasure to be in front of you, mr chairman. Congratulations.

I

uh On your selection this evening, as the staff shared we're here, seeking a variance from the.

I

Buffer yard standards and as mr knight clarified and I think spelled out very well, the two.

I

That we need tonight are along the highways that are there our main presentation tonight.

I

Will be by nicholas speech the the primary engineers worked on the project. I helped to.

I

Assist in creating the concept site plan, as the staff report.

I

Mentioned the concept site plan was presented to the planning commission. I believe that I.

I

Believe after two nights of hearings, it may have been three was approved on august 17th of 2020.

I

One of the conditions that they placed on it was that we come to this board to seek variances.

I

They did review the site plan as presented to you and approved it subject to your variances tonight.

I

So with that I'll turn it over to mr speech- and I know he has a powerpoint to both get you.

I

Generally familiar with the site plan and then walk through the requested variances tonight.

J

Thank you, um I'm going to do my best to share my screen here and I will walk you.

J

Through our quick presentation, uh as always, staff did a wonderful job, so I'm not gonna belabor.

J

This and walk you through a ton of the same information but I'll try to clarify a few pieces.

J

um Just so, you guys can have a better idea of what we're proposing and why. um So. As.

J

Noted uh in stats presentation, we are located at the corner of point lookout and piney point road.

J

um There is a single-family house and driveway located on the southern portion of our site. The.

J

Northern portion of the site is currently vacant just to show again to give a little bit more.

J

Clarity without the lot line shown you can see from this aerial.

J

To the right of us or to the east is an open field to the south of us. There's another single.

J

Family house and again west, we are bordered by piney point north ordered by point lookout. Road.

J

As a part of the original site plan approval, one of the the factors that we had discussed.

J

Which is a little different from what staff had shown just because they have the original plans.

J

That were submitted. We did update our entrance to point lookout to be a write-in right out as.

J

You can see on the slide in front of you. This was worked out with the state and so from this.

J

We have a little bit different of a buffer up on front the sizes. Don't change, though,.

J

One thing that I want to point out on this slide and just to to make sure everyone understands.

J

One of the key factors of the reason that we're asking for this variance on the buffer widths.

J

Along both roadways is because of the narrow shape of the site and, as you get to the intersection, the.

J

Site kind of cuts off drastically, and so, um as staff mentioned in their presentation, while we.

J

Are not proposing a consistently uh one size buffer? uh We we can't in this case, because the.

J

Frontage along point lookout is not perpendicular necessarily so.

J

uh That that width on that side does vary while uh along pine point, we do have a consistent.

J

15 foot buffer, the buffer along point lookout varies from in one case. You can see just as the.

J

The area next to the parking spaces, we can actually hit the 65 feet, but for a large.

J

Portion of it we're closer to a mix between 65 down to the 19 feet, as staff described.

J

Just from the site plan requirements is what was approved previously.

J

We do meet the other requirements for building setbacks, canopy setbacks. um So that's not an.

J

Issue, it really comes down to this next slide, and- and this is our landscape plan- that's being.

J

Proposed again, this landscape plan shows the updated entrance of the right and right out.

J

And one of the key things to note, as I mentioned previously, you know we have a consistent 15-foot.

J

Buffer along the western side of our property, we have a varying buffer of 19 feet to the full.

J

65 feet along point lookout and the main reason we're asking for this is because, as.

J

The site is being used and to make this use work. Obviously we need to be able to have.

J

Vehicles traverse the site coming in both entrances, be able to get to the convenience store.

J

Use the pumps and, furthermore, we need trucks to be able to access the site to fill the tanks um to.

J

Bring deliveries to the store so in order to have those larger vehicles be able to make their.

J

Turns and and work through the site we needed more room uh and honestly, the just the 65-foot buffer.

J

uh Wouldn't wouldn't give us any dry vials. um I believe staff mentioned in their presentation.

J

And I'm not sure if everyone can see it, but this dashed line that kind of comes through.

J

The the center of the site- that's where the buffers would be if we use the 65 feet along.

J

Both roadways and you can see you know you- can barely get a convenience store alone.

J

Without even having drive I'll, so there really would be no access to the.

J

Proposed use if we weren't granted a variance for this buffer reduction. uh One of the key.

J

Things that I think needs to be mentioned, though, is while we are asking for a reduction in the.

J

Width of the buffer, we're not asking and we're not proposing reduction in the landscape that.

J

Is actually going to be planted, so the requirement for specimen trees and shrubs are all being met.

J

So we, what we're doing in a sense is we're creating a more dense buffer while it may.

J

Not be as wide it's still providing the the the shade and then the visual buffer that that would.

J

Normally be giving again, it just would be in a more compact setting, so we feel as a part of this.

J

We are moving the intent of the code while just reducing the size to make the use work.

J

So with that uh that that wraps up my presentation again um just to kind of show, we are reducing the.

J

The buffers along what it look out from 65 to adam the minimum 19, although that varies, and along tiny.

J

Point uh we are reducing from 65 feet to 15 feet. Now I know staff did bring up a couple. Other items.

J

uh Which I will address quickly just to to give you a little bit more information, um the.

J

South of the site along the existing house that will remain, we do have a 30-foot buffer. We are.

J

Providing that 30-foot buffer, uh we are also meeting the plant requirement in that buffer.

J

Along the eastern side to the vacant lot, we have a 15 foot buffer requirement. We are providing that.

J

15 feet and providing the landscaping required, and then I know there was a question that came.

J

Up regarding the fencing, while fencing is not required because we are meeting the buffer widths.

J

uh We are pro excuse me. We are proposing fences um just as an additional screening method.

J

The fence that is being proposed, while not detailed on the plan.

J

Is meant to be a board on board fence, so it is a a screening measure from a visual standpoint.

J

um It's not chain link or stocking; uh it will be a full visual screen. So uh with that.

J

I'll wrap up my presentation and I will offer up any answers to questions you may have.

A

I have one question: um I've seen where the.

A

Planning, commission they wanted sidewalks on are they shown on the plan.

J

So the original plan that was submitted did not have the sidewalks record that were asked.

J

For by the planning commission, we are proposing those and we will include them in our final plans.

J

One thing with the sidewalks just to clarify: they will be within the right-of-way, so they.

J

Won't be on our site, and so the buffers that are provided are on our site, so the sidewalks.

J

That will go in will not reduce or affect the width or planting requirement in these buffers.

A

Okay, all right. Thank you any other questions. No one nope john question typical me here I come.

H

um The one question I have is if, and I I've seen your diagrams or where it is, but I look at it as.

H

You have acquired a piece of land and then you've over built. It I mean that's, somebody can allege.

H

That okay and therefore you need the buffers. What would be the impact, if you or would you even build.

H

If you, if you're building, if, if you had the standard buffer.

H

If you had the 65-foot buffer, how would that truly impact the pumps and the convenience store.

H

Meaning it would obviously.

J

Right so that you know to that point we wouldn't be able to fit. Quite frankly, the canopy or the.

J

Convenience store on the site um with having drive, aisles and parking. That's required for what we're.

J

Doing so because of the the tight nature of the site and the shape that it is and in. In addition,.

J

The the way that the right-of-way cuts off at the intersection um the site, even without what.

J

We're proposing, but I would say with with a lot of proposals of what you would be able to do on.

J

The site, it would be too small to fit everything. Okay, I just wanted to get that point in. That's all.

H

I understood and just one more clarification: the board on board fence. That's six foot high.

A

That's correct and and what what size is that on? On the south side and.

J

It would be on the south and the east, so it would be.

J

Buffering both sides of the site that weren't fronted by a runway. Okay, thank you.

C

When I was describing the cardinal points, I was considering driving south on five. So that's why.

C

We're twisted 90 degrees, okay, john. I have one one more question, if I may, mr chair sure,.

H

uh The board on board, I I I have a visual concept of what that is in simple terms,.

H

Any tr what it really will do also is trap any trash or paper or anything else that may.

H

Be blowing through the prop, in other words, it's not going to be something like a you know where.

H

It's open and trash could blow through it. Correct, that's correct, okay! I just want to understand that.

E

Any other questions no sir, um mr longmore.

I

Yeah. Thank you, mr chairman, as I mentioned in the beginning, nick is our primary presenter.

I

Given the relief we're requesting tonight, we do have.

I

um Other members of our team here, if there are any other additional questions, we ask that.

I

Nick driving from leonhard and traffic be here as well in case there's any questions about that.

I

uh Mr speech did show you the write in right out entrance as it's currently configured, which was.

I

The third uh condition on the concept site plan approval and mr uh driven could certainly speak to.

I

That chantal mourinho is here with ebi consulting, who is a senior project coordinator with that.

I

Consultant and she's been working on the project and and, as you heard during the swearing in ms.

I

Wilson- and mr williams are here as representatives from 7-eleven, if there's any questions.

I

um But we do believe that you know mr speech kind of showed you the need for it and once we're done.

I

With any questions you have, I would appreciate the opportunity to to summarize and kind of highlight.

I

What's in the record that we think is important uh to our requested relief, any other questions from.

E

The board members, no sure john questions, any more questions. No! No! Okay! It's up to you, mr longmore.

I

Good job and mr chairman, I believe this is a a public hearing. I don't want to step on harry.

I

Or stacy's toes, I don't know if we need to open it up for that and then yes, typically I'll, provide my.

C

Clothes yeah I misunderstood, mr, but apparently he wants to withhold his um final remarks for after.

C

The public hearing- okay, that's uh while hearing from the public, that's correct, yes and then we'll.

E

Open the meeting to uh the public comment- and I guess we'll check to see if anybody is online. Okay,.

D

Sherry are there any um speakers on the phone.

H

um No, but it might be good to um announce the phone number one more time for here.

C

You want me to do that. I got it right here. You got it okay. If anybody would like to.

E

Make public comments or speak to the board? The phone number is 301-475-4200 extension 1234.

C

Call call now or call now or forever hold your peace into a wedding or two.

C

So stacy can call again and um like, for instance, if she's on with someone.

C

We won't get through so that'll be a good test, but if we get through no one has called okay.

C

Okay, just let me know when you want: let's go ahead and do it.

G

D

Okay, thank you.

E

And then we did get one written public comment from.

E

Mr oddskins, yes, charles hoskins hoskins from hollywood, correct, I'm lighting up and.

E

I think his his comments were. We have enough gas stations in that area. In a nutshell, that was it.

E

But that I think that item has been taken out taken and approved by the planning commission.

E

They've indicated approval, so I guess we're to you now, mr longmore. um You would want to formally.

C

Close the public comment. Yes, I don't think I think you formally closed the public comment. Yeah.

E

Thanks bang, I tap I'm not his leo.

I

All right, thank you, mr chairman. If I may, I can uh summarize the relief for requesting and.

I

And and highlight some of the items in the record that we think support it.

I

um And I'll be brief tonight, but can certainly answer any questions. The board has.

I

uh The the standards are set forth in the in the written staff report. I'll highlight some of the.

I

The items that have been put into the record tonight and that are also found on board docks.

I

uh Which, of course, are part of the record as well. The first standard is that, because.

I

Of the particular physical surroundings, such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness size, shape or.

I

Topographical conditions, strict enforcement of the ordinance will result in practical difficulty. We.

I

Believe that this site can show this, as mentioned in the staff report, the narrowness of the site.

I

Is certainly the primary reason for requesting these, and also, we believe, the shape of the site.

I

At the intersection where the two highways meet um you, you saw from this site uh plans that it isn't.

I

A pure rectangle there is a cut-off there and it'd be very difficult to meet the any setbacks for.

I

Really any type of mixed-use development or any commercial development, um including the one that.

I

Where we proposed and was approved by the planning commission, the second standard is the conditions.

I

Creating the difficulty are not applicable generally to other properties in the same zoning.

I

Classification, this narrowness and that shape are unique to this site and you can see just.

I

Looking to the south of the site, there's a very large parcel that does not have the same type of.

I

Restrictions that we have many others on the zoning map that were presented tonight, the third.

I

Standard is that the purpose, the variance is not based exclusively for convenience, profit or priest.

I

We're requesting this again because of the the nature of the site and the narrowness of it.

I

This use is allowed in the district that it's in and the planning commission has seemed fit.

I

To approve the state plan with the conditions that are before you tonight, um the fourth standard is.

I

That the difficulty has not been created by the property owner or their predecessors and title.

I

um As noted in the staff report, the size and shape of the parcels uh and again there's two.

I

Parcels that are being treated as one site uh they predi to predate the proposed development plan.

I

The fifth standard is, the granting of the variants will not be detrimental to the public welfare.

I

Or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood and the character of the.

I

District will not be changed by the variants, as noted in the staff report, all neighbors.

I

Have been provided notice, as required under the ordinance and those receipts are in the record.

I

I'd also note the the aerial photo that is part of the the um staff powerpoint tonight, I believe, was.

I

On slide, nine does show the area and um with the buffer yards that would be provided by my client.

I

After the variance, I believe, they'd be the most intense buffer yards in that area, so we believe.

I

That, if anything, this will improve um the public welfare and provide appropriate buffers for the.

I

Type of use we have the sixth standard is that the proposed variants will not substantially.

I

Increase the congestion of public streets or increase any danger of fire or public safety.

I

Or diminish or impair property values. The tec and planning commission have reviewed this.

I

The tec agencies all recommended approval by the planning commission, as found in the staff reporter.

I

As mentioned there and the planning commission software to approve it where they address most.

I

Of those standards- and we don't believe the reduction in these buffer yards in any way- will.

I

Cause any danger to the public um and set forth in that standard, and the last standard is that.

I

The variance complies as nearly as possible with the spirit, intent and purpose of the comprehensive.

I

Plan this property is in the callaway village center. This is one of the zoning categories or.

