Planning commission denies request to modify subdivision agricultural buffer in Woods Heritage

The Queen Anne's County Planning Commission on Thursday denied a request to modify a required vegetative buffer for the Woods Heritage subdivision, ruling the proposed easement and delay in planting would undercut the county's agricultural-buffer standards.

The commission's decision came after the county planning staff, the applicant's attorney and multiple residents debated whether allowing a recorded easement that deferred planting, while doubling the potential easement width, would meet the intent of code section 18-1-76(d) to protect adjacent agricultural lands from nuisance claims.

Planning staff presented the history of the county's agricultural-buffer rules and recommended denial. Doug Summers, county planner, told the commission the parcel at 516 Poplar School Road had been conditioned with a 15-foot vegetative buffer under prior approvals and that the proposed easement could produce fragmented planting and leave future lot owners without practical recourse to ensure their neighbors planted a buffer.

Ryan Showalter, speaking for 4 Oaks Farm (the agricultural parcel owner), said the easement would be recorded and would run with the land, and that the proposal aimed to respond to current residents' preference to maintain open views while offering the ability eventually to establish a wider buffer on the farm parcel. Showalter said the applicant was willing to increase the potential buffer width (to 30 feet or more) and that homeowners would be able to plant the buffer themselves if they wished.

Several commissioners and residents said the plain language and intent of 18-1-76(d) do not support waiving or effectively deleting the buffer requirement. Commissioner Tillman said the change would 'diminish' protections the county adopted to protect farmland. Commissioner Ben (last name not specified in the record) and others expressed concern about subsequent owners who might not share current preferences and warned of setting a precedent.

Resident Judy Whitbread of Woods Heritage told the commission the community opposed the proposal. Jay Falstad of the Queen Anne's Conservation Association urged the commission to accept the department's findings and reject the amendment.

After public comment the commission voted on a motion to deny the amended major-subdivision approval for file SUB-24-110440, finding the amendment inconsistent with 18-1-76(d). The motion carried; the transcript records the motion, public comment, a second and a vote in open session. The transcript does not record a roll-call tally by name.

The denial leaves the original buffer requirement and the recorded subdivision conditions in place; the applicant may pursue other lawful options, such as planting the buffer as required under the existing approval or pursuing a formal code amendment through the county's text-amendment process.

Commission discussion at the same meeting also directed staff to prepare proposed code language to clarify timing and enforceability of required buffers for future subdivisions, including the possibility of tying planting obligations to building permits or certificates of occupancy and retaining landscaping surety requirements.

The Planning Commission's action is a recommendation/decision by the county planning body; any future code amendments would require separate hearings and adoption by the county commissioners.