march 18 2026 planning commission meeting packet

Exactly as extracted, unformatted — for checking against the original. The readable version is easier to read.

CENTREVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION
March 18, 2026
Liberty Building - 2nd Floor
107 North Liberty Street
7:00 p.m.
A G E N D A
I. CALL TO ORDER – Kara Willis – Chair
II. Chair’s Announcements
III. Review of Minutes from Previous Meetings
• February 18 – Regular Meeting
• March 4 – Work Session
IV. Opening Statement
V. Citizen Comment (Citizens are requested to keep their comments to three minutes)
VI. Appearances
• Hillside Liquors: 425 Commerce Street
Site Plan Extension Request: The Planning Commission granted final site plan approval on
March 19, 2025. The applicant is requesting a six (6) month extension because they are not
in a position to commence construction activities prior to March 19, 2026.
VII. Old Business
• Proposed Fence Code Edits
Presentation by the Zoning Administrator of proposed revisions to §170-39 (Accessory
Structures and Fences) previously discussed at the February 18, 2026 Planning Commission
meeting.
VIII. New Business
IX. Zoning Issues – Discussion
X. Miscellaneous Business / Correspondence
• Approved Building Permit list issued February 2026
XI. Citizen Comment (Citizens are requested to keep their comments to three minutes)
XII. Council Member Report
XIII. Adjournment

Centreville Planning Commission
February 18, 2026
7:00 p.m.
MINUTES
The February 18, 2026 Centreville Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Kara Willis, Chair;
in the Liberty Building, second floor meeting room. The following members and staff were present: Kara Willis, Chair;
Tim Zuella, Vice Chair; Dan Worth, Mitchell Delaney, Kyle Farabaugh, Members; Tim McCluskey, Alternate Member
(voting); Peter Flint, Zoning Administrator; Sharon VanEmburgh, Town Attorney; Pegeen McGlathery, Administrative
Assistant.
Also in attendance: Sandy Huffer, Town Council Liaison.
Chair’s Announcements
• No announcements were reported.
Review of Minutes from Previous Meetings
A. January 21, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes
• Action: Approved as amended (5 Ayes, 0 Nays, 1 Abstention).
B. February 4, 2026 Work Session Meeting Minutes
• Action: Approved as amended (unanimous)
Opening Statement
• Audio recordings of Planning Commission meetings are available upon request by contacting Town Hall.
Citizen Comment
• No citizen comments were offered.
New Business
A. Appearance (SE-02-26 – Short-Term Rental)
Applicant: Matthew Raines
Property: 109 Wharf Lane
Zoning: R-2
The applicant requested approval of a special exception to operate a short-term rental in the R-2 District pursuant to §170-
20.C(6).
The Zoning Administrator provided staff analysis, noting:
• The property meets off-street parking requirements.
• No structural alterations are proposed.
• Short-term rentals are permitted in R-2 via special exception.
• The applicant has been cooperative in obtaining proper approval.
• Recommended conditions include:
1. Single booking rule (no separate room rentals).
2. Non-transferability of approval.
3. One-year expiration if not acted upon.
Page 1 of 6

Discussion included:
• Parking capacity and on-street impacts.
• Revocation authority in the event of nuisance conditions.
• Rationale for non-transferability (to ensure future owners apply independently).
Motion:
To forward a favorable recommendation to the Board of Appeals for approval of SE-02-26 for a short-term rental at 109
Wharf Lane, finding it consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and subject to the conditions listed in the January 29, 2026
staff memo.
Vote:
Unanimous
Motion carried.
Applicant was advised the matter will proceed to the Board of Appeals in March.
B. MD Route 213 Speed Transition
Chair Willis raised concern regarding the 45 mph to 35 mph transition northbound near Food Lion, particularly with
anticipated increased traffic from new development.
Discussion included:
• Petitioning MDOT for a speed study.
• Town responsibility to initiate such request.
• Historical context of prior speed adjustments.
No formal action taken.
C. Fire Marshal Authority – Short-Term Rentals
Discussion addressed language in special exception provisions requiring Fire Marshal approval.
Clarifications:
• Short-term rentals are treated as residential occupancy.
• Bed-and-breakfast uses may trigger Fire Marshal review.
• Current code sequencing creates procedural conflicts.
Issue to be addressed during upcoming use table and supplemental standards revisions.
Old Business
A. Proposed Fence Code Edits
The Commission continued discussion of proposed revisions to §170-39 (Accessory Structures and Fences).
Key discussion points included:
1. Building Restriction Line
• Consideration of whether the term should remain or be replaced with setback language.
Page 2 of 6

