BEFORE THE BOARD OF APPEALS OF QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY  In the matter ofApplication by Cedar Lane Solar Farm, LLC  Case No. BOA-23-06-0154  for Conditional Use  FINAL DECISION OFTHE BOARD  Introduction  The Queen Anne's County Board of Appeals (the "Board") held a meeting on April 17, 2024 at 5:00 p.m. to consider Case No. BOA-23-06-0154 filed by Cedar Lane Solar Farm, LLC, Lessee of lands owned by Estate of Peter G. Sheaffer, for conditional use approval to permit the construction of a utility scale solar array, conditional use approval to permit the use of a 1.744 MW (AC) utility scale solar array on a 15-acre lease area within a 165.028-acre parcel in the Agricultural (AG) Zoning District. The subject property is located on Cedar Lane in Church Hill, Maryland ini the 2nd Election District of Queen Anne's County (the Property").  The Board members present were Chairman, Howard Dean, and Board Members Craig W. McGinnes, and Michael Lesniowski. Attorney for the Board, Lyndsey Ryan, Clerk to the Board, Cathy Maxwell, Senior Planner Steve Johnson, Development Review Principal Planner, Rob Gunter, and Zoning Administrator, Vivian Swinson were also present. Present on behalf of the Applicant were Attorney for the Applicant, Kurt Karsten, Zac Meyer from Soltage Renewal  Energy, and Nate Hoxter from Lane Engineering.  At the beginning of the hearing, the Board established that all requirements were met governing the filing of the conditional use application, and proper notice of the April 17h public hearing. Board Chairman Dean administered the oath to all who wished to testify on the  application, including the Applicant.  Applicant's Request  The Applicant is seeking a conditional use on the Property. Specifically, the Applicant is seeking conditional-use approval under the provisions of SS 18:1-14.C(25), 18:1-38.1, and 18:1-    Cedar Land Solar Farm, LLC Conditional Use p.2  95.S to permit the use ofa 1.744 MW (AC) utility scale solar array on a 15-acre lease area within  al 165.028-acre parcel in the Agricultural Zoning District.  Applicable Provisions of the Code  Queen Anne'sCounty Code Section 18.1-14.C25)provides that utility scale solar array is The standards the Board must apply the Applicant's request for a conditional use are set forth in $ 18:1-94 ofthe Code. Toa approve the conditional use, the Board must find as follows: 1. The proposed use at the proposed location shall be consistent with the general purpose, goals, objectives, and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, this Chapter 18:1, or any other plan, program, map, or ordinance adopted, or under  a Conditional use in the Agricultural Zoning District.  consideration pursuant to official notice, by the County.  2.  The proposed use at the proposed location will not result in a  substantial or undue adverse impacts on adjacent property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, public improvements, public sites or rights-of-way, or other matters affecting the public health, safety, and general  welfare.  3. The proposed use at the proposed location will be adequately served by, and will not impose an undue burden on, any of the required improvements referred to in this Chapter 18:1, Part7. Where any such improvements, facilities, utilities, or services are not available or adequate to service the proposed use at the proposed location, the applicant shall, as part oft the application and as a condition ofapproval oft the conditional use, be responsible for establishing ability, willingness, and binding commitment to provide such improvements, facilities, utilities, and services in sufficient time and in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, this Chapter 18:1, and other plans,  programs, maps, and ordinances adopted by the County.  Section 18:1-95.S identifies specific standards for a solar array conditional use. In addition, $ 18:1-123.B requires the Board to make the following findings to approve a conditional  use:  1. exist; 2. 3.  The conditions concerning that conditional use as detailed in this Chapter 18:1  The conditional use conforms to the Comprehensive Plan; and The conditional use is compatible with the existing neighborhood.    Cedar Land Solar Farm, LLC Conditional Use p.3  Last, pursuant to Maryland Annotated Code, Land Use Article $ 1-303, the Board must include in its evaluation of the Comprehensive Plan, pursuant to the above-cited section, certain consistency findings. The Board's approval ofa conditional use must further, and not be contrary  to, the following items in the Queen Anne's County Comprehensive Plan:  1. 2. 3. 5. 6. 7.  Policies;  Timing of the implementation of the plan; Timing of development; 4. Timing of rezoning; Development patterns; Land uses; and Densities or intensities.  Property Description and Department of Planning & Zoning Recommendations Steve Johnson, Senior Planner with the Department of Planning & Zoning, presented his Staff Report on the application. Mr. Johnson said the Applicant is proposing to construct a 1.744 MW (AC) utility scale solar array on a 15-acre lease area within a 165.028-acre parcel (the  "Project").  Mr. Johnson explained that all solar arrays that sell to off-site customers are considered utility scale, including community solar projects. All utility scale solar projects must fall within the Utility Scale Solar Array Overlay District. Mr. Johnson confirmed that the project falls within  this District.  