118

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - JANUARY 6, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Monday, January 6, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Vice-Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Carol Johnson, Bernard Moser, and Donald Spickler. Staff: Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich, Associate Planners; Timothy A. Lung, Lisa Kelly Pietro, and Edward Schreiber and Secretary, Janet L. Walkley. Absent were: Ex­ Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Steven West and Planning Director, Robert C. Arch.

CALL TO ORDER:

The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:00 P.M.

MINUTES: Mr. Moser made a motion to adopt the minutes of the Special Meeting of October 21, 1991 as written. Seconded by Mr. Iseminger. So ordered.

Mr. Iseminger made a motion to adopt the minutes of the Special Meeting of November 18, 1991 as written. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered.

Mrs. Johnson made a motion to adopt the minutes of the Regular Meeting of December 2, 1991 as written. Seconded by Mr. Iseminger. So ordered.

Items to be Withdrawn from the Agenda:

Mr. Goodrich informed Commission members that requests have been made to withdraw the following items from this evening's agenda: the Steve Bushey Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance roadway determination, the Crawford/Sipes and David Fitzwater variance requests, and the demolition permit for Mark D. Thomas.

Item to be Added to the Agenda:

Mr. Goodrich informed Commission members that a request has been made to add the preliminary consultation for Terry Karn to this evening's agenda. Mr. Spickler made a motion to add the Terry Karn consultation to the agenda. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered.

NEW BUSINESS:

Variances:

Ernest Younker:

Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Ernest Younker. The subject site is located along Millstone Circle in the area of Orchard Ridge Road in Hancock. The variance is being requested from Section 405.11.B which requires all new lots to have frontage and access to streets owned and maintained by the County. The applicant is proposing to create a 3 acre lot to be located on a County owned but not maintained right-of-way. The portion of Millstone Circle that the proposed lot would front is dirt and gravel with steep topographic conditions. Mr. Iseminger suggested that the County Engineer look at Millstone Circle to determine if the entire road should be maintained by the County. 1'19

After a discussion, Mr. Iseminger made a motion to table the variance request until the February meeting so the county Engineer can review the condition of Millstone Circle and to determine whether the County should maintain the entire roadway. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered. Subdivisions:

Cross Creek: Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary subdivision plat for Cross Creek Phase I. The subject site is located along the east side of the Sharpsburg Pike, just south of the 1-70 interchange. l Zoning is Highway Interchange. Phase I will consist of a residential area and a business/office park on approximately 56 acres. The residential section will consist of 52 single-family lots and 150 duplex lots on 43 acres. The business/office park will encompass 13.3 acres. A total of 163 acres will remain. The residential lots will be served by an internal public street system which will link with Battle Creek Boulevard which will connect with Maryland Route 65. A proposed future road will be <0 constructed upon development of any lands behind the railroad ~ tracks. It will also connect with Maryland Route 65. The site ,.- will be served by public water and sewer. The Water Department has issued approval for 100 dwelling units and after that, the OJ developer must upgrade the mains to the Sharpsburg Pike. Total z area of open space is 15 acres and will include two play fields, a play lot, a multi-purpose court, a softball field, macadam :2: .walkway and a fibar fitness trail. There is floodplain and wetlands on the site, however, this area will not be constructed upon. If any development should occur within these areas, all floodplain and wetland requirements must be met. Two 10 x 10 bus waiting areas are provided throughout the residential portion of the site. The business/office park is located along the south side of Battle Creek Boulevard and will include four new lots in addition to the one previously approved in July 1991. All these lots will have access onto Battle Creek Boulevard; there will be l no access permitted onto poffenberger Road. These lots will also be served by public water and sewer. All agencies have responded and approved with conditions that changes be made at the final plat stage.

Mrs. Johnson suggested that fencing be constructed along the railroad tracks to the rear of the duplex units for safety purposes. After a discussion, Mr. Hilton Smith, developer, agreed to provide a fence and said he will work with the staff on the type of fence to be constructed.

Mr. Moser asked what type of screening would be installed on lot #1 in the business/office park. Mr. Lung said that vegetative screening will be installed along the northern property line between the residential and commercial sections with the screening installed during the phase that is constructed first. The screening should be on the commercial side of the property line.

Mr. Iseminger said that due to the steep ravine, the pool was removed and a play lot will be added. He asked what improvements will be made to construct the play lot. Mr. William Weikert, Fox and Associates, said the play lot will be moved to the west since the topography is less severe. Mr. Iseminger added that the proposed ball court is located within the floodplain area and asked how grading will be handled. Mr. Weikert said grading will not be required except for the backstop.