• Consensus to remove if unnecessary and clean up references.
2. Secondary Front Yard / Through Lots
• Recognition that current code treats through lots as having two front yards.
• Concern that requiring 25-foot setbacks for fences on through lots creates unreasonable limitations.
• Direction to treat through lots similarly to corner lots under a unified “secondary front yard” concept.
• Fences may extend toward the street provided visibility triangles are protected.
3. Residential Applicability
• Administrative exception for corner lots to apply across all residential districts, not just R-1.
4. Height
• Increase secondary front yard fence height from 36 inches to 48 inches.
• Maintain visibility protections and staff discretion where safety concerns exist.
5. Commercial/Industrial Districts
• Provide Planning Commission discretion for fence heights and materials in commercial contexts (e.g.,
security fencing, state-regulated uses).
• Consider language allowing modifications via site plan approval.
6. Definitions
• Remove “use” from “Accessory Use or Structure” where unnecessary.
• Define “interior side yard.”
• Clarify relationship between accessory structures and fences.
7. Centreville Business District (CBD) Considerations
• Clarify application to residential uses within the CBD zoning district.
Staff was directed to prepare a revised ordinance draft reflecting:
• Through lot treatment
• Secondary front yard adjustments
• 48-inch height limit
• Planning Commission discretion provisions
• Definition clean-up
Fence revisions will return at a future work session.
Zoning Issues – Discussion
A. Commercial Solar Panels
The Zoning Administrator noted:
• Residential rooftop solar standards exist.
Page 3 of 6

• Commercial rooftop solar standards are not explicitly addressed.
• Staff approved solar panels on a commercial building under customary and incidental use.
Discussion included:
• Whether flat roof solar should be screened similar to mechanical equipment.
• Potential design standards for commercial solar installations.
Matter to be addressed in a future code update.
Citizen Comment
• No citizen comments were offered.
Council Member Report
Town Council liaison Sandy Huffer provided the following highlights:
• Sign ordinance amendments approved February 5.
• Leave of Absence policy resolution adopted.
• Providence Farm road dedication ordinance (01-20-26):
1. First reading completed.
2. Public hearing scheduled for March 5.
Discussion occurred regarding expired bonds and letter of credit issues related to Providence Farm. It was noted that the
original developer’s death and expiration of bonds limited the Town’s enforcement options.
Council will review internal processes to prevent recurrence.
Adjournment
There being no further business, Chair Willis moved to adjourn the February 18, 2026 Planning Commission meeting.
The motion was seconded, and the meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Pegeen McGlathery
Administrative Assistant
Page 4 of 6

Action Items
1. Fence Code Revisions (§170-39)
Responsible: Zoning Administrator (Peter Flint)
Coordination: Town Attorney (Sharon VanEmburgh)
Return To: Planning Commission Work Session
Staff to Prepare Revised Ordinance Draft Including:
A. Through Lots
• Redefine through lots to include:
1. One apparent front yard
2. One secondary front yard
• Allow fences in secondary front yards up to the street line.
• Ensure visibility triangle protections remain in place.
B. Corner Lots / Secondary Front Yard
• Apply administrative allowance across all residential districts (not limited to R-1).
• Remove building restriction line limitation where possible.
• Increase height limit to 48 inches in secondary front yards.
C. Commercial / Industrial Districts
• Draft language providing Planning Commission discretion for:
1. Fence height above standard limits
2. Materials
3. Security fencing required by state regulations
• Coordinate with Town Attorney on legal structure of discretion provision.
D. Definitions Cleanup
• Remove “use” from “Accessory Use or Structure” where appropriate.
• Define “interior side yard.”
• Review and potentially eliminate “building restriction line.”
• Clarify applicability to residential uses within commercial/CBD zoning.
E. General Code Cleanup
• Address typographical issues.
• Reorganize §170-39 for clarity and consistency.
Page 5 of 6