I

Centers that where development is targeted to be it's a third tier level of development within our.

I

County just below the development development districts in the town, centers.

I

So there is a pro the proposed plan of our county does provide that this use is allowed here that.

I

Commercial development and mixed use development is encouraged to go there uh with the goal that.

I

It be in these areas and not in the more rural areas of our county. So we believe that it is.

I

Consistent with that, and as mr brennan said, you know anytime, you ask for a variance you.

I

Are asking for a variance from the standard uh dimensions that are normally required for these.

I

But I would note, as I know, the board is well aware that asking for a variance does not mean.

I

That you don't comply with the comprehensive plan. It's part of the planning process.

I

And it is a clear right of an applicant to seek one under the zoning ordinance. We believe.

I

uh That we have met the standards that are here. We think this is a good site. Mr speech had shared.

I

With you the site plan, there will be sidewalks there, which will be nice for that area. There.

I

Will be the fencing on the backside of that to protect the neighboring properties that are there.

I

And again, this will be a buffer on our site. That is not on other properties, particularly the other.

I

Ones right at that intersection, so we think this will add both to the aesthetics of the.

I

Area into the safety of it, so we'd ask that you approve the variances presented to you tonight.

I

Thank you, mister. Those are my comments, but certainly certainly if the board has any questions, we're happy to answer.

E

Oh good, I guess we'll open it up for discussion. I have one I have one. I have one question.

H

uh And it's just pure clarification because we'll have to ultimately put it in our emotions.

H

uh Is while we're reducing it, uh I would say like a variable, 19 foot or.

H

Whatever it is around the edge, what will be the vegetation again as far as the planting.

H

Bee buffer sure it'll be a b buffer with all the required plantings.

I

Per you know linear feet the way the buffers are set up, I think so to have the same number.

I

Of plantings, it'll just be on a more narrow strip than the 65 normal one and again.

I

Along the north border of the property, it would be a 15 foot down to 15 foot reduction on the east.

I

Side, I believe, or on the route 5 side, that's where it would be a variable, 19 foot. Thank you. Thank you.

E

Okay discussion, mr spearman, I I've shut up now, mr chairman. I think we're all familiar with callaway.

B

I used to work on the base I drove there. Every day I have rental property down there.

B

Close by that callaway is a virtual desert, there's hardly a tree down there and I think the addition.

B

Of these buffers it'll be a bright green spot down there I mean it's a nice little area, but it's.

B

It's desolate. There's the buildings are built right up to the road.

B

Sidewalk be nice to have, but it's almost too late and I I I would go vote to approve it.

B

I think it'll be a nice addition down there, so even with the narrowness, but.

E

They have a number of trees in there to meet the requirement and yeah brighten up the area. Okay,.

K

I think that there's a significant request in the reduction of the buffer is there any.

K

Is there an um happy medium? We can come to not not to grant that large of a difference.

K

That would be my question.

A

um My thing is: I'm with mr richardson: nothing else has a buffer at all down there. On the other.

A

Properties, so I I think this would be a a good thing, but I did have one question from mr scott.

A

About defenses does that need to be a condition. Let me let me uh address that to mr longmore or.

F

To staff is, is that in the site plan approval? Well, they are on the concept site plan and I can also.

C

Remind you that those buffers on those two sides of the property are not asking a variance. Those.

C

Fully meet the minimum standards of the comprehensive zoning ordinance as first determined.

C

By lagum staff and second decided by the planning commission, so it's only the 65 foot along the.

C

Highways that they're asking a variant from I'm not asking about the the buffers themselves that.

A

They said that they would put a fence but- and I would say, they're obligated to put a fence.

C

Because it's on the concept plan, I think the most important clarification to be made tonight.

C

Should you make a decision to approve a plan is to be clear which plan so, for instance, he.

C

Mentioned that the planned staff showed was not necessarily the plan, he was showing you.

C

um The important thing is that the director of land-use and growth management must.

C

At the time of major site plan, approval verify that it is in conformance with the concept plan.

C

Approved by the planning commission in august of last year, okay, that had a condition that it.

C

Have the 65-foot buffer yard variance approved by your board so, for instance, ms delahaye's interest.

C

In negotiating an alternative size, but I think the important thing is that if, if the majority.

C

Of the board likes the exhibit presented by the applicant, then you should name that exhibit number.

C

So that we know exactly which version of the plan we're approving okay. So the answer, of course, is no.

F

We don't need to mention the fence yeah, which exhibit then do we need to make stacy or okay.

C

Identify that um approved concept plan um well, no, I would go with the um the applicants exhibit okay.

C

Because that's what he showed yeah, the applicant's presentation is exhibit four and just to clarify.

F

Mr knight, that is consistent with the approved concept plan it just that was the applicant shows.

C

The reduced applicant's statement his testimony his testimony and it will be the director's.

C

Responsibility to verify that should this move forward for a final major site, planner, okay,.

C

Thank you so that'd be exhibit four and mr scott. I can clarify that that that exhibit also.

I

um Included the other condition of a write-in right out entrance on route 5.. That was the.

I

Significant difference between the two plans and that was presented to the planning, commission and.

I

They did review that. So. Thank you, mr martin. It's clear thank you. Go find the exhibit number one. Mr.

E

Brown any comments. uh Yes, I uh I I am in support of this- of the uh the fact that the properties.

H

All around it are commercial, the fact you're putting the they're volunteering to put up that.

H

Fence which traps any trash the fact that they're going to be putting the uh shall we say a b buffer.

H

Or, or put it this way, a lot more foliage than normally expected for that of that? What was it.

H

17 18 19 foot variable buffer around the property. uh I don't think you can ask for much more.

H

uh Given the facts- and I already brought that out- that the property uh it was sort of like.

H

You bought a small piece of property and build a mansion on it and then complain because you don't.

H

Have any yards but, but in forgetting that I think uh we've uh I think we beat the horse to death.

E

Okay, I am in favor.

E

Somebody like try motion yeah. I might I might need some help before this is over, but I'm gonna do the.

A

Best, I can, in the matter of vaap number 19-132 callaway 7-eleven have made the finding that the.

A

Standards for granting a variance in the objectives of section 63.3, buffer yards and.

A

Schedules: let's see buffer yards and schedule, 63.3 point a buffer yard standards of the saint.

A

Mary's county comprehensive zoning ordinance have been met. I moved to approve the variance requests.

A

Who to reduce the 65 foot type b buffer along the maryland route, 5 and 249.

A

To a 19 foot b, buffer varying size, buffer and.

A

As shown on exhibit number four presented by the applicant.

A

What will that say? Second, that shows the right end right up: okay,.

E

We have a measurement second motion be approved.

E

Okay motion and mr brown is second to none and mr mr chairman, this is chris longbrad. I.

I

Sincerely apologize for interrupting just to clarify the motion. I believe mr speech.

I

Had testified that along um piney point road, it does vary down to 15 feet along.

I

That road, I just want to make sure the motion uh considers that at the boards that it chooses.

C

It it included the word variable, it didn't, and it named the exhibit that mr speech was. That was.

C

Was presenting, I agree, so um thank you very much sorry to interrupt.

E

Is there a motion and the second, mr brown seconded it and I'll call for the vote? Yes? Yes, yes, yes,.

E

John, yes, okay, an order reflecting the board's decision will be prepared by.

E

Staff and signed by the board within 60 days, a 30-day period, follows from the date of the order.

E

From the date, the order is signed, during which any aggrieved party may appeal the board's decision.

E

To the circuit court, any action taken during that time must be at your own risk. We will mail a copy.

E

Of the order, once it is signed, I'm sure you could call angels in growth management and pick it up.

E

Okay, thank you now do we need to take a break, so you can get the next. Yes, I got to get my computer.

E

Back up, that's just how long five minutes, let's say, let's take a 10-minute break. Okay,.

G

I appreciate that I've got to get it. Thank you. Thank you, mr chairman board. Member.

E

I'm calling a meeting back to order the board of appeals meeting for january 14th.

E

I will now call our next case and I will ask stacy to remember she has been sworn in and if she would.

E

Give the staff report for the appeals case- that's gone: okay for town creek, marina, let's see here, we.

D

Go: we've got a public hearing for january 14 2020, one for zaap, 20-1746, town, creek, marina.

D

The applicant is requesting to appeal the decision of the director of the department.

D

Of land use and growth management, the director the decision was the applicant's development.

D

Sketch for residential development that did not meet the setback, standards and the base.

D

Density standards of schedule, 32.1 of the st mary's county zoning ordinance.

D

The property was posted and legal ads were sent to the neighbors within 200 feet on december 29 2020.

D

And it was printed in the local newspaper, the southern maryland news.

D

On december 25th in january, first um 2001 or 2012 20 21.

D

Okay, the property appellants is town, creek, marina and greg burkhart they're.

D

Being represented by billy mahaffey, the location of the property is at two three: eight: zero, zero.

D

Eight and two three: nine zero zero north patuxent beach road in california. This is lots nine through.

D

17 and 22 and part of eight of section four of the leverings they're, also known as parcels. A and b.

D

Parcel in the rm is 0.73 acres and 1.16 acres in the commercial marina. The zoning is.

D

Rm and cm and the overlay is ldo with [ __ ], loot, overlay, okay, it is located on patuxent.

D

um Patuxent peach road on north patuxent beach road on route 4, as you near the bridge.

D

We've got commercial marine is highlighted in blue and the residential.

D

Mix density is highlighted in the light yellow the cream colored.

D

Okay, here's the development sketch that was submitted by the applicant. It is proposing.

D

Three: four: five: six, seven, eight um single family dwelling units.

D

Okay- and that is all I have, is there any questions, any questions? No! No, mr brown. Any questions. No okay,.

E

Next, I guess we'll have the appellant and chris longmore. I think it is you again.

E

Is that correct? It is mr chairman, thank you and if I could, I will administer the oath at.

E

This time, and as we did before, we'll have the members stand up, as I call their names.

E

Please stand raise your right hand. Do you declare and affirm, under the penalties of perjury, that the.

E

Testimony responses and statements you may give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

E

And the list of folks that I have are greg burkhart.

E

Yes, laura clark.

I

She's, not loved, miss clark is not participating tonight. She.

I

Was unable to be here, okay, billy, mahaffey,.

E

He must be say: yes billy. I think I think you're, muted billy.

L

Yes, is this mike working better, that's good! That's good!.

E

Okay, did I miss anybody, mr longmore.

I

Those were all our witnesses, I believe mr hunt and mr knight are going to be testifying for.

I

Mr murphy, for the county, okay- and it's up to you, your turn, go ahead.

I

Okay, thank you, mr chairman, um and I guess what I'll start with a couple of comments.

I

um And our primary presentation will be based upon the testimony of mr mahaffey.

I

This evening, and and if it pleases the board.

I

um After my initial comments, I'm going to share my screen with a powerpoint and put.

I

Up my exhibits, as I walk mr mahaffey through them, and asked him to testify about the various slides.

I

And as staff mentioned, we're really here talking about two groups of lots tonight and.

I

I'd like to say from the outset, um as a way of an introduction to to our case tonight, is that this.

I

Appeal isn't a little bit or isn't a unique posture. We're not here reviewing an application.

I

For building permits we're not here reviewing an application for site plan there. There really was.

I

Not a formal application that gave rise to this appeal uh tonight. um I walked mr mahaffey through.

I

Some of the the documents to show you how this was presented to the county, um but as a result of.

I

An inquiry by my client on a proposed development plan for some of these lots, we received back from.

I

The county, um a formal or or straight disapproval, uh with the notice that it was a final decision.

I

That if we disagreed with it, we would be required to appeal to you tonight. So that's what what led.

I

Us here um in front of you I'll know just just to frame the issues in the beginning, a little bit.

I

There are two sets of of lots as we talked about one set of zone residential medium use, one.

I

Zone, commercial marine: there were two decisions cited in the disapproval of our request for.

I

For feedback on the plan, one was a denial based on the residential medium use property, because one.

I

Of the outlines of a potential future structure appeared to be over the 10-foot side, yard setback.

I

um That was disapproved straight out with without any feedback. We don't think that was appropriate.

I

We think it was premature, uh there really wasn't an application for a building permit or anything.

I

Of the kind- and I think when it ran afoul the county's normal process of allowing applicants.

I

uh To be told that and seek a variance if they they want a variance from the side and setbacks.

I

um And we don't think that is the main issue here, though tonight that alone probably would not led.

I

To this appeal, the main issue that we will focus on, although we will address that setback issue.

I

Is an interpretation by the by the county of the word site in the definitional section of the.

I

Zoning ordinance- that's really! Why we're here tonight and really we're focused on the properties.

I

That are zoned commercial, marine and mr mahaffey, and I will walk through and show you what those.

I

Properties are, if I recall correctly, there are six uh recorded lots that are part of that at.

I

Least, six and I think part of a of a seventh but at least six slots that are part of that.

I

And the county has interpreted the word site to say that my client is only allowed one house.

I

On all six lots because they view it as one entire site, where my client was seeking guidance.

I

I'm on a plan that would allow him to build one house on each lot.

I

The effect of the of the county's decision is probably obvious to the board um that we're here.

I

Appealing tonight that it dramatically reduces uh the ability of my client to use this property.

I

It would dramatically devalue the property and we believe it's an interpretation that has not.

I

Been applied to other properties uh before, but I'm sure that'll come out in the testimony for.

I

Mr knight or mr hunt, um so um because it was a an interpretation of that issue, a legal determination.

I

By the county that that definition and it applied to a provision within the ordinance would restrict.

I

The development to only one dwelling unit on the on all six lots. We felt that we needed to appeal.

I

Based on the fact that it was presented to us as a final decision of the director, so that.

I

That's how we ended up before you I'm going to share my screen now um and begin the powerpoint.

