Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Planning Commission Workshop - February 20, 2024

Planning Commission — Tuesday, February 20, 2024

BodyFrederick, Maryland

SessionPlanning Commission

DateTuesday, February 20, 2024

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 3:23:48

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

0:11

Well, good afternoon, it's one o'clock, and welcome to the workshop for the Planning Commission of the City of Frederick.

0:19

And as uh you have obviously taking note, we're starting a little earlier today because we have um a hefty agenda.

0:28

So uh with that, um our procedure for the workshop is we invite the applicants up to the front table and we ask them to walk us through their um application.

0:42

And I think everyone that I see here uh is a veteran of the process, so I'm not gonna explain the whole thing, but really the purpose of the workshop is to have a thorough discussion of the item.

0:57

So after the um applicant walks us through, the commissioner will have its um uh questions and comments, and we'll go back to the applicant.

1:06

And there is often a good deal of back and forth, and then we'll turn to the staff and we'll ask them for comments and go back and forth with the staff, etc.

1:17

Um after that we'll ask for public comment, and then if the applicant would like to comment on the public comment, etc.

1:26

So again, the the goal is to have a thorough discussion on the item and hopefully to answer all of our questions.

1:36

Um so with that, we'll ask everybody who is going to testify before the commission today, including the staff, the applicant, and anybody from the public to stand and raise their right hand.

1:54

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the responses given and statements made in this hearing before the planning commission will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

2:04

If so, say I do.

2:06

Okay, terrific.

2:08

First item on our agenda is a fence modification for 324 Heather Ridge Drive.

2:14

And this is PC 23-1418.

2:18

We invite the applicants up to the table.

2:21

Uh the applicant.

2:25

Um, and if you would give your name and address, and we'll just tell you you're gonna have to speak pretty darn close to the mic for us to hear you.

2:36

So um start talking and and we'll let you.

2:43

Oh, that's a good one, Joe.

2:44

Thank you.

2:45

There you go.

2:46

You don't have to be nervous.

2:47

All right, the floor is yours.

2:54

And for three to four Heather Ridge Drive.

2:58

A little closer.

3:00

Okay.

3:00

Or you can bring the mic back towards you so you don't have to.

3:04

Okay.

3:07

You can pull it.

3:12

The address is 324 Heather Ridge Drive.

3:16

And my name's Antonia.

3:20

So I should have said this because I said everybody here is a veteran, obviously.

3:27

You are not.

3:28

So um while the uh commissioners have all read it, instead of just asking if we have any questions.

3:36

If you could give us a summary of your application and address the key points, it would be helpful.

3:44

Okay.

3:46

Um so it's uh we replaced the fence that was falling down, and it was from the backyard into his front yard.

3:59

Um we're not sure how the front yard necessarily had a fence.

4:05

Um, but my crew replaced it after we got it permitted, and the permits showed that we could not.

4:14

Um we ended up replacing it anyway.

4:19

And the homeowner saw that we failed inspection, and instead of us taking it down, requested us to appeal for it because it's apparently been there since he bought the house about 10 years ago.

4:34

And over the years it just has rotten away.

4:40

So I'm not okay.

4:43

That's great to uh start.

4:45

So I think we'll take our questions from here.

4:48

Let's start at the on the right with Commissioner Lee.

4:53

Right now I have no questions.

4:55

Uh Commissioner Strawson, thank you.

4:57

So you're not the homeowner?

4:59

No.

5:00

So what is your relationship to the property?

5:02

We are the contractor.

5:06

Okay.

5:07

And then so why did it?

5:11

I mean, if you saw that the permit was only for up to the front of the facade.

5:15

I get the gathered the old fence had extended further, so that's why you went ahead and put the well I notified my team that we weren't supposed to go further, but I I guess it was about three weeks after I got the permit, and my representative who meets the crew out there failed to notify them that we weren't supposed to, so my crew went ahead and saw the fence further and was like, oh, okay.

5:42

And continued.

5:44

But the picture show that the old fence had I mean it was basically just putting new fence in the same spot where the old fence was, correct?