2. Short-Term Rental / Use Table Update
Responsible: Zoning Administrator (Peter Flint)
Coordination: Town Attorney (Sharon VanEmburgh)
Timing: With upcoming Use Table & Supplemental Standards update
Action:
• Separate short-term rental standards from bed-and-breakfast standards.
• Clarify Fire Marshal review requirements.
• Correct sequencing issues in special exception language.
• Incorporate supplemental standards format (rather than repeating across districts).
3. Commercial Rooftop Solar Panels
Responsible: Zoning Administrator (Peter Flint)
Return To: Planning Commission (future agenda item)
Action:
• Draft language explicitly permitting rooftop solar on commercial buildings.
• Determine:
1. Screening requirements for flat roofs (consistent with mechanical equipment rules).
2. Height/roofline limitations.
3. Whether to incorporate into Design Standards or Zoning Code.
• Ensure consistency with existing residential solar provisions.
Page 6 of 6

Centreville Planning Commission
WORK SESSION
March 4, 2026
7:00 p.m.
MINUTES
The March 4, 2026 Centreville Planning Commission Work Session was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Tim Zuella, Vice
Chair, at the Centreville Wharf, first floor meeting room. The following members and staff were present: Kara Willis,
Chair; Tim Zuella, Vice Chair; Kyle Farabaugh, Nancy Emerick, Pat Fox, Dan Worth, Members; Tim McCluskey,
Alternate Member; Peter Flint, Zoning Administrator; Sharon VanEmburgh, Town Attorney; Pegeen McGlathery,
Administrative Assistant.
Also in attendance: Sandy Huffer, Town Council Liaison.
Citizen Comment
• No citizen comments were offered.
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU)
Town staff presented information regarding existing Town Code provisions related to accessory apartments and accessory
dwelling units (ADUs), along with a Local Government ADU Compliance Assessment Tool provided by the State of
Maryland. The purpose of the discussion was to review current regulations, evaluate compliance with State law, and
identify potential approaches for updating the Town Code.
Staff summarized the Town’s current regulations, noting that:
• One accessory apartment within a single-family dwelling is permitted by right in the R-1, R-2, and R-3 zoning
districts, subject to certain conditions.
• Detached accessory apartments are permitted by special exception in the R-2 and R-3 districts.
• Existing regulations include requirements related to lot size, parking, owner occupancy, and design compatibility
with the primary residence.
Staff explained that several elements of the current code may need to be revised to comply with new State requirements.
In particular, the State law limits subjective design requirements and requires that setback standards for detached ADUs
be consistent with those applied to other accessory structures.
Staff proposed a hybrid approach to implementing the new requirements. Under this approach, a new section addressing
Accessory Dwelling Units would be created within the supplemental regulations of Chapter 170. This would allow the
Town to make the minimum changes necessary to comply with State law while continuing broader zoning code updates,
including the eventual development of a consolidated use table.
The Commission discussed several issues related to ADU implementation, including:
Parking Requirements
Staff explained that if the Town requires additional off-street parking for ADUs, State law requires the Town to provide a
waiver process. Staff has begun working with the Eastern Shore Regional GIS Cooperative to conduct a parking analysis
using GIS mapping to identify properties eligible for detached ADUs and evaluate street conditions and parking
availability.
Page 1 of 3

