Board of Appeals approves variance to build on wetland‑constrained Piney Point lot, grants three‑year approval period

The St. Mary's County Board of Appeals on Nov. 6 approved variance VAAP-60696 to allow construction of a single‑family house and associated lot coverage within the critical‑area buffer at 16406 Ballpoint Road in Piney Point.

The variance was necessary because the lot is constrained by non‑tidal wetlands and an expanded critical‑area buffer. The applicant, Curry Hess, is the recorded owner; Robin Guyther, the applicant’s planning consultant, told the board the property was advertised as 6,673 square feet in county notices but described the lot informally as “very small, just over 5,000 square feet.” Guyther said the plan minimizes disturbance to wetlands and that state wetland reviewers had approved the approach to limit permanent disturbance to a narrow construction zone.

Staff recommended approval and explained the lot is essentially fully within the critical‑area buffer so it would be unbuildable without a variance. Jen Ballard, environmental planner, and other staff noted approvals from the health department (July 14) and the soil conservation district (July 16). Ballard said the applicant proposes to add 996 square feet of lot coverage, bringing existing plus proposed coverage to about 2,167 square feet — just under the lot limit of 2,168 square feet reported in staff materials.

The board attached two conditions to its approval: that deck planks have at least one‑quarter‑inch spacing to allow precipitation flow, and that the variance be valid for three years. The three‑year period was requested by Guyther, who said the owner lives in Texas and may need more time to sell that residence before returning to St. Mary’s County. The board’s motion approving the variance and the two conditions was made and seconded at the hearing and the board voted to approve the request.

The order reflecting the board’s decision will be prepared by staff and signed by the board within 60 days; once signed a 30‑day appeal period follows, during which work at the applicant’s risk may be appealed to Circuit Court.

The board’s action preserves environmental protections required by the county’s critical‑area procedures while allowing an otherwise constrained lot to be developed with mitigation and construction limits. Staff and the applicant said the final limits of disturbance will be marked on site with silt fencing and that the applicant intends to record a survey showing wetland boundaries.

An administrative note from staff at the hearing clarified how the variance/permit timeline operates: if the applicant obtains a building permit before the one‑year lapse of a variance, building permits themselves may be extended, which in effect can allow the project to proceed up to about three years without the applicant returning to the board, but an explicit three‑year variance was granted in this case to provide certainty for the owner.