20th, 2026 workshop of the City of Frederick Planning Commission.

Before we begin today's proceeding, I'd like to give an overview of the process we will follow today, since it's different than the process we use for the actual hearings.

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 of the modifications that you are requesting.

Following the applicant presentation, the commission will then ask questions of the applicant.

Then we will ask staff to add their comments on the application, followed by commission questions or comments to staff.

After that staff presentation, we may go back to the applicant for additional questions.

We will then ask for public comment and if needed, go back to the applicant and or staff with any additional questions.

Anyone wishing to make public comments is asked to sign up on the sheet provided at the table just inside the door.

And when taking public comment, we will invite people up in the order on the sign-up sheet.

Then anyone who is not signed up will be given the opportunity to comment.

And before beginning public comments, please give your name and address.

Public comments are limited to three minutes, and you will be able to see the timer to the left.

Anyone speaking publicly at the meeting regarding any application must be sworn in prior to giving their remarks, including the applicant, city staff, and members of the public.

Therefore, at this time I ask that anyone who anticipates giving comment or testimony on any agenda item, please stand to be sworn in.

Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the responses 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.

Thank you.

Okay, so our very first application for review is Carroll's Fuels Gas Station, PC 25-628 FSI, final site plan, and PC 25-629 FSCB combined for stand delineation and preliminary forest conservation plan.

It asked the applicant.

Thank you.

I am Cole Hayden.

I'm with Polar Engineering.

I'm Jesse Newman with Carroll Fuel.

Mine is still on it.

Okay.

So the overview of our project is one address is 1180 West Patrick Street.

The other one is 1200.

Right now, currently there are two fueling stations separated by that lot line running down the middle diagonally.

We're proposing to consolidate the lots and do one fueling station of Carroll Fuels with six fueling pumps, so 12 MPDs, and then the associated parking improvements and everything associated with the store.

A couple of them have to do with the landscaping along West Patrick Street.

So we're doing what we can with landscaping along West Patrick.

We're kind of bound by there's not a lot of space.

There's a lot of utilities running through there.

But what our plan is is to beef it up as much as we can.

There might be lacking some tree trees, which would be the modifications, but we're going to put as much landscaping as we can to kind of satisfy the intent of the code, make it better than it is today.

While still kind of meeting all the setbacks from you know utilities and that sort of thing, just to make it a safe design.

Another modification that may come through is the site sign.

But we do want that visibility from the road.

So we want to satisfy the code by making the site visible, but we also want to kind of adhere to some of the setbacks.

We just might have a challenge with everything that's going on up here in the right-of-way, which has been kind of the focus of this project.

Another modification I'll touch briefly on is the trash enclosure.

Um not a huge amount of places to put the trash enclosure on this site.

That makes it easy for the truck to get in and out.

Um I think that modification is landscaping on three sides of the trash enclosure, which we would be able to do to satisfying the code with the intent being to screen the trash enclosure on three sides.

The other side would be screened by the building and the other features on site.

I believe that is the extent of the modifications.

Let me just run through really quick.

No, that is the modifications that I have listed.

Okay.

That was it.

Okay, thank you.

Um with that, I will do roll call for questions.

Uh Commissioner Temple.

I have no questions.

I just want to uh thank the applicants for consolidating the driveways.

I think there's four out there now, and there's gonna be two.

I think it's a great improvement to the built environment.

So thank you.

Commissioner Roby.

No at this point.

Commissioner Montes.

No questions.

Okay, and I don't have any questions either.

Um I I would make a comment that um anything you can do for for street trees.

I know it's tough with easements and things, that would be great.

Um, but I do know that spot is is tough.

Um with that, um, no further questions.

I would ask that staff present if they have anything.

Hello, good afternoon.

Um, a couple of corrections, um, notes to be making.

So we do not have a lighting plan yet for the parking area.

Um, if there is any light spillage, any foot candles over the lot lines, we will require modification for that.

Uh several of the other modifications are landscape related.

Uh as the as the applicant was stating, they have both in-ground and overhead utilities across the site that they're gonna have to deal with.

Um, old infrastructure, hard to move.

Um, also the state highway administration is assessing the access points because that is a state route.

Um, and as far as signage goes, that is a separate permit, and anything that we need to be varied with that would go through the zoning board of appeals through a variance and would not come before you as a modification.

And that's it.

Great, thank you very much.

Um we'll do a roll call again with Commissioner Roby.

Commissioner Montes.

No questions.

And Commissioner Temple.

No questions.

Okay, and I don't have any questions either.

Do we have any public comment?

No public comment.

Okay, so with that, uh, thank you very much.

And we will see you next time.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So our next application for review is the Canterbury PC 25-247 PSU FSI, combined preliminary subdivision plat and final site plan.

The applicant could present, please.

Good afternoon, Chris Mariga with Harris Moriga.

Tim Comas with the Duffy Companies is here as well.

Um guess we're getting a graphic pulled up.

Okay, great.

While we're pulling this graphic up, um this is the last phase of the Canterbury subdivision.

Um's important to note, and this is unique, there is a historic overlay placed on this last phase of the project.

So the the earlier phases were just R16 zoning.

This last phase actually the HPC placed an overlay on the property.

So Tim, before we got here, had to work with the H the Historic Preservation Commission on the level one approval.

Um can we go to one of the larger sheets, maybe like sheet 16 in the set, possibly.

We're getting there.

There we go.

It's coming, huh?

Okay.

So it's a very large set.

Okay, perfect.

Yep, that's great.

That's great.

This is the landscape sheet.

So this is the phase here that we're talking about.

Oops.

Okay, here's the phase that we're talking about.

So as Tim worked on the level one approval, what was most important to HPC was the viewshed from Market Street, looking back to the three existing build buildings, whether you want to call them banner or odd fellows, they've been around for quite some time.

Um they're vacant today.

Tim will repurpose those as multifamily units and then some amenity space with the pool in the back.

But basically, this lawn was what the HPC wanted to preserve that view shed.

So what they what they reviewed, other than just the viewshed, was then the relationship of the new buildings, which kind of flank all the perimeter of that green space, which includes eight rental townhomes.

It includes multifamily buildings that are on the outside here and fronting on market.

And then these are fee simple townhouses, which really complete the grid that was the last phase.

So we've already established the road network to the left of this plan.

So this kind of continues that same network with the new townhouse units.

So basically, the new units are around the perimeter of the site, and then there'll be renovation in the middle here, and then this quad gets preserved as well with specimen trees and a big uh tree line drive coming into it.

So that was kind of the focus of the level one approval, the massing, the scale, how the site was going to lay out.

Um if we're fortunate enough to get approval with site plan, Tim then goes back to HPC, and then the details of the architecture itself will get reviewed there as well.

So this is it's it's combination process, HPC review as well as planning commission review.

Um of the things we had requested in the application, which since initial submission, we've kind of changed our mind, and we've had a meeting with the parks and rec commission.

2.34 acres of new parkland was required.

Tim has already provided part of a park on uh Shifferstat, the dog park that's there, and not only did they dedicate the land, they actually built the units.

So we talked originally about well, you know, we've got this open space, which really the city parks doesn't want, it's part of our quad here in the historic district.

Um maybe we get a waiver.

But we've we went to Parks and Rec last week.

We're not asking for a waiver anymore.

We're gonna dedicate the 2.34 acres of park.

We have land adjacent to the existing dog park, but that'll be added on to.

So we have we got a positive recommendation from them last week to expand the size of that park.

Tim is still providing, like I said, almost five acres of open space with this project as well as an amenity and pool.

