More News

Garrett Park is again consulting attorneys about a town ordinance so poorly written that it has previously launched a lawsuit, a referendum and sparked the formation of a town task force charged with examining the entire land use code.

The ordinance leaves unclear a question of whether protrusions of a structure, like bay windows or porches, count against building setbacks. Disagreement on the matter sparked a lawsuit when a Garrett Park couple was denied a front porch building permit, and has mired the town in controversy for about a year and a half. The county exempts such protrusions from setbacks and Garrett Park defers to county "definitions." But Garrett Park's code does not specify whether it also defers to county "exemptions" and the longstanding practice in town has been not to exempt protrusions.

The Land Use Task Force, formed to analyze whether Garrett Park's land use rules are still relevant and useful, asked the Town Council on Monday to make an interim declaration adopting the county's exemptions in the Garrett Park code until the task force comes up with its final recommendations.

"We feel rather strongly, we voted 11 to 1, that this has to be done sooner rather than later," task force member Bob Reinhardt told the council. He said because the ordinance is so ambiguous, Garrett Park will be left in "no man's land" on the matter until the task force completes its duties.

"If you guys don't agree with this, it puts everybody applying for a building permit in limbo," Reinhardt said.

Councilman Hans Wegner said he was "puzzled" by the task force's decision to ask for a piecemeal ruling from the council when the purpose of the task force had been to get comprehensive, holistic input from residents about what needs to be changed in the town code.

"I'm puzzled by the need to segment out this piece before the whole process is done," Wegner said. Wegner said the purpose of the task force was to get direction for the council from the public, not the other way around.

"I see this as a breaking of that process," Wegner said.

Town resident Charles Snyder agreed, complaining that after everything the town had been through with the lawsuit, referendum and election, the task force was trying to "sneak this in."

"The upshot (of all that) was there's a land use committee that's supposed to make recommendations to the town and once the town council knows what those are the council can start making decisions on it," Snyder said.

But task force member Pam Morgan said the ambiguity of the ordinance has resulted in conflict and clarifying it for the task force would give the group a "baseline."

"In the future if the town knows that [the exemptions are] in, then we can have a meaningful discussion and say, ‘no, we don't want that, we don't want bay windows,'" Morgan said.

Ultimately, the council decided to consult with its attorney on whether the exemptions were in according to code or not. If they were, reasoned Mayor Chris Keller, no change was necessary. If they were not and the town desired to write them in, crafting a new ordinance would be necessary. He said it was not "in the spirit of the task force" to simply change the way in which the setback ordinance was interpreted, even though the attempt to include exemptions was endorsed by the full three-member Setback Committee that approves building permits.

The Land Use Task Force will make a presentation on its work to date to the Garrett Park Citizen's Association at a meeting scheduled for 8 p.m., Oct. 28, at the Garrett Park Town Hall, 10814 Kenilworth Ave.