Frederick Planning Commission Workshop: Yellow Springs Elementary, Prospect Center, Forest Conservation - May 20, 2024
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Frederick Planning Commission Workshop: Yellow Springs Elementary, Prospect Center, Forest Conservation - May 20, 2024
The Frederick Planning Commission held a workshop on May 20, 2024, at 2:00 PM at City Hall (101 North Court Street) to discuss three agenda items: a final site plan for Yellow Springs Elementary School, a zoning map amendment for the Frederick County Prospect Center, and a text amendment to Section 721 (Forest Conservation) of the Land Management Code. No decisions were made; the workshop was for discussion, staff and applicant presentations, and public comment. Commissioner Beattie arrived late, but the commission proceeded with two members present.
Public Comments & Testimony
- John Citrone, president of the Tuscarora Creek HOA (543 homes), presented a 10-minute presentation (approved by a motion to suspend the three-minute rule) opposing the traffic plan for the new Yellow Springs Elementary School. He stated that the HOA gathered 550 signatures on a petition citing traffic safety and student safety concerns. He argued that the proposed parent drop-off entrance on Spring Run Drive would cause congestion and safety hazards, and suggested using Christopher's Crossing for private vehicle access. He noted that the traffic study estimated 250+ vehicles entering during drop-off/pickup, while the applicant claimed 65-car stacking on site. The HOA had requested an alternate plan in February but felt it was not considered.
Discussion Items
-
Yellow Springs Elementary School Final Site Plan (PC24-74FSI)
Applicant Brian Siger (Frederick County Public Schools, Senior Project Manager) and Alyssa Nelson (Adtek Engineers) presented the plan for a new school at Walter Martz Spring Run Drive and Christopher's Crossing. The site has been master-planned for a school for 26 years and is zoned institutional. The design includes a separate bus loop (access from Christopher's Crossing) and parent drop-off loop (access from Spring Run Drive) to enhance safety. A mini roundabout at Walter Martz and Spring Run Drive is proposed to ease congestion. The applicant requested a modification under Section 601 for a parking lot with more than 100 spaces on a single access (109 spaces). Staff supported the modification. Commissioners discussed stacking capacity (65 cars on site, expandable to 87), the feasibility of an alternate entrance on Christopher's Crossing (rejected due to grade changes, floodplain, and separation distance requirements), and the need for a traffic study summary. The traffic engineer (Carl Wilson) explained that existing school volumes are low (138 vehicles exiting in morning, 61 entering in afternoon) and that the roundabout mitigates delays. -
Frederick County Prospect Center Zoning Map Amendment (PC24-250ZMA)
Applicant Peter Soprano (Site Resources) requested rezoning 25.9 acres at 585 Himes Avenue from Professional Business (PB) to Institutional Floating Zone (IST) for a multi-functional government office building. Uses include the Division of Family Services, 911 call center, Scott Key Center (employment for individuals with cognitive disabilities), data center, vehicle storage, and community spaces. The justification letter cited population change, public facilities, transportation patterns, compatibility, and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Menelas noted the justification lacked detailed analysis of transportation patterns and population change; the applicant indicated a traffic statement was included in the submission but not in the justification letter and agreed to provide additional information. Staff noted the IST zone offers flexibility for community uses and reduced impervious surface requirements. -
Forest Conservation Text Amendment (PC24-224ZTA)
City Planner III Pam Reppert presented proposed changes to Section 721 to comply with state Senate Bills 234 and 526. Key changes include: adding exemptions for transit-oriented development, forest management, and federal facilities; extending the fee-in-lieu spending period from 2 years (3 growing seasons) to 5 years (6 growing seasons); requiring 1:1 mitigation for clearing forest in priority retention areas (the entire city is a priority funding area); lowering the threshold for forest conservation applicability to 10,000 square feet of forest on lots under 40,000 square feet; removing the real estate transfer exemption; increasing the bond survivability period from 2 to 5 years (based on DPW data that 75% of plantings do not survive in 2 years); removing fee rates from the ordinance to be set by fee schedule; bonding street trees used for forest conservation credits under the forest conservation bond; adding a fence detail (recommended by a retired regional forester); and requiring specimen tree replacement based on diameter at breast height (DBH). Commissioners discussed typos, enforcement of clear-cutting violations, feasibility of tree relocation (species-dependent, with low survival rates for large trees), and clarified that mitigation ratios are based on priority retention areas, not funding areas. The applicant agreed to provide additional information on mitigation ratios and bond history.