I

That I'll have a couple other introductory topics and then billy I'll start asking you questions.

I

About the slides that hopefully you'll be able to see on the screen, as I share um so mr chairman is.

I

My is my screen showing to the board members. Are you all able to see it um if it says z-a-a-p-20.

E

1746 town, creek, marina, slash, burkhart, appeal, christie, longmore, that's correct! That's what I say.

I

That's ours: okay, thank you, mr chairman, so again as a brief summary um and to give.

I

You a little background this. uh The potential development of this project has been ongoing for.

I

For many years for several years and the department of land use and growth management has.

I

Worked with really the applicants, mr burkhart owns some of the property individually and.

I

There's an llc, that's listed town creek marine llc that owns the other properties.

I

Over the years regarding the potential development of the project, what gave rise to.

I

Us being here tonight is that the applicants or mr mahaffey submitted a letter with a.

I

Sketch to the to the staff asking them to review it and to discuss a proposed process.

I

Going forward to develop the the property and again what we received back or what mr mahaffey.

I

Received back was a formal disapproval stating that it was a final decision subject to an appeal.

I

Before this board, um we did not, as I mentioned, seek any formal building permit applications or.

I

Site plan applications uh the the cover sheet that was submitted with it, made that clear that it was.

I

uh Checked other and asked uh for the the zoning review of this, um and we believe that the appeal.

I

Tonight is you know there and I raised that and I've said that a couple of times to make.

I

It clear that there's a lot of things that are not part of this appeal. It really is a narrow appeal.

I

One is relating to that side, yard setback issue and did the planning director incorrectly apply.

I

Incorrectly disapprove that, but again, as stated in that first issue listed there.

I

Is did the planning director incorrectly apply the definition of site in relation to the commercial.

I

Marine zone properties, um so with that, I'm going to start asking mr mahaffey to clarify.

I

And confirm some of the next slides. So um what I'm showing on on this slide, which is our slide number.

I

Four um is an aerial photo of of a portion of the neighborhood we're on and billy. Can you see that.

I

Slide on your computer, yes, I can okay and does do you see the the commercial marine property in the.

I

Very upper right hand, corner of that aerial photo from the county gis map. Yes, I do it.

L

It sort of it sort of wraps around that that last finger of town, creek.

L

The water body of cane, creek, okay and so, and so the the property we're talking about is that.

I

It's almost a c-shaped property. You know that kind of wraps around that finger. As you said,.

I

Very good description, okay and then to to the immediate left of that along the the road that.

I

That fronts, that just above the water is the um residential mixed-use property, we're talking about.

I

Is that correct? Yes, I think residential medium density, that's correct lots, lots, 14, 15, 16, 17.,.

I

Okay and the the property I just circled is that that residential, medium dusty.

L

Yes and it's it's bounded by north conduction, beach, road and saint claire road, okay,.

L

Okay and then the property that I've now I found a way to draw on this. This is the property that.

I

We're talking about that is zone, commercial, marine property that I just drew around there.

I

Is that correct, that is, that is correct. It was shown very well on the staff's um zoning maps, a.

L

Lot that they showed okay, and that this also shows us some of the neighborhood that is surrounding.

I

These properties, correct- that is, that is correct and you've uh you've had a chance to be in the.

I

Neighborhood on multiple times working on this project and and you're familiar somewhat with that.

I

Neighborhood is that correct, I, I am very familiar with this property. Okay and I'll show you a second.

I

Slide that kind of slid to the to the right, if you will I'm showing- and this is the the the boatyard.

I

That's next to the property, we're talking about correct, correct and then over here is some of.

I

The other neighborhood that is referred to as the leverings subdivision. um I I'm not seeing exactly.

L

Where you're pointing chris uh but but yeah closer to the east, more to the east of the okay.

H

Chris draw your circles around whatever you're talking about okay, and I guess.

I

What I'm asking mr mahaffey does this show kind of the other side of the neighborhood.

I

uh Where our clients property is located, yes, it does, you know you, can you can very clearly see.

L

The overpass, you know the bridge, the road heading over to solomon's there yeah and.

I

This is governor thompson bridge here, it's at governor, thomas bridge there. It's all right. Yes,.

I

Okay, so in this neighborhood is primarily residential other than some of the other marine.

I

Uses that are in the area is that correct. I mean that that is, that is absolutely correct. Okay, most.

I

Of them are single-family detached dwellings. I I would say the greatest majority is single-family.

L

Single-Family, residential, okay and then this is a closer up version of the aerial photo.

I

um That that we just looked at and again the commercial marine property that we're here.

I

Discussing the the interpretation of the county of the of the term site, it's this property that we're.

I

We're talking about is that correct that that is, that is the. That is the property. Yes, it is.

L

Okay and then again just for for reference for the board, the the residential medium density, property.

I

Is this section of the property that's shown here? Is that correct? That is, that is correct. Okay,.

I

Now I'll also show this is an excerpt of the zoning map. I think this may have been part of the.

I

The staff presentation as well um again showing the different zoning categories again, the blue.

I

Is representing commercial marine um and the the tan or the cream colored.

I

Is the residential medium density? As you understand it? Is that correct? That is that.

I

Is correct and these numbers I superimposed on those, uh so the board is aware: those are.

I

Are the addresses that are referenced in the staff report in case this assists the the board members.

I

To determine which property was which addressed? Did they look like the correct addresses they do.

L

And it is very interesting to note that, because, because you know when I was when the director.

L

Made the decision that that he made he referred to them by address, and I had referred to them by.

L

Tax map parcel so so it was, you know I had to figure out what the address was.

L

Yes, okay, so these numbers are provided to the board members and we can refer to it if you need.

I

To if that is, I know, sometimes the addresses are easier uh to follow in these hearings. um The next.

I

Slide, billy, that that we have is um a sketch and- and this is the sketch- I think, we're here talking.

I

About, I believe, was in in the staff report as well. This is a sketch that you prepared correct.

L

um Yeah, yes, that is correct. Okay, and this is one that was submitted to the.

I

To the county, along with your cover letter that is shown on this slide, which is slide number.

I

Nine in our presentation do you see that that is that both of those statements are.

L

True that that is the steps that I submitted along with this letter.

I

Okay, and, and can you describe kind of your purpose in submitting uh this letter in.

I

The sketch to the county, what you were you're asking the county to do when you submitted it.

L

Well, well, yes, yes, um obviously this this land has had a historical use. We were proposing to.

L

Change that we had had previous discussions with the department that that proposed to proceed in a.

L

In a residential development on this land, and we had favorable favorable.

L

Receipt, you know reception on that, so we were trying to get that ball rolling.

L

And I wanted to find out what was the process that we would follow? Because, because there are.

L

Many variances and there are a lot of steps that have to go through this project.

L

You know there are, there are a lot of just issues that are involved and I and I just.

L

Wanted to get a handle on those before we got before we got into some processing procedure. Okay,.

I

So so you didn't intend this to be any type of formal application. It was more one.

I

As I think you said, seeking a path forward is that correct, yeah, you're looking for a path forward.

L

Yeah a process forward is what I said. You know to develop a process to move forward.

I

And that's it and I'm circling a portion of your letter here. That was the.

I

That's right requests you had at the end of your your cover letter is that yeah.

L

Absolutely that's that's what the purpose of the submittal was.

I

Okay, and now mr mahaffey, you had, this is the the decision you got back. um I believe you received.

I

It by email and then also got a copy of the notes in the county's filing system is this.

I

The response you received from from the director upon the middle of your request- yes, that is that.

L

Is the response that I received okay, and so, if I could just kind of kind of highlight this for.

I

Again for the board to clarify the decision we're here uh appealing tonight, the first related.

I

To this um statement that says, the um proposed building does not conform with a minimum 10.

I

Foot side yard setback. You see where I underlined that yeah I see that and- and that was the response.

L

That is the response and that's the two three eight eight zero property. That's the property.

I

That is zone uh medium, use, resident or residential medium density. Is that that's correct, and at that.

L

There was particularly on lot 14 that showed the encroachment in the side mark okay, so that is.

L

The lot bounded by saint clair and north patuxent beach and is this: did I circle the right lot? There.

L

Indeed, that's that is the correct circle: okay and the area that they issued a formal disapproval to.

I

You was relating to this little corner of the structure. Yes touch, the 10-foot setback line.

I

Is that correct? That is correct? Okay, now, the the second part of the denial that that you received.

I

Related to what they identified as two three nine: zero, zero north patuxent beach road, correct.

I

Correct- and that was this commercial marine property that we looked at on the zoning.

I

Map with that overlay, to give to give that um to give it some context, yes, and in that.

I

um In that one they discussed, you know the proposal to replace an existing commercial.

I

Building and one detached single-family dwelling unit with five new dwelling units um and the.

I

Response was, this does not conform with schedule. 32.1 of the comprehensive zoning ordinance.

I

um And they reference a note 4, which reads: one single family dwelling is permitted for sight.

I

Do you see that yes, yeah, that that's that's, that is what that denial says. Yes, okay,.

I

And then I apologize skip the slide and then it looks like, and I believe what the director did.

I

Next and correct me, if you think, I'm wrong that he then quoted the definition of sight.

I

From the back of the zoning ordinance, where the, where the definitions are found within.

I

The ordinance is that is that correct, that is, that is correct. Okay, um and this is the.

I

Quote of the of the definition of sight that is found in that ordinance, you've looked at.

I

It since then correct well, I've looked at it many times. Okay! Yes, that's! That's! That's it.

I

And this is the full substance of the denial that was received from the director. Is that.

I

Correct, yes, I believe that is the full substance. As you said, okay now, you've.

I

Been working on this project a long time before you had submitted the letter this summer to the.

I

This past summer, to the planning director is that fair to say yes, yeah I've been working.

L

On this project, for probably ten years, we we've looked at several development scenarios. With this.

I

Okay, and during the course of your time, have you had a chance to look at some.

I

Of the title and plots and other documents relating to the property yeah it is, it is.

L

Very reasonable and it's something we always do as we look at the boundary of the property, so.

L

We went back to the original subdivision plan. Okay and I've shown you. What is our 11th slide.

I

um That that I'll represent to the board is a copy of a plot that I obtained from the.

I

Platte records of saint mary's county, um and it is the plot reference reference.

I

On that's that uh tax records, among other things, for the property we're discussing.

I

Is this a plan you've seen before? Mr mahatma? Yes, oh yeah, that's that's the plan of this subdivision.

I

Okay, I will note for the board, uh so the record is clear: the copy of my powerpoint that was presented.

I

To staff had a a typographical area under the folio of this plot, the correct plot was provided.

I

But it had 328 where it is shown in red here it should be page 428 just so. The record is clear:.

I

So, mr mahaffy, going back to the site we're talking about on the commercial marine side, in particular,.

I

Is this the portion of the plat that relates to the property we're talking about tonight.

L

Yes, yes, when you read the deed, when you read the deed and you go through the meets.

L

And bounds description it. It describes part of lot. Eight lot, nine lot, ten lot, eleven like 12.

L

And then 22., okay and I'm going to try to blow this up a little while here I'll show you on the.

I

Next slide: okay, yeah, because I think I left out a lot 11 I mean 13.. That might be a little easier to.

I

To show you now now before I do that this is a pretty old plot, correct. It is an old plan, but this.

I

As you said here tonight, is it your understanding that this is a plot, that's recorded among the.

I

Platte records of saint mary's and is the most recent platform record for these lots. Yes, it's the.

L

Original subdivision plat the the document that created these lots from a larger parcel. Okay and.

I

As far as you know, this is the most recent plot that's been recorded. There hasn't been a newer one.

I

Recorded is that fair to say, as far as I know and it's substance substantively the same as any other.

L

I've seen okay, and this was the date of the plan, as shown in platte records was september. 28Th of.

I

1927. does that sound, accurate based on I know it's. It was a very old subdivision. Okay, so now.

I

I'll show you a blow up of the property. This is another. This is a portion of that plot. Just to.

I

Show the board members and again the lots that are subject to and are now zoned commercial marine.

I

That relate to the question of whether this has one site with one house or whether it's.

I

Multiple lots that are allowed a house on each lot. These are the lots that that are shown on.

I

That flat, that we're talking about tonight is that correct, that that is correct and and to belabor.

L

The point when you, when you look at the meets and pounds description of the dean it describes part.

L

Of lot, eight lot: nine through lot 13 and then lot 22 on the west side of st claire's street.

I

Okay and and then the residential mixed use property we're talking about. Are these four lots.

I

Shown on this side of the plot is that correct, indeed, that is correct? Okay, so this is the rm.

I

Property now- and this is the the cm property is that correct- that is, that is correct. Okay and.

I

You were referring to lot numbers just to I know this is an old platinum may be hard to see, but.

I

For example, when you reference lot number nine on this plot, there's a number nine that I'm circling.

I

On this lot, is that what you understand to be lot number nine on this plot? Indeed, it is indeed.

L

It is, and then again this is number 10 correct, correct and that 11 is here yes, number 12 is here.

I

13 yeah 13 is here, and then you mentioned lot. 22 is this yes lot? 22, okay and these again this is.

I

An older plot- but I know you've, been doing this type of work for some time. Is this a typical.

I

Type of drawing on a plot for this air you know is this: what a plant would look like in the 20s.

I

Or 30s you know the modern ones. Look different now sure. There's nothing unusual about that plant.

L

I mean it's it's it was. It was customary to do a plot of that nature at that time frame. Okay,.

L

Okay, great now, you said that you've been working on this project for for approximately 10 years.

I

Was there a time when you were working with the department of land use and growth management.

I

um Approximately I I guess six to seven years ago and I'm showing you a letter in relation to that.

I

Time period- yeah, yes, and just just to uh kind of give some history we had looked at doing a.