5:51

Correct.

5:51

Okay.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Transportation Safety███████████████████19%

Affordable Housing█████████████13%

Zoning And Land Use█████████9%

Engineering And Infrastructure████████8%

Procedural███████7%

Urban Design Compliance██████6%

Forest Conservation█████5%

Fencing Regulation████4%

Active Transportation████4%

Summary of Proceedings

Planning Commission Workshop - February 20, 2024

The Frederick Planning Commission held a workshop on February 20, 2024, at 1:00 PM in City Hall to discuss six agenda items. The workshop aimed to allow applicants to present their proposals and receive preliminary feedback from commissioners, staff, and the public. No votes were taken; decisions are expected at future public hearings.

Fence Modification – 324 Heather Ridge Drive (PC23-1410PCM)

The applicant, Antonia of MC Fence and Deck, explained that a new fence was installed in the same location as a previous rotten fence, extending beyond what the permit allowed. The homeowner requested an appeal for the existing fence.
Commissioners observed that the fence visually separates the property from a private drive and provides safety, preventing cut-through traffic. Staff noted that the lot has no public street frontage and the fence is consistent with the comprehensive plan; the police department concurred it is necessary for public safety.
No public comment was offered. The applicant will be notified of the public hearing date for a vote.

Architectural Review – Sycamore Ridge (PC16-436-08PND)

Andrew Walker (Oshman Properties) and Dango Milkovich (Lennar) presented Phase 2 of Sycamore Ridge, which includes 16-foot-wide townhomes replicating the approved design from Phase 1.
Commissioners asked about windows on the Devonshire model; staff confirmed they meet the minimum aspect ratio and do not require a modification. Commissioner Strawson requested photos of completed 20-foot-wide product for comparison; the applicant agreed to provide them.
No public comment was offered. The item will proceed to a public hearing.

Combined Preliminary & Final Forest Conservation Plan – Rose Hill Farm Exhibit Barn & Carriage House (PC23-1300PFCP/FFCP)

Tim Kellerman (Triad Engineering) presented the plan for Frederick County’s proposed carriage house and exhibit barn at Rose Hill Manor Park. The plan mitigates a small planting requirement by retaining forest in perpetuity.
Staff clarified that the forest conservation plan was triggered by the cumulative impact of two minor site plans. The plan avoids removing any specimen trees. Commissioner Strawson noted the park’s proximity to the Wormans Mill Court Apartments proposal and confirmed the park is open to the public.
No public comment was offered. The plan will be considered at a future hearing.

Preliminary Plat & Final Site Plan – 226 W South Street (PC22-924PSU / PC22-291FSI)

Jeff Holtzinger (project engineer) and Ron Hemby (project manager) presented an infill townhouse project. They have addressed technical comments, received APFO certificates (provisional for schools), and request forward movement to the Planning Commission.
Commissioners inquired about grade changes, retaining a cinder block garage, and a handicap parking space. Staff noted that the garage cannot be demolished per HPC requirements. The parkland fee-in-lieu of $7,000 will be used for improvements in the area.
No public comment was offered. The item is scheduled for a public hearing.

Preliminary Plat & Preliminary Forest Conservation Plan – Sycamore Springs (PC23-1054PSU / PC23-1055PFCP)

Jonathan Pembroke (Oshman Properties), Jody Walker (Harris Smariga), and Jeremy Holder presented the development, formerly the Barrick Property. The master plan was approved in 2005 and revised in June 2023. They request modifications to street setbacks, centerline radii, street details, and architectural guidelines.
The applicant proposes 16.93 acres of parkland (exceeding the 6.29-acre requirement), a shared-use path network, and a trailhead with parking. Commissioners expressed concerns about the 25-year floodplain analysis, visual impact of corner lots, and connectivity of the shared-use path. Staff noted that the city floodplain manager has no basis to establish a 25-year floodplain, and a modification may be needed.
The applicant agreed to provide visual exhibits and a vicinity map before the hearing. Parks and Recreation recommended the plan. The item will go to a public hearing.