Preliminary mapping indicates that a significant number of residential parcels would not qualify for detached ADUs due
to minimum lot size requirements. Commissioners discussed how a parking waiver process could be structured
administratively and supported by the parking study.
Owner Occupancy
The Commission discussed whether the Town should maintain an owner occupancy requirement for properties containing
ADUs, particularly where the ADU is used as a rental unit.
ADU Size Limits
Staff explained that State law defines an ADU as being no greater than 75 percent of the size of the primary dwelling. The
Commission discussed whether the Town should also establish a maximum square footage limit.
Density Calculations
State law specifies that ADUs are not counted toward residential density limits. Staff noted that the Town’s current
practice effectively reflects this approach but that the code will need to explicitly state this requirement.
Setbacks and Design Standards
The Commission discussed existing setback and screening requirements for accessory structures. Staff noted that some
current screening provisions may be overly subjective and could conflict with the intent of State law. Commissioners
discussed whether objective design standards applicable to accessory structures could still be used.
The Commission also discussed how ADUs may apply in future development projects, including Traditional
Neighborhood Developments (TNDs), where such uses could be incorporated into development plans reviewed by the
Planning Commission.
Staff indicated that the next step will be to prepare draft language for a new ADU section of the zoning code, which will
be reviewed by the Planning Commission at a future meeting.
Other Planning and Development Updates
The Commission briefly discussed several ongoing projects and upcoming agenda items:
• Hillside Liquors
Staff reported that Hillside Liquors has requested a six-month extension of its site plan approval. The applicant
will appear before the Planning Commission at the March 18, 2026 meeting to formally request the extension.
• Fence Ordinance Amendment
Staff reported that work is ongoing on proposed amendments related to fence regulations. Depending on
staff availability, draft language may be presented to the Planning Commission at the March 18, 2026
meeting.
• Wood Ingenuity Project
Staff provided an update regarding communications with the Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT).
MDOT indicated that previously submitted plans did not include required pedestrian facilities. Staff noted that
waiver requests must be for specific design elements rather than for eliminating required pedestrian improvements
entirely.
Council Member Report
Town Council liaison, Sandy Huffer provided an update from the most recent Town Council meeting.
• Representatives from the Goodwill Fire Department attended the meeting and provided an update on departmental
activities and the use of Town funding. The department reported recent equipment purchases and outlined
Page 2 of 3

upcoming capital needs, including a cardiac monitor, parking lot repairs, a generator, and a future fire apparatus
replacement.
• A second reading was held regarding the Providence Farm road dedication.
• A mid-year financial update indicated that Town revenues and expenditures remain on track with the adopted
budget.
• Additional updates included recruitment efforts for the Centreville Economic Development Authority (CEDA)
and discussion of upcoming budget planning activities.
Adjournment
The work session was adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Pegeen McGlathery
Administrative Assistant
Page 3 of 3

1 170-70 Definitions
2 For the purposes of this chapter, certain terms or words used herein shall be interpreted as
3 follows:
4 YARD, FRONT. A yard extending between side lot lines across the front of a lot.
5 1. In any required front yard, no fence or wall shall be permitted which materially
6 impedes vision across such yard above the height of 36 inches, and no hedge or
7 other vegetation shall be permitted which materially impedes vision across such Commented [PF1]: Delete and renumber below -
8 yard between the heights of 36 inches and 10 feet. current code does not allow for fences in front yard. this
could be added to allowed locations if PC desires
9 2.1. In the case of corner lots, a front yard of the required depth shall be provided
10 in accordance with the prevailing yard pattern, and a second front yard of half the
11 depth required generally for front yards in the zone shall be provided on the other
12 frontage.
13 3.2. In the case of corner lots with more than two frontages, the Zoning
14 Administrator shall determine the front yard requirements, subject to the following
15 limitations:
16 1. At least one front yard shall be provided having the full depth required
17 generally in the zone.
18 2. No other front yard on such lot shall have less than half the full depth
19 required generally.
20 4.3. Depth of required front yards shall be measured at right angles to a straight
21 line joining the foremost points of the side lot lines. The foremost point of the side
22 lot line, in the case of rounded property corners at street intersections, shall be
23 assumed to be the point at which the side and front lines would have met without
24 such rounding. Front and rear yard lines shall be parallel.
25
Page 1 of 8