L

Traditional marina here we had looked at doing a boat yard for boat repairs, the the property.

L

Was actively marketed in those ways it was unsuccessful. We also looked at doing a restaurant.

L

On the property, and so what what we kind of backed up and said, we need to put this land back.

L

Into its original intent as residential locks um and and attempted to to market it that way.

I

Okay, and and as part of that, did you work with the department of land use and growth management.

I

During this time period of june of 2014 roughly, you know in that time.

I

Period to discuss your approach, yes, we we had several meetings with with several agencies,.

L

Prior to that date, okay- and is this a letter- this appears to be a letter addressed.

I

To you and I'll show the second page of the letter on our next slide and it appears to be addressed.

I

To you from philip shire, who is then director of land use and growth management, is that correct.

I

That that is correct now now this letter appears to be in response to them. Reviewing.

I

Some information you provided to them about the potential redevelopment of the site, we're talking.

I

About today is that that a fair statement that is correct, it is not, it is not the the exhibit.

L

That the decision was based on, but but it was very similar to that. I had prepared an exhibit.

L

Similar to that okay, so this one predates anything that mr hunt had seen that exhibit that mr hunt.

I

Had reviewed correct, absolutely and it had a different configuration than the one in some ways.

I

That you presented to mr hunt slightly different. It was a slightly different configuration.

I

But this letter did consider whether or not single-family dwellings could be built on each.

I

Of the lots that are in the commercial marine district in particular is that.

I

A fair statement that is that is, that is absolutely a fair statement.

L

um Yeah that that's the way the discussion was going at that point. Okay, and- and this is a letter.

I

That you received during this time period and I'll highlight a couple of the points of and.

I

Just ask if you have any recollection of it. It starts off by saying that mr shire and his staff.

I

Had met with ren siri, the director of the maryland critical area, commission and two of his.

I

Environmental planners, is it your understanding that the lucam staff had consulted with the.

I

Critical area commission, um in in relation to your general proposal, to put a house on each lot.

L

Well, well, in as much as that, you know the summary letter says that they did but but but.

L

I was pretty serious about getting information in a way to proceed with this. The development.

L

Of this project or the redevelopment of this property, so I was, I was glad that that he sought.

L

Out the critical area commission, because they they're gonna, have a lot to say about it: okay,.

I

And at that time he references what's called a doctrine of merger and it looks like you know at.

I

Least from from the opinion in his letter at that time it says lot: consolidation will not.

I

Be required for redevelopment. Do you see that? Oh absolutely, because that was long.

I

Okay- and it says, as long as the lines of the original subdivision.

I

Are not altered is that that that is correct yeah. That was a very important. You know finding to me.

I

Okay and the original subdivision was in your understanding that the original subdivision.

I

Is this subdivision plot that you- and I just talked about a few minutes ago,.

L

Yes, it is, I mean absolutely okay, and um it then goes on to discuss.

I

The fact that in footnote, 14 of schedule, 32.1 of the comprehensive zoning ordinance.

I

It states that one single family dwelling is permitted for sight. Do you see that, yes,.

I

And that's the footnote that that mr hunt based his decision on to the best of your knowledge.

I

Is that fair to say that that is fair to say, it might be interesting to some people to note that.

L

That says note 14 and right and at the end of 2019 the ordinance was rev revised schedule, 32.

L

And and now that's note, 4. right and I'll note um for the record to the board and certainly.

I

um We're happy to discuss this, the zoning and just to make it clear to the public. The zoning.

I

Ordinance that is online on the county website um as a whole ordinance does not include all.

I

The recent amendments that have been made to the ordinance- I believe mr mahaffey, is referring to.

I

A series of amendments that were done, I believe, at the conclusion of the lexington park,.

I

Development plan, I will note for the board, and so the public has access or easy access.

I

To it, rather, a copy of that is attachment 3 to our exhibit 4 on board docs. The full version of that.

I

I will note for the record that the language of that footnote aware was located on the chart. Did.

I

Not change at all in those amendments, um but some of the other footnotes were removed so.

I

Instead of there being a whole bunch of them to the chart in question, um there are many fewer.

I

So it changed from footnote 14 to footnote 4.. So I appreciate you, you pointing that out.

I

um Mr mahaffey and then it goes on um to discuss um the site, and I guess what I'd highlight for.

I

The board in this letter is, it talked about residential development and redevelopment.

I

And it talks about principal structures throughout it, talks about a maximum of a thousand square feet.

I

Of existing lock coverage in the buffer on each lot, um you can see that reference in paragraph.

I

Three here yes um and then in the second page of this letter it went on.

I

um To discuss the the percentage of the various lots based on their their square footage, um it.

I

Also went on to say the buffer on each lot must be established um and there's other examples.

I

In this and the board can certainly look at it, it appears that this letter throughout.

I

Applied these findings to different lots and, what's at your conclusion in reading this, that.

I

The staff of land use and interpreting the same provision we're here talking about tonight.

I

In 2014 agreed that a dwelling unit could be allowed on each lot as long as you met the other.

I

Requirements in the zoning ordinance is that a fair statement that is, that is exactly the way.

L

They interpret this letter. Okay, and did you have any other conversations or communications with the.

I

Staff during that time, uh that suggested that to you, you know during the time of this letter.

L

um The the only other comment of significances is that, in an effort, an effort to minimize the.

L

Footprint I had suggested duplexes single-family attached dwellings to be shared on a property line.

L

And then you know in an effort to um to minimize footprint, if you will and- and I was asked.

L

You know in the same time frame of the uh denial, if you will to make those single families.

L

uh And not multi-family! Okay, so that's when you say: that's the change when you, when you talked.

I

About duplexes was that, before this letter from mr shire was it kind of in the in-between period.

I

Between I think that I was I was looking to to limit the footprint in the critical areas.

L

When I was working with mr shire okay, you know now the sketch the sketch that I produced.

L

In that same time, frame show duplexes. The duplexes stayed on the sketch until.

L

Shortly, you know maybe may before the july denial. Okay, before the denial you submitted last year in.

I

2020 or the yes, the sketchy submitted in 2004, um I revised that sketch, based on input from.

L

The staff okay, now I'm gonna, um just go through a couple of the zoning ordinance.

I

Provisions that that appear to be relevant just ask you to confirm that for the board.

I

um You know: we've been talking about the sketch, showing uh dwell detached dwelling units on.

I

It those are typically single-family dwelling units. Is that a correct thing.

L

um You know, I'm not sure I'll, follow up your question, but but we we have suggested.

L

Single-Family detached dwelling units on each of these lots, and that is that is common in.

L

This neighborhood, okay and you're, familiar with schedule, 54 of the zoning ordinance, which is.

I

The table of uses within the zoning ordinance is that correct, I'm familiar with that table.

I

And I'll note for the board that that, like the other provision, we discussed.

I

A few minutes ago that table of uses was also amended in 2019 and the full.

I

Ordinance that includes that is attachment three to our exhibit four on on board docs.

I

um So so the use that you were you know suggesting in your sketch and asking for feedback from.

I

Was for detached dwelling units? Is that correct? That is correct. That is correct, and am I correct.

I

That on the used chart and the commercial marine district that we're talking about.

I

The dwelling units are labeled as permitted uses in that district. Correct well, footnote.

L

Four footnote four allows them to be: one per site is the fifth right, but it's in the table.

I

Right and we haven't gotten there yet that that's in schedule 32.1 right, but in the in the table.

I

Of uses that lists all the different uses, and I can I can pull up a copy and share that with you.

I

If you need a bill, I I uh I'm gonna. Look it up real quick, because I think I can do that faster.

L

Yes, you're absolutely correct um schedule, schedule 50.4.

L

List list single family, residential as a permit abuse in the cnc. Okay, and- and this is a.

I

Table that I'm sure the board members are somewhat familiar with that's a table that loads.

I

All possible uses of property down the right and then across the top of the chart. It shows all.

I

The zoning categories in our county and it tells you whether it's permitted or not, or whether it's.

I

Some, whether it's a limited use or conditional, use, correct yeah that is correct, okay and for this use.

I

It is permitted um in commercial marine, correct that is correct, it is not limited and it is not.

I

A conditional use, it's a full permitted user use. Okay and I'll show you below at what is the.

I

Purpose of commercial marine district- and I pulled this again from the amendment that that.

I

We've attached to our documents and the the board can read this: it talks about it being a district.

I

That allows marine sales and services and, and it discusses marinas and boat yards and other.

I

Things that are allowed there, and then you see at the end of that where it says the uses allowed.

I

And the cm zoning district are identified in schedule. 54 use classifications.

L

The last sentence of that paragraph says that, yes, it does okay, so in the very purpose clause.

I

Of the commercial marine district, it points to schedule 54.4 and in that schedule it says.

I

That this use is permitted on commercial marine districts, correct. That is correct.

I

And then this is not necessarily an excerpt from the zoning ordinance, but I'll share with the board.

I

This is a list of all the other uses that are allowed in the commercial marine district.

I

I've highlighted the one we're speaking about tonight: use number 15 dwelling unit detached.

I

But these are, are the other ones and and billy. I know you're not going to go item by item, but.

I

Does this look list appear to be accurate to you, based on on your experience and review this case.

L

um It looks very reasonable, I mean we could check. I think the one that's really appropriate for us.

L

To to to focus on is 15 the dwelling unit detached right, but this does show that there's other.

I

Non-Marine uses that are allowed in commercial marine districts correct, like.

I

Bed and breakfast could go that that is correct, okay or farmers, markets or or the other.

I

The daycare is another one. That's allowed there right now over here I'll share with the board.

I

And this can be compared to the ordinance. That's in the record. I did this for use the board to just.

I

Show you the other types of uses that are allowed in the commercial marine district that are not.

I

Non-Marine uses, I did not list those on this chart uh kind of the obvious things like marinas and.

I

Stuff that are allowed in the chart, but there are also conditional uses in that zone such as.

I

Campgrounds and construction material equipment and then there are also limited uses in there.

I

Really just to the board, I know they know this for conditional uses they're allowed in districts, but.

I

You've got to meet certain conditions in order to get an approval, above and beyond normal conditions.

I

Is that a fair statement? Well absolutely, and in fact a conditional use has to be approved by.

L

The board of appeals right so they've heard and then a limited and then a limited use.

I

You have to meet all the normal standards, and then it may be limited in other ways. Is that.

L

Well, when you look in the u standards, when you look in the use standards and the ordinance.

L

As you have said, there are permitted uses, there are, there are conditional uses and there their.

L

Limited standards and then frequently there are standards additional standards when it's.

L

It's prevented as a limited use. Okay, but for the use we're here to talk about as you you know,.

I

So eloquently said that we should focus on the dwelling unit. Detached is a full permitted use.

I

It is not a conditional use in the commercial marine district and it is not a limited use.

I

Correct it's neither of those and it's not a, not permitted use okay, so it is fully permitted. um The.

I

Next highlighted the zoning ordinance, I'm going to show you- and this is a little fuzzy- the way it.

I

Came out, I just noticed I apologize board members part of what mr hunt had based this decision.

I

On, according to the communication you received with schedule, 32 of the zoning ordinance correct.

L

That is correct and, and that's a rather large chart, I exerted the portion that we're talking.

I

About tonight that has various development standards um that must be met in each of the.

I

Zoning categories of our county- correct, um yes, and and what what you focused on there is the density.

L

Right of the uh right that particular zoning district, so this shows the base density right here.

I

Right, that's what this row that I've highlighted is! Is that chris, that's exactly correct.

I

And just for the board members to give them a frame of reference, these uh three-letter for.

I

The most part, references are the different zoning categories, in our account correct. That is correct.

I

And the zoning category relating to the lots that that are at issue here in the definition of site.

I

Is the commercial marine district- and this is the the column of this chart that relates to that.

I

Correct that is the column that we're interested in, but it might be good to note also that the rm.

L

Zoning district allows one unit for five acres right so on that other property.

L

It allows one one to five units for every angle: okay, no, on the on the commercial marine ones,.

I

And I know this is fuzzy, but just give the board. You know kind of the provisions that we're here.

I

Talking about tonight it says none and then it references, note, 4 correct that is correct and then.

I

This is foot note four on the second part of this chart which, again I know the language is fuzzy.

I

And I apologize I'll read it to the board, it says one single family dwelling is permitted per site.

I

Yes, you see that okay, so that is the footnote upon which you understand our denial.

I

Was based by the director is that that's true, okay and um the definition of sight was included.

I

In the um director's decision and here's another copy of that, should the board need it that might.

I

Be a little easier to read than the prior one um and again this reads any track lot.

I

Or parcel of land or combination of tracks, lots or parcels of land which are in one ownership.

I

Or are contiguous and in diverse ownership, where development is to be performed as part of a unit.

I

Subdivision or project, as shown on an application correct that I mean that's, that is correct.

I

And I did a quick word search. That term is used approximately 156 times and are in the.

I

Zoning ordinance online that's been amended, so that might not be an accurate number, uh but the.

I

Version, that's online. It's used that time so that term is used in a variety of contexts. Correct.

L

Yes, because site is used in many contexts that that term can be used. I mean one one of the most.

I

Obvious is in the site plan process right that that word is included in and that that.

I

I know this board is familiar with yes, um so my understanding and I'll ask you to confirm from.

I

The director's decision is that staff acknowledges that one dwelling unit is allowed in commercial.

I

Marine districts, but only on a site only one per site is that correct. That is, that is correct.

I

And their decision is that, even though I believe we have six lots in the commercial marine district.

I

Where, where our property is located, they have deemed that, to only be one site. Is that your.

L

Understanding that is, that is the way I interpret mr hunt's letter now. Have you ever seen? You know.

I

In your you've been doing this for for many years in the county, right development work in the county.

I

Yes, have you ever seen that term site used in that way before, meaning that.