So it's not that this is not going to have amenities, they're just not going to be city public amenities that'll be in the dog park down the street.

Um there are a few modifications as well related to landscaping.

These are self-inflicted uh modifications.

As soon as you go through a development like this and start carving off lots, so like when we took the townhouse lots here, or we created a lot up here for these multifamily units, we're establishing new lot lines and then buffering requirements come into play because of the new lot lines.

But that's not the way we looked at the project.

We obviously looked at it as one complete project.

So the landscape sheet looks at you know the perimeter of the overall project, looks at all the you know most appropriate places internal in this area in the front with the tree line drive, the tease off in two directions here.

Um the overall landscaping for the project is still met.

We're actually planting more street trees than required.

We're planting more parking lot landscaping than required.

We've just shifted it around to fit the layout more so than to fit the lot lines.

So that's how we established where the plantings were gonna go.

With that, Tim, do you want to add anything?

Yeah, I mean, really.

Okay.

Uh yeah, this has been a long process.

Uh we've been working with HPC for uh several years to kind of get to this point uh where it's uh something that uh you know feels um in scale with the existing historic buildings, but we're still hitting that design density for the site as well, uh, which I think is really uh an accomplishment here on both sides to you know prevent that urban sprawl, but also fit in with the existing uh layout of the buildings out there.

So uh we're really happy with where we were able to get to on this one.

Okay, thanks.

Thank you.

Uh we'll go ahead with the roll call, starting with Commissioner Montez.

No questions right now.

Commissioner Temple.

Could you talk through what the open space plan is for that 2.34, if I'm not mistaken, acres.

Uh and I understand that it's next to that dog park.

Are there improvements there?

Is that just gonna be a dedication of the lot to the city?

We can scroll back, I think a sheet or two.

There's a site plan for the parkland.

Keep going.

There it is.

So I think the requirement in the first couple phases was around 5.8 acres of dedication, which has already been made here.

So this is the lot line, kind of runs at an angle and then runs down the sliver.

So this is I mentioned Tim not only dedicated but then built the dog park.

So we actually use that provision which allows the developer to, in lieu of paying impact fees to the city to take that money and build the improvement.

So it gets funded earlier.

So Tim and his team actually built the dog park today.

What we'd be adding is heading up towards Market Street and creating another 2.38 acres.

It's mainly passive.

The hatched area are forest conservation areas, so it's some wooded or future wooded areas.

There would be opportunities to have a little more recreational space.

It's floodplain in that area, so you're not gonna put a structure in there, but it can be used.

If you're here, you could throw a frisbee, you know, or play catch or whatever in that area.

But it it would come in right where the entrance is today, and it'd be this area just north of the dog park.

Any plans to continue that shared use path that terminates at the hammerhead all the way to uh market.

This shared use path here.

Yeah, and on the the northwest, it kind of terminates into the parking there.

Yes.

Uh that's where it terminates today, right?

But I mean, it certainly could be planned that way.

I I also think it's worth noting on this.

There was a time when this entire swath was thought of for dedication.

It just was over acreage for what was needed in the previous phases, so we don't end up having some carved off of it.

Okay.

Thank you for that.

Um there was some public comment around TJ Middle and the connectivity between TJ Middle and the development.

I would love to get your thoughts on that public comment on and on how we can improve the connectivity for the students and residents that are gonna be living there and coming through there to get to the school.

Can we go back to the site plan sheet again?

Fifth 15 is fine.

Yeah, we've we've talked we've talked to the um Heather about the comments that she had made last week.

Tim's Tim's reached out to her as well.

I think the city may have some new information.

Um we we did propose a sidewalk connection from our one of our public roads to to the to the middle school site, which is kind of the one location where it makes sense because it is off of a public road rather than a private internal parking lot, which would be used for the multifamily units.

Um we were told at that time that the uh board of ed was not interested in the location because it would leave I guess kids back in a field area kind of unseen from the front of the school, it's really back behind the school.

I think staff will mention I think they got the same feedback within the last week that FCPS didn't want to have a connection there.

Internal to this project though, before it was built, your only option was to walk down 16th Street and then come around on East Street and Market Street.

Um we do have thousands of square or linear feet of sidewalk being built within this project that did offer multiple different ways for someone to walk through.

Um comes back up, we'll look at them.

Um basically there's there's gonna be a lot of opportunity.

Tim actually, since buying it, has built the shared use path on E Street, so that's been an addition.

We have frontage improvements from this site all the way down to the middle school, which we'll be making.

So we'll be rebuilding the sidewalk on Market Street that exists today, widening it, relocating a little bit.

And then we're also gonna work.

FCPS did say they'd work with us on the uh internal connection they have that's right behind our project, which I'll show you here in a second.

Okay, that's fine.

Okay, great.

So here's Market Street.

We we had proposed it's a stub at one point just off the plane in the old section here to come into the middle.

This is basically the middle school site right here, the lower half of the sheet.

We have proposed a connection that they didn't want.

So our connection now, the sidewalk continues up through the project and comes out to North Market Street.

This is where we're gonna be widening, building a bigger sidewalk.

We're also gonna work with FCPS on there's a connection right here that actually will be hidden by this building because of some grade issues.

So they are agreeable to having us work with them to fix this grade to make it a little flatter through there, so you're not hidden behind a retaining wall.

We're gonna grade that out.

So there will be a connection here into the middle school.

I think what what Heather was looking for was one kind of off the page to the west here through either our project or the Monoxie Village, but like we said, it's it doesn't look like there's an opportunity to make the connection there.

But there's a lot of opportunities through the subdivision here as we actually build out.

We'll be completing that connection.

Yeah.

I think the work along Market Street will be great to see when you bring it back to the commission.

I think that the shared use path, you know, diverting across market where it does makes it really hard for a cyclist, especially a middle school cyclist to get to school safely.

And so anything that you can evaluate along that frontage and into the school property as you've, you know, demonstrated widening that because it's narrow right now.

Um and even the proposal is still pretty narrow for for that intended use.

Um would be really I'd be really receptive too.

Nothing else for me.

Thank you.

And Commissioner Robey.

Thank you.

This is my first review of this project.

And what might be too late on my comments is what I'm saying here.

But uh I would like to know what efforts were made either by HPC or by your design team to screen your development from the banner school historic buildings.

Uh because what you all are building, and this is not a criticism, is not necessarily compatible or compliant.

And not I don't want to say compliant.

It's it doesn't it's not like the historic buildings at all at all.

It's very modern compared.

So in terms of mass and scale, uh they're a little bit different.

I would I would have liked to have seen more screening, and I don't want anybody talk to you about that around the inside perimeter of your greenway that you have there approaching the school.

And uh something to screen off the modern town home development from the visual of the historic buildings.

Uh sure, yeah.

I mean, that that was a point of discussion for uh quite a while with HBC and kind of from the starting point where you even in as much as we had buildings connecting to the historic buildings.

Um, you know, if things kind of move their way back and move their way back.

You know, we did a lot of 3D renderings and imagery throughout the process to look at these.

And generally we looked at that without any plantings involved at all, um, to really consider when you're not leafed out for six months of the year, what things look like.

Uh so I mean that they were judged by that guideline of even without the plantings, how these buildings interact with one another through uh, as I mentioned, iterative process with HBC.

So as you look at this um structure here, kind of lay out here, you'll see that on the wing buildings of the existing uh Oddfellows property.

We kept the uh call it rear or fronts, depending on how you're looking at it, but to the behind the rear of the wing buildings, so that they're not actually in front of them in the view shed.

