[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6351806,"mediaKeyId","2226762-0f992d065c80975ab8b8855a154005c3","parentId",2226762,"title","Board of Appeals upholds Planning Commission denial for FDR Holdings concept plan over FDR Boulevard alignment","audioSeconds",4353,"startMs",74000,"endMs",4427000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2226762-0f992d065c80975ab8b8855a154005c3&start=74&end=4427","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2226762-0f992d065c80975ab8b8855a154005c3/thumbnail_74000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6351806/St-Marys-County/Maryland/Board-of-Appeals-upholds-Planning-Commission-denial-for-FDR-Holdings-concept-plan-over-FDR-Boulevard-alignment","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6351806-0325d498ac8cca0af9dc62bde8615910/orig.mp4?Expires=1775158874&Signature=G69TfMVRsou4sQbCcGybHZZOieNmXqWtIA9ba03nT5rwlWhj2TtbzWN5OWIarNi8Iq5B2v1xUz2fv99JpV5thAL8eh1zjAIYGLyu2ReQxeA5wXyBqhpeaJZQ4T1EaNS9Ay4-4RxrJ2Xaf3LPX4Y1XEZxV92aB1QC6PPRLR8ghNvc66zrNc4-48botfI2GfCeRoo30TTJCU3xc3IQmazlq1wKAruZNJEqU5toM3KLLrcj0S9OrYo1~0cJD4LnPBLd0orr4g7o173mqF802JSv7qE72nZCAhu~JKG7Q5NCIfyuHBA4XdLHkU76LvwpcQT-hRLhThH3wdpP-Gx6a3gq4w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","St. Mary's County, MD","date","2025-02-05T19:15:22Z","article","The St. Mary’s County Board of Appeals on Nov. 29, 2007 voted 4–1 to uphold the Planning Commission’s decision to deny a concept site plan submitted by FDR Holdings LLC for a proposed office building in Lexington Park, a decision the appellants tied to the proposed alignment of FDR Boulevard.

John Norris, attorney for FDR Holdings, told the board the case turns on FDR Boulevard and argued the county has not completed the legal steps — spelled out in Article 66B, §6.01 — needed to reserve a formal right-of-way that would support setback requirements. “The county hasn't followed the steps to protect FDR Boulevard,” Norris said, and urged the board to overturn the Planning Commission and approve the concept plan.

The Planning Commission had denied the concept plan on July 9, 2007, finding it failed to meet section 60.50.3 of the county zoning ordinance requiring concept plans to be consistent with the comprehensive plan and applicable functional plans; staff also cited section 61.70.3 on official right-of-way lines and setbacks. County staff and the Director of Public Works (Mister Erickson) testified that the FDR Boulevard alignment used in the county’s 2006 transportation plan derives from a 1999 survey and is being used for design work in the county’s capital improvement program, though staff acknowledged the alignment has not been “officially mapped” in the manner described in Article 66B.

Erickson described the 1999 survey work (deed mosaic, datum NAD 83/NGVD 29, environmental delineations and stationing) and said the alignment was used to design sections of FDR Boulevard. He and other staff also said the alignment had been accepted as the basis for design work in several public hearings and incorporated into capital budgeting at times, although an adopted county resolution and recorded plat specifically reserving the right-of-way, as described in Article 66B, had not been completed.

Board members debated whether the Planning Commission erred in applying the zoning ordinance standard (section 60.50.3) given the transportation plan and associated surveys. Counsel advised the Board its role was limited to determining whether the Planning Commission erred in its findings. After discussion, the Board voted to uphold the Planning Commission’s denial. The Board directed staff to prepare an order reflecting the decision; the chair said the order will be prepared and signed within 60 days and noted a 30-day appeal period to the Circuit Court would follow the signing.

The decision leaves in place the Planning Commission determination that the concept plan was not consistent with the comprehensive and transportation plans as applied, and that setback requirements tied to the proposed FDR Boulevard alignment supported denial. Norris said the property owner may pursue remedies available outside the administrative appeal process.

Votes at a glance: The Board of Appeals upheld the Planning Commission’s denial by a 4–1 vote. The Board did not record a roll-call vote in the audio transcript; the chair’s announcement recorded the tally as 4 in favor of upholding the denial and 1 opposed.

