[{"_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",6555929,"mediaKeyId","3336022-e03037ed5676a475ddae88135ee8305a","parentId",3336022,"title","Chesapeake Beach council passes two zoning amendments after public questions about clarity","audioSeconds",4600,"startMs",0,"endMs",4600000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3336022-e03037ed5676a475ddae88135ee8305a&start=0&end=4600","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3336022-e03037ed5676a475ddae88135ee8305a/thumbnail_0.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6555929/Chesapeake-Beach/Calvert-County/Maryland/Chesapeake-Beach-council-passes-two-zoning-amendments-after-public-questions-about-clarity","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6555929-a2e8e2e8a2323a0d737480ab425dba69/orig.mp4?Expires=1771174523&Signature=lIzPTft9nLrS1gkXnb2zWRUc-wMLULI~VpcOJjbjR9dhq3M3B~ubKsyaAyGUqa80ORFLYmoXLk7HvERKGjzUL7AmRFZuXwa4abzPHe7aa1a0KnXE-JeiY0SXFCXGRi6P41oizWmAaeX9VPTY1DaYWWN~RsH2x2Cm2kNVWzU1A3oappVoI-gRN~VoYQIdelRRLPJCLeoW5eVpTSDEAdAdb8ZExDdCMwQthtxD3P9~8FhqsP88sqTauzTwLJ13C3ycGLIQszwse8znog4W2hCrzjZIWtQlhPZ0y5QoIdS7UiCq7scCMu2lmpbdnKFfe2Vepne6DuVj7rdNu66KYdFsDw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Town of Chesapeake Beach, Maryland","date","2025-05-16T00:23:55Z","article","The Chesapeake Beach Town Council approved two zoning ordinances on May 8 after public and council members pressed for clearer wording and context.

Ordinance O-25-4, described by town planning staff as a request from the Critical Area Commission, relocates a single restriction on the grant of variances in the town code from one subsection to another. Sarah, the planning and zoning administrator, told the council: “This is actually a request from the Critical Area Commission…they asked that we move this 1 bullet from the standards to the procedures portion of the ordinance.”

Council discussion centered on clarity and context. A resident, Dan, and a council member (identified in the meeting record as Laurie) said the ordinance text as presented lacked the surrounding code text and numbering context, making it hard to follow. Laurie said she would not vote for the ordinance in its current presentation because “it is not presented in a way that is clear.” Planning staff and a planning commission representative explained the item was discussed at length by the planning commission and that the change is largely administrative: it repositions existing text rather than creating a new substantive requirement. The ordinance passed by voice vote; the clerk recorded the tally as four in favor and two opposed.

The council also approved Ordinance O-25-5, amending chapter 2.90 (zoning), article 5 (dimensional requirements), section 2.90-19(f). That ordinance provides exceptions to side‑setback and lot‑coverage rules for certain single‑family attached dwellings (townhomes) and clarifies application to properties built before Nov. 21, 2024. Planning staff explained the practical effect: interior townhouse units would not be required to maintain the previous 5‑foot side setback for decks, allowing decks to extend to the house edge, and would permit higher lot coverage for decks next to permanent open space. The staff explanation noted the change also reduces the need for repetitive board of appeals variances on nonconforming lots. A council member framed the change as a response to permit denials that had created discrepancies with neighboring properties.

Council members debated whether the ordinance’s phrasing should reference the zoning district or the constructed homes; planning staff recommended wording tying the rule to houses built before Nov. 21, 2024 so it would not inadvertently apply to new development. A small amendment clarifying the sentence order was proposed, discussed and then withdrawn after staff and the town attorney confirmed the intended reading. O-25-5 was approved by voice vote.

Both items were presented at a public hearing; members of the public asked for clearer display of the code sections affected and for the council to review the full text when the comprehensive update returns from the planning commission.

What changed and why it matters: O-25-4 is a code‑reorganization requested by the Critical Area Commission that staff described as administrative. O-25-5 removes a practical permitting barrier for some attached dwellings, reducing variance requests for preexisting townhomes and addressing permit denials that had frustrated residents and property owners.

Councilmembers and staff said both items will reappear if not adopted now as part of the comprehensive code review that is ongoing. Staff advised the public that the planning commission discussed these items at length prior to the council hearing.

