Carroll County Board of Zoning Appeals Public Hearing - July 28, 2026

The Carroll County Board of Zoning Appeals held a public hearing on July 28, 2026, starting at 9:00 AM in the Reagan Room of the Carroll County Office Building. The board heard three cases: a conditional use and variance for a two-family dwelling (Case #6626), an appeal of a zoning administrator's decision regarding a rear yard setback variance (Case #6620), and a continued hearing for a commercial kennel conditional use (Case #6609). The board approved Case #6626, denied the appeal in Case #6620, and continued Case #6609 to a future date.

Case #6626 – Two-Family Dwelling Conditional Use and Variance (9:00 AM)

• Applicant: David B. Fisher, represented by Attorney Jay Brooks Leahy. Property at 3021 Walnut Street, Manchester, zoned R-10,000 Residential.
• Request: Conditional use for a two-family dwelling not in a planned unit development or retirement village, and one variance for lot size (reduction from 15,000 sq ft to 13,906 sq ft).
• Testimony: Mr. Fisher testified he purchased the property, renovated it (spent $50,000, estimated $70,000 with labor), and learned of the zoning issue during refinancing. The property had been a two-family unit since at least 1991. Expert witness Martin Hackett (CLSI) stated the use is consistent with the county plan and does not adversely affect public health, safety, or property values. No public opposition was voiced.
• Decision: The board approved the conditional use and variance unanimously. The board noted the improvements benefit the community and that the violation should be cleared.

Case #6620 – Appeal of Zoning Administrator’s Decision (9:30 AM)

• Appellant: Ray Howes, represented by Attorney Matthew Hurf. Property at 1415 Stover Road, Taneytown, zoned Agricultural.
• Background: The zoning administrator (Anastasia Yemelyanova) approved an administrative adjustment allowing a 20-foot rear yard setback (instead of 50 feet) for a replacement dwelling. The applicant was Daniel Justice.
• Testimony: Zoning administrator explained her decision based on site constraints (corner lot, floodplain, existing structures, septic location). Appellant argued the reduction would impact farming operations (spraying) and that the applicant could relocate the garage. Expert witnesses (Chris Weaver, Gary Dell) testified that herbicide/pesticide labels require 80–100 foot setbacks from residences, reducing farmable area and causing financial loss. Mr. Justice testified he attempted to work with the neighbor and the setback was never intended to be 30 feet; he needed the attached garage.
• Decision: The board overturned the zoning administrator’s decision, denying the variance. The board cited additional information about spraying impacts and the ability to place the garage elsewhere. The vote was 4-1 (Ms. Dennis dissented, citing the administrator’s consultation with the Ag Preservation Office).

Case #6609 – Commercial Kennel Conditional Use (10:00 AM – Continued)

• Applicant: Rachann Mayer. Property at 6270 Davis Road, Woodbine, zoned Conservation. Request for conditional use and multiple variances for a commercial kennel of more than 10 dogs (up to ~140 dogs).
• Status: This was a continuation of a prior hearing. The board heard testimony from opposition witnesses throughout the afternoon.
• Opposition Testimony Highlights:
  • Karen Joines (veterinarian, neighbor): Raised concerns about traffic safety (narrow roads, school bus stop, limited sight lines), water consumption (estimated 700+ gallons/day for boarding), noise impacts (up to 100 dB), property value decreases (5–20% estimated), and incompatibility with the conservation zoning. Presented a petition with ~500 signatures.
  • Jeanette Bingaman (realtor): Testified that a similar kennel in California reduced property values by $180,000. Emphasized impact on nearby homeowners with limited equity.
  • Todd Bingaman (property owner): Stressed the 16 variances requested, self-created hardship, and impacts on neighbors and Mount Olive Church.
  • Vincent Fertetta (neighbor): Cited traffic hazards, children walking home, and loss of peaceful enjoyment.
  • Donna Fields (adjacent property owner): Described well and septic issues, removal of trees, and fear of devaluation.
  • Linda Frazier (mother of special needs adult son): Testified that her son has autism and dog barking is a major trigger. Expert witness Rachel Sousa (behavior analyst) confirmed the son would likely face severe distress, potential self-harm, or need to move.
  • Nicole Romiser (retired police officer): Raised emergency response concerns due to narrow roads, limited shoulders, and increased accident risk.
  • Bob Geldmacher (neighbor): Highlighted noise (audible from 4 miles away), property value concerns, and dangerous intersections (Cabbage Spring Road and Gillis Falls Road).
  • Diane Isaac (horse farm owner): Described difficulty maneuvering horse trailers on narrow roads, especially with increased traffic. Noted road conditions require frequent county repairs.
• Decision: The board did not make a decision on this case. The hearing was adjourned and will reconvene on September 22 or 23, 2026, to allow for additional testimony and review of new evidence.

Key Outcomes

• Case #6626: Approved unanimously. Written decision to be issued within 30 days.
• Case #6620: The board overturned the zoning administrator’s decision, denying the requested variance. The written decision will be issued within 30 days.
• Case #6609: Continued to a future hearing date (September 22 or 23, 2026). No vote taken.