I

The staff in some way has said that, even though there may be multiple lots, they all.

I

Have to be treated as one site for density. Have you ever seen it applied this way.

L

I have seen it. I have seen it applied that way a couple of times, but I don't know that it ever.

L

That it ever affected a project like this one. Before now, and my understanding of how this.

I

Definition has been used at times is to say that you may have multiple lots, but you can develop.

I

Them as one site, if you wish to do so correct that is correct, but but the internal lot lines could be.

L

Could be ignored or you know just looks it's a site even though there might be several parcels.

L

Involved right so an example. If you were watching earlier, was the 7-eleven case we had before.

I

Tonight there were two lots on it, but it was one site that was being developed with one project so.

I

Is that the type of example where you might have two lots but put one commercial structure.

I

Across both of them and the county does not require you always to remove the lot lines.

L

Yes, that that that is what I'm referring to. Okay, now, I'm gonna! um This is just uh to get into the.

I

The side yard setback just to show uh the board again and we had highlighted it on the.

I

Other one, the second basis of the director's decision, was that um the side yard setback.

I

And their residential medium intensity, property crossed the 10 foot, side, yard setback line and.

I

So it was disapproved, you saw that part of it have you ever had a disapproval on something like this.

I

When you were just seeking, you know the information you were seeking in this case.

L

um I mean really, I I've never seen anything like that. I I think it's it's kind of obvious that that.

L

That point is, is is focused on in the decision, but if you look at lot nine and ten, if you look.

L

At those, the setback is much greater. The the in the encroachment into the setback on.

L

Those lots is, the lots, are very respectful, very restricted by the side, yard, setbacks.

L

And that's one of the issues that we have to deal with, so that was a thing that I was looking.

L

At how to handle those numerous variances that will be required to side yard setbacks,.

G

So this am, I correct that, what's showing on the screen now was not meant to seek a final approval.

I

For that location, there's more meant to seek advice on on how to proceed with the project.

I

Exactly I was looking at how to proceed with restrictive lines where we've got a group of.

L

Blocks that are impacted the same way: okay, and and would it be possible if this project is allowed.

I

To go forward using this one as an example to reconfigure that building, so it does not encroach.

I

On the side yard setback that encroachment when you look at it numerically, it's really about nine.

L

Inches over the property line, so yes, the building could be made, one foot narrower and it would fit.

I

And is it also possible to potentially seek a variance to encroach into the side yard subnet.

L

I would think because this is an old subdivision. I would think that seeking a variance would be an.

L

Appropriate remedy to the solution to this problem and none of those options were presented to you.

I

Is just the denial you received justin and I'll know no offer of other ways to move forward. Okay,.

I

Mr mahaffey, do you have anything else you want to share with the board about the development or the decision that you find.

I

Important to their consideration tonight other than what we've gone over.

L

I mean not not really peculiar to to the decision. We're making I mean it was. It was.

L

Kind of unprecedented to get a letter like that, without any more discussion than we had.

L

I think, but I don't know what bearing that has on this decision. Okay, uh mr chairman, I think those.

I

Are the I'm going to stop sharing my my screen here? um I think those are the questions I have of.

I

Mr mahaffey, at this time um I know that mr murphy has the right to to ask any questions. He desires.

I

um And- and we had the right for rebuttal after mr murphy's.

I

uh Case so we do reserve the right to call mr mahaffey if we need to um clarify or address any.

I

Of the issues raised in his case, but those are all the questions I have for him at this time.

E

Mr murphy, do you have any questions of the applicant appellant.

M

Yes, thank you. I do yes. Thank you. I was muted sorry about that.

M

uh I I certainly do so. Mr mahaffey, uh thank you for coming this evening. I we haven't met.

M

Before but pleasure to meet you um pleasure to meet you so again, you're familiar with the.

M

Comprehensive zoning ordinance and the lexington park uh development plan from 2019 is that right.

M

That is correct and you're familiar with lot lines and setback requirements. Yes, yes, I am.

M

And you've mentioned that this wasn't your first time submitting a sketch to log in for review. No.

L

No, no, the not at all right and you've, been looking at this property for about 10 years. Is that right.

M

Every bit of that and I'm going to share my screen as well, you should be able to do it.

M

Can you see this yes perfect, so this says development review application is that right.

M

At the top, can you see that that is correct and it's dated around? Let's see if I can highlight it.

M

um Right here it says july: 10 2020 it was received by logan. Is that right? Yes, that.

M

That looks to be correct and then down here it says: authorized asian signature, william.

M

A happy and that to you is that right in your signature, yes, that's correct, and so this was a.

M

An application that you did submit so you actually did submit an application for review. Is that right.

L

um Yes, yes, I did, and it says other zoning review of development is that right? Yes, okay and- and I.

L

Would like to add that that you know this, I've never done an application like this before I.

L

Was there I was asked to do this by the deputy director. I did it and I put a cover letter with.

L

It because it was very peculiar right. I know I saw that I we appreciate that. um So let's look at the.

M

The neighborhood, can you see this now, I'm showing this is actually from your.

M

Attorney's slide, can you see this screen? I can see it very well, so you mentioned that single family.

M

Dwellings, uh detached single family dwellings are common in the neighborhood. Do you remember.

M

Saying that, yes, sir, and that's what we see here on the left side of the screen, mostly right.

M

Mostly are those right is, that is that, are those houses, zoned commercial marine.

M

um No okay: let's look at the next page on the next site slide. We also see a number of single.

M

Family detached dwellings is that right? Yes, you do and are those zoned commercial marine.

L

I would think they're not, I would think now yeah, I don't know and we're now looking at.

M

What is marked as attachment 11? This is the sketch that you submitted with the letter in.

M

The application is that right, yes, it is, and you designed the sketch, that's your name at the bottom.

M

Something like that yeah guilty as charged sure.

M

So, let's look at the property on the left: that's the 23 880 north patuxent property. Yes, so.

M

You mentioned um before that you, the logo, is the first ones that refer to these by.

M

Their addresses you had originally referred to them by their tax map parcel. Is that right.

L

Yeah and lot number subdivision numbers refer to lots and the personal number.

M

You refer to that because the tax map is by those that parcel number personal four. Is that right.

L

All of this land is referred to as parcel four right, and it's because it's all taxed as one.

M

Property, um yes, it all. It all occurs in one d, I'm sure so on the property on the left, with those.

M

Four lots: it looks like 14, 15, 16 and 17.. Those are in the residential medium intensity, as you.

M

As you stated, medium density, yes and, as you said, under the you're familiar with the 2019 ordinance.

M

um And under that the side, your septic is 10 feet as we mentioned earlier. Yes, that is correct and.

M

So we'll zoom in a little bit as we we just went over this with your attorney, but.

M

You see the dotted ten foot side with that back line over here, yeah yeah. You asked me if I was.

L

Familiar with those and I'm- and I said I was- I drew it on this exactly and so the proposed.

M

Building goes beyond those 10 feet. Yes, it does and that would violate the setback requirement.

M

It would okay and all these are called or not all, but most of them are called proposed. Buildings.

M

Yes, when asked what that meant, did you tell harry knight that you proposed single family homes.

M

um If you don't, remember, that's fine, I don't I don't specifically remember, but I do remember.

L

Putting duplexes on each of these, but when you tell them that, where there were two.

L

Together, which is which is single family attached and and we decided to make them.

L

Not be worried about that use, so we made them single family, detached gotcha. So what's written.

M

As proposed building or some version of single family dwelling is your proposal. Presently it's.

M

Attached but it may turn back into detached or it presently it's detached, but it may turn back.

L

I would not expect it to go back to detachment, but the the purpose for doing that was not to.

L

Suggest using a youth that was not permitted, it was to. It was solely to reduce the footprint.

L

Within the buffer sure which is which is a goal of the critical area? Okay, I had a question about.

M

This one all the way at the bottom, it's uh it says existing building to be revealed rebuild over the.

M

Existing footprint, what is that existing building and what is going to be built over it? It's a house.

L

It's it's a dwelling and you're planning to have it be turned back into a dwelling. Yes,.

L

The intent of that like 22, was just simply to rebuild the house, so there's a total of eight.

M

Proposed dwellings is that right, that is, that is correct. Okay, two on the cm property, as we see on.

M

The left aria right, I'm sorry, that's my mentality! Sorry, I think two on the rm property and then six.

M

On the cm property correct and as I said, there are four lots on the r property 14 15, 16 and 17.

M

And you're proposing to construct single-family homes on only two of them. Two of those lots is.

M

That right, that is correct and will septic be on those other two lots is that the intent, the intent.

L

Is to do a small, decentralized wastewater treatment plant to treat all eight homes.

M

All eight is that, because there's no practical septic in the cm property.

L

The the cm property does not perk. Well, it's not perfect. The two uses that are there currently.

L

Are on pump and hall gotcha? Okay, that makes the whole application. You know the health department.

L

They operate but they're they have a pump and hall agreement. That makes sense. Okay, so could.

M

One home could that pump and halt support one single family dwelling.

L

There there are many single family homes on pumpkin halls, but but it's not something that.

L

The health department would approve as a new use. Don't you okay? So then let's look at the.

M

Property on the right of cm property, and for how long has it been zoned commercial, marine.

L

As long, I would say at least since 2000 and during the 2002's dominion ordinance.

M

Right because it's been at least since the 2010 one it's on ours currently.

L

Before that right, yeah, and it's uh so far so long before you begin working.

M

On this project, because you said you started working 10 years ago,.

M

At least that long has it ever been changed from cm to any other zoning district.

L

Not not, in my recollection, did you lobby to change it from cm to rm or another zoning district.

M

I I I would not have done that on my own and the owner never asked me to do that.

M

So effectively because it's zoned cm you have to comply with concerning requirements, is that right.

M

That is correct, so let's talk about the purpose of the cm district from the 2019 ordinance. I have.

M

That up on the screen um oops, can you see that for me? Yes, you and your attorney went over this.

M

And um we can just read it quickly, since he did it. The commercial marine zoning district allows.

M

Marine sales and services, including marinas, dry storage for vessels and boats boat yards.

M

And vessel yards vessel and boat and equipment sales and rentals marine related sales yacht.

M

Clubs, visitor accommodations, food and beverage sales and eating and drinking establishments.

M

And then the uses allowed are those identified in schedule. 50.4, that is correct, are single-family.

M

Homes or anything related to residential or residences, listed as a purpose of the cm.

L

Other than it's listed in schedule 50.4 right, but I think that's a use right, not part of its purpose.

H

What um people live on boats? You know, I mean that I don't. I don't really get that. I don't think.

L

You look at the purposes it doesn't. It doesn't. Yacht clubs have residences on them. Sure I mean.

L

You know, there's what you mean. I see. I take your point. I don't think that that's exclusive of that.

M

Sure so this is a gis view of the property. Is that right that that is correct?.

L

And, what's the case, the cm zone department? Absolutely thank you.

M

Thank you for the clarification. What is the current use of the cm property as a whole.

L

Here there is a there is a building. That's been used as a nightclub. It's been used as a restaurant.

L

And there's a house on the property: what's its current use, you know the owner is here. I think he.

L

Would be most appropriate to answer that question? Okay, is it being used as a marina? Do you know.

L

From the photograph I see one in a slip and I see I see boats on the property and I see.

L

A marina I see, I see many slips on the property. Is the marina going to remain under your proposal.

L

No, um yes, the the intent is to leave the marina there.

M

Which lots are part of the marina the promenade use? I should say.

L

um I would say the marina is part of all the uses, all the lots, all the ways, and there was once a bar.

M

On the property is that's right, yes, that's not one. That's no! Longer there that's correct the.

L

Business doesn't operate there to the best of my knowledge, that's like how to yeah. So you said all.

M

The lots are related to the marina is that right, yeah, I think, from a marketing perspective. The.

L

Owner intends to to make a slip available to every law, sure that makes sense or multiple slips. Okay,.

M

So our lots- 9 10, 11, 12, 13 and 20 still 22 still going to be used for the marina.

L

The marina will be associated with them. Yes, but but they'll be operated as a as.

L

Lots that you know the proposal is put a single family residence on each lot.

M

Will the acreage of lots of the single-family homes be reduced from the acreage of the marina.

L

I'm not sure I understand that question, so the marina is currently 1.16. Acres of the property is.

M

That correct something like that, the square foo or the footprint of each of the houses is 800 square.

M

Feet I I think that is correct. Will that square footage be reduced from the acreage of the marina.

L

I I mean, I guess it depends on what you call a marina. I mean, I think the marina is where.

L

Boats, wear boats more and you know the number of slips is not anticipated to reduce.

M

No, but you said that all of the lots are part of the marina.

M

So when you put houses on them, doesn't that reduce the marina use? Well, from that perspective, I guess.

L

It would but, but it might increase the marina use you know karina used, but the marina acreage.

M

If you're putting a house on something, doesn't that decrease the use for the marina.

L

I I mean I'm saying hypothetically if I understand your question question.

L

Yes, I would say yes, okay, okay and more less than my hypothetical same house there can somebody.

M

Who visits the marina go inside my house as part of the marina? Well, I would think not.

M

Yeah right, so it's decreasing part of the acreage from the marina is that right.

L

I'm gonna, I'm gonna say yes yeah. So in let's look to the 1927 plat. This is. um I took this from your.

M

uh Your attorney's presentation, but do you know, can you do you know what the dimensions are.

M

The of lots, 9 10, 11, 12 and 13 and 22- are if, if we look at the fine print on the plat, we.

L

Could discern that? Okay, so are the dimensions of these lots going to be changed in your application?.

L

No okay, as the letter from the letter from phil schar, stated back in 14 as long as the boundaries.

L

Do not change it, it would be permitted to go forward gotcha. So that is why we're leaving it.