Next steps: Town staff will continue to post updated code supplements online and will bring follow-up materials when the comprehensive critical‑area revisions return from the planning commission.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","May 15, 2025 Public Hearing and Town Council Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","The Chesapeake Beach Town Council approved two zoning amendments May 8 after public comment and council requests for clearer wording, one moving a Critical Area Commission‑requested sentence within the code and the other creating limited exceptions to setback and lot‑coverage rules for certain townhomes built before Nov. 21, 2024.","taxTitle","Chesapeake Beach, Calvert County, Maryland","taxId",71658,"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},6555919,"Votes at a glance: Chesapeake Beach Town Council actions, May 8, 2025",5973,1001000,6974000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3336022-e03037ed5676a475ddae88135ee8305a&start=1001&end=6974","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3336022-e03037ed5676a475ddae88135ee8305a/thumbnail_1001000.jpg","/articles/6555919/Chesapeake-Beach/Calvert-County/Maryland/Votes-at-a-glance-Chesapeake-Beach-Town-Council-actions-May-8-2025","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6555919-46dbe19d2ab1e9fab92685dab2492637/orig.mp4?Expires=1771174523&Signature=mwNsBKXAyxcN-ovGcQ5ywN2CLNxwkSJNELMZk6pzjcNX4PKEA18vdtMSKPAqs9K~USihcxPD5fOl8MgOVVo8FmqD27EZWro03uUDc9lNdwr49cfs1jZoVI2Qs62Y~OFRoh4iw-wlclgvJ~XYXti5Dmf~iM8L~oEmK4tqcVUO6eY8usn2c30iNTmDLFJjaTtUphm5IrYZd2lloSCUh~mfmyG-1iVm4cH98IgD9LUPmur0hgCtsu-tRYiuJxGE0tzCwFuUA4Xh~SImIyXZwrEIVy5miSB17wp3uEL8By-gSJ1SYTASS4IVa2XJwXc6HVKTqjKN5iWwbRrtSfcy91Et7g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Chesapeake Beach Town Council recorded the following formal actions on May 8, 2025. This roundup lists each motion, the stated outcome, and key details from the meeting record.

Ordinances and land-use actions
- Ordinance O-25-4 (amending ch. 2.90, art.7, sec. 2.90-32): Motion to approve; passed, recorded as 4 in favor, 2 opposed. Item described by staff as a Critical Area Commission request to relocate a restriction in the code.
- Ordinance O-25-5 (amending ch. 2.90, art.5, sec. 2.90-19(f), exceptions to setbacks and lot coverage for certain single‑family attached dwellings): Motion to approve; passed by voice vote after staff and planning commission explanation and a withdrawn amendment clarifying sentence order.

Approvals of routine business
- Motion to approve the meeting agenda: Passed by voice vote.
- Minutes approved: April 10 council meeting, April 30 budget work session, and April 30 closed session minutes (closed session minutes approval recorded with one abstention noted because a councilmember said they were not present).

Contracts, purchases and budget items
- Purchase of vacuum trailer for Public Works (Ditch Witch), $49,556.86: Motion to approve; passed by voice vote.
- Authorize agreement with Think Big for fiber‑optics installation: Motion approved (one councilmember abstained citing insufficient time to review). Staff noted vendor can upgrade later; council asked to record preference for higher speeds in writing.
- Authorize agreement with Mid Atlantic Asphalt and approve spending up to $290,000 for Beach Elementary tennis court repairs: Motion passed (recorded one no vote). Engineer listed a Mid Atlantic contract price around $206,000 and estimated total engineer budget at $290,000 to cover additional items; staff said $600,000 in state earmarked funds are available for the broader project.
- Move $26,300 from general fund salary/wages to legal services line and $2,500 to green team line: Motion passed; one abstention recorded.

Other
- Introduction of multiple FY2026 ordinances and scheduling of public hearings for June 12 (general fund, mitigation fund, waterpark fund, utility fund, water reclamation treatment plant fund, and a pool maintenance ordinance): Introductions made; hearings scheduled for June 12 beginning at 6:15 p.m.
- Motion to close the regular meeting and move into closed session under Maryland Code General Provisions §3-305(b)(7) (to consult with counsel regarding potential/pending litigation): Motion passed by voice vote.

Notes on procedure: Several items were introduced with staff and engineering reports attached in the agenda packet; council members repeatedly asked for clearer presentation of revised code language and for deliverables and budget estimates from outside contractors before further votes.

Detailed action records (as recorded in meeting minutes)
- Where roll-call names were not recorded in the transcript, outcomes are reported by voice tally or clerk summary as stated on the record.

