Speaker numbers apply only to this recording. Names come from transcript evidence. “Possibly” marks uncertain attribution.
The Charles County Board of Appeals convened on April 14, 2026, to handle a consent calendar, deliberate on two complex administrative appeals regarding legal non-conforming uses, and address procedural matters. The Board heard closing arguments on Docket 1474 (Duke 925 LLC trucking use) and issued a final ruling on Docket 1459 (River's Edge restaurant).
Topic: Appeal of a zoning officer's decision denying a legal non-conforming use for two parcels (~1.52 acres) used for trucking and storage on Route 925.
Applicant's Position: Attorney Steve Scott argued the property has been continuously used for trucking, storage, and maintenance since approximately 1985. Witnesses Raymond Messick (former operator of Mezick Trucking) and Joe Wasner (commercial real estate agent for owner Duke 925 LLC) testified the use never lapsed for more than a month. They presented aerial photographs from 1988 to 2025 depicting trucks on the site and leases with subsequent trucking tenants (Butler, Huezo, Delsid). No Use and Occupancy (U&O) permits were found by the applicant or county, but they argued this was historically common in the corridor. They stated the owner bought the properties expecting the stalled Waldorf Central vision plan to provide sewer, water, and road improvements (APF).
Board Discussion and Counsel's Advice: Board Counsel informed the members that the burden of proof is on the applicant to show a legal use prior to the zoning change. Because no U&O permits were ever found for these specific uses, the use may not have been legal at its inception, disqualifying it from grandfathering. A lease does not establish a legal use. Members questioned the evidence for both parcels, noting one lease limited use to parking only. Chairman Humbert argued for a practical decision based on the decades of history, lack of public complaint, and risk of the property becoming tax-delinquent. Vice Chair Watkins argued the Board must strictly apply the law as a quasi-judicial body, not make policy. He stated they are not authorized to ignore the plain language of the ordinance.
Key Vote & Outcome: The motion to uphold the zoning officer's determination (denying the non-conforming use) passed 3-2.
Topic: Final ruling on whether a non-conforming use (a burned-down restaurant on the waterfront) can continue.
Board Discussion: The record was closed. Mr. Trainer argued the applicant failed to re-establish the use within the required 12 months. Despite receiving extensions from the county, he made no progress, failed to provide requested budgets, and did not clear debris promptly, overwhelmingly forfeiting the right to the non-conforming use. Chairman Humbert argued the site is now cleaned to the slab, the community strongly supports the restaurant's return (via a large petition), and forcing conformance with current zoning (which lacks parking and waterfront allowances) would kill the project. Ms. Walker noted the community's desire for the business and the significant remaining regulatory hurdles (county, state, federal). Mr. Watkins agreed with the strict application of the rule, calling the applicant's lack of progress undeniable.
Key Votes & Outcome:
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Board of Appeals meeting for Tuesday, April the 14th, 2026. Prior to the start of this hearing, I wish to tell all in attendance the following. The Board of Appeals is a quasi-judicial board appointed by the county commissioners. The board is charged with the responsibility of applying the Charles County ordinance to each application for a variance or special exception in a fair and impartial manner after a hearing where all parties or interested persons are heard. Our decisions are not based on the number of witnesses or the quantity of evidence, but rather on the quality of the evidence. Repeating a point of view or an opinion already given does not make it any more credible and repetition is to be avoided. After the applicant has completed their presentation, only the individuals that signed up will have the opportunity to speak. The signing sheet is located in the front of the room with the clerk for all scheduled hearings. If you are present and wish to speak, you must put your name on the sign-in sheet. Each member of the Board of Appeals is required by law to be and remain impartial to both sides and can only base its decisions on the evidence presented at the hearing. Consequently, any verbal communication with a board member outside of the hearing room and pertaining to any pending case is strictly prohibited under the ethics of all independent boards. The board appreciates your anticipated respect for the process. Anything you'd like to talk about other than the cases tonight. And Docket 1459 River's Edge Administrative Appeal. Madam Clerk, please conduct a record. I'm sorry, please conduct and record a record. Call attendance of the board. Certainly. Vice Chair Benjamin Watkins. President. Jennifer Walker. Present. Damien Chasada. Present. Timothy Trainer. Present. George Grindle. Present. Chairperson Bud Humbert. President as well. Our next order of business is to accept the agenda for this evening. Take a motion to approve the agenda tonight for April 14th, 2026. Mr. Chairman, I move to approve the agenda. Second motion. We have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed the same sign. Motion carries. The motion to accept the agenda has been approved. The approval for the meeting minutes from March the 24th, 2026. We discussed the two variances for Riverside Shore and the Wawa. I'd like to have a motion for the approval of the minutes.