|
The Kent County Planning Commission met in regular
session on Thursday, May 1, 2003, in the County Commissioners Hearing
Room with the following members in attendance: Elizabeth Morris,
Chairman; Bill Sutton; Jay Lancaster; Roger Mangels; Rev. Ruben
Freeman; Marcy Brown; G. Mitchell Mowell, Attorney; Gail Owings,
Planning Director; Amy Moredock, Environmental Planner; and Elizabeth
Carroll, Secretary.
MINUTES - The minutes of the April
3, 2003 meeting were approved after making a correction to page
seven, last paragraph - "tractor" trailer.
APPLICATIONS FOR REVIEW
#03-25 John
& Nancy Caldwell - Buffer Variance - The Caldwells request
approval to construct a 3 by 60 foot deck on their property located
on Kinnairds Point Road in the Third Election District. Two variances
are needed: a buffer variance and a variance of slopes greater than
15-percent. The 2.203 acre parcel is zoned "CAR" Critical Area Residential.
Mr. and Mrs. Caldwell were present and sworn in with
staff by Chairman Morris.
Ms. Moredock reviewed the staff report noting the
existing dwelling is located entirely within the expanded Critical
Area Buffer and was constructed in 1980, prior to the Critical Area
regulations. The deck will consist of a three-sided 3-foot by 60
foot walkway around an exiting room.
Ms. Moredock reviewed applicable law found in the
Zoning Ordinance, specifically: Article V, Section 4; Article X,
Section 2.23; Article V, Section 4; and Article IX, Section 2.3
The Caldwells meet the impervious requirement however the deck would
be in the 100-foot Critical Area Buffer. The Buffer is expanded
due to steep slopes on the site, which exceed 15-percent. The variance
will not cause a substantial detriment to neighboring properties,
nor will it change the character of the district. The Comprehensive
Plan promotes the maintenance of buffers. Ms. Moredock feels the
deck does not constitute an unwarranted hardship, nor does it deny
the Caldwells uses generally shared by neighboring property owners.
The proposal is not consistent with the buffer and steep slope requirements
of the ordinance. Staff recommended denial. However, should the
Board approve the application, approval should be contingent upon
the following:
- The proposed deck should be pervious
- Mitigation of th 1:3 for disturbance within the buffer and
1:1 for disturbance outside the buffer should be required consisting
of a mix of native trees and shrubs; and
- Stormwater run-off from proposed structures should be directed
to stable vegetation.
The Planning Office received correspondence from
Julie LaBranche, Natural Resource Planner at the Chesapeake Bay
Critical Areas Commission noting the property is designated as a
Limited Development Area (LDA), and if the variance is approved,
recommended: "1) Mitigation of 3:1 for disturbance within the Buffer
should be required. They recommended mitigation plants consisting
of a mix of native trees and shrubs be direct first to non-forest
areas within the Buffer then to other areas on the property. 2)
Stormwater from the new impervious surface should drain to vegetated
areas on the property to allow for infiltration."
There was no other correspondence, and there were
no comments from the audience.
Chairman Morris invited the Caldwells to comment.
Mr. Caldwell presented photos of his property to better explain
his proposal. He noted there will be no entrance to the house from
the proposed deck. The deck will be even with the ground at one
point. The purpose of the 3-foot deck is to allow the owners to
safely wash windows that are otherwise difficult to reach. Mr. Caldwell
said he currently stands on a plank which is not very safe. A 3-foot
deck would be much safer.
In reviewing the site plat, the Planning Commission
noted there is a 2- foot overhang from the dwelling. Through discussion
and review of the criteria for granting a variance, the Board advised
the Caldwells they could not establish an unwarranted hardship and
would be unable to recommend approval of the variances.
Following additional review and discussion, it was
noted that if the deck was kept at 2-feet in width, there would
not be an increase in impervious surface, and a variance would not
be required. The Caldwells considered comments by the Planning Commission
and staff, and decided to withdraw their application.
