Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Zoning Board of Appeals Hearing – August 23, 2016

Zoning Board of Appeals — Tuesday, August 23, 2016

BodyFrederick, Maryland

SessionZoning Board of Appeals

DateTuesday, August 23, 2016

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 48:39

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

0:39

Good evening, everybody.

0:41

Welcome to the August 23rd, 2016 meeting of the City of Frederick Zoning Board of Appeals.

0:48

A little bit of background on the zoning board of appeals for anybody who might be watching or not familiar with us.

0:55

We are all residents of the city and volunteers.

0:58

We are all appointed by the mayor, and those appointments are confirmed by the Board of Aldermen.

1:03

We have five voting members and one alternate.

1:07

Tonight, Mr.

1:08

Overbeat on my left will uh be serving it as our alternate.

1:14

Also participating in tonight's cases are members from the City of Frederick staff.

1:20

Just for everyone's edification, to my far right and your far left is Ms.

1:25

Rachel DePo.

1:27

Ms.

1:27

DePo is in an assistant attorney here with the City of Frederick.

1:30

And then next to Ms.

1:31

DePo is Gabrielle Collard, and she is the division manager of current planning for the planning department.

1:38

And among their many responsibilities, they also support the ZBA in our work here.

1:45

A little bit about our procedures tonight.

1:48

We have a little bit of housekeeping on our agenda to go through, and then we'll get on with tonight's cases.

2:27

Following the staff report and recommendation, we will ask if the applicant and anyone uh here with the applicant uh has testimony to add.

2:38

If there's anything you would like to expand about or clarify from the staff report, um now's the opportunity to do that.

2:44

Members of the board uh may ask questions uh during that testimony.

2:50

Following the applicant's testimony and presentation of their case, we'll see if anyone from the general public would like to speak uh regarding uh the case.

2:57

And following the general public's comments, we will uh have the applicant see if they would like to make any closing remarks.

3:05

Uh following that, that will end the testimony section uh here of the case, and I will call for a vote from the members.

3:13

Uh we need three votes in the affirmative to pass a motion, so three out of five will pass any motion uh before us.

3:20

Um if you come to the microphone and do happen to speak tonight, um uh first we will uh administer a uh oath to the audience uh for anybody who may be testimony testifying.

3:33

And when you come to the uh uh microphone, we would like your name and your address for the record.

3:38

Uh if you happen to step away from the microphone and then come back at it at another time, if we could have your name again, that would be great.

3:44

Uh reason for that is that all of the proceedings tonight are being recorded.

3:49

Anyone who is aggrieved by a decision of the zoning board of appeals has the right to appeal our decision to the Circuit Court of Maryland.

3:57

And those items just help help help the judge who happens to be reviewing the case, keep straight who happens to be talking at any one time, and we make sure that we've got everyone on the record and and and under oath as appropriate.

4:10

Uh any questions about tonight's proceedings.

4:14

No?

4:15

Okay.

4:15

Well, as I mentioned, we've got a couple of housekeeping uh matters on our agenda before we get started, and then we'll get on with the case that we've got on the docket for tonight.

4:25

Members of the board, uh well, let's see.

4:29

We've got a new order here.

4:30

Um call to order and announcements.

4:34

Our second item is general public comment regarding zoning.

4:37

If anybody is here tonight to speak generally about zoning, not about a case tonight.

4:41

Now's the opportunity.

4:44

Seeing none, uh, we will move on.

4:47

Members of the board under item three, we have uh approval of uh minutes from both the May and the June meeting.

4:54

Uh I'll entertain a motion.

4:56

I think we should probably handle those uh individually.

5:00

So we'll start with May 24th, 2016.

5:15

Oh we had two absentees.

5:17

I'm moving the approved as well.

5:20

We have a motion for approval as written.

5:22

Do we have a second?

5:29

I second.

5:31

We have a second.

5:32

We had two members missing from that meeting, so do we have uh any further comment regarding the minutes from May 24th?

5:41

Seeing none, uh we'll uh um the members present uh who approve uh signify by saying aye.

5:51

Aye.

5:51

Any opposed?

5:53

None, and that passes three to nothing.

5:56

Uh and members, you also have before you uh minutes from the June 28th, 2016 minutes.

6:03

Uh and I will likewise entertain a motion.

6:05

I move for the approval of the June 28th meeting minutes.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Zoning And Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████48%

Stormwater Management██████████████████████23%

Assisted Living█████████████████18%

Procedural███████7%

Historic Preservation████4%

Summary of Proceedings

Zoning Board of Appeals Hearing – August 23, 2016

The City of Frederick Zoning Board of Appeals met on August 23, 2016 at 7:00 PM at City Hall. The board approved minutes from previous meetings and conducted a public hearing on a conditional use application for a 72-bed memory care nursing home facility on a 7.45-acre parcel at the intersection of Gas House Pike and Monocacy Boulevard.

Consent Calendar

Unanimous approval (3-0) of the May 24, 2016 meeting minutes as written.
Unanimous approval (3-0) of the June 28, 2016 meeting minutes as written.