Mrs. Johnson suggested that a bus waiting area be constructed to the rear of the residential area. Mr. Smith said he has no problem adding another bus waiting area if it will be needed. 120

Mr. Spickler ask~d if sidewalks are proposed since the trails are not connected. Mrs. Pietro replied no. Mr. Goodrich added that County street standards require paved shoulders which are suitable for walking. Mr. Spickler said that the fibar trail crosses the proposed future access road. He suggested that the Planning Commission should require a bridge to be constructed once the road is constructed. Mr. Iseminger said there should be some type of crossing from the residential area to the commercial area. Mr. Weikert had no problem with installing a crosswalk to the commercial from the residential. Mr. Moser asked how many swings or play equipment are proposed for the play lot to adequately serve this development. Mrs. Pietro added that the developer is proposing swings, slides and climbers for the play area. After a discussion, the Commission requested that the Recreation Department be contacted to determine the adequate number of play equipment to be installed for this development. Mr. Iseminger said that due to the allocation for public water service, will this development be constructed in phases? Mr. Bruce Cubbage, developer, said appro~imately 25 to 30 units will be constructed at one time. Mr. Is·eminger said that he does not want to see the play areas get tied Up with the allocation of lots. He added that the pl~y lot should be constructed during the first phase of construction. Mr. Iseminger added that the developer can submit a phasing plan to the COmmission for future use. Mr. Iseminger made a motion to grant preliminary plat approval for both the residential and commercial areas with the following conditions: the final plat come back to the Planning Commission

prior to approval, the pedestrian crosswalk from the residential ~ section to the commercial section be added to the plan, the developer work with the Planning staff on the construction of the fence along the railroad tracks to the rear of the duplex units, the developer work with the Parks and Recreation Department regarding the adequate amount of play equipment for the play lot, a future delineation for the crossing of the fibar trail be shown, and that the amenities for the play areas be constructed during the first phase of construction. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. Site Plans: s: z Washington County Hospital A~sociation Medical Center: OJ Mr. Lung presented the site plan for the Washington County --I. Hospital Association Medical Center. The site is located in the .J::::.. Airport Business Park along the north side of Breezehill Drive. 0) Zoning is Highway Interchange. The developer is proposing to construct a 60' x 100' building on 1.2 acres. Public water and sewer serve the site. The County Engineer has waived stormwater management requirements for this site plan. Due to an existing house located on the adjacent property to the west and the property being zoned HI, a 75 foot buffer is. required. The Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance for a reduction in the buffer yard from 75 feet to 15 feet in March 1991. The Planning Commission has the authority to establish additional setbacks if "" necessary. Based on the landscaping and vegetative screening that is proposed, the staff is not recommending any additional requirements. Two entrances are proposed onto Breezehill Drive. A total of 54 parking spaces are provided around the building. Hours of operation will be 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. Monday through Friday and 8:00 A.M. to 12:00 P.M. on Saturday. Mr. Lung informed Commission members that a County Commuter bus route serving Citicorp provides bus service to the site within walking distance. According to Keith Godwin, Director of the County Commuter, a bus waiting are at this site would not be necessary at. t.his t.ime. A screened concrete .dumpsterpad is provided in 121

the northeast corner of the parking lot. Due to the relative small size of this operation, the staff does not recommend an outside collection facility for recyclables. Recyclables will be collected and .stored inside along with the medical waste. There are two existing fire hydrants within 250 feet of the site. All agency approvals have been received. Mr. Iseminger made a motion to grant site plan approval. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered.

Burger Park USA:

Mrs. Pietro presented the site plan for Burger Park USA. She informed Commission members that this site plan is to be added to a previously approved site plan for the Village Square Shopping L Center. The subject site is located along the south side of Maryland Route. 64. The developer is proposing to ~onstruct an 800 square foot building with a drive-thru to be located on a part of the 5.7 acre site. The restaurant will be constructed in the former stormwater management area. The stormwater management area has been moved to the west side of the site.. The site will be served by public water and sewer, however, sewer allocation <.0 has not been granted by the Town of Smithsburg for this ~ restaurant. Hours of operation will be 9:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M. .,.- Monday through Saturday. projected customer use will be approximately 150 patrons per day. Delivery will occur once a co week. An existing 10' x 45' loading area is located to the rear of the retail stores. A dumpster will be provided to the rear of z the restaurant and will be enclosed with a six foot fence. A ~ total of 208 parking spaces are provided through the site. Lighting will be building mounted and pole mounted throughout the parking area. A sign for the restaurant will be included on the main shopping center sign. Directional signs are to be located at the accesses. Mrs. Pietro noted the sta~f's concerns for traffic congestion in an area south of the proposed Burger Park building where cars waiting in the drive-in line conflict with auto parking and trucks that may be exiting the rear of the other buildings in the shopping center. If trucks are unloading, they will also be blocked by the cars in the drive-thru lane. All l. agency approvals have been received except the Town of Smithsburg's approval of sewage service., Mr. Iseminger said he has a problem with the site plan for the Village Square Shopping Center being revised for stormwater management without Planning Commission knowledge. He added that he would like to have the entire history of the site prior to Planning Commission approval, therefore, Mr. Iseminger made a motion to table any action on this site plan. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Preliminary Consultations:

Western Commercial Funding Section E:

The written summary of the preliminary consultation for Western Commercial Funding Section E was presented to the Commission with nothing to be added by the staff. No action was taken by the Commission. Terry Karn:

Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary consultation for Terry Karn. The subject site is located along Porterstown and Geeting Road. The developer is proposing to create 42 residential lots on 55 acres. Zoning is Agricultural. Due to contamination in

\_- some existing wells, the Health Department required a test well on the site. After a discussion, no action was taken or necessary by the Commission. 122

OTHER BUSINESS: Seventh Day Adventist Church/Youngstoun III PUD Lot #1:

Mr. Lung informed Commission members that a request has come from Gerald A. Cump and Associates to revise the entrance location and buffer yard for the concept plan for the Seventh Day Adventist Church which is part of the Youngstoun III PUD. The subject site is located at the intersection of Robinwood Drive and Sunrise Boulevard. Due to topographic conditions, a small portion of the proposed building and the parking lot infringes on the required 50 foot buffer yard/setback along the eastern property line. The consultant is requesting that the Planning Commission reduce the 50 foot buffer/setback to 10 feet and to relocate the entrance for the church from Sunrise Boulevard to Dawn Drive. Dawn Drive is a proposed private street that will serve College Heights apartments. Due to the higher elevation of the apartments in comparison with the church site (10 to 12 foot difference), the staff does not object to the reduction in the buffer yard. The developer is proposing to provide landscaping and vegetative screening along the property line. The developer is requesting the entrance relocation due to steep grades on Sunrise Boulevard. The developer's opinion is that it would be more feasible for the entrance to be located onto Dawn Drive, a private road. The County Engineer has no objection to the entrance relocation. The site plan for the church as not yet been submitted. The Planning Commission will have the opportunity to review the site plan again or grant the staff the authority to approve the site plan . .After a discussion, Mr. Iseminger made a motion to grant a variance from the required 50 foot buffer to 10 feet and to relocate the entrance onto Dawn Drive conditional that appropriate landscaping and vegetative screening be provided. The Commission also gave the staff the authority to grant site plan approval for the church. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered. -- Potomac Edison Ringgold/Liberty 138 Kv Transmission Line:

Mr. John Sanctner with Potomac Edison introduced Mr. Ed Dinda, Mr. John Werking, Mr. Mike Watson and Ms. Patience Fisher from Potomac Edison. Mr. Sanctner presented a map to the Commission and illustrated on the map the proposed route for the Ringgold/Liberty 138 Kv transmission line. Mr. Sanctner explained to the Commission how Potomac Edison selected this route. He added that PE took into consideration, among many items, Historic Preservation, Agricultural Land Preservation and s: the Special Planning Areas, ie. the Appalachian Trail and z Hagerstown Watershed, when selecting this proposed route. No OJ action was taken or necessary by the Commission...... Water and Sewerage Plan Amendment WS-91-9: ..p.. 0) Mr. Goodrich reminded Commission members of a public hearing on January 21, 1992 at 10:00 A.M. during the County Commissioners' Regular Meeting to discuss a Water and Sewerage Plan amendment requested by the Washington County Sanitary District (WS-9l-9). No action was taken by the Commission. ADJOURNMENT: "". There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M. 123

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - FEBRUARY 3, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Monday, February 3, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Vice-Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Ex-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Carol Johnson, Bernard Moser, and Steven West. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Associate Planners; James P. Brittain, Timothy A. Lung, Lisa Kelly Pietro, and Edward Schreiber and Secretary, Janet L. Walkley. Donald L. Spickler was absent.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:00 P.M.