Next, Mr. Johnson described the Property and its location. He said that the Property is located at Tax Map 30 Parcel 8, Lot 14 located off Cedar Lane in Church Hill, Maryland and contains 165.028 acres. Mr. Johnson presented the concept plan for the Project. The Property is currently used for agricultural production and there is an existing solar array to the north of the project area. Mr. Johnson pointed out an existing Delmarva Power substation near the Property that the Project will connect to. Mr. Johnson pointed out that the leased area totals 15 acres and the fenced solar array area is 10.92 acres. The Property is currently zoned Agricultural. The proposed use is a conditional use in the Agricultural zoning district. Mr. Johnson said that the site is partially located within a sensitive species project review area. Correspondence from the Department of Natural Resources indicates there are no sensitive species on site, but the Property    Cedar Land Solar Farm, LLC Conditional Use p.4  does fall within the drainage of Southeast Creek, which supports sensitive freshwater mussel species. The Project will adhere to protective measures for aquatic habitat provided by DNR. A copy of the correspondence from DNR was included in the Board's packets. Mr. Johnson explained there is nontidal wetland buffer within the leased area but there is no proposed  disturbance to the buffer.  Mr. Johnson explained that in order to address forest conservation requirements, the Applicant will retain and place into long-term protection 3 acres of offsite woods on adjacent Lot  1, which is adjacent to another forest conservation area.  Mr.. Johnson explained that the concept plan shows there is access to the Property off Cedar Lane. All parking and deliveries during construction will be within the temporary staging area and there will be no parking along Cedar Lane during the project. Proposed impervious coverage is 34,963 square feet, which is far less than the maximum allowed 261,360 square feet. The Department of Public Works reviewed the storm water associated with the Project and approved it, and they will continue to do sO during the site plan process. The stormwater management consists of disconnection, sheet flow, and vegetation provided throughout the site. There isno permanent water and sewer required for this project, however, any on-site work exceeding two hours requires portable toilet and handwashing facilities. A condition was included at the end of the Staff Report regarding this requirement from the Department of Environmental Health. Noise associated with the use will be less than sixty decibels at the Property line as required, there is no  lighting proposed, and existing topsoil will not be removed from the site.  Next, Mr. Johnson presented the Board with the application materials related to the required 50-foot landscape buffer. The owner-operator will enter into a contract with a landscape contractor to provide regular irrigation and maintenance. A detailed irrigation schedule was included with the landscape plan. The Staff Report includesacondition that the Applicant provide paid invoices for watering to the County once a month for the first year. None of the equipment exceeds the maximum height for the Agricultural Zoning District. The solar panels have a maximum height of 10.5 feet. All other equipment on the site will be 7 foot six inches or less. The proposed black vinyl coated chain link fence will be 8 feet tall and will include all required  signage.    Cedar Land Solar Farm, LLC Conditional Use p.5  The Applicant provided a site access plan in the packet, which provided that trucks will enter the site by traveling on US 301 to Price Station Road and then turn immediately right on Cedar Lane; they will exit the same route. Mr. Johnson concluded by stating that no agencies that reviewed the concept plan object to its approval, and Planning and Zoning staff does not object to the Board of Appeals granting a conditional use subject to the conditions listed in the Staff Report. Mr. McGinnes asked Mr. Johnson whether the entrance on Cedar Lane was the only way toa access the property. Mr. Johnson explained that the entrance on Cedar Lane is the main  entrançe, but there is another entrance for utilities.  Applicant's Presentation  Kurt Karsten presented the application on behalf of the Applicant. Mr. Karsten explained that the Project includes a curved section at the bottom oft the site plan due to an irrigation system. The proposed site for the project was intentionally placed just outside of the irrigation cove to  avoid disrupting the agricultural operation of the neighboring farm.  Mr. Karsten further explained that the Applicant worked hard with Planning and Zoning to create a model for similar projects in the County. Mr. Karsten explained that the Applicant has no objection to the conditions set forth int the Staff Report. Mr. Karsten stated that the Applicant may consider tying into the irrigation system for watering the plantings and suggested that there may  be some flexibility in the language of the conditions to do SO.  Next, Mr. Karsten explained that the power generated by the Project is proposed to go toa community solar project which is a low and moderate income project that has been approved by the Public Service Commission through which 51% of the power would be sold to low and  moderate income residents.  Mr. McGinnes asked if the community solar project would support low and moderate income residents in the area. Mr. Karsten answered that it would go to the Delmarva distribution  center.  Nate Hoxter from Lane Engineering, the liçensed landscape architect on behalf of the Applicant, explained that the Applicant worked with various agencies at the different stages of review regarding stormwater, fire apparatus, access, and landscaping. Mr. Hoxter also stated that the Applicant provided a full landscape plan that provides and meets requirements for the site.    