KENT COUNTY, MARYLAND
PLANNING AND ZONING

The Kent County Planning Commission met in regular session on Thursday, August 5, 2004, at 1:30 p.m., in the County Commissioners' Hearing Room at 400 High Street, Chestertown, Maryland, with the following members in attendance: William Sutton, Vice Chairman; Patricia Langenfelder; Rev. Ruben Freeman; Marcy Brown; Jay Lancaster; J. Francis Hickman; G. Mitchell Mowell, Attorney; Gail Webb Owings, Planning Director; Carla Martin, Community Planner; Amy Moredock, Environmental Planner; and Elizabeth Carroll, Secretary.

MINUTES - The minutes of the June 3, 2004 meeting were approved with minor corrections. The minutes of the July 1, 2004 meeting were approved as written.

APPLICATIONS FOR REVIEW

Frank P. Hudson - Agricultural Land Preservation District - Mr. Hudson wishes to create an Agricultural Land Preservation District for his 202.8 acre farm located on Flatland Road in the Sixth Election District. The farm consists of 184.7 acres of cropland, 5.8 acres of woodland and several ponds. Approximately 92.4% of the soils are considered Class I or II. There is one dwelling and several farm buildings on the property. The farm is zoned "AZD". The property is outside the 10-year water and sewer plan.

Mr. Hudson was present and sworn in with staff by Vice Chairman Sutton.

Ms. Martin reviewed the staff report advising the Board that this farm is adjacent to other district and easement properties which is will form a block of 2000+ acres of protected land. Code of Public Laws of Kent County establishes the criteria for establishing a district. The property exceeds the criteria for creating an Agricultural Land Preservation District and complies with the goal of the Comprehensive Plan to preserve large blocks of contiguous prime agricultural land.

The Agricultural Advisory Commission reviewed the proposal and identified this farm as one that is critical to the continuance of agriculture in Kent County.

Staff recommended approval of the Hudson Agricultural Preservation District.

Vice Chairman Sutton invited Mr. Hudson to comment. Mr. Hudson stated he wants to preserve agriculture in Kent County and therefore wishes to place his 202 acre farm in a district. Mr. Hudson advised he adopted his brothers for tax purposes. After a few comments, Ms. Martin said she would speak with Mr. Hudson further to clarify the matter.

There were no public comments.

After a brief discussion, Rev. Freeman made a motion to forward a favorable recommendation to the County Commissioners recommending the establishment of an Agricultural Land Preservation District for the 202.8 acre farm of Frank P. Hudson, finding:

• The Agricultural Land Preservation Commission recommended approval of the district.

• The Comprehensive Plan encourages the preservation of large blocks of contiguous prime agricultural land.
• This proposal exceeds the criteria set forth in the Code of Public Laws.
• The establishment of this district will create a block of 2000+ acres in preservation.

The motion was seconded and the vote unanimous.

#04-73 Nancy Hansen Buffer Variance - Ms. Hansen is requesting a variance to replace a screened porch and a portion of her two-story dwelling within the 100 foot Critical Area Buffer. The 1.9 acre parcel is located on Belchester Road and the Sassafras River in Kentmore Park in the Second Election District. The property is zoned "CAR".

Ms. Hansen was present along with her contractor Tom Pitre and were sworn in with staff by Vice Chairman Sutton.

Ms. Moredock reviewed the staff report noting a portion of the home is currently located within the buffer and an approximate 1400 square foot addition and approximate 600 square foot two-car garage are located outside the buffer. A variance of about 20 feet is needed for the proposed replacement porch and a portion of the dwelling. This parcel is not located within the Buffer Modified Area of Kentmore Park. Ms. Moredock reviewed applicable law found in Article V, Section 2.7 of the Land Use Ordinance. Article IX, Section 2.2 of the Ordinance sets forth criteria for granting a variance.