L

In its present configuration okay, that makes sense oops, let's see, okay, that makes sense.

M

So what is the minimum acreage needed for a cm site.

L

You know I don't I don't I well, I think it's one acre. I think it's one acre, okay and one acre is.

M

43 560 square feet right. Yes, okay and this property is 1.16 acres.

M

Correct so I did the math earlier: that's 50 529.60 square feet. So basically fifty.

M

Thousand five thirty square feet: sure: okay and there are five houses, as you said,.

M

Up six, I think. Oh sorry, six houses, that's right! Good, yeah, good point: six houses on the cm property.

M

And six times and each house has a footprint of 800 square feet, as we said.

M

Okay and six times, eight 800 is uh 4 800. Is that right? I I think that's correct.

M

So if we subtract, I can do this on if you guys want. Let's see if I can do this.

L

I mean what I would like to interject here is: is these lots were created long before the zoning.

L

Regulations, you know, there's lots of record if them carries a development right and I don't think.

L

There's anything in this ordinance that denies that development right and the development right.

L

Is specified to be one person, one single family, residence per side? Yes right, so okay! So if we take.

M

4 800 from 50 05 330 square feet. We get seven 45 thirty. Does that seem fair? Yes, yeah! It's fair.

M

And that's just subtracting the footprint and do these people get front yards.

I

Mr chairman, if I may jump in it seems that this line of questioning is.

I

Pretty far away from the reason the director gave for denying this okay, I hate to object in these. I.

I

Know the rules of evidence don't apply, but but I don't think that was at all the basis. The acreage.

I

Or anything of mr hunt's decision, as shown in the written denial or I can skip ahead, that's fine.

L

Because that is exactly the kind of guidance I was looking for.

L

In these particular cm lots, all of the lots are going to be in the critical.

L

Area expanded buffer working out even the expanded buffer. Maybe the 100 foot buffer.

L

And and so you don't even start talking about a front yard until you get past the buffer, so you.

L

Know they don't really have a front yard, so we've got to kind of figure out a way to deal with that.

L

It's kind of an unusual situation and that's the kind of guidance I was seeking.

M

Sure, oh, my point was only that if you have six houses with 800 square feet,.

M

And they have a front yard that decreases the acreage of the marina below one acre. That was.

M

Also what it was, but we can well well fair, but but also you know this, this marina, if you will.

L

The building on the property extends out over the waters of the state. It has existed so long.

L

That the state is not trying to take that away, but but it is an offer of the applicant to remove it.

L

To kind of make the critical area program work a little better to establish some buffer.

L

Okay, so we're trying to complain com we're trying to comply with many overlapping rules.

L

A project which makes sense all right. I completely understand.

M

So, let's take a look at your application again, you list. I've highlighted you list.

M

The project name as system subdivision number four of patuxent peach.

M

Did you choose that name because that's the name of the subdivision for this part of the leverings.

L

That's, what's that's: what's on the plat, that's a subdivision exactly exactly! You know why it's.

L

Called leverings, you know, I don't know why it's called levels. I don't know, I don't know if anybody.

M

Knows but that's what's on this right here, I think if you look hard enough in the land records you.

L

Will find a plant that says leverage it's the same plan, it's shown the same, but it's called something.

L

Different, I agree, but right here that I have uh is where you get, that I get that from the name.

L

The name comes right off of the subdivision. Exactly so, is this redevelopment to be part.

M

Of that subdivision is that the intent I think the redevelopment is is has to do.

L

With some of the lots within that subdivision, okay and you list two property addresses 23 880.

L

Yes, because, because that is the way the tax records, the tax map shows the property. That's.

L

The way the the land use and growth management has assigned addresses to the property. Okay, let's.

M

Look at your letter, the letter that you wrote the cover letter, I guess, is what we're calling it so.

M

You wrote, please find a copy of a sketch plan showing the proposed redevelopment of the property.

M

Do you see that highlighted? Yes, are you treating the property all as one.

M

Big property is that what is that? What that means.

L

I I I clearly have shown all the property on one piece of paper in one exhibit. Okay, I clearly have.

L

Done that right and then you say, a review of the files for this property will reveal several.

M

Ideas that have been sought for the use of the property. Do you see that yes and then the next.

M

Large paragraph or the third paragraph I guess said or second it says the property is divided.

M

Into two zoning districts and the critical area overlay part of the land is in the cm.

M

Zoning district with an lda overlay and part is in the rm zoning district with the same ca.

M

Overlay district, yes, okay and again, we've talked about how last year wasn't the first.

M

Time that you explored redevelopment of the site, you did that again in 2014.

M

Yes and former director phil tyre wrote you concerning the project.

M

That is correct, and in that case I have the letter before us. Can you see that yes, okay and in the ray.

M

Line it says: town creek, marina redevelopment tax map, 35 block 2 parcel 4 lots 8 through 17 and 22.

M

Yes, that's the property at issue that we're talking about this whole time.

M

Yes and several of my and then the next highlighted part says several of my staff.

M

And I met with ren siri director of maryland eric critical area, commission and two environmental.

M

Planners to discuss redevelopment of the town creek arena site in parentheses, the site, so the.

M

Prior director also viewed the redevelopment project as a site. Is that correct.

L

Site is a term. You know you're talking about a grouping of lots. If you want to call it a site.

M

I mean the czo calls it the site or is it the word site, but that's fine. So then it next says several.

M

Issues were examined with the understanding that the redevelopment would include seven dwellings.

M

Nowadays and a consolidated operation in a shared sewage system located on two of the rl zoned lots.

M

Now, rm is that right that is correct, and these issues and our guidance on how to proceed to.

M

The site plan submission are elaborated below these issues. Do you see that I do.

M

Okay and then the next highlighted part says regulatory and site constraints. You see that I do.

M

And then your attorney went over this, but we'll go over it again cm district, which is commercial.

M

Marine food note 14 now foot note 4 of schedule. 32 of the czo stipulates that quote one single family.

M

Dwelling is permitted per site. End quote schedule 50.4.15 notes that only a detached dwelling is.

M

Permitted only a detached dwelling is permitted in the cm district. Do you see that I I do see that.

M

So the first line references uh the conversation with ren siri. You- you spoke about this with your.

M

Attorney and that's just a second ago, but do you were you at that meeting? No, I was not.

M

Did you ever communicate with phil shire regarding his use of the term the site.

L

Not that I can recall, and then if I can, I wonder if I can highlight this. Maybe so do you see in the.

M

Second, light from the bottom of this paragraph, the first two words say consolidated operation. Yes, do.

M

You know what mr shire meant when he referred to a consolidated operation. You know I, I would say he.

L

He would talking about the the project as we were envisioning it, and I would also say that he also.

L

Is talking about something dwelling units? What is the? What is the project as you envisioned it.

L

I mean I've put it on a piece of paper, it's it's shown on a sketch, it shows it shows a.

L

Public sewer treatment, plant and eight houses on on eight separate and distinct lots. Okay,.

M

Let's talk about how the czo defines the word site, I took this from chapter 90 of the czo.

M

And I just underline parts of it: okay, so site an inc tract lot or parcel of land.

M

Or combination of tracks, lots or parcels of land which are in one ownership or contiguous.

M

And adverse ownership where development is to be performed as part of a unit.

M

Subdivision or project, as shown on an application you've committed an application. Is that correct.

H

Well, who he submitted, I I submitted. I submitted a sketch plan for discussion. Yes, if you want to.

L

Call that an application- yes, I mean no, no doubt no doubt there. It is that says the application right.

M

Yes, you submitted an application and it involved.

M

A combination of lots is that right, it is 9 through 13 and 22 in the cm.

L

Mr chairman, may I ask a question, mr it's up to you. It's your call yeah who wants.

E

To ask the question mr mahaffey, the the witness? Yes, okay, go ahead!.

L

It would have been a reasonable response from land use to say, submit each of these lots on a separate.

L

Application- I would, I would have willingly done that I would have expected that to happen, but I.

L

Was told to do exactly what I did and I did what I was told to do requested to do. Did that deny you.

L

So if what we're talking about is, I should have made eight separate applications. You know, then I.

L

Was misdirected was the director that's what we're talking about anyway, stopping you from doing that.

L

Well, we were told we had to appeal this decision, so yes, we're scamming, because.

L

We have to seek remedy through the appeal process before we can seek other other relief.

E

Well, it looks like you had submitted a plan and that plan was rejected.

E

It seems like maybe you could have gone back and perhaps revised the plan and resubmitted.

L

That wasn't that wasn't offered as a solution he's right. I don't know if it's here.

I

Certainly requirement to give to give that sort of solution to a client.

I

Well, mr chairman, if we may I'm happy to ask those questions to mr knight and mr hunt.

I

My understanding was that, even if they did that their interpretation would be that only one house.

I

Can be on the entire cm zone property we're looking at if their opinion has changed in.

I

That we gladly welcome it when we, uh where, if we just need to support, we will hear we will hear.

E

That testimony okay, so going back to the definition of site.

M

It says which are in one ownership and the burkhart's own. All of it is that correct.

L

He is the probably the managing member of one of the llc's, but it doesn't matter if they believe.

L

Diverse ownership, it can still be called a site if that's the way the application is stated, but but I.

L

Was I was seeking guidance for an application of this land? It was pretty clear what I was trying.

L

To do and we can read the letter again, that's what the decision is. I wanted to know how to.

L

Proceed and here we are right and then the next line says where development is to be performed.

M

As part of a unique subdivision or project, as shown on an application and on your application,.

M

You wrote that the project name is cisco's subdivision number four of patuxent beach.

L

Yes, because that's the way the land is described, but we were not, we were not. We were not seeking.

L

A re-subdivision of any of the laws right, so you were seeking to be part being part of sicil.

M

Subdivision number four, it is part it was. I was, it was just a reference of what the land is known as.

M

Right and the entire project was on one single uh sketch known as the town, creek, marina development.

M

Sketch that you designed that is correct and it might, it might be worthy to note if you look into.

L

The zoning ordinance a bit further that they that a right-of-way private republic separates parcels.

L

So there are two distinct parcels that you cannot possibly say, or one summon.

L

Right they're, separate they're, separated by a road right. No I'm.

M

Talking just about the cm site for now. Okay, if you want to talk just about the cm site.

M

And all this was shown on your application that you submitted for review is that right.

M

That is correct. Nothing further. Jesus does the board have any questions. Mr chairman,.

I

I I think I have a right to to redirect if the chair allows it just a couple of brief questions.

E

I'm sorry and you're what you want to redirect yeah. Just a few brief questions to clarify.

I

Certainly, um mr mahaffey, I'm going to just share.

I

My powerpoint, before in the letter from from mr schreier before and I'm I'm concerned that.

I

Mr murphy only showed you a brief portion of the letter that he had highlighted and you remember.

I

Him doing that during your testimony. Yes- and he referred to it being one site and he referenced.

I

That there is a definition of sight in the zoning ordinance. Yes, but mr shire's letter.

I

Clearly showed that you were anticipating building a house on each lot and that wasn't that.

I

Your understanding of the letter, as I pointed out in that first paragraph, he mentions seven.

L

Seven laws right and I'll show you in a paragraph that mr murphy didn't show you or the board during.

I

Your questioning, uh where I've drawn some of the the highlights on this section, where it.

I

Says staff recommends that you build detached dwellings. Do you see that? Yes, so I I'm not an.

I

Expert in english language, but dwellings means more than one correct it does. It means that to me.

I

Okay- and it says relatively small footprints right that that is correct- you wouldn't need.

I

More than one footprint, if you're only allowed to do one house on this site, is that correct.

L

That's the way, I understand the plural of the word, and then it says, although parking areas are not.

I

Required to be located under the dwellings again, do you see that? Yes, plural? Yes, okay and it talks.

I

About each property, do you see that, in order to meet the minimum setbacks, yes, each property and.

I

Then it goes on to say that locating the parking areas under the dwellings- again a plural, correct.

I

Correct so I understand mr murphy wants to make the argument that this is all one site, but.

I

When you read this letter as a whole, it's pretty clear that mr shire was looking at it that there'd.

I

Be more than one dwelling put on the sites that we're talking about here tonight? Is that fair.

I

To say, I mean absolutely fair to say and and it was my intent to investigate how to proceed with.

L

Adjacent lots that were that were had eight lots.

L

Six lots created in the cm district that were distinct and separate lots and how.

L

Would be the best way to proceed through the development process for those lots.

L

Not to detach from that, but but they kind of go as a group, because we need a public sewer system.

L

Because they're on individual lots, you can't serve and serve lots with a private sewer system.

L

Sure- and you know just to call call a spade a spade, but what we're here talking tonight.

I

About appears to be that, there's a a different interpretation of the ordinance now.

I

Than the one that was applied in this letter from mr shire is that a fair statement.

L

Most most definitely different now, okay, mr chairman, that's all I have for redirect to.

I

Mr mahaffey, but I do reserve the right to call him in our rebuttal argument.

E

John any questions at this time or you want to hold them. I will hold them.

G

I have a question: okay, one question, mr richardson, mr lawnmower. This is rich richardson on the letter.

B

Dated 10 july 2020, would you consider that a request for guidance, a request for approval.

I

I mean I don't I'm happy to answer the question. I think mr mahaffey certainly can as well as a sworn.

I

Witness I mean my understanding is that he was looking for you know, information and guidance and.

I

Not a formal approval through that letter billy. Is that correct? I mean that that's exactly the.

L

What I meant with the final two sentences, you know I offered up, I needed guidance to move forward and.

L

uh Offered you know if there any questions or comments or you need anything else. Let me know.

B

So again, mr lawnmower so here hearing the answer is a request for guidance. Yet mr hunt disapproved.

B

It that to me that doesn't match we're asking for guidance and we just get a disapproval.