Cedar Land Solar Farm, LLC Conditional Use p.6  Chairman Dean asked ifthere are trees all around the site. Mr. Hoxter described the size of the trees. Chairman Dean asked whether they need to move soil for the berm. Mr. Hoxter  answered that there will be no berm.  Chairman Dean said that the trees should bei irrigated. Mr. Hoxter stated that the Applicant will provide invoices for irrigation services for the Project and they are proposing a water truck  for watering.  Zac Meyer, Director of Development at Soltage, the proposed long-term operator of the Mr. Karsten stated that the irrigation plan includes working with a local provider and the Planning Commission to set up an irrigation plan for short and long term irrigation needs. Chairman Dean said that the neighboring farm'si irrigation schedule and the access to water should  Project introduced himself and stated that he was available to answer questions.  not be a problem.  Ms. Ryan said that looking at $18-1-95.S(3)a) is the requirement for the conditional use and for this specific project is the recommendation from the Planning Commission. Mr. Karsten confirmed that the Applicant did receive a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission. Ms. Ryan asked if there were specific recommendations from the Planning Commission. Mr. Johnson said that the Planning Commission recommended concept plan approval with conditions matching those oft the Staff Report. Ms. Ryan asked ifthere were minutes from the Planning Commission meeting to document the approval. Then, Ms. Ryan said that the Board could supplement the record with the statement in the Staff Report noting the favorable  recommendation of the Planning Commission.  Mr. Lesniowski asked about the monthly receipts for irrigation and how the plan accounts for rain events. Mr. Karsten answered that the local contractor would have to document that they went to the site and determined that irrigation was not necessary. Mr. Lesniowski suggested making thatacondition for approval. The Board and the Applicant engaged in: a general discussion about various options for the irrigation plan and the condition addressing the irrigation plan.  Testimony from the Public  After the Applicant presented his case, Chairman Dean asked ifany members oft the public  wished to testify. No members oft the public testified.    Cedar Land Solar Farm, LLC Conditional Use p.7  Findings and Conclusions of the Board  The Board finds the testimony, application and exhibits provided by the Applicant, as well as the written report and testimony provided by Mr. Johnson, credible and persuasive. The Board concludes that the evidencej justifies approval ofthe conditional use request. Based on the evidence presented, and duly considering the applicable factors from the Queen Anne's County Code, the  Board specifically finds and concludes as follows:  1. 2. 3.  The application met the submittal requirements pursuant to $ 18.1-95.S. The application meets the required conditions of $ 18.1-38.1.B.  The proposed use at the proposed location is consistent with the general purpose, goals, objectives, and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 18:1, or any other plan, program, map, or ordinance adopted, or under consideration pursuant to official  notice, by the County.  4.  The proposed use will not result in a substantial or undue adverse impact on adjacent property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, public improvements, public sites or rights-of-way, or other matters affecting the public health,  safety, and general welfare.  5. 18:1, Part 7. 6. 7. 8. 9.  The proposed use at the proposed location will be adequately served by, and will not impose an undue burden on any of the required improvements referred to in Chapter  The project supports the environment and local development.  The Applicant proposed long-term preservation of 3 acres of off-site woodlands There is an existing privately owned solar array on an adjacent parcel. The Property does not require permanent water and sewer facilities.  that contain wetlands.  Decision  Based on the foregoing findings and conclusions, by a vote of three in favor and none opposed, the Board grants to the Applicant: conditional-use approval under the provisions of $S 18:1-14.C(25), 18:1-38.1, and 18:1-95.S oft the Code to permit the use ofa 1.744 MW( (AC)utility scale solar array on a 15-acre lease area within a 165.028-acre parcel in the Agricultural Zoning  District subject to the following conditions:    Cedar Land Solar Farm, LLC Conditional Use p.8  1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.  Ifby the time ofconstruction, the panels proposed have changed from that provided Applicant must notify Planning and Zoning when ownership of the solar array changes and the signage containing emergency contact information must be kept current. Prior to final site plan signature, provide the finalized forest conservation plan and Prior to final site plan signature, provide an automatically renewable Prior to final site plan signature, provide an automatically renewable landscape Provide documentation that connection to the public utility is approved. Provide a finalized decommissioning plan that addresses all of the requirements Per the Department of Environmental Health, until the project is decommissioned, any owner, operator, or subcontractor performing work on the solar array site that lasts for a duration exceeding two (2) consecutive hours shall provide portable hand sanitizing and toilet facilities. These facilities shall be provided on-site for the duration ofthe work being performed and shall be utilized by all workers and/or site visitors during that time. The facilities shall be regularly serviced and all waste shall be disposed of properly off-site in  on the plans, updated information must be submitted.  