Ms. Moredock noted the granting of a 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 of buffers. Staff feels the proposed demolition and replacement of the porch and dwelling do not constitute an unwarranted hardship nor would denial of the variance deny the applicant of uses generally shared by neighboring property owners. Ms. Moredock recommended denial, however if the Planning Commission is inclined to approve the application then the approval should be contingent upon: 1) Mitigation of 3:1 for disturbance within the buffer should be required consisting of a mix of native trees and shrubs; and 2) stormwater runoff from proposed structures should be directed to stable vegetation in the form of rain gardens.

Ms. Moredock read a letter from the Critical Areas Commission wherein they state they would recommend the applicant explore expansion possibilities outside the Buffer. However if the Board of Appeals finds the request has met the variance standards, they would recommend the applicant provide mitigation in the form of native vegetation at a 3:1 ratio.

Mrs. Hansen was invited to comment on her application. Mrs. Hansen advised she and her husband resided at this site for 15 years. The porch is in need of repair and she would like to rebuild at the exact site.

Mr. Pitre reviewed the plans with the Planning Commission they would like to remodel the existing structure. Everything new added to the existing home will be out of the buffer. Construction within the buffer will be placed on the original footprint. He noted the house needs to be taken down because the wood is rotted. Mr. Pitre advised he met with Ed Birkmire at the Health Department who advised him the project would be okay since the septic will be moved outside the buffer. He further noted the foundation is structurally sound. The house is not within the 100-year flood zone, but because of a considerable grade the house will be raised further with additional cinder block to help with drainage. The Hansens did have a permit for construction of a new house outside the buffer but Mr. Hansen died and the permit expired because Mrs. Hansen did not proceed with construction. Discussion continued.

Mr. Pitre noted he is a licenced contractor and feels his determination regarding the structure is accurate. A leaky roof over a number of years has caused the damage. It was suggested he have the structure inspected by an engineer. Mr. Pitre explained that everything will be torn down and part of the renovation will be on the existing footprint within the buffer, and everything new will be outside the buffer. After further discussion, Ms. Moredock noted that the staff report was based on the portion of the house and porch within the buffer.

There were no comments from the audience regarding this variance request.

Following review and discussion, Ms. Brown made a motion to forward a favorable recommendation to the Board of Appeals recommending approval of the variance request of Nancy Hansen based on the following 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 need for the variance was not caused by the applicant's own actions but is a result of the dwelling needing to be elevated 18 inches to comply with flood plain regulations.
• The granting of the variance is in harmony with the general spirit and intent of the Critical Area Law and Kent County regulations.
• Denial of the variance would cause an unwarranted hardship to the applicant.

Approval of the variance is contingent upon the following:

• The contractor has indicated the structure is not sound. This should be documented by an engineer and submitted to the Board of Appeals.
• The foundation is sound. The replacement dwelling will be constructed within the existing footprint (including any overhang).
• An overall reduction of impervious surface in the buffer is proposed.
• The septic system will be removed from the buffer and relocated in the rear yard.
• A mitigation plan at a ratio of 3:1 native vegetation planting shall be submitted during the permitting process to offset potential adverse water quality impacts from the proposed buffer disturbance.
• All run-off should be directed to stable vegetation and away from the buffer.

The motion was seconded and the vote unanimous.

#03-127 Skippack Aviation LLC / Kent Sand & Gravel - Special Exception for Heliport - Skippack Aviation LLC is requesting a special exception to relocate a private helistop at Kent Sand and Gravel on the Alexander Farm on Alexander Road near Massey in the First Election District. The property is zoned "AZD."

Present and sworn in by Vice Chairman Sutton were John Kerns of Skippack, Pennsylvania and his attorney Daniel Saunders.

Ms. Martin reviewed the staff report noting in February 2004, the Board of Appeals approved a helistop to be located near the gravel pit scales and other structures, approximately 1000 feet from the home of Shirley Alexander. When the applicants applied for a use permit, staff learned that the location for the helistop had been relocated to a site near the building once associated with the shooting range. The closest residence to the new site is on land owned by Massey LLC, and is approximately 1600 feet away. The Alexander house is now 3000 feet from the proposed helistop.

