Sussex officials take steps to cut red tape

Sussex County officials are fine-tuning several sections of code that could end up saving residents and developers money. In turn, the measures would reduce the number of variance applications heard by the board of adjustment.

Variances before the board of adjustment cost $400 to file and require a public hearing while other land-use hearings before county council and the planning and zoning commission cost $500 and require as many as two public hearings.

In all, nine amendments are proposed. At its Feb. 22 meeting, the planning and zoning commission recommended approval of seven, denial of one and deferred on another of the amendments. County council will have the final vote on the amendments whether to adopt the amendments into county code.

County council will have a public hearings on the amendments starting at 10 a.m., Tuesday, March 20.

Commercial interconnectivity

Since Kim Hoey Stevenson of Lewes was appointed to the planning and zoning commission last year, she has promoted interconnectivity between adjoining parcels as part of site-plan approval.

Thanks to her efforts, the commission has started to take a new look at interconnectivity.

But during the meeting, she was forced to take a step back when it came to requiring more road connections in residential developments.

While all commissioners agreed with an amendment that interconnectivity should be required for most new commercial projects, four commissioners did not agree that those same road connections should be required for new residential multifamily and townhouse projects.

The commission already has authority to require interconnectivity on site plans for subdivisions.

Hoey Stevenson urged commissioners to reconsider and require residential projects with 100 units or more to have interconnectivity to adjacent parcels, especially undeveloped parcels.

The four other commissioners did not buy into the idea and agreed that residents do not want outside traffic using their private roads

“There are liability, maintenance and safety issues,” said Commission Chairman Marty Ross.

In Sussex, subdivision streets and roads are not required to be built to state standards, so the state will not take over maintenance. Homeowners associations ultimately assume road ownership and maintenance.

Hoey Stevenson said interconnectivity is important for safety reasons to give emergency vehicles another option to get into a development. She said in the last snowstorm at least two emergency responders were trapped in their neighborhoods by cars blocking the one entrance into the community.

In addition, she said, it would take some of the pressure off area roadways. “If local people could get around without having to get on the main roads, it could cut down on so many traffic jams and help our residents get where they need to go,” she said. “I think if developers knew up front that we were looking for interconnectivity, they would be able to design it so people wouldn’t be treating their developments as freeways.”

Hoey Stevenson did not seem deterred in her mission. “Visionaries are often not appreciated in their time,” she said.

Regulations on handicap ramps?

Another surprising debate ensued over updated regulations on temporary handicap ramps.

“Why are we regulating handicap ramps in the first place?” asked Commissioner Bob Wheatley.

“No one is going to build one who doesn't need one,” he added. “The vast majority regulate themselves.”

Planning and Zoning Director Janelle Cornwell replied that ramps have to comply with setback regulations in code and require a building permit.

“That's only because we say they do,” Wheatley said. “Regulations should be minimal.”

Planning and zoning staff want the new regulations to mirror those in manufactured home parks, but no agreement on setback distances has been made.

Ramps in manufactured home parks are allowed to encroach 4 feet into a setback.

Assistant county attorney Jamie Sharp said some regulation is needed to ensure ramps are not built on adjoining property lines. “But we can make it easier than what we have now,” he said.

During public testimony, Georgetown-area resident Paul Rieger asked what the definition of temporary is. “That's part of a bigger picture than the ramp. Who makes the decision on the time frame?” he asked.

Sharp said residents with a medical hardship can apply for a special-use exception through the board of adjustment for placement of a manufactured home on a small lot. That permit is good for two years, and it can be renewed annually, he said, suggesting the county could consider that type of process for handicap ramps.

The commission deferred on a recommendation to council.

Changes in small-lot setbacks

Of the more than 12,000 applications the county board of adjustment has heard over the past four decades, hundreds – if not thousands – have dealt with setback variances for small nonconforming lots that date back before zoning came into existence in 1970.

If county council approves the proposed amendment, those variances would no longer be required.

“There are lots in manufactured home parks where you can't get a home built that size anymore mostly because of the width issue,” Sharp said.

Cornwell said there are still many lots in the county with smaller than the minimum 50-foot-wide frontage required by code, yet property owners are still held to the same setback and encroachment standards as property owners with larger lots.

“There are some that are 40 and even 30 feet wide,” Cornwell said. “It's difficult to build on them.”

The county is proposing five-foot front, rear and side-yard setbacks, with no structures allowed within the 5-foot setback area. Cornwell said where feasible, instead of a 5-foot setback, a front-yard setback could be set as the average of all front setbacks in a community.

“This would reduce the number of variances and give people more room to build,” Sharp said.

The commission voted in favor of the amendment.

Commission: No to condition changes

The commission recommended denial of an amendment that would require applicants seeking changes to conditions in conditional-use applications and residential planned communities to go through planning and zoning and county council public hearings, regardless whether the commission or council imposed the condition.

Currently, the planning and zoning commission has the option to approve commission-imposed changes without a public hearing. Cornwell said residents want a more open process with a chance to comment on the changes.

Ross said the current process is working. “I can't see dragging people in for minor changes,” Ross said.

“It seems burdensome to me,” Wheatley said.

He cited an example of an applicant who might want to to change hours of operation. “We would force someone to pay $500 to see if they can stay open one-half hour later,” he said. “No is the answer to this one.”

Recommended approval:

• A change in the maximum outside wall width dimensions from 165 feet to 170 feet for townhouse and multifamily dwellings. Mixed-use buildings and commercial buildings are not subject to width restrictions.

• To allow more latitude for the county's planning and zoning director to grant variances beyond one foot when a building permit or certificate of occupancy was issued in error by the county based on information that is not the applicant's fault. An applicant would not have to pay $400 and go through the public hearing process at a board of adjustment meeting.

• To extend the sunset time for special-use exceptions and variances from one year to two years with an option for a one-year time extension for good cause.

• Allow decks, porches, patios, platforms and steps to be built within 5 feet of the rear or side property lines. “This will eliminate a lot of variance applications,” Sharp said.