If you rely on these results for an administrative or legal purpose, consult the official council minutes and ordinance texts filed with the town clerk for certified vote tallies and effective dates.","Summary of formal motions and votes taken at the May 8 Chesapeake Beach Town Council meeting, including ordinances, contracts and budget transfers.",{"_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},6555924,"Council hears water reclamation plant operations report; waterpark developer deliverables expected next meeting",748,1618000,2366000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3336022-e03037ed5676a475ddae88135ee8305a&start=1618&end=2366","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3336022-e03037ed5676a475ddae88135ee8305a/thumbnail_1618000.jpg","/articles/6555924/Chesapeake-Beach/Calvert-County/Maryland/Council-hears-water-reclamation-plant-operations-report-waterpark-developer-deliverables-expected-next-meeting","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6555924-2c9ea7c47eb1d0f6ecc97ab840afab58/orig.mp4?Expires=1771174523&Signature=L4RtY4LlsUo647dDFIJmby~ibdf9h7MOePnH7dUkCy5zDxmsFPDt2rtLPRMdjXVc62d4BWSP2q2DLkz7qMGoqefSmUVdBGIxSS7feJV9URPzGtPFiUH4vNnryqgaSBxnDoHo-Py-eFKK9KhU~6XIpl8MKZdOS0BJvLBn5QxO4HFJaOP9YEHBjIPU-LYL2hdogPpRVoDWhoAdVn5Y6UCiBgpXzoIhlxuqem~DgJmhf-ddPNVuKVJGBWMKGIOgTlSV1NWWYHqEt~DnMJE85~akg2C-wIMi9M6MYe-qclxQwL6yd0Gkk~J3t2gnqCqefe4QnBvK-7uatWKLgo0AMkq3MA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Town staff and the plant operations team briefed the Chesapeake Beach Town Council on May 8 about ongoing operational challenges at the town’s water reclamation treatment plant and on deliverables for the Waterpark renovation project.

Josh, the plant operations representative, summarized recent maintenance and emergency repairs at the plant and described a large runoff event in April that forced the plant to route excess flow into the shellfish protection tank. He said the plant saw more than a million gallons routed to the tank during the April 11–12 rain event and that the plant’s partners have been engaged to address upstream sources of inflow. Josh told the council a meeting with Anne Arundel County is planned for July to discuss high flows from the Rose Haven area and possible mitigation steps.

Josh described actions taken this reporting period: preventative maintenance (gear reducer inspections, lubrication, greasing), replacement of a reagent injector, repair of a UV distribution block after a ground short, and the installation of a new HVA ventilation system in the denitrification filter building. He said a previously noted blower vibration issue traced to faulty sensors, which were replaced. He also reported that core sampling of piles and grade beams at the waterpark site found no significant settlement and that piles were cored and in good condition; Paddock Pools’ field report was provided to the council that afternoon.

On interjurisdictional flows, staff said Anne Arundel County flows spike from a typical 70,000 gallons a day to around 400,000 gallons during heavy rains in certain areas that rely on grinder pumps; those spikes contribute to hydraulic challenges at the plant. Council members raised concerns that a single large storm could overwhelm the system and lead to discharges.

Separately, the council discussed the waterpark redevelopment. Council members recalled approving up to $60,000 earlier to Paddock for deliverables (scope of work and budget) and the expectation that the developer would return with a demolition quote and a budgetary estimate at the next meeting. Staff reported Paddock is preparing demolition‑permit support materials and said the developer indicated they would not proceed with demolition unless replacement plans are in hand; staff described the developer as doing preparatory work to be ready to execute once the full plan is presented. Council members reiterated that the $60,000 deliverable was to include a scope and a budget and that those deliverables were expected at the next meeting.

Additional plant items: the headworks project has an MDE permit and is ready to proceed when funding is available; the plant team will meet with partners to address discrepancies in EDU allocations; the utility rate study has completed phase one with a follow-up report and proposed rates expected in June.

What’s next: staff said they expect Paddock’s demolition quote and a rough budget estimate at the next council meeting; the council also expects an update after the July meeting with Anne Arundel County on high upstream flows.","Plant staff described heavy rain events, shellfish‑tank usage and interjurisdictional flow problems; the council was told headworks MDE permit is ready and that waterpark developer Paddock will provide scope and budget deliverables at the next meeting.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Chesapeake Beach council passes two zoning amendments after public questions about clarity

Votes at a glance: Chesapeake Beach Town Council actions, May 8, 2025

Council hears water reclamation plant operations report; waterpark developer deliverables expected next meeting