Key Outcomes
- No votes were taken; all items will proceed to a future public hearing for formal action.
- For the Yellow Springs Elementary School, the commission requested that the applicant provide a summary of the traffic study and additional information on the design iterations considered for alternate traffic layouts.
- For the Prospect Center zoning map amendment, the applicant was asked to provide a more detailed justification regarding transportation patterns and population change.
- For the forest conservation text amendment, staff will refine the ordinance based on commissioner feedback, including correction of typos, clarification of mitigation ratios, and consideration of threshold language for tree relocation. The fence detail may be moved to engineering standard details. Staff will also provide bond history from DPW.
Meeting Transcript
The Planning Commission workshop is now called to order. Commissioner Beattie is stuck in traffic and will be joining us as soon as he can, but I have been told that since we're not a decision-making body tonight, we can proceed with two people. So we're gonna go and get through the agenda. Before we get into today's proceedings, I'm gonna give you an overview of the process that will follow today. Um for everybody who's new to this process in the city of Frederick, um, we're looking for a fairly thorough overview of the application, um, specifically addressing any modifications that you're asking for. Um, what is not helpful to us is if you just come up and say you've seen the staff report, do you have any questions? Um following the presentation by the applicant, we'll turn to staff and have them give us any additional thoughts that they have on the application, any additional comments that they have. Um, at that point, um the commission is going to be asking questions of both the applicant and the staff, and we might have a little bit of back and forth at that point. Um, following the staff part of the presentation. We'll then ask for public comments. Um and then after the public comments, the applicant will have the opportunity to make a rebuttal to the public comments. Um I've already mentioned once to have people sign up for the sign-up sheet. Um during the workshop, we are the rules limit us to um three minutes for public comment. Um we understand that somebody in the comp in the is hoping to make a presentation. We will have to make a decision at that point on whether we can suspend the rules and give you extra time for the presentation. So we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. Um and then at that point, or at this point, um, everybody who's going to be speaking before the commission today needs to be sworn in, and that includes anybody who makes public comment. So at this point, if everybody would stand up, raise your right hand and prepare to be sworn in. So do you solemnly swear or affirm that the response is given and the statements made in this hearing before the planning commission will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? If so, answer I do. All right, thank you. Um we don't have comments or announcements on the agenda, but Gabrielle, do you have anything that you need to say before we get started? Just one update. We do have um usually our community uh planning department community-wide uh presentation meeting is this evening at the third Monday of the month. Um, however, we do not have any agenda items uh that were new applications that require that level of public notice. So we won't be holding the community meeting tonight, which is the first time in probably a couple years since we we started um that process. So I just wanted to make that announcement. So you all get to go home early. That is the case. Enjoy the beautiful weather. Right. So the first agenda item is PC 24-74 FSI final site plan for Yellow Springs Elementary School. Um if you could introduce yourself and your team, tell us your affiliations, and then we'll get started. Uh hi, uh Brian Siger, Frederick County Public Schools Senior Project Manager. Along with Alyssa Nelson from um AdTech Engineers. Great. And we're here to talk about the new Yellow Springs Elementary School. So, first off, I wanted to thank you guys. Thank the planning commission, thank the city staff and everybody else for all the work and everything that we've been putting in on this. So we we do appreciate it. Can you please put up the plan of the site, please? As many of you know, the existing uh school is at capacity and past its useful life. The new location is at Walter Mart's Spring Run Drive and Christopher's Crossing, that little intersection. Um the site was master plan with the city and FCPS for the past 26 years to be a school site. It's been zoned institutional since 2019. And there's been a lot of site criteria that we had to take in account with designing the site. We have had um a portion of the site has little Tuscar Creek and a tributary that runs to that creek on it. So we have a floodplain. We do not impact the floodplain in any way with our development that we've proposed. Yeah, maybe you can also turn that on and I realized you couldn't see it.
openpublica.com