executed long-term protection documents.  decommissioning bond that is enforceable by the County.  surety and maintenance agreement.  provided in 18:1-95.S.(5)(e).  accordance with applicable laws and regulations.  9.  As a condition of permit approval, the applicant will water the landscape buffer plantings according to the final approved watering schedule and must provide the Zoning Department paid invoices for the watering of the landscape buffer plantings once a month 10. As a condition of permit approval, there must be documentation of the Planning Commission's concept plan approval and favorable recommendation added to the record. 11. Any outstanding comments stemming from agency reviews are addressed prior to  for the first year, unless otherwise agreed by Planning and Zoning.  Major Site Plan submittal.    Cedar Land Solar Farm, LLC Conditional Use p.9  ORDER  For the reasons set forth in the foregoing Opinion, it is this, 17th day ofJune, 2024, ordered that the conditional use approval requested for Cedar Lane Solar Farm, LLC, Lessee of lands owned by the Estate of Peter G. Sheaffer, in Case No. BOA-23-06-  0154, be granted, subject to the conditions set forth in the Opinion.  BhCnela Howard A. Dean, Chairman  CW.MEL Craig W. McGinnes, Vice-Chairman  Michael A. Lesniowski, Member    Cedar Land Solar Farm, LLC Conditional Use p.10  State ofMaryland, County of Queen Anne's:  IHEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy ofthe Opinion and Order of the Board of Appeals of Queen Anne's County in Case No. BOA-23-06- 0154, for Cedar Lane Solar Farm, LLC, Lessee of lands owned by the Estate of Peter G. Sheaffer, which Opinion and Order resulted from aj public hearing conducted by the Board of Appeals on April 17, 2024 and that the minutes and a recording oft the April 17,  2024 meeting are filed in the office ofE Board of Appeals.  Certified this 17th day ofJune, 2024 by:  Coctluy ayiu Cathy Maxwell Clerk to the Board of Appeals    BEFORE THE BOARD OF APPEALS OF QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY  In the matter of Application by for Zoning Variance  *  Case No. BOA-24-03-0171  James A. Burns, Jr. and Sharon T. Burns *  FINAL DECISION OF THE BOARD  Introduction  The Queen Anne's County Board of Appeals (the "Board") held a meeting on April 17, 2024 at 5:30 p.m. to consider Case No. BOA-24-03-0171 fora variance application filed by James A. Burns, Jr. and Sharon T. Burns (hereinafter the "Applicants"). The Board members present were Chairman, Howard Dean, and Board Members Craig W. McGinnes and Michael Lesniowski. At the beginning of the hearing, the Board established that all requirements were met governing the filing ofthe variance application, and proper notice ofthe April 17h public hearing. Board Chairman, Howard Dean, administered the oath to all who wished to testify on the  application, including the Applicants.  Applicants' Request  The Applicants request a variance to the provisions ofs1 181-14.E0)0)21D) oft the Code of Public Local Laws of Queen Anne's County (the "Code"), to reduce the required side yard setback from 50 feet to 35 feet to construct an addition to an existing dwelling. The Applicants' property is located at 1115 Damsontown Road near Queen Anne, Maryland, in the 6th Election District (hereinafter the "Property"). The Property is located in the Agricultural (AG) Zoning  District.  The Applicants submitted al Building Permit (BR23-03-0215) to construct an 18'x16'(3) season room addition. On February 9, 2024, the Queen Anne's County Zoning Inspector denied the Applicants' Building Permit after determining that the proposed addition will be 35' from the side property line which does not meet the minimum 50' side yard setback as required by $ 18:1-  14.E.(1)(d)2/b) of the Code.    Burns side yard variance 1115 Damsontown Road  p.2  Applicable Provisions oft the Code  The standards the Board must apply to the Applicants' variance request are set forth in $ 18:1-121.B. of the Code. To grant the requested variance, the Board must find as follows:  1. 2. 3. 4. 5.  Literal enforcement of this Chapter 18:1 would result in unnecessary hardship or  practical difficulty as the result of specified conditions;  Those conditions are peculiar to the property involved; Those conditions are not the result of any action taken by the appellant; The variance will not be contrary to the public interest; and Evaluation of alternatives proves variance is required.  In addition, pursuant to $ 18:1-122.A. of the Code, the Board must find that any variance granted is no greater than an amount minimally necessary to ameliorate the conditions giving rise  to any practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship.  Property Description and Department of Planning & Zoning Recommendations Michael Olds, Zoning Inspector with the Department of Planning & Zoning, presented his staff report. Mr. Olds identified the Property as 1115 Damsontown Road, Queen Anne, Maryland. He furtheri identified the Property as Tax Map 62, parcel 38, consisting of36.76 acres. Thel Property isz zoned Agricultural. There are noi mapped wetlands, floodplain, Critical. Area, or sensitive species located on the Property. There are hydric soils and wetlands on the Property but they are not within  the project site.  