Um, there's no no structures in front of the central building or the central green, those are all kept as is.

Um the existing trees, uh many of them are in treesements, and we do have a specimen tree up there as well.

And we've added the amount of trees I'd say are even possible for this site.

Um, when we look at the overall green space that we have, the raw number of trees is quite a few, and we've found a place for each of those, even in as much as that was one of the main comments from the last review period was to keep all of those trees outside of the influence ring of these specimen trees.

So it is a uh an extensive amount of planting.

I don't know that this necessarily does it justice as to how many trees will be out there when all is said and done.

Um, but it's rather extensive.

Yeah, I think it's almost 200.

It's like a hundred and ninety-two new trees.

As Tim said, the outside, like the new townhomes here sit back behind the face of the old banner school building, and same with the multifamily.

So that was something HPC wanted.

And these circles here do represent the specimen trees.

So there's a wide canopy, there's kind of a tree line that that will block the new uh rental townhomes from the main drive, which you can see here.

And then we're adding as well.

Well, then there's a tree line uh driveway, and then there's also some trees we've added on this western edge, which will kind of you know screen what's going on in this this corner as well.

I think it is gonna grow in and and screen and leave most of the the view shed open while you know using the periphery here to kind of screen what's happening behind it.

I don't have anything further.

Thank you.

Thank you for the response.

Thanks.

I'm glad to see that that some of the walkability has been improved with this development.

Um can you uh I my ears perked up when you said the quad green space that HBC is asking you to keep there.

Can you kind of point to where that is there?

I need to I just want to understand exactly where that is.

I'm pretty sure I know.

So that's basically this large rectangle.

Yeah.

It comes back from market all the way to this last building.

Okay.

And all the way across.

So all the older buildings, it would be between them as like a college quad would be a good idea.

Exactly.

Yep.

That's what I keep thinking about.

And so nothing will be in that space.

It'll just be entirely green space if someone wanted to throw a frisbee or fly kite type.

There'll be a couple trees that line the driveway.

So the driveway coming in will be focused kind of on this one main building in the back, and then it tees off.

But other than the drive with some parallel parking on it and tree line, there'll be nothing else.

True green space.

Other than some trees, right.

Great.

Thank you very much.

With that, I will turn it over to staff for their presentation.

Hello.

I don't have a ton more to add.

Um Chris updated you on the park land.

We have figured out where we can get some parkland.

Um parks and recreation commission has recommended approval of that, and it will come to you for recommendation to counsel.

As far as the school connection goes, so we went back and looked at our previous comments that we received from them.

They did not want the connection at that time.

We reached out to them to see if that was still the case, and we received confirmation today that they do not want a connection from Canterbury over to Thomas Thomas Johnson Middle.

They cite that there is adequate sidewalks along the front of North Market.

And they do have a uh sort of desired path from the school up to North Market so people can actually cut through the school's rear yard to get back up to the school.

So we did confirm that.

Um as he stated, HBC does want all of that to be open.

If you have the opportunity to drive over there or look at it on street view, I really encourage it.

Is a beautiful site.

Um and they will be preserving these historic buildings and you know giving them a new life.

And everything within Canterbury is connected very, very well.

So this also means that other people that live in these new townhomes will be able to have the benefit of these historic structures in our community.

The only modifications that they're currently requesting is just some landscaping.

Um and we've got some analysis in here.

We'll make it a little bit more robust for planning commission.

But otherwise, I have nothing more to add.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh with that, we'll take a roll call for questions.

Commissioner Temple.

How does the district define adequate sidewalks?

What do you in what in what context?

In it you had said that FCPS had deemed the sidewalks on market adequate.

Is that so I am I don't know what they take into account with their review?

It's not a requirement for them to tell me the details.

Um but I do have that FCPS does not support a new pedestrian connection from Canterbury to the school, other than the existing sidewalks along North Market and the existing path just north of the Canterbury, which is the desired path I mentioned.

Um so they have determined that that is the access that they are happy with.

Thank you.

Commissioner Robey.

The public comment that we had addressed in lieu of land associated with parks.

Is that obviated now because you're now going to add that land to an existing green area?

Yeah, that would be the fee and lo would be if we weren't dedicating, but we are dedicating now the 2.34 acres.

So it's a moot point.

Correct.

That's all I want to know.

That and the waiver are right move.

Thank you very much.

Okay.

Commissioner Montes?

Uh yeah, I just had a question.

Um you said that the end there would be all fee uh fee sample townhomes.

Um first time reviewing this.

Uh so were the two over two still part of uh the plan around there, like two over two style uh homes for like increased density.

Uh nah we we hadn't considered that for this project.

We we were getting to the 212 density without any two over twos.

Oh, okay, gotcha.

Um and then was there any study on traffic, increased traffic that would come from this uh final development?

Yep, that that was part of our uh APF review.

Okay, got you.

No further questions or no.

Okay, and I don't have any uh questions either.

Do we have any public comment?

So all right.

Well, thank you very much.

We'll see you at the next meeting.

Uh next up we have PC 26-32 FSI final site plan, bricks brickworks, mixed-use central district lot four revision.

Good afternoon.

Uh my name is Eric DeVito.

I'm with the applicant Greenburg Gibbons, along with me is Jay Diamond, also with Greenburg Gibbons.

Our consultant, uh Chris Mariga is also here who was just at the table with you.

And I also have uh Dustin Pigeon.

Dustin Pigeon with uh Club Studio, which is the fitness user that will come up later in our application as we talked, because we felt he probably would be the best person to address the utilization of the the building that is part of our plan, and I there may be some questions as to why we've configured it as such.

So Dustin was was generous enough with his time to come and be available for questions when we get to that point.

So thank you all.

Commissioners Temple and Llewellyn, it's nice to see you again.

I think we've we've we've been at other hearings.

Commissioners Roby and Montez, nice to meet you.

Welcome.

Although I know Commissioner Robey, you've you've been following this project for many years as we've gone through the hearing process, so nice to see you up there instead of out here.

Um but we've, as you know, this project has had uh is been in front of uh the city of Frederick for years now.

In fact, I our first approval was I believe in October of 23.

So we're coming up on almost three years of this project.

This particular site plan we're here to discuss today was originally approved back in May of 25.

Um at that time we had a few placeholders, I would say, for one of the buildings that we're talking about today, just because we hadn't refined it, and since that time we have narrowed down a use and a user, so that's required slight tweak to the that building footprint.

And also another one of the pads that was originally part of our initial submission way back when it got a lot of attention because we had proposed a drive-thru.

We realized that that was uh there was a lot of opposition to that drive-thru.

So we pulled it back at that time, just had it as future development, and now we're coming forward with that building.

No drive-thru.

It is a multi-tenant retail building that is consistent with the other design and features of the rest of the project.

So we heard the city, we did not move forward with the drive-thru on that pad.

But now, since we have a little more refined idea of how we're going to use it, we we have come back forward with the revival revisions of the site plan mainly for just those two things.

The the and if uh I don't know we will have that site plan, I guess.

Can you go ahead and advance, Jay?

So this was the original one where we talk where the one and the two are so the buildings that are in white there that you can see on this plan are not changing.

The only ones with the white circle in yellow and the two circle, um, the red number two there are the only two that we're coming back and talking to you today.

The other buildings are staying exactly as they are on this plan.

And there's still another future development pad on the far right next to the multi-building that is not part of the submittal either.

We'll come back at a future time on that.

So this is this is what the original lot four site plan was.

So now what we're coming in with now is where the red boxes are.

Those are the only two changes.

So building one the fit prints enlarge slightly.

