Planning commission favors variance for Griffin Neck Road porch despite Critical Area opposition

Dorchester County planning staff told the commission that Critical Area reviewers oppose a variance request that would place a 16-by-16 screened porch 14 feet inside the county’s 100-foot Tidewater buffer at 4214 Griffin Neck Road.

Cass Dyson of Dorchester County Planning summarized the record: the original house dated to 1965 and predated Critical Area rules; the dwelling was demolished in 2024 and the replacement was permitted so that the main house sat outside the 100-foot buffer. In 2025 the applicants applied for a separate permit for a 16x16 covered porch on the house’s north side, but county inspectors later found footers for a porch on the west side that would sit approximately 86 feet from the water, inside the buffer. Dyson said Critical Area staff reviewed the application and “recommend an outright denial,” concluding the applicants had not met the statutory variance standards, including the burden to show an unwarranted hardship.

Applicants Jody and Theresa Sachs said the permit and construction resulted from contractor miscommunication. “We were kind of just left out of the plan,” Theresa Sachs told the commission, saying the contractor excavated footers where the owners expected the porch to be. The couple said moving the house footprint or relocating utilities (septic, well, heat pump) would be expensive and disrupt the home’s intended mudroom entry. They also said they had submitted a minor buffer management plan and offered to relocate two outbuildings; the applicants estimated removing those structures would increase buffer area by about 314 square feet while the porch would place roughly 128 square feet inside the buffer.

Commissioners questioned whether the porch had been shown on the house permit, who submitted the porch permit and whether the site posting matched the built location. County staff said porch and house permits were submitted separately online and that contractors sometimes sign permits on an owner’s behalf; the record shows the porch permit was submitted by the contractor, identified in the hearing as Adam Brown and associated with Clayton Homes. Inspectors issued a stop-work order when they discovered the footers in the location that differed from the approved plan.

Under Maryland Critical Area Law and implementing guidance cited by staff, the board must find that every variance standard is satisfied before granting a critical area variance. Planning staff relayed Critical Area staff’s view that the applicants had not overcome the presumption of nonconformity because the property, at about 11–12 acres, had room to locate a porch outside the buffer or to pursue alternatives such as a reduced-size porch or a different approved location.

After extended discussion about feasibility, alternatives and the applicants’ mitigation proposal, a commission member moved — and another seconded — a motion to forward a favorable recommendation to the Board of Appeals conditioned on removal of the two outbuildings and the buffer mitigation offered by the applicants. The motion passed by voice vote; commissioners emphasized that the Planning Commission’s action is advisory and that the Board of Appeals will make the final determination on the variance.

The commission concluded its meeting by noting scheduling items and adjourning. The advisory recommendation and the supporting record will be transmitted to the Board of Appeals for its review and final decision.