OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Frederick Planning Commission Workshop – June 13, 2023

Planning CommissionTuesday, June 13, 2023
BodyFrederick, Maryland
SessionPlanning Commission
DateTuesday, June 13, 2023
StatusFILED
Video Record

STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE

Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

Allows it to be reduced by another point two five.

0:02

And then they were even assuming more that it would get approved.

0:05

And that's how they were getting to that point six.

0:07

So it just clarified that.

0:10

I did talk briefly with the city attorney about the MPDU question, not in terms of any substance, but uh whether if you got into whether we could in the LMC, and the mayor and board ultimately, you know, adopting it, whether you could do something that would supersede the MPDU ordinance chapter of the city code without actually also going in and changing the city code.

0:39

Right.

0:40

Uh her initial reaction, you know, this wasn't hours of analyzing or studies, but um, was you you could it's not good legislative format to to do that because then you have a disconnect in your ordinance.

0:55

So you know, ideally, if you were going to change it, you would change the chapter 19 as well.

1:00

And then she did raise the um the uh the point that the uh mayor and board are contemplating amendments overall in a more holistic capacity to the MPDU ordinance or the chapter 19 of the city code.

1:15

So wouldn't, you know, those sorts of changes should be looked at holistically was the the feedback.

1:22

I don't know.

1:22

Um I haven't been involved with any of the MPDU legislative potential legislative changes, what's going on there?

1:29

Um, but it's on the remote.

1:31

Bad Ben isn't here because I mean the last time I talked to them, it sounded like they were, you know, it wasn't really anywhere yet.

1:39

I can see if it's anywhere like besides besides in talk, um, if they have a plan for a workshop or you know, if they're had a workshop on it on end of March.

1:50

Okay, I think, but the impression because I talked to Ben after the workshop, and it sounded like it was just like we can't decide, you know, we don't ideas.

2:00

Yeah, they haven't gotten as far as any further than that.

2:05

Yeah, more significant policy changes.

2:09

So that was her initial feedback.

2:11

Um, you know, seems to me that at least putting this in something like that, and I'm from my perspective, putting that into our notes, I mean and into our recommendation kind of forces the mayor and board to start thinking about it a little bit more, even if they don't ultimately approve it at this point.

2:27

And and I that was gonna be my you know overall sentiment.

2:32

You can this is your recommendation, right?

2:35

And you don't have to recommend, you know, if there were if there were specific language, you know, if we were looking at the ordinance, I think um, Commissioner Manales uh with the MU text amendment, she recognized something that was like kind of a specific, like, oh, we need to amend this reviewing authority thing.

2:49

And and there was a really specific, like we recommend approval of this with this added language.

2:55

That's one thing.

2:57

Um, but if you also just have more conceptual things, we don't need specific language for you to incorporate that into your recommendation.

3:05

If you want to say we recommend approval of this with the caveat that all houses be blue, you know, you you we don't need someone to come with a legislative draft of anything for your for your recommendation.

3:20

So and so and based on that, and and this the way I was looking at it, if if they're asking for um this increase of density, then to me, all the rules and regulations and everything that's written is is something that we're we're now going to um uh elicit those changes.

3:50

So if we change the density for Carroll Creek, we can recommend um you know, X amount of MPDU not even recommend it, require if we're going to if we're going to um recommend this to the mayor and board, then we could put in specific so MPDU and parking uh could be part of that.

4:20

And and that that's what I was trying to get at at the workshop was um the you you you can't keep um some parts of the LMC in place because you're asking for an increase of density and the increase of density has to include A and B or C.

4:51

So any of those, so any of those things, I just think conceptually you could make a recommendation that was as simple without having what I what I want to see, the applicant may not agree with your recommendation to require MPDUs.

5:07

So they're probably not going to revise their draft to provide you with something that you would ultimately get to a place of approval with, right?

5:12

Like to be like, yes, we recog we recommend approval of this.

5:16

Um so we could go on forever without making recommendation if if we waited for that.

5:24

Um whereas if the commission feels like it has all the information that it wants, and you have reached a place where you feel confident with your recommendation, it could be just something as simple as we recommend.

5:36

We support this amendment with changes that would require X, Y, and Z MPDUs to be provide one space per unit.

5:44

That's all I meant, is that you're not going to get a draft ordinance that you're going to want to recommend flat out approval with if there are things that you don't, if there are things you want to see.

5:54

And that's okay to just make a recommendation of that nature.

5:58

Okay.

5:58

If you're comfortable with it.

6:00

Yeah.