#03-22 Zabel
Family, LLC - Buffer Variance - The Zabel Family is requesting
three variances:
1) Variance of 44 feet to replace a septic tank within
the 100-foot Critical Area Buffer;
2) Variance of 32 feet to replace a sun porch within
the 100-foot Critical Area Buffer; and
3) Variance of 26 feet to construct a second-story
deck within the 100 foot Critical Area Buffer.
The .95 acre parcel is located on Roberts Drive, Pleasant
Cove Subdivision in the First Election District and is zoned "CAR"
Critical Area Residential.
Joseph Curtain was present on behalf of the Zabel
Family and was sworn in with staff by Chairman Morris.
Ms. Moredock reviewed the staff report noted applicable
law found in Article X, Section 2.23 of the Zoning Ordinance which
defines the Critical Area Buffer. Article IX, Section 2.3 of the
ordinance sets forth the standards for granting variances.
The variances will not cause a substantial detriment
nor will it change the character of the neighborhood. The Comprehensive
Plan promotes the maintenance and upgrading of septic systems. The
Health Department has advised the following:
- -based on the applicant's pending expansion plans a new
septic system would be required;
- -because the slope on the property is so steep, a pump system
will be necessary
- -due to the permeable nature of the soils, a nitrogen removal
system would be requested.
The practical difficulty is caused by the applicant's
expansion plans in a separate permit for a second-story addition
over existing impervious surface. The addition is a permitted use
and creates no new impervious surface. The septic system needs to
be replaced to accommodate the proposed second-story addition. The
Comprehensive Plan encourages the maintenance of buffers. Ms. Moredock
noted that neither a second-story deck nor a sun porch constitutes
an unwarranted hardship, nor does it deny the applicant of uses
shared by neighboring property owners.
Ms. Moredock recommended approval of the replacement
septic tank in the Buffer, but recommended denial of the deck and
sun porch.
Mr. Curtain advised there is some confusion because
he understood the Health Department to say the nitrogen unit was
not necessary because the proposed drainage field is out of the
buffer area. Mr. Curtain presented some photos of the property pointing
out the location of the sun porch which is being replaced, but not
enlarged. He explained at length the history of this property and
the existing structure. There will be no increased impervious surface.
Mr. Curtain reviewed the site plan with the Planning Commission
and argued his case.
There were no public comments on the proposed variances.
After a lengthy discussion and review, Ms. Brown
made a motion to forward a favorable recommendation to the Board
of Appeals, recommending approval to allow the Zabel Family to replace
their septic in the Buffer, contingent upon:
- -Verification of the exact location of the replacement septic
by the Health Department.
- -Installation of a nitrogen removal system, if required
by the Health Department
- -Vegetative mitigation of 3:1 for disturbance within the
Buffer with a mixture of native species planted in the area
of the expanded buffer.
- -Stormwater should be directed to stable vegetation.
The Planning Commission based their decision on the
following findings:
- -There will be no substantial detriment to neighboring properties,
nor will it change the character of the neighborhood.
- -The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
general intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
- -The practical difficulty is caused by the second-story addition
which is a permitted use. The ability to expand causes the need
for an enlarged septic. The location is determined by the Health
Department and the septic field is to be located outside of
the 100-foot Buffer.
- -The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general
spirit and intent of the Critical Area Law and Kent County regulations.
The motion was seconded and the vote unanimous.
Ms. Brown made a motion to recommend denial of a
variance to replace the existing sun porch in the Buffer. The sun
porch is currently non-conforming and cannot be replaced without
a variance. The Planning Commission found:
- -There will be no substantial detriment to neighboring properties,
not will it change the character of the neighborhood.
- -The variance is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
- -A practical difficulty was not determined.
- -There is no evidence of an unwarranted hardship.
The motion was seconded and the vote unanimous.
Following the voting by the Planning Commission,
Mr. Curtain, stated he would just like to leave the meeting today
with approval to put in the septic tank and get on with his project,
he and the Zabel Family will be satisfied. Therefore, he asked to
withdraw the request to construct the 3-foot story deck in the Buffer
and leave the plan as previously submitted to the Department of
Planning an Zoning.