Um it still fits in with the overall road network, parking network.

Uh it's consistent with the overall plan, but that is a refined layout based on this particular user that is here today.

And the pad two that's up on the the lower end on Monocasee, similar in size to what we were originally going to plan, but again, no drive-through.

And again, it's also fits and is uh consistent with the rest of the parking and the road network.

The main entrance doesn't change.

None of the other layout of the shopping center will change with these refined building footprints.

So this is what was shown if you go back to the prior slide real quick.

This is number one.

So what we're about to show you right now is what's going on on number one.

So when we go to the next slide, this is a rendering of the particular fitness building that we are proposing for uh the site number one.

So Jay, I don't know if you want to go to get into some specifics about size, the type of operator, and then we have some interior layouts later, and we'll bring um Dustin up for that.

But for now, Jay, why don't you go ahead?

Yeah, thanks, Eric.

And I I think to to piggyback on what Eric was saying here before, this is kind of an evolution of our site plan right now.

So you're you're seeing us what was approved in May come forth you today.

And we're talking about you know, potentially bringing one of the best new to market studio-led fitness users in the entire country.

This operator has about 640 locations nationally of 40-year experience.

This exact brand is a studio-led concept, and we'll get into kind of the interior layouts, but there's only 18 of these in the entire country.

So, for example, there's locations in New York City and Miami and Arlington, Virginia, and out in California here too.

So what we originally got approved was about 10,000 square feet.

This concept is now 30,000 square feet, two-story.

Um the floor plate is about 15,000 square feet.

So to what Eric was saying before, as it relates to the footprint uh necessitating changes.

If we go back to to here, there's some little bit of changes as it relates to kind of the dry aisle out front.

That actually, in our opinion, connects better to what's in front of retail too, before is kind of more angled.

So you have a a clear site line coming through to retail too.

And with that, um we'll kind of jump into the interior layout.

I'll call Dustin up here in a second.

Um what's important with this user is that as I mentioned, this is a two-story concept.

This is not their single story prototype.

And what they require is limited glazing, which we'll get into as part of the modification request.

Um limited glazing because they're their focus is having these dark uh rooms for their classes.

So you'll typically see in some of their in their studios, dark rooms, um, and we can get into some of these layouts here too.

Um, but that really you know emphasizes their their training concepts and their programming.

Um, and then you can kind of see in the bottom hand side here where there are proposing glazing, and again, this gets a little bit into the modifications, but what we thought working with the operator, because they need limited glazing, is to be able to put trellises with some type of IV, and that really is able to compensate for the produced glazing requirement as part of the code here as well.

So, with that, I'll call Dustin up here.

Dustin, if you want to talk through to the Planning Commission a little bit about your programming in the interior layout, I think that would be very helpful.

And here's this too if you want it.

Thank you, Jay.

Um, as he referenced, the the organization has been around 40 years, and we carry numerous brands under that organization.

Um, in any of the other brands, uh, we would be able to accommodate this and actually welcome uh welcome it.

We do not operate your standard aerobics clubs in this type of class.

Uh, if any of you ever seen the the boutique style studios that are out there, your club Pilates or former Pilates, um, your hot yoga, your soul cycle styled ride classes.

Um, these are the brands that we're competing with here.

And typically, those studios, you'll see people paying two, three, four hundred dollars a month to have this specialized class.

And our brand, we're charging at many times half the price, giving five carefully curated boutique studio experiences, in addition to workout equipment, pool, hot tub, sauna, recovery studio.

Um there's a list of high-end amenities and top of the line of equipment.

But our main draw is these special studios that compete with the best of the best that's out there.

And because of the low price point and how much you get on top of it, people are already skeptical when they're coming in until they experience it.

And it's really the full experience that makes Club Studio what it is.

So anything that would interfere with the lighting, the temperature, the sound just wouldn't work.

It would adjust the atmosphere, and that would not work in this model.

That makes sense.

Thank you.

And and just so you're aware, by the way, I don't know if it was mentioned.

Is Club Studio is part of the LA Fitness brand?

So while Club Studio is more of a smaller concept, I mean LA Fitness has been around forever and is a very reputable and successful operator.

Yeah, and just to add there too, the rollout that with the rollout that we're looking into to expand that brand um and really make it one of the most notable brands under our heading.

Um it is coming to a lot of key markets, as Jay was referencing.

And this would be this would make Frederick one of the early adopters on in this brand as well.

Okay.

So then as Eric mentioned on on pad one, the the high level thing here is that there's no drive-thru.

So this this is the number two.

Yeah, so this is number two, right here.

If you go back to the site plan, this would have been the number two at the bottom.

That's the one we're going through.

It's it's this pad site right here.

So the the big takeaway here is that there's no drive-thru.

Um, I think from conversations that we had with the community planning and the planning commission, um, this feels like a better use for the community.

Um, this feels like a better use for the community not having the auto-oriented drive-thru was was super important.

Some other things that we want to talk about here is that this use is only restricted to dry retail.

So there's not going to be any restaurants associated in this building.

It's a pursuant to the grocery lease that we have that's restricted in that instance.

Um and then the architecture is consistent with the balance of the project.

There's two accesses off of Monoxy Boulevard from pedestrian standpoint.

So we have the shared use path that runs uh along the property boundary, and then from the shared use path, you'll be able to access this pad uh as well as the grocery into the balance of the site as well.

So with that, there was a few modifications that we're asking.

A lot of them were also previously approved in the May site plan approval.

Um we're asking for those here as well.

This is modification A, um, which includes the parking has to be set back 25 feet of the right-of-way.

This was also approved as part of the uh May site plan we had talked about.

And you can see in this location here, that line went right like right about here, so we were able to you know squeeze in another probably about six or seven parking spaces.

That would also um is a part of this application here as well uh for pad one.

And just to reiterate that, so this is this was already approved for the left side of the site, and one of the compensating features was a screening wall.

We're maintaining that whole feature all the way through.

So it's it's gonna look like what's what's already was programmed and planned on the left side of the screen with the screening wall, that will continue all the way over in front of this building as well.

So we're proposing this.

Correct.

So we're gonna continue to have that screen wall right here, and then there's also a screen wall proposed right there as well.

And as Eric said, that was one of the compensating features to that.

Um the reason for the break is to for the sidewalk entrance, I guess.

Is that or is that uh landscape?

That break is landscaping.

It's actually going to be it's going to be blocked like it is it's fully screened.

I just it's going to be screened with landscaping as opposed to heartscape.

That's what that hole in the wall is there.

Uh we touched on this uh a little bit in the prior slide here, too.

But as we had mentioned, you know, any of the areas that you see here, this is where there's no glazing being currently proposed right now.

Um the modification request is for 50 less than 50 percent of the facade having some type of of glazing requirement that's a real multi-light window.

Um again, anything that's in pink does not have glazing, or what's called salmon does not have glazing to what Dustin was saying here before.

There are opportunities where we could potentially add glazing on the second story, um, which we are happy to add when the operator was okay doing so, although it doesn't impact anything as it relates to the ground story transparency calculation.

Um I think that's probably it for that one.

And to reiterate what Jay said before, as a compensating feature to not be able to put glazing in those location locations because of the programming aspects.

There are some trellises and Ivy walls and other more attractive features to to make the building appear, you know, to offset the fact that there isn't that glazing feature there.

It isn't just going to be a blank wall.

Uh the next one is a loading space.

So again, this was also approved in the May 2025 approval.

And what that is is it's to reduce the size of the loading space.

So for example, in between retail one and two, this was approved.

This is about a nine by twenty loading space.

