Board upholds violation notices for River Road farm after testimony on unpermitted bins, pit and structures

The Caroline County Board of Zoning Appeals also took up a separate appeal from Heartland Holdings LLC concerning multiple violation letters for property at 14010 River Road in Greensboro.

Appellants’ counsel summarized the River Road case at the start of the second hearing: a concrete storage tank alleged to have been built without a permit and used at times to store dissolved air flotation (DAF) food-processing residuals; a manufactured home and an office trailer with an attached deck placed in locations that did not match permit drawings; multiple grain-storage bins, some constructed without permits and some sited inside required setbacks; and a straw-storage barn whose built size did not match the approved plans. Counsel said the applicant had been working with an engineering firm (Lane Engineering) and the health department, had applied for several permits and special-use approvals, and had pursued a variance that was denied.

Engineer Brett Ewing of Lane Engineering described surveying the site, preparing the site plans for heifer barns, a concrete pit and the grain operation, resubmitting plans after county comments in 2023 and coordinating with environmental health to address septic and wastewater issues. He testified that he had provided resubmissions in response to staff comment letters and that some elements (heifer barns, dwelling approvals) were near completion pending contractor paperwork, while other matters (grain-bin setbacks; variance denial) remained unresolved.

County staff said an on-site inspection after neighbor complaints identified additional grain bins, a relocated house and other structures beyond those on the original permit; staff explained stop-work orders issued in 2023 and said the county would not finalize certain accessory permits (such as for a manure-storage pit) until outstanding violations were remedied. Staff also read portions of violation letters and earlier staff comment letters into the record to demonstrate a protracted exchange of submittals and revisions.

During cross‑examination county counsel focused on the scope and timing of applications and the long-running effort to bring the property into compliance; the appellant said it had engaged engineers and attorneys, that some permits were pending with environmental health and planning, and that certain smaller structures would be removed once the dwelling and related approvals were finalized.

In deliberation the board addressed each violation item-by-item and voted to affirm the majority of the violation notices: house moved onto the property without required permits or in a different location than approved; office trailer and attached deck installed in different locations without permits; shed and straw-storage building sizes/locations inconsistent with approved permits; an unpermitted concrete pit used for storage; multiple grain-storage bins placed or expanded without proper permits and a subset sited inside required setbacks. The board noted that the applicant had pursued a special-use application and variances but that the variance had been denied and that unresolved violations prevent issuance of some accessory permits. The board instructed staff to prepare a written decision describing findings and compliance steps.

What’s next: staff will prepare the written decision describing required corrective actions and any timetable. Parties may appeal to the Circuit Court of Caroline County.