Mr. Curtain informed the Planning Commission that
the roof was fiberboard and needed immediate repair. Counsel concurred
that regulations do permit repair of a nonconforming use. Mr. Curtain
said he will obtain the necessary information to take before the
Board of Appeals to support their the rest of Zabel proposal.
#03-24 James
& Karen Creveling - Buffer Variance - The Crevelings
request a variance to construct a septic system within the 100-foot
Critical Area Buffer. The 5.25 acres parcel located on Quaker Neck
Road in the Seventh Election District is zoned "RCD" Resource Conservation
District. The existing dwelling was constructed in 1937 and is located
within the 100-foot Buffer.
Real estate agents Billy Norris and Sam Martin were
present on behalf of the Crevelings, and were sworn in with staff
by Chairman Morris.
Ms. Moredock reviewed the staff report advising the
Planning Commission of relevant issues and applicable law. The granting
of the variance will not cause a substantial detriment to neighboring
properties nor will it change the character of the district. The
Comprehensive Plan encourages the maintenance and upgrading of septic
systems. Staff finds the practical difficulty was not caused by
the owners' own actions. At a recent Technical Advisory Committee
meeting, the Kent County Health Department advised the existing
system is failing and the nature of the soils would promote the
request for a nitrogen removal system. Therefore, Ms. Moredock recommended
approval of the variance.
Ms. Moredock read a letter from Christine Brockmeyer
who has no object to the placement of the septic system as proposed.
Mr. Norris advised he and Mr. Martin were involved
with the sale of the property. At that time the Health Department
tested the septic system and found it to be failing, thereby requiring
another septic and drain field be installed. Mr. Martin noted the
only location for a replacement system is in the 100-foot Critical
Area Buffer. They reviewed the site plan with the Board. It was
noted the existing garage has a second-floor recreation room and
bathroom.
There were no public comments.
Following discussion and review of the proposal,
Ms. Brown made a motion to forward a favorable recommendation to
the Board of Appeals recommending approval of the Buffer Variance
to allow the Crevelings to construct a septic system within the
100-foot Critical Area Buffer, with the following conditions:
- Vegetation mitigation of mitigation of 3:1 for disturbance
within the buffer with a mixture of native species planted in
the area of the buffer.
- Stormwater runoff should be directed to stable vegetation;
and
- A nitrogen removal system should be considered.
The Planning Commission made the following findings:
- There will be no substantial detriment to neighboring properties,
nor will it change the character of the neighborhood;
- The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
the intent of the Zoning Ordinance;
- The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general
spirit and intent of the Critical Area regulations;
- The practical difficulty is caused by the condition of the
property because of a tidal marsh and soils;
- The need for the variance was not caused by the applicants'
own actions since the septic system is failing and the Health
Department designated the location of the replacement system.
The motion was seconded and the vote unanimous.
#03-32 John
E. Kostick / John Stoltzfus - Impervious Surface Variance
- Mr. Kostick, the prospective buyer is the applicant requesting
an impervious surface variance to construct a 30 by 80 foot building
on the property currently owned by John Stoltzfus. The property
is located on West Edge Road, First Election District and is zoned
"CCA" Commercial Critical Area. Currently the parcel has 141,352
square foot of impervious surface (43%.) Mr. Kostick proposes to
add 3,571 square feet of impervious surface increasing the total
impervious surface to 144,923 square foot (44%.) The existing impervious
surface exceeds 15%. If a variance is granted Mr. Stoltzfus will
divide a .54 acres parcel to Mr. Kostick.
John Kostick was present and sworn in with staff
by Chairman Morris. Maria Stoltzfus, daughter of John Stoltzfus
was also present.
Ms. Moredock noted the history of the property advising
Mr. Stoltzfus submitted a concept plan for a hotel and convenience
store in 1994 and has been resubmitted in 1998 and 2003. Since 1993,
the Technical Advisory Committee has reviewed concept plans approximately
seven times, and the Planning Commission recently reviewed the revised
site plan. The concept plan will reduce the amount of impervious
surface for the hotel and convenience store to that amount of impervious
surface existing on the site as of the effective date of the Critical
Area Program.