6:00

And this gets back to the uh to me, the kind of training thing.

6:05

I'll use training thing in quotes of um, you know, we we don't have to we can we can have our own specific recommendations that we read into the record uh on Monday, and then the it's it's up to the mayor and board whether they adopt them or not.

6:25

Right.

6:26

And yeah, as long as you all agree with them, right?

6:28

We but we don't want everybody to come with their own recommendations.

6:31

I mean, you know, the group would need to vote on something, but correct.

6:34

It is long as the commission is comfortable making a recommendation, understanding that from your point on that how that got built in, either the mayor and board could go, no, we don't like that.

6:47

Thank you anyway, or the mayor and board could go go, we like this.

6:50

And then, but you've you've waived your right to see that exact language.

6:55

Like from there it would move on without you.

6:58

Right.

6:59

That's that's the I want you all to be mindful of that.

7:03

That if you make a recommendation general like that, then you're you're not seeing exact language.

7:08

But I don't know that you're going to see exact language if it's not something that the applicant is building into it, right?

7:14

Right.

7:15

Because it's their amendment.

7:16

And then whether or not um the recommendations are uh, or let's say the recommendations were accepted, then it's up to the mayor and board to change whatever regulations LMC or whatever needs to happen to put the if they agree with us, and if not, then obviously it doesn't need to.

7:42

Yeah, yeah, a number of things could happen.

7:43

The applicant could go, you know, could see the writing on the wall, see that they wanted to change other things, they could withdraw it.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Affordable Housing█████████████████████████████29%
Archaeological Assessment███████████████████████████27%
Procedural█████████████████████████25%
Annexation█████████████13%
Legal Matters██████6%
Summary of Proceedings

Frederick Planning Commission Workshop – June 13, 2023

The Planning Commission held a workshop on June 13, 2023, to discuss several items including a proposed text amendment for increased density at Carroll Creek, two annexation applications, and broader policy considerations around the Moderately Priced Dwelling Unit (MPDU) ordinance. Commissioners debated the scope of their recommendations, the role of the Land Management Code, and procedural aspects of their authority to shape development conditions. No formal votes were taken, but the commission laid groundwork for future recommendations to the Mayor and Board of Aldermen.

Discussion Items

  • MPDU Ordinance and Text Amendment Recommendations: Commissioners considered whether they could recommend specific MPDU requirements and parking changes as part of a density increase for the Carroll Creek project without having a revised draft from the applicant. Staff advised that while the city attorney cautioned against piecemeal amendments that would create a disconnect in the city code, the commission could make conceptual recommendations (e.g., “require one parking space per unit and a set percentage of MPDUs”) without specific legislative language. The commission acknowledged that such recommendations would then be considered by the Mayor and Board, who might accept, modify, or reject them.
  • Annexation Applications – Two Properties: The commission reviewed two annexation requests for the second time (first hearing). Updates since the workshop included a proposed increase in the square-footage fee from $0.75 to $1.25 per square foot (adjusted for 2016–2017 cost escalation), a call for construction of the logistics park road from Gas House Pike to the southern end of the MERSA property, and an expected letter from the county requesting additional proffers. Commissioners raised questions about the status of an archaeological area on one of the sites and whether the city already owns part of the annexation area (a pumping station on the south side of Gas House Pike). Staff agreed to review the transcript and provide clarification.
  • Meeting Scheduling: Several commissioners expressed frustration with Monday and Friday afternoon meetings, citing conflicts with holidays, travel, and shifting work schedules. They suggested moving meetings to Tuesdays or Thursdays in future years. Staff noted that the commission calendar is reviewed annually in October/November and that boardroom availability would be a factor.
  • Commission Authority to Initiate MPDU Policy Changes: A commissioner asked whether the planning commission could independently recommend amendments to the MPDU ordinance without a pending application. Staff confirmed that the commission could write a letter or a more detailed recommendation to the Mayor and Board, but would not be assigned staff resources to draft language. The commission expressed frustration that applicants often choose to pay a fee-in-lieu rather than provide affordable units, and questioned where those funds are actually spent (MPDU fees go to the Department of Housing and Human Services; school impact fees are passed through to the county).

Key Outcomes

  • The commission agreed that they could make conceptual recommendations on the Carroll Creek text amendment (e.g., requiring MPDUs and parking) even without an applicant’s revised draft.
  • Staff will follow up on the annexation questions regarding the city-owned pump station and the archaeological area.
  • Scheduling discussions for the next commission year will be revisited in October/November, with a possibility of moving away from Monday/Friday afternoon meetings.
  • The commission may pursue a formal recommendation to the Mayor and Board regarding MPDU ordinance changes, independent of any current application.