I

And I certainly agree that and and again to clarify the reason. Why we're here tonight and why.

I

We felt we had to do this and we, you know by no means we're here to to frivolously waste your time.

I

When the decision was labeled as a final decision and it appeared to have.

I

A legal determination that all six of these lots could only have one dwelling on it. We.

I

Felt the need to protect my client's rights that we had to come to you to clarify that.

I

Interpretation of whether that's accurate under the ordinance or not.

I

And that's really what we're asking for tonight. um It appears that they made that determination.

I

So any other applications we brought could be denied and they could tell us, you lost your right.

I

Because you didn't appeal it last time so that that's really why we're here tonight, okay, then.

E

I guess we'll move on to mr murphy. If you want to, let me know who's going to be testifying for you.

F

And excuse me, mr chair, any other witnesses for mr longmore.

I

uh Not not at this time I will say that mr murphy and I spoke before I- I do have questions for.

I

Either mr hunt and or mr knight, but we've decided I'll, ask them as part of cross examinations and.

I

Not to double up witnesses so I'll be happy to defer to mr murphy to begin with those. Thank you.

E

E

Mr murphy, could you say that again and get off of mute.

M

I'm muted, sorry thank you. uh The witnesses uh will be so first, I said. Thank you, mr chairman.

M

Thank you, chris, but after that I said, uh the witnesses will be harry knight and then bill.

M

Hunt in that order, as bill hunt, I have sworn in harry knight for the evening- is mr hunt. There.

H

I tried to I tried to take the oath before, but you didn't say my name: okay,.

M

Perfect, okay, please stand and raise your right hand. You declare an affirm under the penalty.

E

Of perjury that the testimony responses and statements you were about to give.

E

Will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I do okay, thank you. You may proceed.

M

So I'm going to just begin with a brief opening and then.

M

Which has some slides, but all of the slides had the testimony that was provided by.

M

Mr mahaffey um and then I'm going to ask mr knight and then mister on questions.

E

If I could just remind you, we will be closing the meeting at 10 o'clock, we're thereabouts and.

E

We have a couple of items I think to go over. Take about 10 minutes. Certainly, you've got a.

E

Little more than a half hour and that we're all right, thank you! So much or else there'll be a.

M

Thank you, sir. I appreciate that.

M

So I'm sharing my screen. Hopefully this works. Can everybody see this very well? Does it say? Is.

M

It the powerpoint yes, yeah, perfect. Thank you so good evening. We ask that you uphold the decision.

M

Of director bill hunt and just approve of the town, creek marina development sketch for two reasons.

M

First, one of the proposed buildings in the residential, medium density.

M

Did not meet the 10 foot, side, yard setback, standards and second, the base density standards.

M

Mandate that only one single family dwelling per site in the commercial marine zoning district.

M

In other words, marina one house here, the applicants proposed six single family dwellings.

M

At one commercial arena in the cm zoning district, that's five more dwellings that.

M

Then are permitted at one marina. As a result, the town, creek marina development project.

M

Is in violation of the base density standards of the czo and the lexington park development plan.

M

As for the rm zoning district, the 2019 lexington park development plan ordinance 2019-32.

M

Requires the 10-foot side, yard, setback for all principal structures and the rm zoning district.

M

On the screen is the entire sketch plan and then, as I showed in mr matthews testimony, I zoomed in.

M

To the area at issue, as you can clearly see on the screen, one of the proposed buildings.

M

Clearly, approaches beyond those ten feet. Mr mahaffey said it was around nine inches.

M

And mr longmore was correct: normally a sketch plane would not be denied merely for this.

M

Because this issue could be resolved either with comments to change the.

M

Size of the proposed building or with a variance request, however, you'll hear.

M

Testimony that mr mahaffey asked logan to render a final decision on the sketch plan.

M

Which contradicts mr mahaffey's testimony that basically, mr mahaffey wanted a yes or.

M

No decision without comments, as a result, mr as a result, because he wanted a yes or no decision.

M

And because the side yard, step back standards were not met, logan disapproved of the sketch plan.

M

As for the commercial marine zoning district, the schedule 32.1 of the czo and the lexington.

M

Park development extract uh describe the base density for each zoning district.

M

For commercial marine, the base density is none, though in the czo. It says after none it's list.

M

14 now it says 4 which refers to footnote 14 in the czo and footnote 4 in the lexington park.

M

Footnote 14 is the same as footnote 4 and is produced in the same screen.

M

Which says only one single family dwelling is permitted for sight again, as described in my.

M

Conversation with mr mahaffey, the minimum lost size in the cm district is one acre.

M

The czo defines site as the following, which I went over with mr mahaffey.

M

Any tract of land any sorry any tract lot or parcel of, or combination of lots.

M

Or parcels of land which are in one ownership, are contiguous and adverse ownership where.

M

Development is to be performed as part of a unit subdivision or project, as shown on an application.

M

Here the application proposed development on lots 9 through 13 and lot 9 and mod 22. Thus.

M

A combination of lots- and all this was actually confirmed with my conversation with mr mahaffey.

M

That he admitted that it more or less was cite according to the application that he.

M

Should have submitted or could have studied something differently had he known better.

M

The application included both addresses of zoning districts for one large project, the project name.

M

For the entire redevelopment lists, the original subdivision name for the lots system subdivision.

M

Number four tucson beach and mr mahaffey stated that all this was to be part of one subdue.

M

The old subdivision, because that's how it's been planted, there was no intent to re-subdivide.

M

Because it remains part of systole subdivision number, four.

M

Thus, by mr mahavi's own words, the development is quote to be performed as part of a subdivision as.

M

Shown in application thus meeting the definition of sight. Furthermore, the application used a single.

M

Sched for the entire project, labeling it, the town, creek, marina development, sketch.

M

The sketch, as will be shown by testimony from mr knight or mr hunt, ignore the lot lines and set by.

M

Requirements in the cm district all proposed homes on both properties will share a single port of.

M

Single point of sewage disposal in the rm property and based on the applications they submitted.

M

These lots form a single site, while only one single-family home is permitted per site in the.

M

Cm district, their application pro 6, which violates the base density requirement of one per site.

M

While there may be six lots of record in the cm property and while each has its own development.

M

Right they cannot ignore the zoning district in which these lots sit. They are uniquely positioned.

M

Differently from the other, lots that are single family dwellings in the levering.

M

Those ones are not in the cm property and that's what matters here.

M

The steam district only allows one single family dwelling for sight. Director hunt reviewed the.

M

Application as they submitted it and from the applicant's own language, what there is.

M

And what there was is one single project, part of one subdivision and therefore one single site.

M

Simply put the zoning district allows them to build one single family home.

M

They proposed six that was wrong, so was denied as correct director hunt correctly determined.

M

That the development sketch failed to satisfy the setback and base density standards. We asked them.

M

To hold this decision at this time, I'd like to call harry knight.

C

Present hi henry.

C

You hear me all right, I can, can you hear me, yes, can you introduce yourself to the board.

C

Harry knight, deputy director of the department of land, use growth management. How long have you.

M

Been deputy director and what'd you do before that I've been deputy director one year, acting deputy.

C

Director, a period of time before that permits coordinator since well permits manager for.

C

A brief period of time when it was reclassified up from its coordinator since approximately 1998.

C

um Between 1994 and 1998, I was the code coordinator here in the department of land use.

C

Growth management, even my job history, is not good for sure um and you've been with logan for about.

M

26 years is that right over 26 years and what are some of your responsibilities as deputy director.

C

The um review and approval of permits, which are the um oh with deputy director, is overseeing.

C

The permits division, the comprehensive planning division, the board of appeals.

C

That is it, and do you also administer the the comprehensive zoning ordinance? Well, certainly,.

C

In all of those um administration of the comprehensive zoning ordinance as it applies.

C

To those different divisions of the department you familiar and are you familiar with this case.

M

Very, how are you familiar well, my familiarity goes back to.

C

I'll estimate june, when some emails from mr mahaffey were being received by brandi.

C

Glenn of this department asking about this um development proposal.

C

I was probably not privy to the first emails, but brandi glenn did her review based on the.

C

Information received in emails and said you can only have one house on a commercial marine site.

C

He wanted to pursue his proposal further, so I got drawn into the email chains.

C

So I would agree with mr mahathi that he absolutely was trying to find.

C

A process forward because he had been told in numerous emails from brandy and myself and we.

C

Conferred with the director bill hunt, what is the appropriate answer based on requesting to.

C

Put multiple single family dwellings on this commercial marine site and the consensus was.

C

It's not approvable, because you can only have one single family dwelling on the commercial.

C

Marine site, I could dissect mr shire's letter and show you how I interpret it differently.

C

But I don't think we need to go back in time. The key is the definition of site as.

C

Used in this development proposal, so when mr mr mahathi wanted guidance on how to.

C

Move forward, I said mr mahathi sending us a slightly different email on the same subject.

C

Is not going to change it? My advice to you is: if you want to move forward, you apply for it.

C

So he did you'll get a formal decision and as much as he said in his testimony that he was surprised.

C

At the at the abruptness of the response, my whole um intention of having him applied was so that.

C

He would get a final director's decision that could be appealed so that he could move forward.

M

Gotcha and that's eventually what they did correct, they appealed that's why we're here.

M

Tonight, that's why we're here tonight perfect. So, let's look at the sketch plan as it was submitted.

M

um We have one property on the left: that's zoned, a residential medium, one property on.

M

The right that zone, commercial marine is that your understanding, absolutely I I will add mr mahaffey.

C

Claimed in his testimony that he was looking for critical area guidance that was never brought.

C

Up to me and any suggestion that there's buffer issues is a non-issue because mr shire's letter.

C

Pointed it out and our current zoning maps agree, the property is zoned [ __ ], so you should be.

C

Able to develop it without needing any critical area. Variances excellent thanks thanks harry, so.

M

Let's first talk about the property on the left, a residential medium. How long has it been zoned.

M

Rm since september of 2019 prior to that it was zoned rl and that's the rl that was referred to.

M

In mr shire's letter correct, so the multiple dwellings referred to in mr shire's letter.

C

Is in um is taking into account that um at least four dwellings could have been built on the rl.

C

Property and one on the cm, which is why it refers to multiple dwellings, but the part mr longboard.

C

Left off was in accordance with the comprehensive zoning ordinance right. So everybody in the letter.

C

Bill shire points out that per the comprehensive zoning ordinance cm cite one single-family.

C

Dwelling mr mahaffey also brought up that he was told to switch duplexes to single family dwellings.

C

Detach of course, because duplexes are not allowed in the cm zone, but one single family dwelling.

C

Is per site so it's fair to character. It's unfair to characterize mr shire's letter.

M

To say that when he says dwellings he's just talking about this cm site, is that correct? I agree.

M

And there's four lots of record on the rm site.

M

Correct and it's correct and what's on the property right now, what's built on the property.

M

How is it on the rm site, I believe, there's two mobile homes there and the project proposed is.

M

Two new single family homes detached correct. Yes, um it was not clear. Mr mahaffey's plan.

C

Did not name what the proposed development, if you look in the lower right hand, corner.

C

um Nowhere on the plan did it say what the buildings were going to be. They were.

C

um Labeled proposed building footprint, so um I had to call mr mahathi for clarification and.

C

That's why I wrote my note in the lower right hand corner he clarified mixture equals single family.

C

Dwellings detached plus marina per discussion via phone with mr mahaffey 10 40 am july 24 2020.

M

And so there's four lots: two houses and the other two are going to be. What.

C

I believe all the buildings um shown on this sketch plan are intended to be single family.

C

Dwellings details: there are four lots on the rm property on two of those lots will be.

M

Single family home correct, the other two lots will be supporting both the rm property and the cm site.

M

And all of that's completely permissible in the rm district, normally correct.

C

Septic systems supporting permitted uses in a zone are permissible. Notwithstanding the project, this.

M

Part of the proposal was denied. Is that correct the rm side? The only issue on the rm side was.

C

The zoning setback um and I agree that it was very trivial and easily resolved, but my concern.

C

Was that um if we were going to move forward, I should not give him comments asking for.

C

Revisions, I should give him a firm denial, so he could move forward with the appeal tonight.

M

And on the screen is that firm denial, uh which was turned into an email which was on mr.

M

uh Longhorse slide is that correct, that's correct! This is the computer printout of that same email.

C

uh Yeah, it was put in the computer first and then copied and pasted into an email.

C

Actually, but the content is the exact same exactly and that denial. For this says it.

M

Doesn't conform to the 10 foot setback and, as mr happy said, that was 9 inches. Does that sound right.

C

Yeah I'll buy that and for a further view, we've done this before, but this is the issue.

M

Is that right? uh That is an issue that mr longmore brought up. Frankly, I don't think.

C

That issue was worth appealing. What was what's worth appealing is the use of the word site.

M

Gotcha and as you said, this could have been fixed with the comment or variance.

M

The uh the overreaching setback, as emphasized by my previous statement right and it wasn't because.

M

Mr mahaffey asked you to render a final decision on a sketch plan. um He did not.

C

You know in all my previous conversations with mr hafey mahathi. None of it had anything to do with.

C

Zoning setbacks or critical area. It was all about how many houses can I put on the cm site, gotcha.

M

Perfect so now, let's take a look at the next slide, uh which shows on the right. It's the.

M

Commercial marine site that is correct and again uh I'm not going to re-read it, but.

M

This is the purpose of the cm from the um park development district uh plan from 2019.

M

Section, um it mentions a number of things: dry, storage, boat, yards vessels, visitor combinations.

M

Food and beverage sales and then uses allowed or identified in 50.4 are any of the purposes.

M

Listed uh single-family dwellings, uh no, they are not and while schedule 50.4 allows it, um it.

