Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Frederick Planning Commission Meeting Summary – September 12, 2023

Planning Commission — Tuesday, September 12, 2023

BodyFrederick, Maryland

SessionPlanning Commission

DateTuesday, September 12, 2023

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 47:42

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

0:28

Are they ready in the back?

0:33

All right.

0:40

Good evening.

0:41

And welcome to the second night of the September hearing of the City of Frederick Planning Commission.

0:51

Before we get into the agenda, I'd like to give a little bit of background on the Planning Commission and the procedures we will be following this evening.

1:00

Members of the Planning Commission are all residents of the city and are appointed by the mayor and board of Alderman.

1:06

The commission is made up of five regular members, one alternate, and our power and duties are assigned by the charter of the city of Frederick.

1:14

Also with us this evening are Gabriel Collard from the city's planning department, Charian Epen from the engineering department, and Scott Waxter from the city's legal department.

1:26

So at this time we will conduct a swearing in of staff, applicants, and anyone who is here to give public comment on any of tonight's agendas.

1:36

Agenda items.

1:41

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?

1:50

If so, say I do.

1:52

Okay.

1:53

So Gabrielle, I know you gave the announcements last night.

1:56

Do you want to repeat those?

1:58

Yeah, I think they're good announcements to make.

2:00

Um we have our planning commission workshop next Monday, the 18th that starts at 2 p.m.

2:04

and that's held in this room.

2:06

It's also played on Channel 99 and streamed on the city's public meetings webpage.

2:11

And the workshop is for items that will be coming before the commission in future months that have met basically all the technical requirements to start moving forward to the planning commission level.

2:22

So that agenda is posted online with the workshop summaries and backup that was done today.

2:27

The other announcement is that we have our community uh planning department outreach meeting uh at 6 p.m.

2:34

also on the 18th.

2:36

That is held in this room, and that is actually a pre-preview of of any items that would ever come before workshop because those are applications that have just been submitted to the planning department for review through this process.

2:48

Uh so this is really an opportunity to learn about things that are uh many months out from coming to a planning commission new applications, uh and that is just an informational meeting with staff and applicants, um, and it's a very informal setting um ability to ask questions and um learn about projects.

3:05

Okay.

3:06

And thank you.

3:07

So we'll get right into the agenda.

3:09

Uh first thing on the agenda is a continuance.

3:13

PC 21-1436.

3:16

It's the annexation for Wynne Penny and back to Gabrielle.

3:21

Thank you.

3:22

Uh this is uh staff request for a continuance to the October meeting.

3:26

Uh staff is requesting the continuance due to some additional information that was provided with the resubmission post-workshop uh and the need for us to further evaluate it interdepartmentally and formulate a recommendation.

3:38

So we'll be doing that over the course of the next 30 days uh to bring that forward in October.

3:44

Okay.

3:44

And I would note that we did receive an email that uh I forward to the commission uh around four o'clock this afternoon from the applicants' attorneys on the project, um, just stating their opposition to the continuance and their desire to see it continue to move through the process.

4:00

Um speedily or not delayed.

4:05

Thank you.

4:05

Does uh anyone have any questions on this or comments?

4:09

Just a comment.

4:10

Okay.

4:10

So the the wording then on this is a little confusing because it it implies that Winpenny staff is requesting the continuance.

4:22

Oh, I see.

4:23

Correct.

4:24

I think that may just be the formatting on our website.

4:28

Um that it was um that not a separate sentence looking at it currently.

4:34

Um it says Winpenny staff.

4:35

I think it would should be the project name, and then staff is requesting.

4:39

Right.

4:39

Okay.

4:40

Just want to clarify.

4:41

Okay, great.

4:42

Well, then I'll take a motion on this.

4:46

I move for uh a continuance for PC 21-146 ANX annexation for Winpenny.

5:07

Second.

5:08

That is a motion from Commissioner Beattie, second Commissioner Menales.

5:13

All those in favor.

5:14

Aye.

5:15

Aye.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Zoning And Land Use████████████████████████████████32%

Urban Design Compliance███████████████████19%

Architectural Design██████████████14%

Procedural██████████10%

Transportation and Traffic██████████10%

Public Comment███████7%

Forest Conservation███3%

Environmental Protection███3%

Planning Commission Training██2%

Summary of Proceedings

Frederick Planning Commission Meeting – September 12, 2023

The Frederick Planning Commission convened on September 12, 2023, at 6:00 PM at City Hall to consider a continuance, two architectural reviews, a preliminary plat, and a final site plan. All votes were unanimous. The meeting adjourned at approximately 6:34 PM.

Continuance – PC21-1436ANX, Winpenny Annexation

Staff requested a continuance to the October 9, 2023 hearing, citing a need for additional interdepartmental review of late-arriving information.
The applicant’s attorneys submitted an email opposing the continuance, desiring to keep the project moving without delay.
The Commission voted unanimously to continue the item to the October meeting.

Public Comments & Testimony

Margaret Procario (resident of East Church Development) expressed continued objection to the extension of Lindley Road through the industrial development into the residential area, stating it would burden the neighborhood with heavy truck traffic when direct access to Schifferstat and East Church Street already exists.
The applicant (Franz Eller, Harris Mariga & Associates) acknowledged the comment and noted that the Comprehensive Plan supports the road extension, but stated they are willing to collaborate on the issue.
Staff clarified that the road extension deferral agreement would be considered separately by the Mayor and Board of Aldermen.