Meeting Transcript

Allows it to be reduced by another point two five. And then they were even assuming more that it would get approved. And that's how they were getting to that point six. So it just clarified that. I did talk briefly with the city attorney about the MPDU question, not in terms of any substance, but uh whether if you got into whether we could in the LMC, and the mayor and board ultimately, you know, adopting it, whether you could do something that would supersede the MPDU ordinance chapter of the city code without actually also going in and changing the city code. Right. Uh her initial reaction, you know, this wasn't hours of analyzing or studies, but um, was you you could it's not good legislative format to to do that because then you have a disconnect in your ordinance. So you know, ideally, if you were going to change it, you would change the chapter 19 as well. And then she did raise the um the uh the point that the uh mayor and board are contemplating amendments overall in a more holistic capacity to the MPDU ordinance or the chapter 19 of the city code. So wouldn't, you know, those sorts of changes should be looked at holistically was the the feedback. I don't know. Um I haven't been involved with any of the MPDU legislative potential legislative changes, what's going on there? Um, but it's on the remote. Bad Ben isn't here because I mean the last time I talked to them, it sounded like they were, you know, it wasn't really anywhere yet. I can see if it's anywhere like besides besides in talk, um, if they have a plan for a workshop or you know, if they're had a workshop on it on end of March. Okay, I think, but the impression because I talked to Ben after the workshop, and it sounded like it was just like we can't decide, you know, we don't ideas. Yeah, they haven't gotten as far as any further than that. Yeah, more significant policy changes. So that was her initial feedback. Um, you know, seems to me that at least putting this in something like that, and I'm from my perspective, putting that into our notes, I mean and into our recommendation kind of forces the mayor and board to start thinking about it a little bit more, even if they don't ultimately approve it at this point. And and I that was gonna be my you know overall sentiment. You can this is your recommendation, right? And you don't have to recommend, you know, if there were if there were specific language, you know, if we were looking at the ordinance, I think um, Commissioner Manales uh with the MU text amendment, she recognized something that was like kind of a specific, like, oh, we need to amend this reviewing authority thing. And and there was a really specific, like we recommend approval of this with this added language. That's one thing. Um, but if you also just have more conceptual things, we don't need specific language for you to incorporate that into your recommendation. If you want to say we recommend approval of this with the caveat that all houses be blue, you know, you you we don't need someone to come with a legislative draft of anything for your for your recommendation. So and so and based on that, and and this the way I was looking at it, if if they're asking for um this increase of density, then to me, all the rules and regulations and everything that's written is is something that we're we're now going to um uh elicit those changes. So if we change the density for Carroll Creek, we can recommend um you know, X amount of MPDU not even recommend it, require if we're going to if we're going to um recommend this to the mayor and board, then we could put in specific so MPDU and parking uh could be part of that. And and that that's what I was trying to get at at the workshop was um the you you you can't keep um some parts of the LMC in place because you're asking for an increase of density and the increase of density has to include A and B or C. So any of those, so any of those things, I just think conceptually you could make a recommendation that was as simple without having what I what I want to see, the applicant may not agree with your recommendation to require MPDUs. So they're probably not going to revise their draft to provide you with something that you would ultimately get to a place of approval with, right? Like to be like, yes, we recog we recommend approval of this. Um so we could go on forever without making recommendation if if we waited for that. Um whereas if the commission feels like it has all the information that it wants, and you have reached a place where you feel confident with your recommendation, it could be just something as simple as we recommend. We support this amendment with changes that would require X, Y, and Z MPDUs to be provide one space per unit. That's all I meant, is that you're not going to get a draft ordinance that you're going to want to recommend flat out approval with if there are things that you don't, if there are things you want to see. And that's okay to just make a recommendation of that nature. Okay. If you're comfortable with it. Yeah. And this gets back to the uh to me, the kind of training thing. I'll use training thing in quotes of um, you know, we we don't have to we can we can have our own specific recommendations that we read into the record uh on Monday, and then the it's it's up to the mayor and board whether they adopt them or not. Right. And yeah, as long as you all agree with them, right? We but we don't want everybody to come with their own recommendations. I mean, you know, the group would need to vote on something, but correct. It is long as the commission is comfortable making a recommendation, understanding that from your point on that how that got built in, either the mayor and board could go, no, we don't like that. Thank you anyway, or the mayor and board could go go, we like this. And then, but you've you've waived your right to see that exact language.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com