Background: The site at issue is a 0.75-acre parcel zoned BMX in Lexington Park (water/sewer category W1/S1). The Planning Commission denied concept site plan approval on July 9, 2007, citing inconsistency with the comprehensive plan and functional plans because of setbacks measured from the proposed FDR Boulevard alignment. Appellants contend the county has not satisfied the nine-step Article 66B procedure for formally reserving a right-of-way and that without formal mapping the setbacks cannot be required.

Next steps: Staff will prepare the Board’s signed order within 60 days. Parties have 30 days after the signed order to seek judicial review in the Circuit Court if they choose.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","11/29/2007 St. Mary's County Zoning Board of Appeals","oneSentenceSummary","The St. Mary’s County Board of Appeals on Nov. 29, 2007 voted 4–1 to uphold the Planning Commission’s denial of a concept site plan submitted by FDR Holdings LLC for a proposed office building in Lexington Park, a decision the appellants tied to the proposed alignment of FDR Boulevard.","taxTitle","St. Mary's County, Maryland","taxId",51086,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6351796,"Board approves after‑the‑fact Haney deck variance with conditions, orders size reduction and mitigation",964,5276000,6240000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2226762-0f992d065c80975ab8b8855a154005c3&start=5276&end=6240","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2226762-0f992d065c80975ab8b8855a154005c3/thumbnail_5276000.jpg","/articles/6351796/St-Marys-County/Maryland/Board-approves-afterthefact-Haney-deck-variance-with-conditions-orders-size-reduction-and-mitigation","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6351796-b3a83ede2e536c9c9c46fd390f34f08c/orig.mp4?Expires=1775158874&Signature=AiLzrchq4OETHTO4oID52jSNz1d4IwgnT7bN~EBjFX-Z6RXIE~VbjYuA5BNfZASWf0dber4-V2~f7cy8aeh6sNaTo6oAw4M5V3HnadAxGxwWlNXLyqeFXjfF~E6udhbWGtmPuVzndXqvYb2dhp~gfDepBH8AffE-BNnlg~vUsEU31MbxWHSAOGMJjfOujuCVeIHU-xfh2xoV5cL5sVPdRaD7ab85I79rpkWuoFuEUXIWbRtew8DFnobaxsckbGZW-MJWVHNZxWSu4pc1oQlCVzpOo9RHSVBV7DJe37PZYydE9-HCkfqK1dbhSR7o9ZS~mZv2H9WELx89BukTqXXJ7w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Board of Appeals on Nov. 29, 2007 approved an after‑the‑fact variance for a deck at 38810 Collinwood Drive (VAAP‑07‑2595) with conditions that reduce the deck’s footprint and require mitigation measures.

Thomas Haney, the property owner, told the Board he rebuilt a previously existing deck that had been removed after storm damage and that he had assumed a permit was not required for replacement of the earlier structure. The property is in the Critical Area (Resource Preservation District with Limited Development Area overlay) and a deck located within the 100‑foot tidal buffer is counted as impervious surface under county rules.

Staff and Critical Area reviewers recommended denial of a deck of the size constructed — recorded in the file as 925 square feet (approx. 37 feet wide by 25 feet deep) — because it did not meet the minimum-necessary and unwarranted-hardship variance standards for new impervious surface in the buffer. Following discussion, the Board approved a reduced deck size and mitigation: the Board’s motion approved the variance on condition that the deck be reduced to 37 feet by 15 feet (555 sq ft), that gravel or other accepted mitigation be placed under the deck to reduce runoff/impervious impacts, and that the applicant obtain the required demolition and building permits and complete mitigation within the time allowed by the Board’s order.

The Board discussed reasonable use of grandfathered structures in the buffer and staff advised a smaller deck (staff suggested 15x15 feet as a baseline for reasonable use) would be more consistent with county policy. The Board’s approval preserves the owner’s ability to enjoy an outdoor area while reducing impacts compared with the as-built deck and requiring mitigation for new impervious coverage.