We're proposing the same thing here for pad one.

That was a lot of discussion when we got the site plan approved before with loading spaces and we refined it and refined it and got to the point where the small loading spaces were approved by the planning commission after much discussion.

So we just basically mirrored that same path here.

The next one is for the temporary dumpster.

So this is for um the request to eliminate the requirement for dumpster enclosure, not look not located next to a building to be screened year-round with landscaping on three sides.

So the idea here is that we still have not come forward with the pad two layout.

When we do come forward, this location of this dumpster is going to move on to pad two and will be shared between pad two and the pad one building.

As we mentioned before, this pad one building is gonna be all dry retail.

There's no restaurant, there's not going to be a high use of of trash.

So the idea is that eventually once we come forward with pad two, this dumpster slides down off the drive aisle and it's shared between pads one and two.

And the reality of that is we don't have a pad two site plan right now to be able to put that dumpster there.

You'd have to actually file an entire site plan for pad two just to put the dumpster there.

This is part of an existing site plan, so we're able to locate it here.

Um that's why it is being located in this temporary location for now.

But for the future, it will be consistent with all the other dumpsters on a site plan, landscape screened, everything.

Consistent with the balance of the shopping center.

And then the last one, so this was in the DRC letter um that planning had provided, and that's related to the building orientation.

And that's related to the building orientation.

So although this is not a drive-through.

This building is set back from call at this point here, about 33 feet.

And the reason that is so is because we have a major stormwater outfall that's right by Monocasey Boulevard.

All the stormwater in the entire project is coming through that right there.

Which means we have set back the building about 15 feet from this outfall for you know prevent constructibility concerns going forward with the project.

So no matter what layout was coming forward, we're gonna have to request this modification, and staff had called this out here too.

So you will see this when we go to resubmit as part of the workshop or part of the hearing to request this modification here as well.

But it's all driven by the fact that our major stormwater outfalls right here, which leads to lower stormwater ponds south of Monocasey.

And just to you know, to conclude, you know, our our feelings with these revisions to the lot four site plan are are consistent with what you guys have approved in May.

Um we're you know, providing you know a best in class, new to market fitness user as a studio concept, unparalleled to anything else in the balance of Frederick.

And then pad one is consistent generally with what you've seen for retail one and two, similar architecture, similar uses, uh, and so forth.

So with that, happy to answer any questions.

Um you have Eric, Chris, Dustin, and myself.

Thank you.

All right, thank you very much.

Uh we'll start with Commissioner Robey.

Okay.

Uh I would like you to go back to building one.

So which one?

Building one.

Building one?

So the fitness building.

The the rendering of it or the site plan version of it?

The wall that faces Erkworks Avenue.

Right there.

No, that's the other side.

That's the parking lot side, right?

You're saying the elevation.

Uh rear elevation, I think is what it's north wall of that building.

North wall.

I don't think you had it's not it's down in the middle.

Is it not?

This is yes, this is this is this is facing south towards the parking lot.

Go down to the next one with the the salmon colored on it.

I think maybe that one.

Okay.

So I'm not sure what you're telling me here in terms of the storyboard.

I had before I read it, the same reaction that staff had with regard to creating your darkened area interior by using internal screens.

But if you want to if if you're going to do it this way, and I don't know what the black areas are, and and those are non-window areas, right?

That you've got to do that.

Correct.

Yeah, anything that's in black here isn't is not there's no windows there.

So what I would like to see there, and I and I'm talking with a level of ignorance, if you will.

Uh I would like that to be somewhat fetistrated.

If you're going to make it dark for the inside, like bricked up, but different indentation, if you will, uh, from the exterior wall.

So that as staff suggested, the user of this site only stays for five years.

It doesn't work out for them, and they're going to be used for a different user.

They can then open that area up as a window, as a glazed area, and it will look like it belongs there.

It won't look like something you just added in.

So that's just a suggestion I have there.

I don't know how far I could take that.

But that's what I'm suggesting.

And just to be clear, I believe we'd still need a modification in that regard.

I just agree very well.

I'm offering an alternative to what the staff suggested.

Saying it's better, it's just different.

Yeah, I think the the issue with the with the zoning code is that unless it's a real multi-light window, it doesn't count towards the transparency.

So even if we were to add that, we're still in the same situation being below the threshold.

Yes, for your use now.

For though your intended use now.

Yeah.

But what staff rightly pointed out is that this occupant may not be there for the long term.

Maybe you may have different retailers coming in there for what different purposes, and they may need the glazing.

And so if they're going to put the glazing in to meet code and just to meet having light coming into their building, it's got to look like it belongs.

Practically speaking, it's a long-term lease, you know, with this tenant who will be there for a long period of time.

But the other concern is what Dustin mentioned is I don't know what that means for their programming, for their conditioning, for their sound, for all of these other things that they have.

So I mean, I'm not saying we won't look into it.

I guess the only thing I'm caveating there is it still has to work for them.

I mean, that's the tenant we have now, and that this is a very long-term base, and it's a very expensive construction.

So it's got to work for them.

But we'll definitely look into this, what your suggestions see if it's possible.

That's all I had for right now.

I didn't have the same issues for building two.

Say again.

The mic, they can't hear you.

Just wasn't talking to the mic.

Okay.

What's your question?

Okay, yeah, they were just I think you said something about building two.

I would I'm I wasn't sure what that comment was.

I didn't have any comments on two.

Oh that was what I was saying.

Commissioner Montes.

I would just like to thank you all for choosing Frederick City uh for one of the one it's gonna be early, early adopter for for this.

Um big fitness guy myself, so I'm I'm very interested.

Uh and something like this coming here.

Um, in terms of the uh fitness space, the open space that you said would have equipment, um, would that be on the first floor or second floor?

There's a mix across two floors.

Um you have cardio equipment, you have strength training, both free weights, um selectorized machines.

Um you know, that there's there's equipment on both levels.

Um so you're gonna have a full gym capabilities in here, in addition to these uh boutique style studio classes.

Um and I know I didn't go through all of them before.

You have hot yoga, hot Pilates.

Um we actually have a rebound class that people like.

It's a trampoline class that's it's pretty exciting.

Um you have CS4, which if you've ever seen Barry's boot camp or Orange Theory F 45, it's that style hit circuit training course.

Um you have reformer Pilates, um, you have rhythmic ride, and you have a boxing class.

Um this particular site.

Uh I have to see if it has an HWP O, but we have crossfit at a lot of our locations too.

Um, so that it's it's a wide range of strength training equipment in addition to having cool hot tub sauna.

Um and there's a recovery studio.

So you'll have you know, a lot of the locations have things like cryotherapy, red light therapy, massage chairs.

Um there's there's a wide range, oh compression boots, um, you know, so for whether it's recovering athletes, people recovering from injuries, you know, really it's full service, you know, everything from your typical gym to some of the highest end health clubs that you'll see.

And it's top of the line equipment too.

So it's really that high-end feel, and it's a beautiful thing because it's mixed in with the value because you can't get any one of those things by themselves individually at the same price point.

Well, there we are any sale of you said no sale of food or drinks or anything inside of the side of the proposed um we it a lot of times we will typically have what's called a we we call it a beaming cafe, not to say it's always gonna retain that name, but it's a essentially a small juice bar um where they offer what you might typically find in gyms, um, post-workout, you know, energy drinks, things like that.

So it's not gonna be a full-on restaurant, um, but it will be there to service people during the workouts.

Okay, awesome.

Thank you so much.

Commissioner Tempo.

Uh was building three always planned to be a two-story building.

