Board of Appeals approves Drift Inn cell tower but requires owner consent or variance for setback

The St. Mary’s County Board of Appeals voted unanimously July 24 to approve a conditional use permit (CUAP25-0035) for the proposed Drift Inn Communications Tower, a commercial wireless facility proposed by Telecom Capital Group, with a condition that the applicant either obtain a notarized statement of consent from the adjacent owner for structures within the tower’s fall/setback zone or obtain a setback variance.

The decision follows a continuance from June 26 and a lengthy public hearing that included staff testimony, legal briefing on setback language in the county zoning code and public comments from neighbors. The tower was described in the record as a 190-foot commercial communications tower sited on property leased from the landowner (identified in the record as Mr. Adams) and accessed from Newmarket Turner Road. Planning staff and the county attorney advised the board that, as written, the comprehensive zoning ordinance’s site-association language means structures on the same parcel as the tower are not counted as “other structures” triggering the 100% of height setback; neighbors said portions of adjacent parcels lie within the tower’s fall zone and urged caution.

Why it matters: the dispute centered on how to apply CZO setback language that requires a tower to be set back from “any residence, historic site building, or other structure not associated with the tower site” by a distance equal to 100% of the tower’s height. That interpretation determines whether nearby structures on adjoining parcels fall inside the required setback and whether the applicant needed a variance. Board members said they were reluctant to pivot mid-hearing to decide an unadvertised variance question and instead attached a condition that places the burden…