The Board’s action includes standard follow-up: the applicant must revise and submit a corrected site plan showing the reduced deck and mitigation, secure required permits (including any demolition permit for the portion removed), and complete work within the period stated in the Board order. The Board noted orders will be prepared and signed by staff within 60 days; the 30‑day appeal period to the Circuit Court follows the signing.","The Board of Appeals granted an after‑the‑fact variance for a deck at 38810 Collinwood Drive (VAAP‑07‑2595) on Nov. 29, 2007, conditioning approval on reducing the deck from 37x25 ft (925 sq ft) to 37x15 ft (555 sq ft), adding gravel/mitigation under the structure and standard permit/demolition requirements; applicant to submit revised site plan.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6351801,"Board continues Wilkinson variance after county right‑of‑way questions; hearing rescheduled for Jan. 10, 2008",98,5091000,5189000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2226762-0f992d065c80975ab8b8855a154005c3&start=5091&end=5189","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2226762-0f992d065c80975ab8b8855a154005c3/thumbnail_5091000.jpg","/articles/6351801/St-Marys-County/Maryland/Board-continues-Wilkinson-variance-after-county-rightofway-questions-hearing-rescheduled-for-Jan-10-2008","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6351801-7fd8b0560280f2ef5ca15dfbca89a6ce/orig.mp4?Expires=1775158874&Signature=KxgDNSsXCjC8XbbHjnzFIXhPpz~pHNg~U1usCmgOvo7qXLGVxZJNnXgTXcF6gZVP4hepcAcWrZWWC6naxid0x7yfWkQ0Y2KDbuTholZOzPNYNf5SY0gN3ftqsSaqBPwqyhfNUCAo2ZXTrPylovTQAaN3ggX6MQMCAqMmsRYwSC6X7S8m5ddaHoooEXeN0FjNAxJicDjDcSgk7XqMYx7bPpujt17J-acr4zpp7Ppww6xcUWuunKmJ3JDdVL41yzhplgxcnNIZrHz5K1RxAt4H0v2lTNdKMOFzSV0v0HBZqyC2eEydklcXIQh0JdYDzrJvG7rTdkQSzwTHy5VR1RvTow__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Board of Appeals on Nov. 29, 2007 continued a variance application from John and Susan Wilkinson after county staff and engineering raised a disputed county-owned right-of-way that did not appear on the applicant’s submitted site plan.

The Wilkinson property at 14654 Bayfront Drive (Scotland Beach) is a small lot within the County’s RPD (Resource Preservation District) and limited development overlay. Staff told the Board that the county had recently acknowledged a variable-width public right-of-way across Lot 19 based on a State Highway Administration deed conveyed to the county; Department of Public Works supplied a redlined plan showing the right-of-way’s approximate location. Because the applicant’s site plan did not depict the right-of-way, staff said it could not determine whether the proposed replacement house and deck would be located in county-owned right-of-way and therefore recommended postponement until the plan was revised.

Applicant John Wilkinson described a long history of ownership in his family, hurricane damage and a complex chain of title and plat history dating to a 1944 State Roads Commission document. He said the house has been in his family since 1969 and that the Maryland Department of Health had required rebuilding the dwelling in the same footprint for septic and health reasons. Wilkinson said he had multiple prior site plans and surveys (including a 1987 property-line survey by Macron) and is pursuing legal review of the right-of-way claim.

Board members agreed the right-of-way issue created a cloud over the application. Counsel and staff advised that, because staff could not confirm the right-of-way location on the submitted site plan, the Board should continue the matter so the applicant can submit a single, engineer-signed plat showing the house, all easements and the county right-of-way (if present). The Board continued the hearing to Jan. 10, 2008 and instructed staff to ensure the revised exhibit shows the existing conditions and the claimed county right-of-way so the Board can make a substantive decision.

No final decision was made on variances; the continuation preserves the applicant’s opportunity to provide clarified, signed documentation. The Board noted that if a county-owned right-of-way is confirmed, the applicant may require a separate administrative procedure or additional variance for any encroachment.","The Board of Appeals continued a variance application for John and Susan Wilkinson (VAAP-06-2519) after staff said a county deeded right-of-way across the parcel was not shown on the site plan. The board set a new hearing date of Jan. 10, 2008 to allow a revised, signed plat showing the right-of-way and house location.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board of Appeals upholds Planning Commission denial for FDR Holdings concept plan over FDR Boulevard alignment

Board approves after‑the‑fact Haney deck variance with conditions, orders size reduction and mitigation

Board continues Wilkinson variance after county right‑of‑way questions; hearing rescheduled for Jan. 10, 2008