Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board approves height variance for detached garage at 5 Foxfield Court
Summary
Silver Spring Township’s zoning board granted Farinelli Construction a variance to build a detached garage exceeding accessory‑structure height limits at 5 Foxfield Court, finding site slope, distance from neighbors and visual mitigation sufficient to support relief.
The Silver Spring Township Zoning Hearing Board on June 10 approved Variance 2024‑6, permitting construction of a detached garage at 5 Foxfield Court (Parcel 38‑06‑0009‑020) that exceeds the height limits for an accessory structure under Section 204.C of the 2022 Zoning Ordinance.
Andrew C. Sheely, counsel for the applicant, presented Applicant Exhibits 1A–1D, including a topographical map and floodplain mapping. Applicant witness Eric Sechrist, an employee of Farinelli Construction, described the property as a 5.77‑acre lot that slopes to a creek in the rear and said the proposed garage was sited to minimize visibility from the cul‑de‑sac while keeping the garage well away from the floodplain.
Sechrist gave dimensional testimony: the front elevation of the new garage is roughly 23 feet, 8 inches, while the rear elevation facing the creek is approximately 35 feet; the garage would be about 183 feet from the cul‑de‑sac, 372 feet from the rear creek, 80 feet from the north property line and 226 feet from the south property line. He said the garage peak would be approximately 20 feet, 4 inches lower than the peak of the existing house.
Owner David Gabel testified he intends to use the garage for equipment (tractor, mower) rather than additional living space; township staff confirmed the upper level labeled “game room” is not intended as an apartment. Chelsea Leiby, Zoning Enforcement Officer, told the board that the plans otherwise complied with code and that a stormwater permit had been approved, leaving height as the remaining noncompliance.
Following brief board questioning about impervious coverage and alternatives, Mr. Siney moved to approve Variance 2024‑6; Mr. Leonard seconded. The board voted unanimously in favor and the chair announced the motion carries. Applicant Exhibit 2, a Homeowner Association approval letter, was also submitted to supplement testimony.
The approval permits the detached garage in the location and dimensions presented; the board’s discussion referenced site slope and visual mitigation (screening and distance) as primary reasons the requested relief would not unduly impact neighbors.
