Preview:

The appellants, Frank Citrano, et ux., challenge an order issued by Judge Lawrence H. Rushworth of the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, affirming the Anne Arundel County Board of

Appeals's denial of the appellants' application for a zoning variance. On appeal, the appellants contend: 1. that there was not substantial evidence before the Board of Appeals for Anne Arundel County to support its decision to deny the appellants' application for variances to permit a deck within the 100 foot critical area, to permit the deck over steep slopes in a critical area, and to permit the deck in the front yard 38 feet closer to the front line lot line; that no variance was required in this case because the deck in question is a "water dependent facility" as defined by the County Code which is permitted in the buffer; and that the deck in question was an "accessory structure for waterfront lot" which is permitted in the front yard of an R-1 district.

2.

3.

In 1992, the appellants, Mr. and Mrs. Citrano, purchased a developed residential waterfront lot of approximately .83 acres ("the property") located on the Magothy River in Pasadena,

Maryland.

The property lies within the Chesapeake Bay Critical

Area1 and contains a number of steep slopes leading down to the

In 1984, the General Assembly enacted the Chesapeake Bay Critical Area Protection Program. 1984 Laws of Maryland, chapter 794, codified at Md. Code Ann. (1990 Repl. Vol.), Nat. Res. II

Download Citrano v. North.pdf

Maryland Law