Zoning Map Amendment & Master Plan – Wormans Mill Court Apartments (PC23-1056ZMA / PC23-1057MU)

Bruce Dean (attorney), Judd Ulom (Standard Communities), and consultants presented a proposal for 100% workforce affordable housing (up to 315 units, all restricted at 60% AMI) on an 11-acre site near North Market Street. The project requires a zoning map amendment from General Commercial and Light Industrial to Mixed Use.
The applicant argued that the site is underutilized and landlocked; acquiring the adjacent Warmans Mill Court property provides necessary access. They propose a 5,000 sq ft non-residential space for a nonprofit tenant. Commissioners discussed traffic, school access, parkland fee-in-lieu, noise buffers, and the future Rails-to-Trails project. Staff recommended that Hum Lane be emergency access only due to conflicts with a planned protected bike lane; the applicant preferred right-in/right-out. The project also requires relief from APFO standards for two intersections on MD 26.
The applicant emphasized that the project is a rare opportunity for workforce housing without local subsidy. The commission will continue discussion at a public hearing, with conditions to be considered.

Public Comments & Testimony

No members of the public provided testimony on any agenda item.

Key Outcomes

All items were discussed and will proceed to future public hearings for formal action. Specific dates will be provided after the workshop.
The applicant for the Wormans Mill Court Apartments was asked to provide additional information on park amenities, pedestrian access to bus stops, and detailed visuals of the project.
The Planning Commission will consider conditions for the Wormans Mill project, including environmental buffers, parkland dedication, and the use of the non-residential space.

Meeting Transcript

Well, good afternoon, it's one o'clock, and welcome to the workshop for the Planning Commission of the City of Frederick. And as uh you have obviously taking note, we're starting a little earlier today because we have um a hefty agenda. So uh with that, um our procedure for the workshop is we invite the applicants up to the front table and we ask them to walk us through their um application. And I think everyone that I see here uh is a veteran of the process, so I'm not gonna explain the whole thing, but really the purpose of the workshop is to have a thorough discussion of the item. So after the um applicant walks us through, the commissioner will have its um uh questions and comments, and we'll go back to the applicant. And there is often a good deal of back and forth, and then we'll turn to the staff and we'll ask them for comments and go back and forth with the staff, etc. Um after that we'll ask for public comment, and then if the applicant would like to comment on the public comment, etc. So again, the the goal is to have a thorough discussion on the item and hopefully to answer all of our questions. Um so with that, we'll ask everybody who is going to testify before the commission today, including the staff, the applicant, and anybody from the public to stand and raise their right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the responses given and 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. First item on our agenda is a fence modification for 324 Heather Ridge Drive. And this is PC 23-1418. We invite the applicants up to the table. Uh the applicant. Um, and if you would give your name and address, and we'll just tell you you're gonna have to speak pretty darn close to the mic for us to hear you. So um start talking and and we'll let you. Oh, that's a good one, Joe. Thank you. There you go. You don't have to be nervous. All right, the floor is yours. And for three to four Heather Ridge Drive. A little closer. Okay. Or you can bring the mic back towards you so you don't have to. Okay. You can pull it. The address is 324 Heather Ridge Drive. And my name's Antonia. So I should have said this because I said everybody here is a veteran, obviously. You are not. So um while the uh commissioners have all read it, instead of just asking if we have any questions. If you could give us a summary of your application and address the key points, it would be helpful. Okay. Um so it's uh we replaced the fence that was falling down, and it was from the backyard into his front yard. Um we're not sure how the front yard necessarily had a fence. Um, but my crew replaced it after we got it permitted, and the permits showed that we could not. Um we ended up replacing it anyway. And the homeowner saw that we failed inspection, and instead of us taking it down, requested us to appeal for it because it's apparently been there since he bought the house about 10 years ago. And over the years it just has rotten away. So I'm not okay. That's great to uh start. So I think we'll take our questions from here. Let's start at the on the right with Commissioner Lee. Right now I have no questions. Uh Commissioner Strawson, thank you. So you're not the homeowner? No.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com