Discussion Items

Architectural Review – PC13-196-12PND, Kellerton PND

Proposal: Approval of a new “Cottage” elevation for the previously approved Devonshire model single-family home within the Kellerton Planned Neighborhood Development.
Staff finding: The elevation complies with LMC Section 604 and the approved master plan; no conditions of approval were recommended.
Outcome: Unanimous approval.

Architectural Review – PC17-1077-03MU, West Park Village

Proposal: Approval of elevations for a 22-foot wide front-load garage townhouse product (Symphony series) by Ryan Homes in the West Park Village Mixed Use development.
Staff finding: The elevations comply with LMC Section 604 and the approved master plan.
Outcome: Unanimous approval.

Preliminary Plat – PC23-188PSU, EastPark

Proposal: Revision to a previously approved preliminary plat to subdivide a 77.3-acre property into seven lots for future light industrial (M1) and general commercial (GC) uses. The applicant requested a modification to standard street details (wider 15‑foot travel lanes, 6.5‑foot tree panels, 1‑foot grass strips) to accommodate larger truck traffic.
Staff finding: The modification meets LMC criteria and supports Comprehensive Plan transportation policies; the plat complies with Article 5 of the LMC.
Conditions of approval (4): Add approval date of modification to note 13 on sheet 1; update floodplain note; correct spelling of “Schifferstat Boulevard” on cover sheet; correct number of street trees required for Lindley Road to 43.
Outcome: Unanimous approval of both the modification and the preliminary plat.

Final Site Plan – PC23-187FSI, EastPark Lot 5 and 6

Proposal: Construction of four buildings (each 38,120 sq ft, total 152,480 sq ft) for office, warehouse, and retail uses on lots 5 and 6. Applicant requested a modification to LMC Section 607E2 (parking area lighting) to allow minor light spillover on the eastern and western property lines.
Staff finding: The modification is not contrary to code intent; spillover only into non-residential areas or public right-of-way; compensating features (reduced fixtures, downward orientation) are provided. The site plan complies with Articles 4–8 of the LMC and the 2020 Comprehensive Plan.
Conditions of approval (6): Update FEMA panel note; add approval date for final forest conservation plan; update lighting modification approval date; add preliminary plat approval date; update APFO certificate information; correct “Schifferstat” spelling on cover sheet.
Outcome: Unanimous approval of both the modification and the final site plan.

Key Outcomes

Winpenny annexation continued to October 9, 2023.
Kellerton PND architectural elevations approved (no conditions).
West Park Village townhouse elevations approved (no conditions).
EastPark preliminary plat approved with 4 conditions.
EastPark final site plan approved with 6 conditions.
All votes were unanimous (5–0).

Meeting Transcript

Are they ready in the back? All right. Good evening. And welcome to the second night of the September hearing of the City of Frederick Planning Commission. Before we get into the agenda, I'd like to give a little bit of background on the Planning Commission and the procedures we will be following this evening. Members of the Planning Commission are all residents of the city and are appointed by the mayor and board of Alderman. The commission is made up of five regular members, one alternate, and our power and duties are assigned by the charter of the city of Frederick. Also with us this evening are Gabriel Collard from the city's planning department, Charian Epen from the engineering department, and Scott Waxter from the city's legal department. So at this time we will conduct a swearing in of staff, applicants, and anyone who is here to give public comment on any of tonight's agendas. Agenda items. 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. So Gabrielle, I know you gave the announcements last night. Do you want to repeat those? Yeah, I think they're good announcements to make. Um we have our planning commission workshop next Monday, the 18th that starts at 2 p.m. and that's held in this room. It's also played on Channel 99 and streamed on the city's public meetings webpage. And the workshop is for items that will be coming before the commission in future months that have met basically all the technical requirements to start moving forward to the planning commission level. So that agenda is posted online with the workshop summaries and backup that was done today. The other announcement is that we have our community uh planning department outreach meeting uh at 6 p.m. also on the 18th. That is held in this room, and that is actually a pre-preview of of any items that would ever come before workshop because those are applications that have just been submitted to the planning department for review through this process. Uh so this is really an opportunity to learn about things that are uh many months out from coming to a planning commission new applications, uh and that is just an informational meeting with staff and applicants, um, and it's a very informal setting um ability to ask questions and um learn about projects. Okay. And thank you. So we'll get right into the agenda. Uh first thing on the agenda is a continuance. PC 21-1436. It's the annexation for Wynne Penny and back to Gabrielle. Thank you. Uh this is uh staff request for a continuance to the October meeting. Uh staff is requesting the continuance due to some additional information that was provided with the resubmission post-workshop uh and the need for us to further evaluate it interdepartmentally and formulate a recommendation. So we'll be doing that over the course of the next 30 days uh to bring that forward in October. Okay. And I would note that we did receive an email that uh I forward to the commission uh around four o'clock this afternoon from the applicants' attorneys on the project, um, just stating their opposition to the continuance and their desire to see it continue to move through the process. Um speedily or not delayed. Thank you. Does uh anyone have any questions on this or comments? Just a comment. Okay. So the the wording then on this is a little confusing because it it implies that Winpenny staff is requesting the continuance. Oh, I see. Correct. I think that may just be the formatting on our website. Um that it was um that not a separate sentence looking at it currently. Um it says Winpenny staff. I think it would should be the project name, and then staff is requesting. Right.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com