City of Frederick Planning Commission Workshop - December 19, 2022
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
City of Frederick Planning Commission Workshop - December 19, 2022
The City of Frederick Planning Commission conducted a workshop on December 19, 2022, starting at 2:00 PM. The workshop covered five agenda items: three final site plans, one combined forest stand delineation and forest conservation plan, and one zoning text amendment. No votes were taken; all items were discussed for informational and deliberative purposes. Public comment was invited but none was offered for any item in person, though letters were received on the text amendment.
Discussion Items
-
Frederick County Animal Control Renovation and Expansion (PC22-926FSI): The applicant, Dewberry Engineer, Inc., represented by Kevin Mack and Ellen Ox, presented a multi-phase renovation and expansion of the existing animal control facility. The plan adds three wings, reconfigures parking (adding eight spaces), relocates a bus stop to an ADA-compliant location, provides new utilities, and adds stormwater management. The project will remain operational through five construction phases. The existing structure is 12,661 square feet; the total after expansion will be 20,619 square feet. Commissioner Strawson questioned the parking layout and construction phasing. Staff noted that the applicant proactively worked with transit staff to upgrade the bus stop. No public comment. No decision.
-
SECU ATM (PC22-919FSI): The applicant, Adtek Engineers, proposed a walk-up ATM at a shopping center. The original drive-up design was revised to include sidewalk access per staff feedback. The plan results in a net loss of two parking spaces, but the site still meets parking requirements. Commissioner Strawson expressed concern about pedestrian safety for visitors coming from the shops, noting the ATM's location in a busy corner. She requested consideration of additional crosswalks or safety measures. Staff recommended approval of a modification to landscaping requirements for safety reasons and noted an existing crosswalk. Engineering staff added that a crosswalk is already marked on River Bend Way. No public comment. No decision.
-
Prospect Hall (PC21-334FSI / PC21-550FSCB): The applicant, Adtek Engineers, with landscape architect Michael Norton, proposed a reception venue at the historic Prospect Hall mansion. The parking lot was shifted north to preserve old-growth trees and the view shed. Parking was reduced from 72 to a lower number (after BZA approval). Four modifications were requested: reduced drive aisle width (20 ft instead of 24 ft) in paver areas, a setback modification for parking on the northern edge, a lighting spillage modification along Butterfly Lane, and a modification for removal of three specimen trees (though the modification letter stated one; staff flagged the discrepancy). A fee in lieu of $4,312.44 for 0.33 acres of afforestation is proposed due to site constraints. Owner Michelle Sigler noted the mansion needs significant interior renovation. Commissioner Strawson asked about restoration scope and pedestrian access. Commissioners discussed the paver design and transit planning for event venues. Staff noted that the tree removal information needed clarification. No public comment. No decision.
-
Visitation Academy (PC22-925FSI): The applicant, Harris, Smariga & Associates, presented a final site plan for a third multifamily building (seven units) to complete a 33-unit program originally approved. The building will be located on East Second Street, replacing a parking lot. The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) approved a Level 1 review of the building's massing and setback in July 2022. Commissioner Strawson questioned the need for a third building and the impact on neighbors regarding light spillover and proximity. The applicant explained that the third building allowed for unit count adjustments and that HPC had already reviewed streetscape impacts. Commissioners requested that renderings and phasing information be provided for the future planning commission hearing. Staff confirmed that the maximum of 33 units had already been tested and MPDU requirements were addressed. No public comment. No decision.
-
Zoning Text Amendment – Carroll Creek Overlay (PC22-370ZTA): A text amendment to Article 4, Section 420 (Carroll Creek Overlay) was presented by representatives of Warmalt Companies and Osherman Properties. The amendment aims to increase allowable residential density in the CCO by eliminating the existing density penalty (raising the density cap from 60 to 75 units per acre) and allowing for further density increases (up to 150 units per acre) when structured parking is provided. The applicants argued that current density limits make projects financially infeasible due to the high cost of structured parking, and that the market demands smaller units (800–900 sq. ft.) which require higher density to pencil. They emphasized that the amendment does not change height, massing, or setback requirements, and that parking minimums remain the same. Commissioner Strawson and Commissioner Beattie expressed concerns about tying density bonuses to structured parking, the potential elimination of the public space dedication requirement (currently 10% dedicated to public use), and the overall consistency with comprehensive plan goals of reducing car dependency. Staff (Gabrielle Collard) noted that the amendment is a limited first step but raises broader policy questions about downtown density, parking ratios, and infrastructure capacity (e.g., water supply). No public comment was offered in person, but letters were received. No decision.