OTHER BUSINESS:

Potomac Edison RZ-91-21 - Recommendation CD V Mr. Brittain requested that the Planning Commission defer taking ,..... action on the text amendment for Potomac Edison until the March meeting so the staff can review some details with the Zoning CO Administrator. Mr. Iseminger made a motion to defer action until Z the March meeting. Seconded by Mr. West. So ordered. ~ MINUTES:

Mr. Iseminger made a motion to adopt the minutes of the Workshop Meeting of November 25, 1991 as written. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Mr. Moser made a motion to adopt the minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 6, 1992 as written. Seconded by Mr. Iseminger. So ordered.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

Ernest Younker Variance Request:

Mr. Schreiber reminded the Commission that this variance request was tabled during the January meeting. The subject site is located along Millstone Circle in the area of Orchard Ridge Road in Hancock. The variance is being requested from Section 405.11.B which requires all new lots to have frontage and access to streets owned and maintained by the County. The applicant is proposing to create a 3 acre lot to be located on a County owned but not maintained right-of-way. The portion of Millstone Circle that the proposed lot would front is dirt and gravel with steep topographic conditions. During the January meeting, Commission members suggested that the County Engineer look at Millstone Circle to determine if the entire road should be maintained by the County. Mr. Schreiber said that after conversation with Ted Wolford, Superintendent of the Roads Department, and Terrence McGee, County Engineer, the staff was informed that the applicant would have to petition the County to provide maintenance for the road. To date, the applicant has expressed no interest in doing so. The staff was also informed that the proposed lot would be conveyed to an immediate family member with the 10-year family member statement included on the plat. Mr. Iseminger made a motion to grant the staff the authority to approve the subdivision as a lot to be conveyed to an immediate family member. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered. 124

Burger Park U.S.A. Site Plan: Mrs. Pietro reminded the Commission that during the January meeting this site plan was tabled so that the Zoning Administrator and County Engineer could appear before the Commission to explain the history of the relocation of the stormwater management area. She added that the Planning staff did not receive the revised location for the stormwater management area until the site plan for Burger Park was submitted for approval. Mrs. Pietro reiterated concerns expressed during the January meeting regarding the flow of traffic around the Burger Park building. Cars waiting in the drive-in line might conflict with vehicles parking and trucks that may be exiting the rear of the other buildings in the shopping center. Mr. Paul Prodonovich, Zoning Administrator, informed the Commission that the site plan for the Village Square Shopping Center did not include the Burger Park building. Mr. Prodonovich noted that he was unaware of the change in the stormwater management pond location until the Burger Park site plan was submitted. If the site plan for Burger Park is not approved, the original site plan for Village Square Shopping Center must be adhered to showing the stormwater management pond in its original location. Mr. Terrence McGee, County Engineer, stated that the approved site plan for Village Square showed two stormwater management ponds. It was requested that one pond be eliminated and have a small drainage area into the larger pond. Calculations were ran and all requirements were met. Mr. Iseminger stated that in his opinion, the site plan for Burger Park is too ambitious for what is already approved and existing. He added that there is an existing dwelling on the corner where traffic will turn into the site. He expressed concern regarding headlights shining into the dwelling and asked what provision for screening is proposed. Mrs. Pietro said a fence will be constructed. After a discussion, Mr. Iseminger made a motion to table any action on the site plan until a site visit can be made with the consultant and developer to see how the flow of traffic will work around the building. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered. NEW BUSINESS: Ronnie Pittsnogle: Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Ronnie Pittsnogle. The site is located along the south side of Harpers Ferry Road approximately 800 feet east of Lime Kiln Road. The variance is being requested from Section 405.11.B of the Subdivision Ordinance which states all new lots shall have 25 feet of public road frontage. The applicant is proposing to create a 3 acre lot with 131 acres remaining. Parcel 106, which is located in front of the proposed lot, is owned by the applicant's mother and the applicants would use an existing right-of-way that crosses her property as their means of ingress and egress. This subdivision would qualify for either exemption in Section 4.1 of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. Mr. Moser made a motion to grant the variance request. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered. Valley World, Inc.: Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Valley World, Inc. The subject site is located along the north side of Cole Road. Zoning is Highway Interchange. The variance is being requested from Section 405.11.B of the Subdivision Ordinance which requires that all new lots have 25 feet of public road frontage. Mr. Schreiber gave a brief description of the history of the property by reminding the Commission that a variance was granted in 1988 for the same property for the subdivision of three lots, two of which do not have public road frontage. Mr. 125

Schreiber expressed concerns about granting another variance which would be the third lot without public road frontage. He pointed out if the parcel proposed to be subdivided were subdivided as proposed, the existing structure and surrounding area would not meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. William Young, attorney for the developer, commented on the condominium regime and how the proposal would lessen the burden on the existing structure. Mr. Iseminger indicated that a financial hardship is not a valid hardship when granting variance requests. He added that in his opinion the Planning Commission was generous in granting the first variance request in 1988. Mr. Iseminger made a motion to deny the variance request based on the above findings. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. Subdivisions: Michael Development:

Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for Michael Development, lots 6 through 10. The subject site is located along the south side of Maryland Route 56. Zoning is CD Agricultural. The owner is proposing to create 5 residential ~ lots ranging in size from 2 to 4 acres. Total area of the site ,- is 18 acres. The lots will be served by wells and septic systems. Access to the lots will be via Route 56. All agency CO approvals have been received. Mr. Iseminger made a motion to Z grant preliminary and final plat approval. Seconded by Mr. ~ Moser. So ordered. Food Lion:

Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary/final subdivision and site plan for Food Lion. The subject site is located in the southeast corner of the intersection of Pennsylvania Avenue (U. S. Route 11) and Longmeadow Road. Zoning is Business General and Planned Business. The owner is proposing to construct a 30,000 square foot grocery store on 3.4 acres. Public water and sewer will serve the site. A total of 10 full-time and 6 part-time employees are proposed with hours of operation 8:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. seven days per week. A total of 149 parking spaces are provided and will be located in the front of the site. Projected daily use will be 1100 customers per day. Freight and delivery will be 17 per day with loading and unloading being located to the rear of the building. Solid waste will include one dumpster to be located on the west side of the building. It will be screened with a 6 foot high privacy fence. Additional space will be set aside for recycling, however, it is not shown on the plan. Lights will be building and pole mounted through the parking area. Landscaping is adequate and will be located throughout the site. A six foot screen will be planted to the rear of the site to shield from adjacent residential properties. A future strip shopping center will be added to the grocery store along the side of the proposed building. The original access to the site was via Longmeadow Road with an easement over the remaining lands into the grocery store. In reviewing turning radius, the access has been relocated further to the west on Longmeadow Road. The staff has not had time to review the revised access location. Access is also proposed along Pennsylvania Avenue and the Maryland State Highway Administration has requested right turn in and right turn out only. An additional access has been added to the rear of Spicher's Appliance Store. This additional access has not been reviewed at this time. Mrs. Pietro added that due to the relocation of the access on Longmeadow Road, a variance will be required from the required 300 feet of access spacing to 200 feet. 126

Mr. Rick Ferris with Food Lion demonstrated proposed traffic patterns on the site and discussed the recycling plan with Commission members. Mr. Terrence McGee, County Engineer, discussed the existing stormwater management problems in the area and possible alternatives to correcting the problem. Mrs. Pietro stated that state Highway Administration approval is outstanding, the County Engineer's approval is conditional based on stormwater management concerns, and the staff needs to review the traffic patterns to determine if there will be enough room for delivery vehicles to move through the site. After a discussion, Mrs. Johnson made a motion to table any action on this subdivision until a Special Meeting can be held due to concerns with traffic and stormwater management. Seconded by Mr. Moser. Mr. Iseminger abstained. So ordered. Planned Unit Development: South Pointe Final Development Plan: Mrs. Pietro presented the Final Development Plan for South Pointe PUD. The subject site is located along the north side of East Oak Ridge Drive. The developer is proposing to create 89 single­ family dwellings, 150 one-story townhouses, 142 two-story townhouses, 216 apartment units and 12 acres for commercial use Qn 121 acres. A total of 30 acres will be reserved for open space to include tennis courts, swimming pool, tot lots and picnic areas. The site will be served by public water and sewer. Mr. Bowers made a motion to approve the Final Development Plan. Seconded by Mr. Moser. Mr. Iseminger abstained. So ordered. At this time, Donald Zombro stepped down as Chairman. Mr. Iseminger chaired the meeting at this time. Preliminary Consultations: Terry Karn: The written summary of the preliminary consultation for Terry • Karn was presented to the Commission with nothing being added by the staff. No action was taken by the Commission. Washington County Hospital Professional Medical Campus: Mr. Brittain presented the concept plan for the Washington County Hospital Professional Medical Campus. The site is located along the northwest side Robinwood Drive 1500 feet east of Mt. Aetna Road. Zoning is Residential Suburban. A Special Exception was granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals for "uses" to be permitted on this site. Phase A consists of 12 acres and the developer is proposing to construct a 140,000 square foot two-story building for medical clinic and physicians offices. A total of 500+ parking spaces are proposed. The requirements of the Board of Zoning Appeals for the development of this property will be attached to the written summary. The County Engineer has stated that this site must have an on-site stormwater management facility to be owned and maintained by the Hospital. A dual roadway with median strip is proposed and being reviewed by the County Engineer. Decel and accel lanes will be required on Robinwood Drive on the opposite side of the entrance at the location of the Elk's Club entrance onto Robinwood Drive. A by­ pass lane is also required. The Water Department is planning a 16 inch transmission main in the vicinity of this site. The Water Department and consultant has met with the Elk's Club and preliminary arrangements have been made to allow a 16 inch water transmission line to feed this site. The transmission line will cross the Elks' property from a water main located on Mt. Aetna Road. A pumping station is proposed to sewer the site but there are concerns how the station will interact with the existing 127

