Sheds have occupied countless hours of county staff’s and elected officials’ time.

A committee was formed of county staff, elected officials and Delaware Manufactured Hom Owners Association representatives to look for solutions. After a few meetings, the committee could not agree on any answers.

“This is more part of a general issue and not just about sheds,” County Administrator David Baker said. “It’s a tough problem in some parks with small lots designed for single-wide homes that are replaced with double-wide homes. We run into lots of problems.”

There may be some help on the way for some residents, if county council passes a proposed ordinance that would amend county code.

The matter will resurface Tuesday, Nov. 3, during the Sussex County Council meeting.

Under the proposed ordinance, endorsed in January by the planning and zoning commission, small nonconforming sheds, or accessory buildings, of 120 square feet or less can be replaced on the same footprint with the issuance of a building permit, without a variance.

There is a small catch – the shed being replaced must have been installed under a valid building permit or be grandfathered in, so the new ordinance would not cover all cases.

The lightning rod

Although other problems exist in manufactured home parks, such as drainage and rising land rents, it seems sheds dominate the current agenda.

Hal Godwin, deputy county administrator, says that is because of one person, Jeanne Sisk, who has become a lightning rod on the issue.

Sisk, an outspoken manufactured homeowners’ advocate, has refused, mostly on principle, to follow current county regulations that she says are wrong. She put up a new 8-by-10-foot shed, to replace an old one, without a building permit. That’s because she knew to obtain a building permit, she would also be required to obtain a variance and survey, because the shed is in the side- and rear-yard setbacks.

She also protests the cost required for someone to request a variance, which could be as much as $1,000 for a shed that costs about the same amount.

The board of adjustment recently denied her request for a variance and an appeal of the need for that variance.

She faces court action, fines and even eviction from the park where she has lived for decades, Sea Air Village near Rehoboth Beach.

She refuses to back down even though there are those in her own park who do not support her effort.

To Sisk the solution is any easy one – remove variances and surveys from the process. “They need to take sheds out of the mix,” she said. “We have no problem with building permits, but that’s it.”

Sisk has been fighting this battle for more than a year; her shed was put in place in May 2008.

She says the county has no right to require a survey from people who live on land they do not own. She says there is nothing in the county code requiring land renters to pay for a survey. County council could fix this tomorrow, Sisk said.

Sisk said the debate over sheds points to more problems relating to how the county treats manufactured home park residents. “It’s all in whom you know,” she says.

She points to case after case, including her own, where misinformation has been given. She said planning and zoning staff told her that her appeal would have to be taken to court. In fact, it was heard by the board of adjustment. She said that bad information delayed her case by months.

“A lot of it comes down to basic education,” she said.

Sisk spoke in opposition to the proposed ordinance at the county council public hearing Jan. 27.

Two sides of the issue

Baker admits cost is a factor. He said one of the options county officials looked at was reducing the charge for variances for small sheds. That option is not included in the proposed amendment being considered by council.

Baker said the stumbling block centers around conforming to county code. “The concern is that these properties will never be in compliance,” he said. “And if we keep allowing nonconforming uses, and structures become closer and closer together, there is a concern of fire hazard.”

Paul Enterline, an attorney representing Sisk, said the whole issue centers around the survey. “It’s not clear what’s needed and why,” he said. “What they really need is a site plan. They need to spell it out and make it a standard rule.”

Enterline said members of the board of adjustment have the power to put conditions on variances. “To say they can’t grant a variance without a survey is simply wrong.” Enterline said.

He said, ultimately, some sort of survey-site plan would be needed, but under current county regulations, there is nothing in writing that spells out the process.

“We need to get this done. It’s time for this to end,” said Councilwoman Joan Deaver, D-Rehoboth Beach. She said some park residents need to be given some leeway to maintain their properties. “However we can get to that point, we need to do it,” she said.

Deaver and Councilman Mike Vincent, R-Seaford, served on the committee.

She admitted the shed issue has become very complicated. “It’s been passed back and forth between the county and park owners with the tenants stuck in the middle. There needs to be some reason applied to the process,” Deaver said.

She said the proposed ordinance seemed to be the best solution.