Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Housing Affordable Setback Variances topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board approves setback variances for Hunting Creek self‑help duplex porches

2222028 · February 5, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Board of Appeals granted five variance requests to reduce front‑yard setbacks so porches already built (or under construction) on Hunting Creek duplexes meet setback rules. Staff described the situation as an oversight on through‑lot treatment; the board approved modest setbacks reductions for each lot.

The St. Mary’s County Board of Appeals on April 22 approved a set of five variance requests (VAAP‑09‑0097 and VAAP‑08‑1529, VAAP‑08‑1530, VAAP‑08‑1531, VAAP‑08‑1532) filed to reduce required front‑yard setbacks for porches on duplexes within the Hunting Creek planned unit development. The properties are part of an affordable self‑help housing project developed by Southern Maryland Tri‑County Community Action Committee.

Planning staff explained the technical basis: the affected lots are through lots (Chapter 90 definition), which require a 25‑foot front‑yard setback from each street. Staff said an earlier house‑location/site plan review overlooked that porches appearing on what the applicant believed to be the rear would actually front Bluebell Street and therefore encroach into the 25‑foot setback. Staff recommended approval, citing the through‑lot configuration, the modest size of the encroachments and the affordable‑housing context.

Lisa Quill, agent for Southern Maryland Tri‑County Community Action Committee, described the project as a self‑help housing program in which participating families perform much of the construction under agency supervision. Quill told the board most of the porches are already constructed and said removal would impose a substantial burden on low‑income families who financed materials through rural development loans: “If you do not approve a variance, our only option would be to remove the porches, and that really would be a burden for the families,” she said.

Board members reviewed staff findings and noted that adjoining lots are similar duplex units; the encroachments ranged from roughly one to four feet in the testimony and staff materials. The board voted to grant the variances individually with the following specific reductions recorded in the motions and staff orders: - VAAP‑09‑0097 (Lot 5, 46650 Orchid Lane): front‑yard setback reduced from 25 feet to 23 feet. - VAAP‑08‑1532: front‑yard setback reduced from 25 feet to 19 feet. - VAAP‑08‑1531: front‑yard setback reduced from 25 feet to 20 feet. - VAAP‑08‑1530: front‑yard setback reduced from 25 feet to 20 feet. - VAAP‑08‑1529: front‑yard setback reduced from 25 feet to 20 feet.

All five variance motions passed unanimously (motions made and seconded on the record; no votes opposed). Staff will prepare and circulate formal signed orders; those orders will include findings of fact and a 30‑day appeal period from the date the orders are signed.

The board’s action resolved an administrative oversight while allowing the self‑help homebuilding program to proceed with minimal disruption to families already engaged in construction.