station at HJC. Also, the status of the station (private vs. public) will depend on how many individuals this pumping station could actually serve. The developer was informed of the future requirements of the Forest Conservation Program. The staff discussed concerns with the Planning Commission regarding traffic patterns for the general vicinity as this site becomes developed. No action was taken by the Commission.

OTHER BUSINESS: Steve Bushey - Roadway Adequacy Determination: Mr. Brittain informed the Commission that the request by Steve Bushey was tabled during the December meeting along with other road adequacy determinations to give the Commission and the County Engineer time to meet and discuss issues regarding road adequacy on existing roadways. The County Engineer indicates that upon review of the existing vertical curve alignment, the proposed subdivision will still not meet the requirements as outlined in the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance nor the criteria being proposed to revise the Ordinance. A memo from the County Engineer dated January 6 indicates that portions of the <0 roads under review are not posted and would require a posting ~ speed of 25 mph to meet the revised criteria. Such posting would ,.... be inconsistent with most other County speed limits on similar 00 roads and this posting is the responsibility of the Roads Z Department. ~ Mr. Terrence McGee, County Engineer, discussed the vertical curve and why the roadway is still inadequate. He added there is a draft of the road adequacy policy which includes an exemption clause exempting smaller lots (under 4 lots), however, this draft has not been approved by the County Commissioners.

Mr. Fred Frederick, consultant for the developer, presented a drawing showing the vertical alignment of Rock Hill Road which indicated how sight distance along the roadway could be determined.

After a discussion, Mr. West said, in his opinion, the Commission should do the practical thing. He added that the problem is with the existing Ordinance, not the road or the development. Mr. West made a motion to grant the subdivision for Steve Bushey. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. On a call for the question, Mr. West, Mr. Bowers, Mrs. Johnson and Mr. Zombro voted 'aye' and Mr. Moser and Mr. Iseminger voted 'nay'. The motion passed.

At this time Mr. Iseminger returned the Chair to Mr. Zombro.

Continental Investment Corporation - Cluster Approval:

Mr. Lung presented a Cluster Concept Plan proposed by Continental Investment Corp. for a proposed residential development called Rockland located along the west side of Maryland Route 65, south of St. James Village and north of Maryland Route 68. The revised concept plan for the development calls for 731 single family lots along with a 18 hole golf course on a total of 443 acres. Lot sizes will be reduced from 20,000 sq. ft. to a minimum of 9,000 sq. ft. It has been the developer's intent to use the cluster concept since the initial Preliminary Consultation held in Feb. 1990. Mr. lung noted that the use of clustering would have to be contingent upon the approval of an amendment to the Water and Sewerage Plan allowing the provision of public water and sewer to the site. Staff comments on the design were included in the agenda packet. One of the staff'S concerns is that according to the concept plan submitted, there are no other amenities proposed other than a golf course.

Mac Davis, Consultant for the developer stated that this proposal exhibits excellence in design in that it will create over 200 acres of green space. He also added that there are no reductions in the normal setbacks being proposed. One of the developers, 128

Adrian Carpenter stated that there will be a swimming club and tennis courts provided as well as tot lots spread throughout the development. Lot lines will be staggered in order to provide better views of the open space. He added that they are asking the Planning Commission for permission to use the Cluster Concept so that they can proceed with fine tuning of the plans. He stated that pedestrian paths or jogging paths may be incorporated into the design. Mr. West encouraged the developer to refine the open space to make it more useful and universal for the joint use of all the residents all year around. Mr. Carpenter noted that the golf course would be a public, daily fee course. It would not be a limited membership country club.

There was a discussion concerning the layout of the lots in relation to the golf course and the need to make the open space more universal to all of the residents. Mr. Lung pointed out a change in the road layout and expressed the Staff's concern. He noted that additional review of this design will be needed by both the Planning Staff and the County Engineer. Mr. Moser and Ms. Johnson expressed concern about approving the Cluster Concept before action is taken on the Water and Sewerage Plan amendment.