Key Outcomes
- No votes or formal decisions were made on any agenda item. All items were discussed in a workshop format.
- Commissioners requested additional information and clarifications for several items, including rendering and phasing details for Visitation Academy, and a more simplified analysis of the financial and policy implications for the Carroll Creek Overlay text amendment.
- The text amendment discussion highlighted significant policy questions about density, parking, and public space that will require further deliberation before a future public hearing and recommendation.
- The meeting concluded at approximately 4:30 PM (estimated from transcript length).
Meeting Transcript
So we will we will call to order the um workshop for the City of Frederick Planning Commission. So welcome. We have been back here together for a number of months. All of our public comment is being taken in person. And our process is to start off having the applicants come up to the front table and walk us through the presentation. If there's anyone here that is somewhat new to the process, we prefer you don't just say you've read the report, you have any questions. Actually walk us through the highlights of the report. We will then take turns and do a quick roll call to do questions and comments, and then we'll have more of a free form uh conversation. And after we exhaust the conversation with the applicant, we'll then ask staff for additional comments. We'll have more questions and comments of staff. And then if we have to return to the applicant, we will, it's a little bit more casual than our regular hearings. After that, we will ask for public comment on every item. And that will conclude our discussion on that item. So with that, um everyone here from the planning staff from engineering, the applicants, and anyone here for public testimony if you would stand to be sworn in and raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the responses given in statements made in this hearing before the planning commission will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? If so, say I do. Okay, terrific. And with that, we will go straight to item number one. And that is the final site plan for the Frederick County Animal Control Renovation and Expansion. It's PC 22 926. And as you come forward, if you would introduce yourself first. Good afternoon, uh ladies and gentlemen. And if I could also ask you, sorry, it's really hard to hear sometimes. You're gonna have to bring that mic a lot closer. Uh now we can hear you. Thank you. There we go. Okay. Um good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen of the commission. My name is Kevin Mack. I'm with the firm of Dewbury, and I represent the applicant, which is the Frederick County Animal Control. Uh this site is uh a portion of the overall 80 acre land that the county owns uh at Montague and Rosemont Avenue. Excuse me. And uh the existing uh animal control facility uh is in desperate need of uh remodeling and expansion to meet its uh current and future uh goals of um animal health and uh so we are expanding the building um in three wings to the existing building, as well as uh doing a complete refurbishment of the of the existing structure. So uh basically we are as you can see from the plan that the northwest, northeast, and southeast corners of the building are uh expanding into providing additional facilities for the animals and for storage and maintenance of the operation. The uh parking lot to the north will be re uh remodeled is as part of this expansion to add a few uh I believe it's eight extra spaces uh over and above what's there today, and to uh provide a more efficient parking layout with uh three rows connected to provide full circulation around the site, as well as to allow us to reconfigure the existing um trash dumpsters, which the existing can um enclosure for the trash is not big enough for all the uh trash plus recyclables, so we're providing a larger container uh space for those, and that has been located as far as we can from the public facade of the site. Um it still is partially visible, but it because the site is bounded and contained by the 100 year floodplain to the west. Uh we couldn't go any further uh and and hide that behind the building. Tied in with the dumpsters, we have the uh we've pushed all the loading and uh uh supply access to that same northwest corner. The uh the trash enclosure will be uh surrounded on three sides by a uh evergreen hedge as well. In the southwest corner, we are providing a stormwater management facility which will treat the uh the site as a redevelopment uh to uh whereas currently there is no stormwater management at all. Uh this will provide uh um the stormwater management for the expansion. Could you bring it just a little bit closer again? I'm losing some of your words. Okay, no problem. Um the Rosemont Avenue facade, we the the new design is bringing the uh the main entrance to the building to address directly towards Rosemont Avenue as whereas the currently it's kind of pointing off toward the towards the parking lot. And we've added a uh sidewalk connection straight out to Rosemont. We've also uh been working with the uh transportation and and for the with the uh business. The uh nearby existing bus stop uh which is in front of the Pizza Hut just to the south, is not adequate for their current needs because it does not meet um ADA uh compliance. So what we've done is we've actually relocated the bus stop to be directly in front of the front door of the uh animal control and widened the sidewalk out there to make a uh a fully functional and co and uh compliant bus stop as part of that also in as part of our um we're we're meeting the uh four of the um design guidelines uh since this is in the uh IST zone, uh one of which is um that we're not quite meeting all of, but we're um the only thing we're not meeting is the setback for uh having the building address the uh road.
openpublica.com