The Applicants are proposing an 18' x 16' (3) season sunroom addition. They are seeking av variance from $ 8:1-14.E.0)0)2D) to reduce the required side yard setback from 50 to 35'. He explained that the Applicants are seeking a 15' variance from the side yard setback  requirements.  The Property is part of a large lot subdivision approved in 1988. He said the Property is currently being farmed and includes a single-family dwelling. The dwelling on the Property was constructed in 1977 based on records from the assessment office. There was a major addition on the dwelling in 2006. He said the Applicants are seeking to remove an existing 18' x'1 12' sunroom    Burns - side yard variance 1115 Damsontown Road  p.3  and replace it with an 18'x1 16' sunroom. He then said that the proposal will increase the sunroom  by 6' x1 16' however, this was corrected to 4'x16'.  Mr. Olds said that the Property isac conforming lot for the AG Zoning District. Thee existing dwelling was constructed in 1977 and is located 35' from the side lot line, which does not meet the required side yard setback of50'. The proposed addition will be located 35' from the adjoining  property located at 1101 Damsontown Road.  He said that Staff! had not received evidence that outlines the practical difficulty regarding  the Property.  Applicants' Presentation  The Applicants presented their application. Mr. Burns said that the dwelling on the Property has been located there since 1977. The dwelling includes a porch on the rear side that is setback 35' from the side yard setback. Mr. Burns said that they are seeking to construct an addition that utilizes the current footprint oft the porch but extends 4' further towards the rear lot line. Given that the Applicants are not seeking to encroach further into the side yard setback than the porch the currently exists, Mr. Burns expressed confusion about the necessity for a variance. Ms. Ryan explained that the variance isi necessary because the Applicants are seeking to demolish the existing porch and reconstruct a new porch with a sunroom above it on the second level. Ms. Ryan advised that the Applicants are seeking to enlarge a nonconforming structure, which requires a variance.  With that understanding, Mr. Burns said that the fence on the Property has been there since the dwelling was constructed and that they are not seeking to construct the addition any closer to the fence than the existing porch. He said that they are seeking to construct the addition toj provide an enclosed sunroom above the porch. The lower level will remain a screened-in porch, but will extend towards the rear lot line an additional 4', and they will construct an enclosed 3 season sunroom on the second story. Currently, an open deck exists on the second story over the porch. Mr. Burns said that the second story deck is unusable because it is in direct sunlight and has no roof. They are seeking to construct a 3 season sunroom with a roof that will provide an extension  oft their interior living space.    Burns side yard variance 1115 Damsontown Road  p.4  Mrs. Burns said that they need the additional 4' to accommodate furniture for living space. The sunroom will provide additional living space. They need to extend the porch underneath to provide a safer structure to hold the sunroom above it. They will provide gutters and downspouts on the sunroom roof which will improve stormwater runoff and drainage. In addition, the Applicants stated that there is no alternative location for the addition due to the location ofthe rear  door.  Testimony from the Public  After the Applicants presented their case, Chairman Dean asked if any members of the  public wished to testify. No members oft the public testified.  Findings and Conclusions ofthe Board  The Board finds the testimony and application provided by the Applicants credible and persuasive. The Board concludes that the evidence justifies approval of the requested variance. Based on the evidence presented, and duly considering the factors set forth in $18:1-121.C. oft the  Code, the Board specifically finds and concludes as follows:  1. Aliteral enforcement of the side yard setback would result in practical difficulty. 2. The lot is peculiar in that the existing porch encroaches into the side yard setback and 3. The proposed sunroom addition is modest and reasonable to accommodate the 4. The existing dwelling on the Property was constructed in 1977 and encroaches in the 5. The variance is the amount minimally necessary to ameliorate conditions giving rise to  the proposed addition is not encroaching further. Applicants' need to increasing indoor living space.  side yard setback.  any practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship.  Decision  Based on the foregoing findings and conclusions, by a vote of three in favor and none  opposed, the Board grants to the Applicants:    Burns - side yard variance 1115 Damsontown Road  p.5  A variance from the provisions of $18:1-14.E.()d)2) to permit the Applicants to reduce the required side yard setback of 50 feet to 35 feet to permit the Applicants to construct an 18' X  16'3season room addition to the existing dwelling.    Burns - side yard variance 1115 Damsontown Road  p.6  ORDER  For the reasons set forth in the foregoing Opinion, itis this_ 5th day of. July, 2024 ordered that the variance requested for. James A. Burns, Jr. and Sharon T. Burns, in Case No.  BOA-24-03-0171, be granted.  