Mr. West made a motion to grant approval for the use of clustering for the Rockland development. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. Mr. Bowers stated that the cluster concept shall be consistent with what was approved for the Cross Creek development. Mr. Bowers, Mr. West, and Mr zombro voted yes. Mrs. Johnson voted no. Mr. Iseminger and Mr. Moser abstained. The motion passed. So ordered.

Ronald Winebrenner RZ-91-15 Appeal:

It was noted that Ronald Winebrenner is appealing to the Circuit Court the action taken by the County Commissioners on his rezoning application for property located along the south side of Route 40. No action was taken by the Commission.

Agricultural Advisory Board Recommendation:

Mr. Lung informed the Commission that they received a copy of a memo to Barry Teach informing him of the Agricultural Advisory Board's recommendation regarding historic preservation and agricultural preservation districts. The Advisory Board is recommending to the County Commissioners that historic preservation overlays and agricultural districts be on separately deeded parcels. The staff is of the opinion that there is not a conflict between agricultural district and historic preservation overlays and that separately deeded parcels are unnecessary. The Planning Commission supported the staff's position. After a discussion, Mr. Iseminger suggested that a Planning staff member be present at the County Commissioners' meeting when this item is discussed.

proposal for Recycling:

Mr. Brittain submitted the proposed amendment for recycling within County developments. Under Article 4.3 it was decided to delete the comma after the word 'material'. In addition, the Commission requested that the staff insure that all applicable "business" and "industrial" zones are included within the proposed text amendment. 129

Clear Spring Town Growth Area: Mr. Lung informed members that Donald Spickler had informed the Planning staff that the Town of Clear Spring may be interested in pursuing a Town Growth Area Study. The Town Clerk was not aware of this but would contact the Mayor and Council. If the Town decides to go ahead with the study, a committee would be appointed by the Town to study the area. The Study would need to be included in the Work Program. No action was taken by the Commission.. Special Meeting: The Planning Commission will hold a Special Meeting on Monday, February 10, 1992 to discuss the Burger Park and Food Lion site plans. Commission members will meet at the Burger Park site at 5:00 P.M. and then have a Special Meeting in the third floor conference room to discuss the above-referenced site plans.

ADJOURNMENT:

~ There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at ~ 10:00 P.M. ,.- ~ JJ. ,aPf ?~LcO 130

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING - FEBRUARY 10, 1992 The Washington County Planning Commission held a special meeting on Monday, February 10, 1992 in the third floor conference room of the County Administration Building. Members present were: Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Vice-Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Ex-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Carol Johnson, Bernard Moser, Donald Spickler and Steven West. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Associate Planner; Lisa Kelly Pietro, Secretary, Janet L. Walkley. Also present were Paul Prodonovich, Zoning Administrator and Terrence McGee, County Engineer. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 5:40 P.M. Mr. Zombro informed the audience that this special meeting is a public meeting and not a public hearing. He added that he agreed to let Brad Gee to have five minutes to voice his concerns. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Burger Park: Mrs. Pietro informed Commission members that a revised plan was submitted today. The revised plan shows landscaping at the edge of the dumpster. The dumpster will be screened with a six foot high privacy fence. Staff still has concerns with the traffic flow and the potential back-up around the drive-thru. During a site visit it was noted that a handicap space does not have a ramp to enter the building. The ramp should be added. Mr. Iseminger stated that during the site visit it was discussed that installing a sign indicating one-way traffic to the rear of the building as well as sufficient turning radius for truck traffic should be added to the plan. He asked if the developer had any objections to that request. Mr. Jerry Cump, consultant, said they agree with that request. Mr. Moser asked what the status of the sewer allocation is. Mr. Bud Dahbura, owner/developer, said the sewer allocation should be resolved this week. The sewer meter has been fixed at this time. The development is using 500 gallons per day and the site has been allocated 2000 gallons per day. Mr. Bowers suggested that at the entrance into the site, traffic signs should be installed delineating the flow of traffic through the site. Mr. Cump said they are shown on the plan. Mr. Spickler suggested delineating some of the parking spaces for a straight access into the Burger Park site. Mr. Cump said the proposed design is the Burger Park's layout. He added that the access road is 37 feet in width. He suggested a sign indicating the traffic flow to Burger Park. Mr. Iseminger made a motion to grant site plan approval conditional on adding screening as discussed during the site visit along the rear of the site so headlights don't shine into the existing house or onto Route 64, the addition of the handicap ramp to the main building (north corner) and also to the Burger Park site, addition of one-way signs on the access road along the rear of the existing retail stores directing traffic north only, there be sufficient turning radius for truck traffic to the rear of the restaurant, and pending the resolution of the sewer allocation with the Town of Smithsburg. Mr. Iseminger noted that this Commission's actions in no way should influence or put undue pressure on the Town of Smithsburg's decision in regard to the sewer allocation matter. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered. Food Lion: 131