It was not, it was single story.

It was single story.

All right, well, for first off, I love the added density um that that you've presented.

You know, while that's retail space density, it's great to see the land go into its highest and best use.

Um I think this is the right building for the added density.

I think it's gonna step up nicely to the apartment uh complex.

Um I'll echo Commissioner Robey's suggestion of you know, thinking through post um lease occupancy to make it more easily viable.

You know, it's like anecdotally you drive by a car dealership to or you you drive by a pizza hut that's now a sushi place, and you know it's a pizza hut in the event, you know, club studio isn't here in 30 years.

We want to make sure we see it as its new use and not oh, that's club studio, it will always be club studio.

Um hopefully they're here for 50 years.

Um but that would be my only suggestion here uh on the other parcel, the other building.

My only question is about the trash enclosure and the just confirming you're asking for a modification based on uncertainty around the timing of pad two, right?

Like it's a modification and that you've communicated is not permanent.

Correct.

Yes.

So effectively, once the layout or the site plan for pad two were to be presented to you guys, this modification goes away.

And it's just the modification is in regards to year-round landscaping.

Yeah, I just have a hard time looking at an approval right based off of a potential future site plan that I don't know if it's gonna come or not.

Um and so I think you know, we just have to think about that that in the event that pad two doesn't come in front of us what that means for what we're approving being there permanently.

Uh no further questions, so thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um just some comments.

Thank you so much for the renderings.

I have a quick question.

Would that be okay if he asks a question?

Sorry.

Um in reference to the the lease term.

Um I know you had mentioned you don't want to see it here for five years, and I agree.

We don't want that either.

Um what would be a lease term that would make you feel more comfortable with the proposed plan?

So I'll ask a question back, I guess.

So right now you have a 30-year lease, is my understanding?

Um I believe those details are still being worked out, but we typically do 15 to 30 year leases.

Okay.

Yeah, I'm not entirely sure.

I mean, normally it's at least a 20-year lease with multiple options that'll get you to 30 or 40 years.

I mean, it there's an opportunity for this tenant to be there for 50 years, frankly, if the business is successful.

But yes.

You know, what le like uh uh not to be cynical, but at least it's contingent leases can be broken if the business decides this isn't the right place.

So you know, I asked for that flexibility irrelevant of how long it's going to be there.

Right.

Um again, thank you for the renderings.

That's very helpful for us, especially you know, as people are joining the commission and maybe haven't seen some of the details here.

Um to kind of piggyback on Commissioner Montez had asked about whether you were going to have um drinks and things.

Um, you know, when you mentioned recovery studio, I thought okay, everyone's gonna be around drinking green drinks and protein drinks.

Um and this was to be um dry.

I am concerned with the location of that dumpster since that you know, people will be consuming food on site.

You well, you were asking about the fitness studio consuming food on site, correct?

Correct.

This dumpster is for just pad one, is it not?

This one right here is what we're doing.

There's another pad, there's another dumpster.

There is a dumpster on pad one.

Okay.

There's a dumpster for this building location elsewhere on the it's in the right in front of it, I believe.

So this modification is specifically for pad two.

Correct.

Correct, because it's gonna be shared between pad one and future pad two.

There's a dumpster location was already approved for this building on the original May 25 approval.

That's right in front of it.

Um, great.

That is helpful.

Thank you.

Um with that, I do not have any further questions.

Uh but Commissioner Robi does.

Interesting concept you brought up there with regard to we'll call it pedestrian or customer uh use of a dumpster.

I don't I'm not envisioning the clients of either buildings one or two using their respective dumpsters.

I'm assuming you're gonna have trash collection outside the buildings.

And that'll get stewardship if you will, is required to keep it open and available.

So that's someone makes sure that was true.

Correct.

Yeah, the dumpsters are just for the tenants to dispose of their trash.

The pedestrians will have trash cans, basically.

Trash.

You can go back to your drawing that you had for me before.

Like the uh are any of those doors?

Yeah.

Yeah.

So this is on the north elevation.

That is required to meet the building orientation modification.

And then on the south elevation is the primary entrance right there.

And there's other doors associated on the egress doors for the case.

I just wanted to know what the pedestrians were going to see along Brickworks Avenue.

Sure.

And it would that go back to the rendering for the Oh on Brickworks on Brickworks Street.

I don't if it'd be more like that.

If I could add just one thing too, because I know there's been some conversation on potentially adding more glazing from a structural standpoint.

There could be glazing added to these bays down the road.

So in the event that the commission, you know, you had fears that Club Studio is not here one day.

There's nothing to say that glazing couldn't be added where we're showing the trellises right now.

Glazing couldn't be added if a new tenant were to come in down the road.

That could be done from a structural standpoint as well.

Thank you.

Okay.

Uh with that, I will turn it over to staff for their presentation, please.

Good afternoon.

So there are two components to this proposed revision.

There is the retail building three, which they have denoted as one on on their presentation, but then there is pad site one, uh, which they denoted as two.

So I would flip those in your head.

Um so you've got three up top, and you've got one down at the bottom.

Okay.

One uh is gonna have a couple of modifications, and just so that you're aware, while we did have multiple modifications on the previous site plan, when any component changes that you all used in your decision making, we are always gonna ask for another modification.

That old modification is now obsolete because circumstances have changed.

So you may see something that's very similar and it's still okay, but we will always bring it back to you.

Okay.

So there are two competing standards on the lot one.

Um in section 607, basically for shopping centers, you've got to have your parking set back 25 feet.

Theirs is not, so they're gonna have to modify that to have it a little bit closer to the to the right of way.

Then there's another section, uh, I believe it's section 604.

Yep, section 604 that requires that a building be no further than 20 feet from the sidewalk.

So when you think about that in terms of development, you want your building closer up and your parking further back.

And in this circumstance, because they have the giant stormwater pipe, they have had to flip those, so you will get a modification for each.

Similarly, because they are doing dry retail, um, that terminology does mean that you're not gonna have a Dunkin' Donuts or a smoothie shop or anything like that.

Um they are also requesting a small loading space instead of a large, and so you'll get a modification for that.

Several of the previous modifications uh tended to that, that they're gonna go from large to small because they do have a very robust solid waste system already.

And um and they're loading, I think you guys time it.

Um we went over that on the last brickwork site plan as well.

So they don't really need large ones in this mixed-use area.

Now the dumpster location, uh, we did discuss it with the applicant.

They've put it in basically if they ever want to develop pad site two, which they do.

Um, if you have just land sitting there, it's not making you any money.

So you're gonna want to develop it the temporary, and we don't consider it temporary, which is why the modification would be needed, just in case it was there for long.

Um it could be there a couple years.

Um, it is being placed in the sort of stub out for the drive aisle that would lead to pad two, and so if they ever wanted to develop it, they will have to address it at that time.

And then there are a couple of other modifications that we are requesting, and we'll see how that goes.

We're gonna move up to that retail site uh three up on the top part, right?

So they are going from 10,441 square feet at a one story to a 30,550 square feet at a two-story.

So they're gaining a story and almost tripling the amount of square footage.

Okay.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that.

Um as discussed very robustly.

Uh staff does disagree.

We currently don't support the modification as presented, and I think I need to explain those standards a little bit.

So we have two standards.

One of them is that um basically any the facade has to have 50% of windows.

Okay, and we do this for it to be inviting, it's good architecture.

You want people to really see a building, you don't want it to be a block.

And so they haven't been able to provide that, and staff in general we aren't going to support something that is for what is considered a temporary use if they had a structural issue, uh location issue, you know, other reasons we might support it.