C

Has a footnote because 50.4 does not supersede schedule, um 32 development standards, where the.

C

um Allowed density in the cm zone is none, and I know the history of that footnote.

C

When the 2002 zoning ordinance was adopted, the allowed density in the cm zone was none.

C

Zero, you couldn't have any and staff pointed out: whoa whoa whoa. What about existing marinas? That.

C

Have a house where the person who operates the marina lives? We should allow at least one house.

C

Per commercial marine site, not for the purpose of further residential development of commercial.

C

Marine sites, but so that a person can live on the commercial marine site where they operate.

C

A marina so basically it's for, like a harbor master or something like that. Yeah right and.

C

There's several examples of that in the leverings: can you can you provide some of those um they.

M

Okay, here I have the leverings up. These are all the commercial marine sites.

C

That's correct and the mr burkhardt's site is is site a.

C

The botel california is site b, which may or may not have a dwelling unit on it. It's not obvious.

C

To me, the site c is the dixon marina, which is made up of multiple lots: um lots, 132, 133 and 134.

C

All in all being used as a single site for a single house site d is the altman marina.

C

um Used to be known as tilly, it uh is half an acre, no lot numbers prescribed. I think that might have.

C

Had a blap but um anyway one site, one house and a jason, but a different owner and a different, marina.

C

Operation is mr gary bradford and his property is made up of lots: 22, 23, 24 and 27 28 and 29 all.

C

Being used as a single commercial marine site with a single house on it, though, I think his house was.

C

Converted to the commercial marine office building and even the existing uh the site in question.

M

There's one single family dwelling on the cm site currently is that correct at most and.

M

That's the trailer that mr mahappy mentioned is that oh on on yes right, there is that one trailer.

C

That is correct and how long has.

M

uh We mr mahaffey, mentioned that the cm property has been zoned cm since at least 2002.

M

And it was reaffirmed, I guess in 2010, with the 2010 ordinance and again in 2019 and during those.

M

18, almost 19 years, no one proposed amending to your knowledge. Did anyone propose amending.

M

The zoning from cm to another district on mr burkhart's property, not to my knowledge,.

C

And during the 2019 rezoning was that the time for mr burkhart or somebody else to change the.

M

Zoning from cm to arm or another zoning district- absolutely that was the perfect time for him to.

C

Come forward and ask to have his commercial marine property, or at least a portion of it, zoned, rm and.

M

By failing to do so, you're, basically stuck with the consequences right yeah, you know I give the.

C

Example, my parents farm or my grandparents farm on bretton bay, you know, would have been able to.

C

Have 250 houses until 1985 when critical area turned it into only 10 houses at 20 acres per.

C

So this is not an unusual situation for a person to lose.

C

Residential density allowances due to a rezoning, so there are some houses in an industrial district.

M

That currently exists right now is that right. That is correct, and we do not allow um single-family.

C

Dwellings detached in the industrial zone, so you could have a vacant lot in the industrial zone.

C

And that does not entitle you to build a house on it because it must comply with the zoning.

M

And similarly here they must comply with the zoning requirements of a cm site.

M

Of cm zoning is that right, that's correct, and so, for instance, I want to point out. It says.

C

um In this list visit visitor accommodations, so he offered to mr longmore to take back to his client.

C

That he could still get fair and reasonable use of his land and basically build those same types of.

C

Structures, but rather than try to turn them condo and sell them, he could um use them as short-term.

C

Rentals bed and breakfast is allowed in the commercial marine zone, and you can have up to ten.

C

Cabins, the um lodging um motels is also allowed in the commercial marine zone as an accessory use and.

C

Also that he could make more money weekly rentals, um you know it's big business. Air beats and b's.

M

Right, and in fact uh mr longboard's presentation had 20 permitted uses in the cm was that right.

M

That's correct: they could still have one single family dwelling.

M

And then use the other part of that property for those 19 uses correct.

M

So let's look at schedule 32.1, uh which is slightly different in the.

M

uh Likes in the park development district one, but the the content is still the same.

M

It says, base density units per acre in the first square for commercial marine. It says none as you.

M

Said- and you went through the history of that change- is that right? It used to be none, but now.

M

And then footnote 14 now footnote one or four one single family dwelling per site. Is that correct.

M

Yes, the idea was to have one house for somebody servicing the marina correct. That was the that.

M

Was the I guess, legislative history of the the change the most importantly, we did not want to.

C

Render existing houses on commercial marine sites non-conforming uses sure sure that makes sense.

M

Too so in it the next part it says, minimum lot area must be one acre. Does that mean each marina.

M

Site has to be at least one acre. I would say that that pertains to, if you were subdividing.

C

New new commercial, marina lots, but this one complies because it's 1.16. That is true.

M

And then we went over the definition of site a number of times and that's at the center of this.

M

um Again, it's I'm just going to read the underlying parts, any combination of lots, which.

M

Are in one ownership where development is to be performed as part of a unit.

M

Subdivision or project, as shown on my application.

M

And you said that on the property right now is the commercial arena and one single family dwelling.

M

Correct, yes, and so again on mr mahaffey's application, uh he described, uh which I.

M

Have on the screen right now, the project name is sissel subdivision number four of patuxent beach.

M

And what does that name suggest to you.

M

um Use of that name that uh mr sissel had some land and he divided it into multiple lots.

M

True, that's funny what is mr mahaffey's use of that name of that, as a project name suggests, to.

M

You that he's um took the name off the plat as a historical um name for the practice.

M

Does it all suggest that he intends the uh it to be part of the same subdivision.

C

Well, well, that's true, regardless of what you call it I mean he could have called it.

C

Burkhardt's redevelopment, but it is still um lots and single ownership um in the commercial marines.

C

Submitted on a single application, that's right and let's look at that sketch again so.

M

uh He suggested placing six proposed buildings or six single family dwellings on one commercial.

M

Marine site is that that's what he proposed, but he can only have one per um the current saint.

C

Mary's county zoning audience gotcha. So let's look at his cover letter. Let's just focus on.

M

The the third highlight where it says the property is divided into two zoning districts.

M

And the critical area overlay part of the land is in the cm zoning district with the lda overlay and.

M

Partisan rm zoning district with the same ca overlay district. Does this suggest to you that.

M

Even the applicant views the properties as one single site- oh jesus. I would feel very strongly.

C

That it was submitted to us as a single site, and it was submitted by the applicant okay and again.

M

Let's take a look at the sketch, so mr longmore in his appeals, says that there are 10 lots of record.

M

At these addresses- which I don't disagree with- and he says that each lot quote, each lot has its own.

M

Allowable density of at least one dwelling unit per live. Do you remember reading that.

C

I'm sorry, where did I read that? Oh it's in mr longmore's appeal, but each lot sure one dwelling.

M

Unit per law basically correct: why is he wrong or is he wrong and what? If so, why is he well again.

C

um That's like saying if I have 250 acres in 1984 and the rural density in saint mary's county is.

C

One house per acre, but then the regulation changes in 1985 and suddenly you have to have 20 acres.

C

Per house- and so this is a similar situation, the property was, you know, some people would say it was.

C

Up zoned to commercial marine, but because he wants residential, it was down zoned to.

C

One house per site, but regardless it is zoned that way and as mr um phil shire's letter said,.

C

Staff recommends that the applicant build detached dwellings in accordance with the czo and the first.

C

Page of the letter clearly said that the czo says that um a regulatory and site constraint is that.

C

You can only have one single family dwelling is permitted per site in the cm, so the multiple.

C

Dwellings clearly, mr shire's letter were referring to one house on the cm and multiple houses in the.

C

Url and mr longmore shaking his head. No, but that's that's why we need the board to decide this right.

M

And so on this sketch it's a single sketch for the entire project. That's correct!.

C

Yeah, so there was a single um sketch plan submitted with the cover letter and the.

C

Development review application and in this edge were the lot lines honored.

C

uh No, the um which to me is, is further evidence that the um cm.

C

um Portion of the property. um Clearly, um he wants to ignore the lot lines based on the.

C

Way the houses are laid out um not adhering to the zoning setbacks that the lot lines would prescribe.

C

And so the side yard setbacks were not met because the lot lines weren't followed correct.

C

Correct, in fact, in some cases, the houses are slightly going over the lot lines.

C

And it's inferring that they're not individual lots anymore, but it's a single site and all this.

M

Right and also the six houses on the cm site uh share a single point of sewage disposal, correct.

C

Yes, uh it appears it's being developed um as a single unit, sharing a single septic system.

M

M

Is our interpretation of the word site unique to pound creek marina? It is not we've.

C

You know: we've used this um opportunity to use an amalgamation of your land so that, in fact,.

C

It's very common in subdivisions you, how many parcels can you assemble to get your overall.

C

Gross acreage to then divide by the allowable density in the zone, which this zone only allows.

C

One house per site and then that's how you figure out how many lots you can have in that zone.

C

Regardless of what schedule 50.4 says, you're allowed to do in the zone, you still have to go.

C

Back to the development standards schedule to find out what your allowable density in that zone is.

M

And even tonight the board looked at the 7-eleven, where there are multiple lots, but they weren't.

M

They were treated all as one site because of it it was presented as one site. Is that correct and.

C

Yeah and mr longboard pointed that out himself right and even the uh so, for example, another.

M

One might be the ford dealership, the chevy dealership in lexington park is that right.

C

That's correct: they took um four or five parcels put them all together. You um take the.

C

Gross anchorage figure out what your floor area, ratio and footprint is allowed to be.

C

We don't have to look at property lines for setbacks on internally.

M

Is our definition of society denying the applicant reasonable use of the land not at all, and in fact,.

C

I would read um phil chotter's letter differently about doctrine of merger. His whole point of lot.

C

Consolidation will not be required, as in you will not have to record an instrument in the office of.

C

Land records consolidating them as one because your development proposal alone makes them one.

M

Nothing further, thank you. I think this might be a good spot to.

E

Hold a meeting for this evening and talk about the continuance at a time certain in the future.

E

And does anybody have any objections to doing that on february 11th, which.

E

Is a regular meeting date for the board and if I remember I'm sorry what was the meeting chairman.

I

Yes, what was the meeting date? I didn't hear you, mr february 11th. There are two other cases that day.

E

But we could do this, one first finish it up and uh go from there and then I guess we will begin.

E

I'm sorry we will begin with mr longmore um in his cross-examination of mr knight.

A

What are the other two cases.

D

The other two cases are critical area um disturbance in the critical area. Okay,.

E

Is mr hunt going to testify? He will yes, okay, so then we'll continue with.

E

Mr hunt and then we'll let mr longmore go through a cross-examination of both of them.

M

Mr hawks is very short by the way- maybe 10- minutes- okay and not even in lawyer time, but in real time.

C

So is february 11th, okay,.

M

Mr longmore works perfectly for me, but I'm always here so that works fine with me, mr chairman, okay,.

E

So that's what we will do and we'll continue with that time. Don't need to make a motion for that or.

I

Mr chairman, just just for for the record, I had mentioned it before under the rules we're allowed.

I

To um put on a rebuttal witness, if we need to, I don't know, if we will, um I think we have right to.

I

Decide that after I cross-examined mr knight and mr hunt testify so mr mahaffey or another witness.

I

May come in to rebut some of the testimony. That's there just I'm letting the board know for timing.

I

Purposes, I know it's being rescheduled tonight with other things on the agenda. Correct sure.

A

Okay, y'all in the matter of z, aap, 20, 20-1746, town, creek, marina appeal.

A

I'd like to make a motion to continue the hearing to february 11th. Second, all in favor.

G

Aye aye, the other thing I have also for tonight are minutes from the december. Mr chairman, I I.

I

Hate to interrupt this, this is chris longmore again in the past, it's been said, it's important.

I

To put the time and the location of that meeting, so it doesn't have to be re-advertised good. Can we.

I

Clarify on the record that it'll be at 6 30 held virtually by webex and the board will be meeting.

I

In the meeting room, where you're located tonight in the chesapeake building make a second motion to.

E

Amend the first well yeah okay motion made by mr second madinsky. Second, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes,.

E

Okay? Yes, yes, okay! Thank you, mr chairman, sorry to interrupt anybody else. Okay, we have the minutes.

E

From the december 7th 2020 meeting, did anybody see any and there was one change I don't know which.

A

Dude, I don't know what minutes they have, I'm not sure either yeah. I made a change to it.

A

Oh remember right here I don't know what you got.

E

That's correct: this is these: are the minutes yeah? That's the one.

E

So this is okay, yeah, that one's okay and the change is the resolution.

E

Motion carried 4-0, recused wayne madinski. Thank you. That was one of the chapman's.

A

Address, okay, I'll make a motion approve the minutes. Second, all in favor all right.

K

Okay and the last item I have are the orders for their hertz kurtzer hartzer property. Second,.

E

Elections district and it was ordered by mr hayden, mr brown, ms delahaye, mr madinski and mr richardson.

A

And mr hayden will have to sign that um that's my question, mr chair, I was going to sign it for.

E

Or just science, but you weren't, even a member of the decision. That's why I asked the question.

F

I think mr chair, as uh as chairman of this body and this body having properly considered and.

F

Approved, I think that the act of signing is more administrative, so I think you can sign it. Yes, okay,.

F

Okay, I'll make a question to sign the order; okay, second, all in favor aye all right. One more motion.

A

um There was bad now there was a correction on the.

A

Was that the roster, the minutes? No in the roster? Oh the roster? Yes, I've got your correction. I have.

A

Your phone number yeah my phone number's wrong and dan's term, and also, I think, his phone numbers.

G

One had to be eliminated, oh, which one, the one that says home: okay,.

G

Okay, he's homeless. All right, I'm good need one more motion I'll make a motion with jiren. Second.

A

All in favor very good, thank you and the chairman did a great job tonight.