BhCaela Howard A. Dean, Chairman  CNMEE Craig W. McGinnes, Vice-Chairman  Michael A. Lesniowski, Member    Burns side yard variance 1115 Damsontown Road  p.7  State of Maryland, County of Queen Anne's:  IHEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is at true and correct copy oft the Opinion and Order oft the Board of Appeals of Queen Anne's County in Case No. BOA-24-03-0171, for James A. Burns, Jr. and Sharon T. Burns, which Opinion and Order resulted from aj public hearing conducted by the Board of Appeals on April 17, 2024 and that the minutes and a recording ofthe April 17,2024 meeting are filed in the office of Board of Appeals.  Certified this 5th day ofJuly, 2024 by:  (seluy MMabil Cathy Maxwell Clerk to the Board of Appeals        BEFORE THE BOARD OF APPEALS OF QUEEN ANNE'S COUNTY  In the matter ofA Application by Glenn A. Haslam and Marlene M.  Case No. BOA-23-03-0148  Haslam for Conditional Use  FINAL DECISION OF' THE BOARD - REVISED  Introduction  The Queen Anne's County Board of Appeals (the "Board") held a meeting on April 17, 2024 at 5:45 p.m. to consider Case No. BOA-23-03-0148 for conditional use approval to construct a2 240' x6 6' pier, including a 10 x 20' "L" platform, 16' x3' wide finger pier, two boat lifts with associated piles, two PWC lifts with associated piles, and four mooring piles filed by Glenn A. Haslam and Marlene M. Haslam (hereinaftert the "Applicants"). The Board members present were Board Chairman, Howard Dean, and Board Members Craig W. McGinnes and Michael  Lesniowski.  At the beginning of the hearing, the Board established that all requirements were met governing the filing of the conditional use application, and that proper notice of the April 17th public hearing was provided. Board Chairman Dean, administered the oath to all who wished to  testify on the application, including the Applicants.  Applicant's Request  The Applicants are seeking conditional use approval under the provisions of $ 18:1-41 of the Code of] Public Local Laws of Queen. Anne's County, 1996 Edition (the "Code"), to construct ai new pier 240' long by 6' wide, plus a 10' x 20' end section platform, a 16' X 3' finger pier, (2) four-pile boat lifts and associated pilings, (2) single-pile PWC lifts, and (4) additional mooring pilings on the unimproved property located at 3009 Bennett Point Road, Queenstown, Maryland (hereinafter the Property"). Pursuant to $ 18:1-41 of the Code, aj pier may not extend into a body of water a distance greater than 150 feet, as measured from the mean high water line, unless the Board allows a greater length as a conditional use. The file reflects that the Applicants have    Haslam - 3009 Bennett Point Road Conditional Use - Pier Length  p.2  received a general tidal wetlands license from the Maryland Department of the Environment to  construct the proposed pier and improvements.  The Applicants submitted a Zoning Certificate (No. Z22-11-0428) to construct a 16'x6 walkway to a 240' x 6' pier with a 10' X 20' platform, 16' x 3' finger pier, (2) boatlifts with associated piles, (2)P PWC lifts with associated piles, and (4) mooring piles on November 18, 2022. On November 21, 2022, the Queen Anne's County Department of Planning & Zoning denied the application for exceeding the maximum pier length permitted by S 18:1-41 ofthe Code.  Applicable Provisions oft the Code  The standards the Board must apply to the. Applicant's request for a conditional use are set forth in $ 18:1-94 of the Code. To approve the conditional use, the Board must find as follows:  1. The proposed use at the proposed location shall be consistent with the general purpose, goals, objectives, and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, this Chapter 18:1, or any other plan, program, map, or ordinance adopted, or under  consideration pursuant to official notice, by the County.  2. The proposed use at the proposed location will not result in a substantial or undue adverse impacts on adjacent property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, public improvements, public sites or rights-of-way, or other matters affecting the public health, safety, and general  welfare.  3. Thej proposed use at the proposed location will be adequately served by, and will not impose an undue burden on, any of the required improvements referred to in this Chapter 18:1, Part7. Where any such improvements, facilities, utilities, or services are not available or adequate to service the proposed use at the proposed location, the applicant shall, as part ofthe application and as a condition ofapproval ofthe conditional use, be responsible for establishing ability, willingness, and binding commitment to provide such improvements, facilities, utilities, and services in sufficient time and in a manner consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, this Chapter 18:1, and other plans,  programs, maps, and ordinances adopted by the County.  In addition, $ 18:1-123.B. requires the Board to make the following findings to approve a  conditional use:  1. The conditions concerning that conditional use as detailed in this  Chapter 18:1 exist;    Haslam 3009 Bennett Point Road Conditional Use - Pier Length  p.3  2.  The conditional use conforms to the Comprehensive Plan; and 3. The conditional use is compatible with the existing neighborhood.  Last, pursuant to Maryland Annotated Code, Land Use. Article $1-303, the Board must include in its evaluation oft the Comprehensive Plan, pursuant to the above-cited section, certain consistency findings. The Board's approval of a conditional use must further, and not be contrary to, the  following items in the Queen Anne's County Comprehensive Plan:  1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.  Policies;  Timing oft the implementation of the plan;  Timing ofc development; Timing of rezoning; Development patterns; Land uses; and Densities or intensities.  