Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pocomoke City board discusses variance request for 6-foot fence at corner lot; outcome not recorded in transcript
Summary
A property owner requested a variance to install a six-foot privacy fence in the front-yard setback at 1514 Cedar Run in the Cedar Point subdivision. Planning staff presented the request and said neighboring property owners submitted signatures in support; the transcript does not record a final vote or outcome.
A property owner requested a variance to install a six-foot privacy fence within the front-yard setback on a corner lot at 1514 Cedar Run in the Cedar Point subdivision, and planning staff presented the case to the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Planning director Daniel Brandoyi summarized the application, noting that corner lots at the site have two front-yard setbacks of 30 feet and that the zoning ordinance limits front-yard fences on corner lots to no more than 30 inches (2.5 feet). Brandoyi told the board the applicant submitted a narrative, a site plan that shows a large portion of the lot as front yard, an aerial photo with the proposed fence drawn in, a street view photo and signatures from neighboring property owners who do not object. He also said there is a similar six-foot fence across the street at 1511 Cedar Street.
Lee Daniels, who identified himself as the applicant’s father-in-law and who said he lives at 7004 Gordy Road, told the board he was appearing in support for safety reasons on behalf of the applicant. “My only interest…is the safety of my grandkids,” Daniels said.
Board members discussed the variance criteria the zoning code lists for grantable variances and noted the staff report highlights the elements the board must find, including whether the variance is necessary for preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights and whether it would cause substantial detriment to neighboring properties. One board member said adjacent signatures and the similar fence across the street weigh in favor of approval. The transcript records discussion of making a motion to approve the variance but does not include an explicit roll-call or the final outcome on the record.
Staff materials attached to the application, as described by Brandoyi, show the lot’s layout leaves little backyard area because a large portion of the parcel falls within required front-yard setbacks. The proposed fence would be located just behind a partial sidewalk and would extend to the rear point of the south house on the property, according to the staff report.
Because the transcript does not record a final vote on the variance item, the board’s disposition of the request (approved, denied, tabled or otherwise) is not specified in the meeting record provided here.