26 170-39 Accessory Uses And Structures; Fences
27 A. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, all uses and structures shall be
28 located outside the required front or side yards in any residential or commercial
29 district. Accessory uses and structures that are a part of or attached to the main
30 building require the same minimum yard setbacks as the main building. [Amended
31 1-2-2014 by Ord. No. 13-2013; 10-4-2019 by Ord. No. 11-2019; 9-2-2021 by Ord. No.
32 09-2021]
33 B. Accessory buildings which are not a part of or attached to the main building,
34 although they may be connected by an open breezeway, may only be located
35 between the rear lot line and the closest point of the rear wall of the main building,
36 provided that the sum of the building footprints of all existing and proposed
37 accessory building does not exceed 30% of the area of the required rear yard and
38 provided the following standards are adhered to: [Amended 9-2-2021 by Ord. No.
39 09-2021]
40 1. Every accessory building shall be set back from side and rear lot lines at least
41 three feet except as provided herein:
42 a. The minimum required setback from the side and rear lot lines shall
43 be five feet up to a maximum height of 15 feet and 10 feet for every
44 height above 15 feet as shown in the table presented here:
45
Minimum Setback from Lot Line
Height of Accessory Building (feet)
(feet)
Side Rear Vegetative Buffer
Under 12 3 3 Not required
12 - under 15 5 5 Required
15 and over 10 10 Required
46 2. The building height shall be no higher than the height of the principal
47 structure on the lot.
48 3. The permit application for any building 12 feet or more in height shall include
49 a native species evergreen buffer planting plan designed to allow only filtered
50 views of the building from adjoining lots and the street.
Page 2 of 8

51 C. Side yard fences. Fences are prohibited between the side street yard building Commented [PF2]: Create new subsection C. Fences
52 restriction line of any residential building and any publicly dedicated street, private and incorporate existing C, & D into the new framework
53 street or private parking area; however, in the R-1 Zone, the Zoning Administrator
54 may permit a fence in a side yard on a corner lot outside of the building restriction
55 line, providing that the fence does not affect visibility at nearby intersections. If the
56 fence crosses any Town-owned easements, the property owner shall record a
57 statement among the land records of Queen Anne's County that it is their
58 responsibility and that they shall bear the cost of removal if the fence must be
59 moved or removed in order to access the easement, and that if the fence is
60 damaged for any reason, there is no liability on behalf of the Town. This section shall
61 not affect any easements that are not Town owned, which shall be governed by the
62 easement document in terms of whether fences are permitted in the easement
63 area. [Amended 5-2-2019 by Ord. No. 04-2019]
64 D. Rule of construction. In applying the fence restrictions contained in this section, the
65 term "front yard" shall mean the "apparent front yard," and the side, side street and
66 rear yards of any lot shall be determined by their relationship to the apparent front
67 yard of the lot. For through corner lots, one yard abutting a publicly dedicated right-
68 of-way, private right-of-way or parking area shall be determined to be the apparent
69 front yard as defined herein, and the other two yards abutting publicly dedicated
70 rights-of-way or parking areas shall be side street yards.
71 [Amended 12-7-2006 by Ord. No. 07-06]
72
73 C. Fences
74 1. Purpose and Applicability
75 It is the intent and purpose of this subsection to protect the public health,
76 safety, and general welfare by regulating the placement of fences or walls on
77 residential lots to: Commented [PF3]: Previous 170-39.B from 2006 had
78 a. Permit unobstructed access to residences by emergency vehicles, this language, kept intact for first draft.
Do we need / want this section?
79 personnel, and equipment;
Commented [PF4R3]: Suggest moving this piece into
80 b. Allow for the establishment and maintenance of public rights-of-way the rationale of the motion and out of the code
81 along streets and sidewalks;
82 c. Prevent the obstruction of visibility at corners and intersections for
83 drivers and pedestrians; and
84 d. Protect the general character of residential areas while adding to the
85 attractiveness and comfort. Commented [PF5]: Previous 170-39.B from 2006
86 2.1. Classification specifically called for residential - Kept language intact
for this draft
Page 3 of 8

