Charles County Board of Appeals Meeting – March 24, 2026

The Charles County Board of Appeals met on Tuesday, March 24, 2026, at 4:00 PM (scheduled start) to hear three cases: two variance requests for a Riverside Shores property (Dockets 1483 and 1484) and a special exception modification for a Wawa convenience store and gas station (Docket 1478). The board also addressed closing the record on a previous case (Rivers Edge, Docket 1459) and a motion to reconsider the Heritage Cemetery decision (Docket 1481). Attendance: Jennifer Walker, Timothy Trainer, George Grindle, and Vice Chair Watkins present; Bud Humbert absent.

Consent Calendar

• Approved the agenda for the meeting.
• Approved the minutes of the March 10, 2026 meeting.

Public Comments & Testimony

Riverside Shores Variances (Dockets 1483 & 1484)

Eight members of the public spoke in opposition to both variances. Key points:

• Bob Lukinick argued that the site plan contained flaws (e.g., mislabeled road, incorrect buffer line) and that the house would be entirely within the 100-foot buffer. He noted that no previous variance had been approved in the subdivision and warned of a flood of similar requests.
• Nancy Shorter (submitted written testimony) stated the applicant purchased the property after regulations were in place, making the hardship self-created. She argued the proposed 24×26 foot house with a concrete porch was not the minimum necessary and that no alternative designs were presented. She emphasized cumulative impacts and precedent for the remaining eight similarly constrained lots.
• Sidney Johnson (36-year resident) described shoreline erosion and deteriorating bulkheads, raising concern about the long-term viability of building close to the water.
• Howard Dent argued the hardship was self-created because the owner bought the lot with full knowledge of zoning restrictions. He stated that design alternatives (e.g., a smaller house) were not explored and that the variance exceeded what is minimally necessary.
• Dorothy Lukinick supported the existing system of requiring multiple lots for development and warned that approving this variance would set a precedent that could harm water quality, sewer capacity, and property values for over 100 similar lots.
• Viv Watson argued the board lacks authority to change land use through a variance and said the house would intrude on his privacy and devalue his property. He claimed the applicant could build a smaller house without variances.
• Andre Douglas (owner of multiple lots) asked whether approval would allow him to develop his five waterfront lots without similar variances. He stated that if this variance is granted, he would not need to consolidate lots.

Wawa Special Exception Modification (Docket 1478)

• Angela Jacks (resident of Motley Place) opposed the project due to increased traffic, pedestrian safety (no sidewalks on Route 5), noise from 24-hour operations, and the potential for more accidents. She noted that there are already frequent accidents on Leonardtown Road.

Discussion Items

Riverside Shores Variances (Dockets 1483 & 1484)

• Case summary: Petitions by Margaret Mike Enes (owner of Lot 9, 1408 Riverside Drive, Bryan’s Road) for two variances:
  • Docket 1483: Reduce side building restriction lines from 15 ft minimum/35 ft total to 7.5 ft minimum/17.5 ft total (50% reduction) to allow a feasible building envelope on the 0.1893-acre lot (56 ft wide, ~150 ft deep). Staff and applicant argued that without the variance, the buildable area would be only ~21 ft wide, making construction of a single-family home impractical.
  • Docket 1484: Variance to allow development within the 100-foot critical area buffer. Staff explained the property lies in the Resource Conservation zone overlay; the buffer is mandated by the Critical Area Act. The proposed house would be entirely within the buffer. The applicant proposed mitigation plantings at a 3:1 ratio for buffer impact and 1:1 for other lot coverage, totaling 4,252 sq ft of planting credits.
• Staff presentations: Kirby Blass (1483) and Kyle Redden (1484) recommended approval with conditions, finding that the lot’s grandfathered status (platted 1946) and septic system constraints create an unusual hardship. They noted that the building envelope is severely restricted and that the proposed house is as far from the water as possible.
• Applicant testimony: Attorney Mark Mudd and engineer Gar Lessner argued the variances are the minimum necessary, adopted staff’s findings, and stated the owner intends to live in the home. They confirmed that the critical area commission received notice and had no significant objections.
• Board concerns: Timothy Trainer raised questions about whether the critical area buffer variance constitutes a use variance (since a single-family dwelling is not permitted in the buffer). Attorneys clarified it is an area variance because the underlying zone (Rural Conservation) permits the use; the buffer is a regulatory overlay. George Grindle questioned erosion impacts and long-term planting maintenance. Staff responded that plantings are covered by a two-year agreement but no permanent replanting obligation exists.
• Public comments (detailed above) all opposed.
• Outcome: The board closed the record and scheduled closing arguments and a final vote for April 28, 2026. No decision was reached.

Wawa Special Exception Modification (Docket 1478)

• Case summary: Waldorf Leonard Town Developers LLC requested approval to modify a previously approved special exception (Docket 1417, 2021) for a 7‑Eleven. Changes include:
  • Eliminating the car wash.
  • Expanding the convenience store from 4,070 sq ft to 6,372 sq ft.
  • Reducing fuel dispensers from 8 to 6.
  • Property subdivided to 3.199 acres.
• Staff presentation: Kirby Blass recommended approval with nine conditions, noting that the modification reduces impacts (fewer pumps, no car wash) and complies with use standards. A condition regarding the St. Mark’s pump station was modified to remove specific language after further coordination with the Department of Public Works.
• Applicant testimony: Attorney Sue Greer proffered that all witnesses would confirm the proposed changes, adopt the staff report, and reaffirm the original application. She addressed the public necessity test, stating that no new fuel stations had been built in the neighborhood since the original approval, and that the county zoning officer had determined the public necessity test no longer applies to stations with fewer than 12 pumps.
• Public comment: Angela Jacks opposed the project, citing traffic congestion, pedestrian safety, noise, and increased accident risk.
• Board discussion: The board considered the public necessity standard and whether it needed updating. Staff and applicant argued that because the number of pumps is decreasing, the original findings remain valid. The board accepted the modified condition 3.
• Outcome: The board closed the record and voted unanimously to approve the modification with the nine conditions as presented (including the original wording of condition 3).

Other Business

• Rivers Edge (Docket 1459): The board closed the record upon receipt of counsel’s letter, as agreed at the previous meeting. A vote on approval/denial was scheduled for April 14, 2026.
• Heritage Cemetery (Docket 1481): The board considered a motion to reconsider the previous approvals because board member Jennifer Walker voted without attending the evidentiary hearing. The motion carried, and reconsideration will be heard at the next meeting (April 14 or later).

Key Outcomes

• Riverside Shores variances (Dockets 1483 & 1484): Record closed; closing arguments and final decision set for April 28, 2026.
• Wawa modification (Docket 1478): Approved (unanimous) with nine conditions; staff to incorporate original condition 3 wording.
• Rivers Edge (Docket 1459): Record closed; vote scheduled for April 14, 2026.
• Heritage Cemetery (Docket 1481): Motion to reconsider granted; reconsideration hearing to be scheduled.
• The meeting adjourned at approximately 9:30 PM.