Frederick Planning Commission Workshop – January 21, 2025
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Frederick Planning Commission Workshop – January 21, 2025
The City of Frederick Planning Commission held a workshop on January 21, 2025, at 2:00 p.m. in City Hall to discuss two subdivision and land-development applications. The meeting focused on a boundary-line adjustment for parcels along Willowdale Drive (Item 1) and a preliminary plat and forest conservation plan for the Rock Hill subdivision (Item 2). No formal votes were taken; the workshop allowed commissioners to hear applicant presentations, staff analysis, and public testimony before moving applications toward future hearings.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Bruce Tobias (resident of the neighborhood) raised four concerns about the Rock Hill project: (1) a proposed sidewalk on Hoke Place ended before connecting to an existing sidewalk, leaving a gap; (2) existing neighborhood roads (Hoke Place, Poplar, Linden) are in poor condition and need resurfacing; (3) parking will be a problem given the density; (4) the two parks cited as nearby (Linden Hills Park, 0.2 acres with minimal equipment, and Hillcrest Park) are not adequate—Linden Hills is too small, and Hillcrest requires a 23- to 30-minute walk along Route 40, which is unsafe for children. He asked for additional parking and park/recreational space.
- Chris McDonald (Golden Mile Alliance) echoed the parking concerns, noting existing parking challenges in the neighborhood, and requested consideration of visitor and overflow parking. He also opposed the fee-in-lieu parkland dedication, arguing Linden Hills Park is too small to serve 50 new homes and that accessing Hill Street Park requires crossing heavily trafficked Hillcrest Drive, creating a safety hazard.
Discussion Items
1. PC23-674FSU – O’Rear Addition to Community Ventures LLC The applicant (Harris Smariga & Associates) presented a plan to add two parcels to Lot 1 and a small strip (Lot 3) to Lot 2 along Willowdale Drive. The main modification request was to allow a panhandle (flagpole) driveway longer than the 80-foot city standard—extending it to roughly 170 feet. The driveway already existed and served an adjacent warehouse and a single-family home. Staff (Sharon Suarez) supported the modification, explaining that the driveway predated city standards and was created when the area was rural. The existing playground on the added parcel is no longer used for a daycare (the special exception for daycare has been vacated), and the applicant stated that the playground and all open spaces would be maintained by a future homeowners association. The new lots would be part of a future 13-townhouse development to be submitted later. Commissioners asked clarifying questions about the rationale for the 80-foot standard and why this panhandle exists; staff noted that the goal of the standard is to avoid many houses on a panhandle, which is not the case here (only one house and future HOA-maintained open space). No public comment was offered.
2. PC23-1045PSU / PC23-1047PFCP – Rock Hill Subdivision Applicant Stephen Crumb (McCreese Hendrickson Glasscock) represented the owners Barber Fritchie Inc. and Blue Diamond Trust. The project proposes to resubdivide a 13.5-acre R6-zoned property into 50 single-family lots (density 4.4 du/ac, well under the 80.8-unit maximum). The plan extends the historic street grid (Hoke Place, Birch, Maple) and will require abandonment of short stub streets from the original 1923/1954 plats. Modifications requested include: (1) not following standard street details ST11.0 and 11.1 – allowing narrower right-of-way widths (50 ft for most streets, 40 ft for Linden Ave, compared to current 55-60 ft with on-street parking), and proposing no on-street parking except on Poplar Street; (2) approval to remove 22 trees ≥25 inches DBH (about one-third in poor condition or dead) located within proposed public rights-of-way. Staff (Gabrielle Collard) noted that the applicant worked hard to keep the unit count at 50 (matching the original plat yield) and that stormwater management has been approved. The Maryland Department of Natural Resources found no rare species on site. The historic Kramer House on the property is within the Historic Preservation Overlay; the HPO must approve tree removal and construction impact plans before the application can proceed. Public comment raised concerns about parking (applicant countered that each unit would have two-car garages and driveways for two cars, totaling four off-street spaces per home), sidewalk connectivity, and parkland adequacy (applicant plans a fee-in-lieu contribution). Staff clarified that off-site road repairs and sidewalk gaps outside the development are not the applicant’s responsibility but are city capital improvement projects.
Key Outcomes
- Item 1 (O’Rear Addition): No decision was made. The commission took the applicant’s presentation and staff comments under advisement. The applicant will correct a reference from “condo association” to “homeowners association” on the plat. The modification to the 80-foot panhandle length (to ~170 feet) appeared to receive preliminary staff support; the commission will vote at a later hearing.