87 Fences and walls shall be considered structures for purposes of this chapter
88 and shall comply with the location requirements set forth herein. Applications
89 for fences and walls that comply with subsections 1 through 4 shall be
90 processed administratively; applications that do not comply may be considered
91 only under C.5.
92
93 3.2. Definitions
94 For the purposes of this subsection, certain terms or words used herein shall be
95 interpreted as follows:
96 Interior Side Yard. The required setback area along a lot line between two parcels
97 where neither parcel boundary abuts a public street, private street, private right-
98 of-way, alley, or parking area.
99
100 Through Lot. A lot, other than a corner lot, having frontage on two (2) generally
101 parallel streets. The frontage to which the street address is assigned shall be the
102 apparent front yard, and the opposite frontage shall be the secondary front yard.
103
104 Secondary Front Yard. On a lot with more than one front yard, any front yard
105 other than the apparent front yard.
106
107 4.3. Allowable Locations
108 Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, fences may be located
109 within the required yard setbacks in the following areas:
110 a. **Front yard (Apparent Front Yard) – Placeholder for front yard allowance
111 if PC wishes to add**
112 b. Secondary Front Yard
113 1. Through Lots. On a through lot, fences and walls may be located
114 within the required secondary front yard.
115 2. Corner Lots. Fences and walls may be located within the required
116 secondary front yard, provided that any portion of a fence or wall
117 located between the secondary frontage and the principal
118 structure shall not exceed forty-eight (48) inches in height,
119 measured from finished grade. The area “between the secondary
120 frontage and the principal structure" shall mean the area in front
121 of a line projected from the foremost point of the principal
122 structure to the secondary frontage.
123 c. Lots with nonconforming principal structure (front setback). Where the
124 principal structure is a lawfully existing nonconforming structure with
Page 4 of 8

125 respect to a required front yard setback, a fence or wall may be located
126 within the required front yard setback between the Building Restriction
127 Line required front yard setback line and the front wall of the principal
128 structure, provided that no portion of the fence or wall is located closer to
129 the front lot line than the front wall of the principal structure and the
130 fence or wall otherwise complies with this subsection. Commented [PF6]: created a carve out for this situation
131 d. Interior side yards. Fences or walls shall be located no closer to the front so a house that existed prior to zoning could still build to
the front wall if it doesn't meet the current minimum
132 lot line than the front wall of the principal structure. setback rules for front yards. This could be a variance
133 e. Rear yards. Fences or walls may be located within the required rear yard.
request that would likely garner support from staff and
PC.
134
135 5.4. Restrictions.
136 Notwithstanding the allowable locations set forth in Subsection 3, fences
137 and walls shall be subject to the following restrictions:
138 a. Sidewalks and pedestrian access. No fence or wall may be constructed in
139 a manner that obstructs or encloses a required or public sidewalk or
140 access easement serving the lot.
141 b. Front yard fences (Apparent Front Yard). Fences and walls are prohibited
142 forward of the front wall (front building line) of the principal structure
143 facing the apparent front yard.
144 c. Visibility at intersections. All fences and walls shall comply with §170-35,
145 Visibility at Intersections.
146 d. Height. No fence or wall shall exceed eight (8) feet in height, measured
147 from finished grade, except as approved pursuant to subsection C.5.
148 e. Materials & Composition
149 1. Finished side out. The finished side of any fence shall face outward
150 toward adjoining properties and public ways.
151 2. Prohibited Fencingmaterials. The following are prohibited.
152 1.a. Barbed wire or razor wire, except as approved pursuant to
153 subsection C.5. Commented [PF7]: I have not considered separate
154 2.b. Electrified Fences. carve outs for industrial. Someone mentioned an
industrial property with chain link fence at the work
155 3.c. Chain link fences, except as approved pursuant to subsection session and that state law may have required it?
156 C.5. Commented [PF8]: again, do we need to put a carve out
157 a.d. Fencing constructed of light duty or temporary materials, somewhere in the fences, or within another section of
170 for industrial?
158 including but not limited to metal T-posts, plastic mesh,
159 construction fencing, snow fencing, or similar materials shall not
160 be used as a perimeter fence or installed along any lot line or
161 street frontage, except for temporary use during active
162 construction or similar short-term activities.
Page 5 of 8

