Frederick Planning Commission Workshop Summary - May 15, 2023
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Frederick Planning Commission Workshop Summary - May 15, 2023
On May 15, 2023, the Frederick Planning Commission held a workshop to review seven items: architectural reviews for Renn Quarter and West Park Village, a site plan revision for Gambrill View Area A, final plats for Linden Hills and 328 Madison, a preliminary plat and forest conservation plan for Highland Trail, and a zoning map amendment and master plan for Westridge. No formal votes were taken; all items were discussed and will return for public hearings or further refinement.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Charlene Eastburn (NAC 5): Attempted to comment on Gambrill View but was redirected; later commented on Westridge. She expressed support for Golden Mile redevelopment but raised concerns about parking allocation, traffic on Key Parkway and Bel Air Road, building height (4-5 stories), impact on Lincoln Elementary and Frederick High schools (120% capacity), and affordability of townhouses and multifamily units. She requested answers on intended prices and rental vs. condo status. The applicant, Bruce Dean, responded that peak-hour trips would decrease by nearly 50% (from 193 to 101), parking is ample, and detailed traffic and parking data will be provided before the hearing.
Discussion Items
- PC14-913-09MU – Renn Quarter Architectural Review: DR Horton presented side-load garage elevations for four lots (Hadley and Summit floor plans) to meet civil engineering requirements. No commission or public questions; staff confirmed the submittal.
- PC22-836-04MU – West Park Village Architectural Review: Zavos Architects presented an elevation package for a standalone building. The commission liked the design. A discussion clarified that the non-recessed entrance would be listed as an element (not a modification) to satisfy code requirements.
- PC23-186FSI – Gambrill View Area A: The applicant requested modifications for front patios (uncovered, no roof) and side entries for end units on 300 units (about 115 condos, rest townhouses). Modifications sought for front-yard setback encroachments (patios) and side-yard setback encroachments (steps/stoops). Staff asked for resubmission clarifying fencing vs. landscaping, plant lists, and justification for modifications, referencing safety and aesthetic guidelines.
- PC23-157FSU – Linden Hills Final Plat: Applicant proposed reorienting two lots (fifth and sixth) from Linden Avenue frontage to Poplar Avenue to create buildable envelopes. The lots are 7,000 sq ft each, undersized for current code. Staff noted the lots are not buildable as platted; the subdivision meets Section 507C criteria.
- PC23-168FSU – 328 Madison Final Plat: Applicant requested a simple subdivision to create a 25-foot-wide lot from an oversized duplex lot. No modifications needed; the lot matches adjacent lots. A survey issue with party wall alignment was resolved.
- PC22-1097PSU and PC22-1098PFCP – Highland Trail Preliminary Plat and Forest Conservation: Applicant presented subdivision creating three lots and two new roads (Highland Trail and Big Al Cohen Boulevard) with modifications to street standards (lane widths, shared-use paths, parking). Fourteen specimen trees will be removed due to grading for drainage. Staff noted the forest conservation plan will rely on fee-in-lieu for a portion, with potential for future credits. APFO compliance was confirmed.
- PC22-650 and PC22-651 – Westridge Zoning Map Amendment and Master Plan: Applicant seeks to rezone 20.59 acres from General Commercial to Mixed Use (MU) and redevelop the eastern portion of Westridge Shopping Center with 41 townhouses and 203 multifamily units. Key features: new public streets, a pedestrian portal through the multifamily building, connection to adjacent shopping center to the east, and improvements to remaining retail. Modifications requested for building setbacks, frontage on open space, sidewalk on one street, and alley width. Traffic analysis shows a reduction in peak-hour trips; school capacity at Lincoln Elementary and Frederick High is at 120% (fee-in-lieu accepted). Parking is ample. Public comment raised height and parking concerns; applicant stated the building height (4-5 stories) is within MU zone limits and on the lowest part of the site.
Key Outcomes
- Renn Quarter: No action needed; item complete.
- West Park Village: Applicant to treat entrance design as an element rather than a modification; no further action at workshop.