Public Comments & Testimony

No members of the public spoke during the general public comment period or during the hearing on the conditional use case.

Discussion Items

ZBA16-589CU – Conditional Use for Nursing Home/Domiciliary Care/Adult Living Facility Staff presented a report recommending approval of the conditional use for a 72-bed memory care facility on Lot 2, Section 1 of the Jenkins Subdivision. The property is zoned MXE (Mixed Employment) and currently designated for commercial use; the proposed use requires reclassification to employment designation, which will be handled during site plan review by the Planning Commission. Staff found the proposal met all criteria under LMC Sections 308, 312, and 841, including compatibility with the Comprehensive Plan, no greater adverse impact than permitted uses, and adequate protections from noise, traffic, and hazards. Two conditions were recommended: final site plan approval (including land use designation change) by the Planning Commission, and issuance of a zoning certificate with construction commencement within two years. The applicant, represented by Noel Manala (Miles & Stockbridge), along with the development team from Buckeye Development and the end user (Poets Walk), presented the project. They highlighted the need for memory care services in the city, the low-intensity nature of the use compared to other MXE-allowed uses, and their commitment to obtaining all required licenses and approvals. Board members asked questions about the building height (40 feet, single story), stormwater management, the number of beds (72, below the maximum 1,081 allowed), safety features for residents, and the need for state and airport approvals. The applicant responded that the facility will have secure courtyards, shallow bioretention ponds, and staff entrances separate from resident areas. No public testimony was offered.

Key Outcomes

Motion to Approve Board member Aronow moved to approve the conditional use with the findings and conditions from the staff report. The motion was seconded by Patchen. The board discussed and confirmed the findings: the use is in harmony with the Comprehensive Plan and LMC; it will not generate greater impacts than permitted uses; it will not adversely affect nearby residential areas; the applicant will obtain all required licenses; the location provides adequate protection from noise and traffic; and the proposed 72 beds are well within the density limit. Conditions include final site plan approval by the Planning Commission (including land use designation change) and a two-year deadline for zoning certificate issuance and construction start.
Vote: The motion passed unanimously, 4-0 (members present: Ying, Aronow, Patchen, Butcher; Chair Racheff also present).

Meeting Transcript

Good evening, everybody. Welcome to the August 23rd, 2016 meeting of the City of Frederick Zoning Board of Appeals. A little bit of background on the zoning board of appeals for anybody who might be watching or not familiar with us. We are all residents of the city and volunteers. We are all appointed by the mayor, and those appointments are confirmed by the Board of Aldermen. We have five voting members and one alternate. Tonight, Mr. Overbeat on my left will uh be serving it as our alternate. Also participating in tonight's cases are members from the City of Frederick staff. Just for everyone's edification, to my far right and your far left is Ms. Rachel DePo. Ms. DePo is in an assistant attorney here with the City of Frederick. And then next to Ms. DePo is Gabrielle Collard, and she is the division manager of current planning for the planning department. And among their many responsibilities, they also support the ZBA in our work here. A little bit about our procedures tonight. We have a little bit of housekeeping on our agenda to go through, and then we'll get on with tonight's cases. Following the staff report and recommendation, we will ask if the applicant and anyone uh here with the applicant uh has testimony to add. If there's anything you would like to expand about or clarify from the staff report, um now's the opportunity to do that. Members of the board uh may ask questions uh during that testimony. Following the applicant's testimony and presentation of their case, we'll see if anyone from the general public would like to speak uh regarding uh the case. And following the general public's comments, we will uh have the applicant see if they would like to make any closing remarks. Uh following that, that will end the testimony section uh here of the case, and I will call for a vote from the members. Uh we need three votes in the affirmative to pass a motion, so three out of five will pass any motion uh before us. Um if you come to the microphone and do happen to speak tonight, um uh first we will uh administer a uh oath to the audience uh for anybody who may be testimony testifying. And when you come to the uh uh microphone, we would like your name and your address for the record. Uh if you happen to step away from the microphone and then come back at it at another time, if we could have your name again, that would be great. Uh reason for that is that all of the proceedings tonight are being recorded. Anyone who is aggrieved by a decision of the zoning board of appeals has the right to appeal our decision to the Circuit Court of Maryland. And those items just help help help the judge who happens to be reviewing the case, keep straight who happens to be talking at any one time, and we make sure that we've got everyone on the record and and and under oath as appropriate. Uh any questions about tonight's proceedings. No? Okay. Well, as I mentioned, we've got a couple of housekeeping uh matters on our agenda before we get started, and then we'll get on with the case that we've got on the docket for tonight. Members of the board, uh well, let's see. We've got a new order here. Um call to order and announcements. Our second item is general public comment regarding zoning. If anybody is here tonight to speak generally about zoning, not about a case tonight. Now's the opportunity. Seeing none, uh, we will move on. Members of the board under item three, we have uh approval of uh minutes from both the May and the June meeting. Uh I'll entertain a motion. I think we should probably handle those uh individually. So we'll start with May 24th, 2016. Oh we had two absentees. I'm moving the approved as well. We have a motion for approval as written. Do we have a second?

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com