163
164 Exception: Wire backing (welded wire, woven wire, or similar open
165 wire mesh) is permitted when attached to and supported by a
166 structural fence, (including split-rail or other wood fence) provided
167 that the wire backing does not extend above the top rail and is not
168 used as the primary structural support.
169
170 6.5. Planning Commission Approval – Nonresidential/security fencing
171 The Planning and Zoning Commission may approve fences and walls for
172 properties used for nonresidential purposes in all zoning districts that do not
173 comply with the standard height and materials limitations of this subsection,
174 including chain link fencing, and barbed wire/razor wire, subject to the
175 following:
176 a. Application and site plan
177 1. An application submitted under this subsection shall include the
178 standard fence permit submittal items required by the Town, including
179 a site plan showing the location of a proposed fence.
180 2. Planning and Zoning Commission approval required. When an
181 applicant proposes a fence or wall for a nonresidential use that does
182 not comply with the provisions of this subsection, including but not
183 limited to height or materials, the application shall be referred to the
184 Planning and Zoning Commission for approval.
185 b. Findings
186 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission may approve a request
187 under this subsection upon finding that the proposed fence or
188 wall:
189 a. Is reasonably necessary for site security, protection of
190 equipment/inventory, operational safety, or compliance with
191 state or federal regulatory requirements;
192 b. Is compatible with adjacent properties and surrounding
193 development considering location, height, materials, and
194 appearance;
195 c. Meets applicable buffer yard/screening requirements or
196 provides additional screening measures as a condition of
197 approval; and
198 d. Complies with §170-35, Visibility at Intersections.
199 c. Conditions
Page 6 of 8

200 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission may impose reasonable
201 conditions on height, materials, placement, screening, lighting,
202 and maintenance to ensure compliance with this subsection and
203 the findings above.
204 d. Residential uses in nonresidential districts.
205 1. This subsection shall not apply to fences and walls serving a
206 residential use, which shall comply with the residential fence
207 location, height, and materials standards of this subsection
208 regardless of underlying zoning district.
209
210 7.6. Easements
211 a. Town owned easements. Where a fence or wall crosses or is located
212 within a Town owned easement, the property owner shall record a
213 statement among the land records of Queen Anne’s County
214 acknowledging that:
215 1. The fence or wall is installed at the owner's risk;
216 2. The owner shall bear the cost of removal or relocation if access to the
217 easement is required; and
218 3. The Town shall bear no liability for damage to the fence or wall.
219
220 8.7. Rule of Construction
221 a. Apparent front yard. The term “front yard” shall mean the apparent front
222 yard of the lot, as defined in §170-70, unless the context clearly requires
223 otherwise.
224 b. Secondary front yard. On lots with more than one front yard, the term
225 “secondary front yard” shall have the meaning set forth in this
226 subsection.
227 c. Yard classification. The side yard, secondary front yard, and rear yard of
228 any lot shall be determined by their relationship to the apparent front yard
229 and, where applicable, the secondary front yard of the lot.
230 d. Lots with more than one frontage. For lots with more than one frontage,
231 yards abutting a publicly dedicated street, private street, private right-of-
232 way, or parking area shall be classified consistent with the apparent front
233 yard and secondary front yard designations.
234 e. Administrative determination. If uncertainty exists as to the designation
235 of the apparent front yard or the classification of yards on a lot for the
236 purposes of this subsection, the Zoning Administrator shall make the
Page 7 of 8

237 determination consistent with the intent of this subsection and the
238 definitions in §170-70.
239
240 9.8. Nonconforming Fences
241 A fence or wall lawfully established prior to the effective date of applicable
242 fence regulations that does not conform to the provisions of this subsection
243 shall be considered a nonconforming structure as defined in §170-13 and
244 may remain in place, subject to §170-14. Nothing herein shall be construed
245 to authorize the enlargement, extension, reconstruction, or replacement of a
246 nonconforming fence or wall except as permitted by §170-14.
Page 8 of 8

ISSUED BUILDING PERMITS
February 1 - 28, 2026
Permit # Applicant Owner Address Type Issue Date*
Niel Ellick/Economy
BP-7-26 Restoration Lacey Walter 230 Northfield Way Replace Roof 2/5/2026
BP-8-26 Kenda Leager/TL Fence, LLC Will Osterling 225 Autumn Lane Fence 2/18/2026
Andrew Harper/Andrew Convert garage to a
BP-9-26 Harper Builder Steve Smith 106 Turpin Lane bedroom, storage and 2/5/2026
Vanesa Gonzalez/Energy roof mounted solar
BP-10-26 Harbor Dollar General 545 Railroad Ave. panels 2/6/2026
BP-11-26 David Burtis/Monarch Roofing Helen Benchoff 106 Happy Lady Lane Roof replacement 2/26/2026
Niel Ellick/Economy
BP-13-26 Restoration Tori Neales 143 Long Creek Way Roof Replacement 2/26/2026
* based on the approval date by Zoning Administrator