She referred to a chart in the staff report which
gives the breakdown of acreage and impervious surface.
Ms. Moredock addressed relevant issues and applicable
law referring to Article V, Section 9 of the Zoning Ordinance. She
also noted page 19 of the Comprehensive Plan which states the county
should "conserve, protect, and enhance the overall ecological values
of the Critical Area, its biological productivity and its diversity."
Ms. Moredock advised, if a commercial site is going
to be developed, than an impervious surface variance is required.
If the Commission is inclined to approve the variance, the approval
should be contingent on:
- No trees should be removed to accommodate a building and
an afforestation plan should be required consisting of a mix
of native trees and shrubs.
- Stormwater runoff from the proposed structure should be directed
to stable vegetation.
- Ten percent water quality improvement should be met to required
to off-set additional impervious surface.
Ms. Moredock also noted that a favorable recommendation
does not confer upon the applicant site plan approval. A separate
site plan for the proposed development is required.
The Critical Areas Commission, in their letter of
April 30, 2003, advised the following: "...regarding the current
development proposal:
- We understand that the applicant proposes 3.571 square feet
of impervious surface coverage to construct a storage building
and access road on the new lot. The maximum allowable impervious
surface limit for the new lot is 3,557 square feet or 15%.
It appears that the proposed access road could be reduced
in size by approximately 14 square feet, to eliminate the
need for a variance to impervious surface limits.
- Mitigation, at a ratio of 1:1 for disturbance outside the
Buffer, should be required. Mitigation plantings should consist
of a mix of native trees and shrubs.
- Stormwater from the proposed development should be directed
to stable vegetated outfalls to provide water quality benefits
on the site. ..."
Chairman Morris invited Mr. Kostick to speak. Mr.
Kostick informed the Planning Commission that he currently operates
his business office from his home. The new building will be used
for storage of equipment only. Parking of trucks will be in front
of the building.
The Planning Commission reviewed the site.
After review and lengthy discussion, Ms. Brown made
a motion to forward a favorable recommendation to the Board of Appeals,
recommending approval of a variance
- -Vegetation mitigation of 3:1 for disturbance with a mixture
of native species.
- -stormwater runoff should be directed to stable vegetation.
- -Ten percent water quality improvement should be met to off-set
effects of additional impervious surface.
- -Subdivision must be finalized.
- -No trees should be removed from Lot 2.
- -Within one year, the amount of impervious surfact on Lot
1 (7.015 acres belonging to John Stoltzfus) must be reduced
to the total percentage which existed in 1988 plus the proposed
impervious surface calculation on Lot 2 (3,571 sq ft on lot
to be owned after subdivision by Mr. Kostick)
- -A separate site plan must be submitted for proposed development
to Lot 2.
Findings of fact:
- -There will be no substantial detriment to neighboring properties,
nor will it change the character of the neighborhood.
- -The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
intent of the ordinance.
- -The practical difficulty is caused by the current impervious
surface total which exceeds the 15 percent limit on the 7.559
acre parcel.
- -The need for the variance was not caused by the owner's
applicant's own actions, but by the current noncompliance with
the ordinance.
STAFF REPORTS
GENERAL DISCUSSION
There being no further business, Chairman Morris
adjourned the meeting at 4:40 p.m.
____________________________________
Elizabeth Morris, Chairman
____________________________________
Elizabeth Carroll, Secretary
Kent County Department of Planning &
Zoning
County Government Center
400 High Street
Chestertown, MD 21620
Tel: (410) 778-7475
Fax: (410) 810-2932
E-mail:gowings@kentgov.org
© Kent County, Maryland, U.S.A.
Information is for personal use only. Any redistribution of this
information is strictly prohibited without permission from Kent
County, Maryland.
Kent County shall make all efforts
to ensure that the Kent County Planning Commission Home Page and
its links are accurate and up-to-date. However, Kent County shall
not be liable for any errors, inaccuracies, omissions, or untimeliness
of the information contained herein.
|