Um but we don't have that here.

And then the other one is 50% of windows that are facing a street right of way have to be real multi-light windows.

So you've noticed they've mentioned glazing a lot.

So glazing is like you look at a window and you can see out of it, but nobody can see in.

That's been glazed.

Uh multi-light is you can see through it.

Okay.

So it's just light coming in and out.

Um staff does believe that there are ways to mitigate that internally, especially with the increased size.

There's no reason why there couldn't be a hallway from the from the windows and internal parishions.

We do this pretty often to create dark rooms.

Um there is internal space that can be used.

So currently we we would like to see some improvements to that request.

Um 19% when we require 50 is a is a large ask without you know robust reasoning.

And I do want to note that we do not take into consideration lease terms.

It is simply that we know that shopping centers, it's very often temporary users, unless you are um an anchor store like a grocery store.

There they won't be going anywhere very soon.

I think that it about covers it.

Um if you have any questions, I'm here for you.

Thank you.

Uh we will start with Commissioner Montes.

No questions.

Commissioner Temple.

No questions.

And Commissioner Roby.

No further questions.

Okay.

And I don't have any questions either.

I appreciate your explanation as it pertains to what we're looking for with the windows.

Um that was that was a good explanation.

Uh with that said, is there any public comment?

I do.

Good to see you.

Yeah.

Kevin Solner is 5th Street.

Um my question is in a general one for the entire brickworks internal area.

If you go to now the northern pad, so I can't remember which one I'm supposed to be saying.

But it was site one originally, and then we're going to go to site two.

It looks like the non-residential but commercial or retail buildings are white.

Bright white, at least in the renderings, and the whole residential complex is brick facade with some mixture of other contemporary things added in.

And I'm wondering, is that a design preference by the developers?

And is it that we're minimizing what we treasure in the brickworks property as a gateway into the historic part of the city?

Because, you know, as Mr.

Robi brought up, if you can look in brickworks drive or avenue, whatever it's called, and you can see an all-white building.

And then you go to site two, and that was rendered as a white commercial area.

Is that getting away from the design that we were hoping for?

Well, some of us were hoping for in terms of that merge into the historic part of the brick part of the city.

So it's just a consideration.

Um, you know, when you see this rendering, for example, when you see the buildings that they've been talking about, they're white, whereas the surrounding buildings are a brick style.

So I wonder whether the planning commission could think about that.

Maybe you don't make a decision now.

Maybe uh Greenberg Gibbs and their clients have already worked out specifics, but a lot more of the brick, I think would be appreciated by the residents of Frederick City.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

Any additional public comment?

No.

Uh with that, I will see if any of the commissioners have questions.

Commissioner Temple.

I really appreciate those uh comments, Kevin.

I think it's a great question to the applicant and the challenge them to come back with you know a decrease of fiber cement panel and an increase in brick or brick veneer.

Um I know that there's some brick on this, but um most of it is not, and it'll be prominent.

So um you know understanding that these are boutique, there's an opportunity probably to make it look like it fits in a little bit better.

Um I I per speaking for myself um would be more willing to uh vote on a modification for you know a reduction in windows if it met the aesthetic.

Um you know, and I think the grocer the grocer applic uh uh renderings are great.

I think the uh apartment complexes use of brick is good.

So you know m maybe there's an opportunity here to use more brick, especially red brick and uh compensate for the lack of windows.

Thank you.

Commissioner Robey?

I thank Mr.

Temple for his comments as well as Mr.

Selner.

So thank you.

Okay, uh Commissioner Montes, any questions?

I'd just like to thank you for the public comment.

Definitely something we'll be keeping in mind going forward.

Thank you.

May we address that publicly?

I was going to ask if you'd like to address it.

And Jay has way more details on the actual finishing materials, and I'll let him go there.

But I that last the last slide that you had up there just to point out, if you go to the very last slide right before the finishing slide.

You know, some of these non quote unquote red brick buildings.

This was all part of our originally approved master plan, and that was the original concept.

And again, our designers didn't want to see of red brick too, on time the entire project because that can get monotonous as well.

So these even what's looking as white or gray, that is brick.

The same thing for the pad one building.

That is a brick building.

Now the fitness building, I think Jay, I'll turn to you to let you address it.

But we have tried to, you know, make it more architecturally appealing while it's brick, but not just all red brick, because we do believe it does actually look better that way.

But you know, with regard to specifics of this building, Jay, I guess I would.

I could completely agree.

I mean, we do have elements in retail too, and we're calling it pad one.

We'll work on naming these better next time.

Yes.

So there's no not as much confusion.

Um but there's elements that we're stealing from retail two pad one that are incorporated into uh the brick here.

On the metal panel, the the multifamily building has a has a large metal panel component to it.

So we kind of thought in working with Club Studio and their architects here as well, that this kind of transitions nicely from the brick that's really on E Street, what you're really gonna see more so than you know the the brick that you're gonna see here, but is it transitions still keeping that brick element to the multifamily building was a nice transition from our standpoint?

But we'll we'll certainly take another look at it just so you know we are actually we're intentionally trying to have a nice transition through the project to not have just red same brick on every single building.

If you remember the grocery building, that's also all red brick too.

So the grocery building is a very large building, is all red brick, then our uh other retails are slightly mixed.

The multifamily has a lot of red brick on it, but it was all meant to transition.

It's a sort of a color panel that our designers put together to make sure everything's compatible, and that was really the intent was compatibility.

Thank you.

Any additional questions?

No.

All right, we'll conclude that item.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I just want to say thank you for the modified response.

I'm looking forward to your next iteration.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, our next app our next application is PC 26-29 FSI, the final site plan for the West Side Community Center.

I'd ask the applicant to come up.

Staff, do you are you aware?

I did not hear from them, so whether or not they were or you know, that they weren't coming.

So well, in that case, um I'm gonna go ahead and move on.

Okay, and I think the next one is the same applicant, so well, if the applicant's not here to present, we would continue.

Okay.

Okay.

Um so let's move on with the next applic application, which is PC 26-34 FSI final site plan and PC 26-37 FSCB combined forest and delineation and preliminary forest conservation plan, FDK airport hangers.

If the applicant could come up, um do we have a site plan?

Can I fast forward?

I mean, can I advance can I have sheet C4?

Sure.

Okay.

Okay.

Good afternoon.

My name is Ian Diaz.

I'm a civil engineer from Adsec Engineering.

Um I'm here today representing uh our clients, uh high flying hangers.

Thank you for the opportunity to present to you uh today at this workshop.

Uh I'll give you a brief overview of the uh of the projects, uh the key components.

So uh see High Flying Hangers is proposing to construct eight rows of uh private airplane hangars.

Um a clubhouse building and associated parking area.

Uh site access uh to the development will cons will be provided from aviation way wrong here via twenty-five foot wide private access road that will lead uh directly to the development.

Uh site utilities will consist of uh well the eight rows of hangars uh buildings are going to be designed for future water and sanitary sewer utilities, which will be uh access from aviation way.

Uh they will be connected to a utility room that is will be provided at the end of each uh row of hangars.

Um also there's about uh seventy-eight um bays available uh eventually for the uh for the for the hangar developments.

Umagment will consist of uh the use of bioretention facilities that will treat the newly improved areas on site.

There's also gonna be a new storm drain uh conveyance system that will uh collect and convey the stormwater away from the site for eventual discharge into the existing storm drain system located off site somewhere.

So uh that pretty much concludes uh my presentation and overview of the project.

Uh thank you for the opportunity, and I am open to answering questions.

Okay.