Property Description and Department of] Planning & Zoning Recommendations Mike Olds, Zoning Inspector with the Queen Anne's County Department of Planning & Zoning, presented his Staff Report. He said the Property is located at 3009 Bennett Point Road, Queenstown, Maryland. Iti is 5.01 acres and is located in the Neighborhood Conservation (NC-5) Zoning District. The Property is further identified on Tax Map 77, parcel 05, lot 7.  He said the Property is partially located in a floodplain along the shoreline. Any electrical panel box placement onsite because oft this proposal must meet the lodplainrequirements: There are hydric soils on the rear of the Property which will be impacted by the proposal. There are no sensitive species located within the project area. The proposed project site in located in a Historic Waterfowl Concentration Area noted on the MDE/USACEI License. Given the Historic Waterfowl Concentration Area, he explained that no construction may be performed from November 15th through March 1sofany year. He added that the entire Property is located within the Critical Area  LDA.    Haslam - 3009 Bennett Point Road Conditional Use - Pier Length  p.4  He said the Applicants are proposing to construct a 16'x6 6' walkway over vegetated tidal wetlands to a 240' x 6' pier to include a 10' x 20' platform, 16' x3 3' finger pier, (2) boatlifts with associated mooring piles, (2) PWC lifts with associated mooring piles, and (4) additional mooring piles. The proposed pier will extend 100' over the 150' permitted by the County code. The Applicants are requesting relief from $18:1-41 which establishes the distance a pier can extend into al body of water. He said the pier will not extend more than a quarter distance oft the waterway.  The Applicants purchased the property in 2022. The Property is currently vacant but the Applicants received a building permit for a proposed dwelling. The Building Permit (BR-23-12-  0876) was approved on February 23, 2024.  Mr. Olds said that the proposed pier does not meet zoning requirements for the length ofa pier extending into the body of water. Therefore, the Applicants are seeking conditional use approval to construct aj pier 250' in length that will not exceed a quarter distance of the waterway. The width of this section of the waterway is approx. 2012ft./4=: 503 ft. He said the proposed pier is consistent with the approval the Applicants received from the Maryland Department of the  Environment.  He added that the proposed pier is consistent with piers in the neighborhood that were constructed between 1978 and 1989. Specifically, 3011 Bennett Point Rd has a pier at  approximately 225', and 3013 Bennett Point Rd has aj pier approximately 232'.  Regarding the Applicants' proposed pier, he said it has an "L" shape with pilings that will extend 250 into the waterway. He: said that a 250' pier exceeds the lengths of adjacent piers in the vicinity. Due to the conditional use, he said the Applicants must identify that the construction ofa pier at this length at this location will not result in substantial or undue adverse impacts on the adjacent properties, the character of the neighborhood, traffic, health, safety, and general welfare. He said the Board may consider the Comprehensive Plan goal to implement resource protection, conservation, and the preservation strategies that protect aquatic life throughout the county. He added that the Board may further wish to consider whether a residential need to a pier at the  proposed length may be more appropriate to a marina boat slip.  Mr. Olds said that all electrical installations must meet the current edition of the National Electrical Code and the Floodplaini requirements. There arenoenvironmental impacts to wetlands,    Haslam - 3009 Bennett Point Road Conditional Use - Pier Length  p.5  hydric soils, or sensitive species on1 the Property. Al Buffer Mitigation Plan will be required fora any  increase in lot coverage onsite at a ratio of2:1.  He concluded by stating that the proposed pier does not meet the zoning requirements for  the length ofaj pier extending into the body of water.  Applicant's Presentation  Ryan Showalter, the Applicants' attorney, presented the application. First, Mr. Showalter addressed confusion over the length of the proposed pier. He said that the Applicants seek to construct aj pier that is 250' long by 6' wide. However, his narrative submitted with the conditional use application, and part of Mr. Olds' staff report, state that the pier length is 240. He said that the Applicants are seeking to extend the pier 16' in length to mean high water, and will extend an additional 250' beyond mean high water resulting in a total pier length of266'.  He said that the Applicants are seeking to construct aj pier as an accessory structure to their principal dwelling. The Applicants submitted a building permit (BR23-12-0876) to construct a single-family dwelling on the Property, which was approved in February 2024. Given that the building permit for the dwelling was approved, the Applicants were permitted to proceed with their request for conditional use approval to construct a pier that does not meet the maximum length permitted by the Code. Mr. Showalter said that construction of the dwelling commenced.  He said the Property was subdivided in 1976. Lots 4 through 14 on the plat for the subdivision front on the Wye River and each have private piers, with exception oft the Applicants' lot. He said the piers on those lots were constructed between 1977 and 2010. He said that the Applicants' proposed pier meets all County requirements, with exception of the pier length  limitation.  