Ms. Martin noted applicable law found in Article VII, Section 7.5 of the Land Use Ordinance which sets forth the criteria for granting approval. It was noted that site plan review is required. The applicant will also need to modify the existing sediment control plan and submit a standard stormwater management plan.

Staff recommended approval of the special exception with the same conditions as the original approval for Skippack, specifically:

• The use is for private business use of Skippack Aviation LLC only
• There shall be no hangers, no fuel, no maintenance except repair if necessary
• A flight log be maintained and open for inspection by the representatives of the Department of Planning and Zoning
• There shall be no more than 25 to 30 landings per year
• The standard condition that the special exception granted will lapse after one year if no substantial construction occurs.

The office has received no correspondence on this application. There were no comments from the audience.

Attorney Saunders advised the conditions are acceptable to the applicants. He noted the office building became available for meetings. The basis for flying to the site would be for staff meetings and the revised site is a more appropriate location for the helistop.

Mr. Kerns reviewed the site plan with the Planning Commission. The applicants feel this is the best location for the helistop. He noted that sporting clay setup no longer exists an the property. Mr. Kerns noted the parking lot is at the revised site. The site is FAA approved. A windsock will be installed. A pond is approximately 4000 feet away and it is not felt there will be any negative effect on hunting.

Mr. Kerns advised the helicopter pilot keeps a log of trips.

It was noted that John Kling from Natural Resources Conservation District inspected the site with regards to the sediment control plan and found the helistop was at a different location than shown on the plans. He reported his findings to the planning staff. Ms. Brown expressed concern that the applicants chose a different site without the proper authority.

After some discussion, Mr. Lancaster made a motion to forward a favorable recommendation to the Board of Appeals recommending approval of the special exception submitted by Skippack Aviation, LLC to relocate the previously approved helistop on the Alexander Farm near Massey. The Board recommends the same conditions be attached to this approval and the inclusion of an addition condition that a copy of the flight log be submitted annually to the Kent County Department of Planning and Zoning for review.

This decision is based on the following findings:

• The closest residence to the new site, owned by Massey LLC , is more than 1600 feet away
• The helistop is FAA approved
• The helistop is designed to minimize approaches and takeoff areas over residential areas
• There will be no sale or leasing of aircraft, maintenance or flight instructions permitted
• This helistop is for Skippack Aviation only
• There will be no hangers or fuel. Only emergency maintenance will be allowed
• There will be no more than 25 to 30 landings per year.

Mr. Lancaster further noted the approval shall be for a period not to exceed five years.

The motion was seconded and the vote unanimous.

STAFF REPORTS

Amy G. Moredock, Environmental Planner - Ms. Moredock noted the Sassafras River Group will holding its fourth meeting tonight in Cecil County. They are looking for a project.

Gail Webb Owings, Planning Director - Mrs. Owings noted the County Commissioners have requested the planning staff focus violation enforcement on the Fourth Election District. Discussion ensued regarding the violation enforcement process. Rev. Freeman asked about a specific violation - moving of trailer on Herschell Claggett's property which was a condition of an approval by the Planning Commission.

The Stories of the Chesapeake Heritage Areas was certified pending approval by all the jurisdictions.

GENERAL DISCUSSION

The Planning Commission discussed with staff a possible amendment to the Land Use Ordinance addressing the minimum lot size and minimum lot width in the Village District. The Board and staff agreed they want to see the best design. Is it possible to create more flexibility with lot sizes? Can it be addressed through a Village Master Plan? Can diversity and flexibility be defended in court? Discussion ensued. It was concluded that further review is needed before considering any such text. Because of staff's time restraints, a consultant may need to be hired. There are several communities that could be considered however it may be best to start with one area.

There being no further business, Vice Chairman Sutton adjourned the regular monthly meeting. The Board then continued with review of text for a section of the Comprehensive Plan.

___________________________________

William S. Sutton, Vice Chairman

___________________________________

Elizabeth E. Carroll, Secretary

Home | Business | Community | Government | Top

© Chesapeake Bay Internet Associates - 1996-2000: All Rights Reserved.