- Gambrill View: Applicant to resubmit with clarified fencing/landscaping details, plant lists, and justification for modifications; changes to be reflected in the design booklet.
- Linden Hills: No further action; item will proceed to public hearing.
- 328 Madison: No further action; item will proceed to public hearing.
- Highland Trail: No action taken; staff encouraged the applicant to explore additional forest conservation credits in future site plans. APFO certificates pending.
- Westridge: The commission will make a recommendation to the Mayor and Board of Aldermen; the applicant will provide additional traffic and parking data before the public hearing. The related text amendment was reviewed by the Mayor and Board in June. No vote at workshop.
Meeting Transcript
Welcome to the May 15th, 2023 workshop for the City of Frederick Planning Commission. Before we begin today's proceedings, I'd like to give an overview of the process that we're going to find follow today because it's a little different than our hearing process. For each item on the agenda, we're going to start by asking the applant applicant to come up and walk us through their project. For those of you who are new to the process, we ask that you provide a thorough overview of everything in your application, specifically addressing any modifications that you're requesting. Following the applicant presentation, we will have a commission questioning of the applicant. And following that, we will ask the staff to add their comments on the application, followed by the commission questioning of the staff. After the staff presentation, we may go back to the applicant with additional questions. Following the staff comments, we'll ask the public to provide comment. And then if needed, we may go back and to the staff to applicant or staff for additional questions if we need to. Anyone wishing to make public comments is asked to sign up the sign-up sheet that's on the table over there next to the entrance. We will take people who are who have signed up first. After everybody who's signed up has given their comment, then what there will be the opportunity for other people who wish to make comment to come up and speak. Before giving your public comments, please give us your name and address and know that public comments are uh three minutes long. Um we now have this wonderful clock, so you will be able to see when the countdown to your time is started, when the light turns yellow, you will have 30 seconds left. When the right light turns red, your comment period is over. So anybody who um is going to be giving speaking at the meeting today must be sworn in prior to giving the remarks. That includes the applicant, any city or staff on the city staff present, as well as any members of the public. So at this point, I'd ask like to ask anybody who is planning on giving addressing the hearing to stand and raise your right hand to be sworn in. And do you solemnly swear or affirm that the responses given and the statements made in this hearing before the planning commission will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? If so, say I do. I do. All right, thank you. So given all that, our first item on the agenda is PC 14-913-09 MU architectural review for Rencord. Good afternoon. I'm Bill Stagal. I work for uh DR Horton. And um today's uh presentation is for um some side load garage elevations. There's four lots in phase one that due to civil uh engineering requirements had to do a side load garage. Those elevations weren't part of the original submittal package, so I'd like to submit them at this time. Uh there were two uh plans, the Hadley and the summit. Um I believe the Hadley has four elevations, and the summit has three elevations. Um is the Hadley A elevation with the side load garage. Um as you can see, the garage door is now replaced by uh three windows on the front of the house. Um so the elevation stays the same except for that. Um the windows are all trimmed out just like the other um windows on that level. And then on the next slide, you can see this is the Delevation. Again, similar uh changes to that with the windows replacing the uh garage door location, and again trimmed out the same as the uh other windows on that level, and then elevation E again for the Hadley. And then elevation F. That's the fourth of the Hadley elevations with the side load, and I believe I have uh the side elevation. You can see now the garage door is there. Um had requested I put see if we could put uh a couple of windows also on that side with the garage door. Um for the high views elevation that would previously those two windows would have been down on the lower level. And since the garage door is there is now is there now, we uh we're able to move windows up to the second floor. So that's how your side elevations will look, and then uh rendering of the Hadley with the side load elevation. And then the next uh plan is the summit plan, and again uh this one windows replacing where the garage door used to be on the front with uh similar features as the other windows on that level and then your D elevation, and I believe there's a one more E elevation there. You go and then uh the side elevation for this house with the garage door, and then uh last slides are rendering. So that's that's pretty much all we have was the side load elevations we want to add to the existing um packet. Okay, thank you. Any questions for the applicant? Nothing.
openpublica.com