Would you be able to speak to uh the modifications that are being requested?

See it again.

We have some modifications that are being proposed here if you would speak to those.

Okay, the modifications.

So section six oh five, the buffer categories and screening.

Oh, yes.

The uh is related to the uh the actual um the architectural stuff.

A little bit about the landscaping requirements and maybe what compensating factors you have that are preventing you from meeting those.

Okay, as far as I understand, um uh we we wouldn't be able to provide uh you know meet the uh the the plant the tree obligations on the site um because it's uh it's it's it's an airport, you know, so they they they don't allow the planting of trees.

Uh you know, so we're gonna um be planting shrubs uh and uh within the bioretential facilities we'll be using like a wetland grass mix.

So that's uh really how we're gonna be, and then the rest of it is gonna be dealt with with a Finlu.

Um thank you.

That helps quite quite a bit.

Um with that, I'll take it up here for questions starting with Commissioner Temple.

I'm just a little curious of how access is works.

You indicated it's a private access.

Um is our fence or gate, or how does how does uh random citizen or resident not get out here while the intended, you know, hangar lessees and guests get to the hangers.

I believe there's gonna be like uh I believe there's an existing uh gates or access way at Aviation Way that you know will uh prevent like you know, anybody um that doesn't have a plane from getting access to this area.

Uh so you know they will be able to access aviation way again on this uh private road, which is basically uh it leads directly to the hangars.

Um there's gonna be some sort of uh entry access, like a gate or something, you know, that would prevent anybody from the public.

Thank you.

Katie, do you mind do you mind turning your mic on?

I'm sorry.

Sorry, good.

Uh so there is gated access, and it is extremely controlled because access to these buildings involves crossing an active taxiway.

So uh very controlled, and the dumpsters, for instance, are outside of near the end of that circle, and trash collection will have to be outside of the site itself because reasons like that.

Um access will go through the airport manager, and they'll likely escort someone who's not familiar with the site.

And you're indicating that that's all existing with the other hangers and improvements, so none of the not within the scope of this project.

You're just correct.

Thank you.

Yes.

Commissioner Roby.

Good afternoon.

Uh was any consideration given by your designers to put solar on the roofs?

You've got a lot of roof space here.

Um it's not something that has been brought up by our client.

I'm not sure with reflections and how that works with it being an airport.

We'd have to um probably go through some additional FAA requirements there.

I'd appreciate you looking into that because I think that there are probably panel designs that would be acceptable by FAA.

I know you don't want glare coming from the buildings, but a lot of these solar panels are mooted, muted in color and might be acceptable.

And it's just too good an opportunity to pass up.

We can certainly find out.

That's all I have right now.

Commissioner Montes.

No questions for now.

Okay, and I don't have any questions.

I think um this will be a huge improvement for the airport.

I know there's a long list of people waiting for hangars.

I have some friends out there.

So I think they're close to 50% sold.

Wow.

Wow, that's incredible.

So thank you for that.

Um and with that, I would turn it over to staff.

Um, just a couple of things to add.

One, the modification request is for the property landscaping requirements.

And as the applicant stated, because it's the airport, there are a lot of things that aren't permitted to be planted out there, such as trees, so that's why the map modification for that is needed.

Also for the design standards, it was kind of difficult due to the nature of this being an airport and having the hangars.

It was difficult for the applicant to come up with some things that would satisfy some of the design elements.

So one of them is they're proposing their utility buildings that are going to be up against the hangar buildings.

And they were proposing those to be different colored than the hangers themselves.

So we were just looking to get your feedback on that and what you thought you guys might think about that.

And then also one of the elements is for the first floor ground elevation.

They're proposing sidewalk elevations around the buildings.

The intent of that element is to have sidewalks that connect to the street.

However, since there is new street around these buildings, that's something that we just wanted to bring to your attention.

But they are adding sidewalks in.

And I believe that's it.

So if you have any questions for me, I'll be happy to answer.

Thank you.

We'll start with Commissioner Roby.

No questions, just staff comments.

Commissioner Montes.

No questions.

Commissioner Temple.

No questions.

Thank you.

Okay, and I have no questions.

I like the idea, and I do recall reading that about the different colors for the utility door versus the hangar, and I think that makes great sense.

You know, someone's coming out to service something that they'll know where to go.

Um because you can get a little lost out there if you don't know exactly what you're looking for.

Um it does look a lot alike.

So I think that would be helpful.

Uh excuse me.

That said, do we have any public comment?

I don't think we did.

No.

Okay.

With that said, we'll conclude this item.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Okay.

And last but not least, we will be talking about the rules of procedure.

So with that said, I will turn it over to staff.

Good afternoon, Gabrielle Collard, the planning department.

So this is the continuation of our conversation of the rules of procedure that we've had several work sessions, workshops on.

Um, and we've provided a couple of iterations of the draft rules.

Um today I was just going to highlight kind of the latest and greatest changes.

Uh you'll see the packets that are included in today's backup, kind of chronologically track the different amendments that we've made.

Um, but for today's purposes, uh, we did revise section 1.1, and this was uh in response to a real world scenario we encountered in which we didn't have enough members on the commission at the time to conduct an election, uh which is otherwise called for in January of each year.

Uh so we did add some language to address um what what we do in that instance uh for for the future, hopefully we won't need it.

Um but in the event that we do, we did add some additional language uh that talks about uh what we would how we would proceed, and let me just get to that section of our draft rules.

Uh so it it reads if at the time of an election there are vacancies on the commission such that it prevents an election from all of the officer positions.

The commission may elect from its members individual officer positions deemed necessary to conduct business and me re may reschedule a full election at such such time that those vacancies are filled.

So we added that new language, and then one change from the previous section or the previous version uh that we actually had to insert back into the draft rules, had to do with the role of the liaison uh from the council.

Upon further review, the council member is uh held to the same codes of conduct that the commission members are, so they cannot participate in ex parte communication.

Uh they they have to adhere to that whole uh chapter or section two.

Uh in the draft from February, we had proposed taking those sections out so the council liaison could act in a more um meaningful fashion, perhaps.

Uh, but the the city code regulations require them to comply with the the rules of conduct like any other member.

So, unless or until that section of the city code is changed, uh we need to leave the rules intact as they were uh in the last iteration.

With that, I think we have incorporated all the other public comment feedback back we've received from the planning commission uh in consultation with our city attorney who's reviewed all of these and um happy to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Uh we will go ahead and start with Commissioner Montes.

No questions.

Commissioner Temple.

Just happy we're getting close to the end on this.

And Commissioner Roby.

No questions, but thank you.

And yes, I'd like to say thank you, especially for adding those sections in and clarifying and taking all of the feedback that we've given over time here.

Um I do not have any questions.

Um, but with that said, I wanted to see if we had any public comment.

Okay.

And just before I close, I would say that um if if we have addressed everything and we're ready to move forward, our intent would be to put this on the May hearing for approval.

So in the next couple of weeks.

That's a good question, I should have asked.

Yes, I saw that.

Yeah, and Sharon, we're gonna go ahead and swear you in when you get up to front.

Okay, do you solemnly swear or affirm that the responses 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.

I do.

Thank you.

And uh this is real quick.

I just want to uh uh thank you for persevering, and I'm I personally um hope you will go forward with this and approve it.

Um I think the changes are excellent, and that you it leaves uh it gives you the kind of tools you need to really do the job you need to do.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

And I agree.

Um if we don't have any other questions up here, I think we would conclude this item and look forward to having this on our May hearing for a vote.

Great.

All right, with that said, meeting is adjourned.