Then, he explained the need to construct a pier beyond 150' in length. He said that the proposed pier length is due to the extremely shallow water in the cove of the Wye River. Within the cove, the water depth available 150' from mean high water is2.Toacommodate that lift, the water depth needs to be greater than 2'. By extending the pier 250', the minimum water depth  increases to 3.5-4'.    Haslam 3009 Bennett Point Road Conditional Use Pier Length  p.6  He said that the Applicants obtained approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and State of Maryland for construction of the proposed pier. He said that the agencies are required to determine whether the pier would have an adverse impact as part of their review, which they did not find as they issued permits for construction. He added that other piers constructed within the  same cove of the Wye River are approximately 250' long.  With exception of the pier length, he said the proposed pier is consistent with the general purpose, goals, objectives, and standards of the Comprehensive Plan. Waterfront landowners throughout Queen Anne's County are permitted to exercise their riparian rights to wharf out to provide access to and from their properties by boat. He added that the investment in residential property enhances the utility and value of the properties, benefiting neighboring property owners  and the County. The proposed pier will not have any impact on navigation.  Mr. McGinnes asked if neighboring properties have piers with lifts. Mr. Haslam said that some have lifts. Particularly, 3011 and 3013 Bennett Point Road have piers with lifts. Mr. McGinnes asked the Applicants to expand on the need for the lift. Mr. Showalter said that the Property is on the channel ofthe Wye River. Due to the location, al lot ofboats traffic the area. The  lift is intended to provide protection to the boat.  Mr. McGinnes asked the Applicants to clarify the length of pier they would need if they did not need al lift. The Board discussed and determined that the Applicants could reduce the pier length by 60' ift they did not need a lift. However, Mr. Haslam explained the need for the lift to  prevent damage to his boat.  Regarding the criteria for a conditional use, Mr. Showalter said that the proposed pier is consistent with the established character of the neighborhood as a waterfront, residential community. The proposed use will not have any impact on traffic conditions, parking, public improvements, public sites or rights-of-way, or otherwise affect the public health, safety, or  general welfare.  Testimony from the Public  After the Applicants presented their case, Chairman Dean asked if any members of the  public wished to testify. No members of the public testified.    Haslam - 3009 Bennett Point Road Conditional Use - Pier Length  p.7  Findings and Conclusions oft the Board  The Board finds the testimony and application provided by the Applicants credible and persuasive. The Board concludes that the evidence justifies approval oft the conditional use request. Based on the evidence presented, and duly considering the applicable factors from the Queen  Anne's County Code, the Board specifically finds and concludes as follows:  1.1 The application is consistent with the 2022 Queen Anne's County Comprehensive Plan 2. A pier may not extend into a body of water a distance greater than 150 feet, as measured  which encourages boating and water recreation.  from the mean high water line, unless permitted by the Board. 3. The water depth extending out from the Property is shallow.  4. A2 250-foot-long pier will not result in substantial or undue adverse impacts on adjacent property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, public improvements, public sites or rights-of-way, or other matters affecting the public health, 5. The pier will be adequately served by, and will not impose an undue burden on, any oft the required improvements referred to in Chapter 18:1, Part 7 oft the Code.  safety, and general welfare.  Decision  Based on the foregoing findings and conclusions, by a vote of three in favor and none opposed, the Board grants approval to the Applicants to construct the following improvements: 1.A A250f.x6f. pier, including a 10ft. x 20ft. "L" platform, 16 ft.x31 ft. wide finger pier, two boat lifts with associated piles, two PWC lifts with associated piles and four mooring a. The Applicants install and maintain safety lights on the length oft the pier.  piles, subject to the following condition:    Haslam 3009 Bennett Point Road Conditional Use - Pier Length  p.8  ORDER  For the reasons set forth in the foregoing Opinion, itis this_ 5th day of July, 2024, ordered that the conditional use approval requested for Glenn A. Haslam and Marlene M. Haslam, in Case No. BOA-23-03-0148, be granted, subject to the conditions set forth in the  Opinion.  BhCrela Howard A. Dean, Chairman  CNNEE Craig W. McGinnes, Vice-Chairman  Michael A. Lesniowski, Member    Haslam - 3009 Bennett Point Road Conditional Use - Pier Length  p.9  State ofl Maryland, County of Queen Anne's:  IHEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of the Opinion and Order oft the Board of Appeals of Queen Anne's County in Case No. BOA-23-03-0148, for Glenn A. Haslam and Marlene M. Haslam, which Opinion and Order resulted from aj public hearing conducted by the Board of Appeals on April 17,2024 and that the minutes and a recording oft the April 17, 2024 meeting are filed in the office of Board of Appeals.  Certified this 5th day ofJuly, 2024 by:  Caly Mchll Cathy Maxwell Clerk to the Board of Appeals