- Item 2 (Rock Hill Subdivision): No vote was taken. The commission will continue review after the Historic Preservation Commission issues its approval regarding tree removal and construction impacts. Staff will invite a representative from the city’s traffic engineering division (Carian) to address specific questions about street design standards at the next meeting. The applicant will also need to address sidewalk gap concerns raised in public testimony, but staff noted off-site gaps are not part of this application. The modification to street details (narrower rights-of-way, no on-street parking) and tree removal will be further evaluated. Public comments regarding parkland adequacy and parking will be considered.
- Next Steps: Both applications are expected to return to the Planning Commission for public hearings and final decisions. No dates were announced.
Meeting Transcript
And welcome to the January twenty first, twenty twenty-five workshop of the City of Frederick Planning Commission. Before we begin today's proceedings, I'd like to give an overview of the process we will follow today since it's different than the process that we use for the hearing. For each item on our agenda, we will start the conversation with the applicant by having them come up to the front table and walk us through their project. For those of you new to the process, we do ask that you provide a thorough overview of your application, specifically addressing any modifications that you are requesting. Following the applicant presentation, the commission will then ask any questions of the applicant. Then we will ask staff to add their comments on the application, followed by commission questions and comments to staff. After the staff presentation, we may go back to the applicant for additional questions. And we will then ask for public comment, and if needed, go back to the applicant and our staff with additional questions. Uh today there are two parcels uh along Willowdale. Uh we have uh what's now lot one, and to the right we have uh single family residence on lot two. With this subdivision plan, we are proposing to add uh two areas uh up in the northeast there, area one uh actually has an existing playground on it that was used by the uh single family house for a daycare center that has since been uh the use is no longer function in in that house. Uh we are adding that to lot one along uh the Willowdale Drive, and then there's also a piece, a L-shaped piece in the back that is being added to lot one as well. And there's a actually a very tiny area known as lot three where we are adding that uh to lot two, the single family house, and that is to um make the lot line parallel with the uh the existing residents. Um real quick. This site is currently served by a driveway in the northeast corner. It shares this driveway with uh uh warehouse um kind of uh company to uh the right in this sorry uh southeast corner. Uh with this application, we are proposing a modification to uh city standard uh panhandle length can be no longer than 80 feet, and we are asking for a modification to increase that to a hundred and roughly 170 feet, and that is due to the fact for this overall development. We actually have a site plan uh slash preliminary plan as well as a fourth plan that will bring be bringing next month. Um which basically it further subdivides lot one into 13 town homes, and but all those new town homes, in addition to this single family residence, are proposed to be within a homeowners association. And all the open spaces um that go with that type of development are all proposed to be maintained by the homeowners association. So the playground in the northeast corner is not proposed to be developed on. It's proposed to be uh retained and maintained by the HOA, so the existing residents uh that Grady back here owns it will continue to have its view unimpeded to Shookstown Road, and uh you would not know that the lot line is ultimately there because Grady and all the new town homes would all be part of that homeowners association. Um I don't know if uh if there's anything else you guys have comment uh questions on, I will do my best to answer them. Okay, good to each of you. Commissioner Lee, do you have any questions or comments? No questions. Commissioner Beattie? No, thank you. Okay. And then we can move to the staff comments. Um the uh hi, bit for this is I'm Sharon Serez. Um the staff is actually, I mean, the the applicant has actually explained what's going to happen fairly well. I will just point out that um this particular lot and its adjacent um warehouse use that he was explaining were actually not part of the city when that long drive was created, and that's why it exists now. In fact, it took over almost two decades before this property as divided as it's currently subdivided along with a single family house, not shown on this, but along Shookstown to the on the right of this plan. Uh would be to the uh to the east of the plan. Um also use that that drive. So um that's why it exists. And as as the uh applicant explained in um in his notes that you'll find in the uh some of the justification letters. Uh the maintenance will take place, they'll access those vehicles. The maintenance vehicles will actually access the playground and maintain the HOA space uh from that drive. But the residence, the single family detached residence, is south of the playground and does need access. And that access has been in place for a long, long time. This is not creating a new panhandle, but it's it is extending it officially uh and making it about 160 feet. Um what's one of the things that was important that he mentioned that I'll point out is that it's critical that the residents continue to have um frontage on Shookstown. That's that's the address. So it becomes important that there is no barrier between visible barrier between Shookstown and the playground. It'll be seamless as they look out over it. And it's true, there was a uh family daycare operating in the single family detached residence. They had a um was it a special exception at one time to do that? They have vacated that, and with that is the they is the automatic um vacation of the requirement to have a playground.
openpublica.com