Mrs. Pietro informed Commission members that a revised site plan was submitted to the Planning Office today. The revision indicates a 40 foot wide access as requested by the County Engineer. The proposed access from Spichers to Food Lion grocery store site has been deleted. Easements have been worked out to get the entrance location onto Pennsylvania Avenue (Route 11). A variance is required due to the new access location being within 300 feet from the existing entrance into Spichers. The County Engineer has no problem with the reduction in the access spacing. The new access location is a better point of entry into the site for trucks to move through the site. When the remaining lands are developed, there will be an additional access constructed onto Longmeadow Road.

Mr. Terrence McGee, County Engineer, reiterated the stormwater management problems and possible alternatives to correct the problem as discussed during the February Regular Meeting.

Mr. Brad Gee, property owner of lot #2 in Arborgate, expressed concerns with water in his crawl space when the stormwater management pond overfilled during a recent storm. He added that (0 water crests over his neighbor's driveway and along Arbor Drive. ~ ,.- After a discussion, Mr. Moser made a motion to grant the variance request from the required 300 feet of spacing between new and o::l existing points of access. Seconded by Mr. West. Mr. Iseminger Z abstained. So ordered. ~ Mr. West made a motion to grant site plan approval conditional on the County Engineer and the developer working out off-site improvements for the drainage area between lots #2 and #3 in Arborgate. Seconded by Mr. Moser. Mr. Iseminger abstained. So ordered.

Mr. Moser made a motion to grant preliminary and final subdivision plat approval. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. Mr. Iseminger abstained. So ordered.

ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:30 P.M. 132

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - MARCH 2, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held its. regular monthly meeting on Monday, March 2, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Vice-Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Ex-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Carol Johnson, Bernard Moser, Donald Spickler and Steven West. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich, Associate Planners; Timothy A. Lung, Lisa Kelly Pietro, Edward Schreiber and Eric Seifarth, and Secretary, Janet L. Walkley.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:00 P.M.

MINUTES:

Mr. Moser made a motion to adopt the minutes of the February 3 regular meeting as written. Seconded by Mr. Iseminger. So ordered.

Mr. Iseminger made a motion to adopt the minutes of the February 10, 1992 special meeting as written. Seconded by Mr. West. So ordered.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

C. William Hetzer Rezoning Case: Mr. Goodrich reminded the Commission that the rezoning case for C. William Hetzer was heard in public hearing on September 16, 1991. The applicant was requesting that the property located along the southwest side of Maryland Route 68 be rezoned from Agricultural to Industrial Mineral. After the staff presented the Staff Report Following the Public Hearing, the Commission decided additional information was needed regarding the impact of the rezoning on the roads in the area. Information was received from C. William Hetzer and submitted to the State Highway Administration and the County Engineer for their review. Comments have been received from the County Engineer but are still outstanding from the State Highway Administration.

After a discussion regarding the roadways in the vicinity of the proposed rezoning site, Mr. West made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that they approve rezoning case Rz-91-l6. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. Mrs. Johnson opposed and Mr. Moser and Mr. Bowers abstained. The motion passed.

NEW BUSINESS: Variances:

Brenda Thomas:

Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Brenda Thomas. The site is located along the west side of Clevelandtown Road approximately 1600 feet north of Reno Monument Road. The variance is being requested from Section 405.ll.G.4 and 5 of the Subdivision Ordinance which states that the length of a panhandle shall not exceed 400 feet and have no more than two tiers of panhandles. The applicant is proposing to create a 30 acre lot to be served by an 800 foot panhandle. A total of 5 acres remains with an existing house. This proposed subdivision qualifies for an exemption in Section 4.1 of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. The lot could be created without public road frontage, however, the applicant is requesting its own access onto Clevelandtown Road. After a brief discussion, Mr. Iseminger made a motion to grant the variance request. Seconded by Mr. West. So ordered.

Subdivisions: 133

Orchard Heights: Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for Orchard Heights lots I through 4. The subject site is located along the east side of Bain Road. Zoning is Agricultural. During the December meeting, the developer requested that five lots be approved. The County Engineer disapproved the subdivision of five lots due to sight distance problems on White Oak Ridge. The Planning Commission suggested the elimination of one of the lots so the subdivision would qualify for an exemption under the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. The developer is now proposing to create 4 single­ family lots on 14 acres. The proposed lots will range in size from 1.5 to 7 acres. A total of 130 acres will remain. The lots will be served by individual wells and septic systems. Access to the lots will be via Bain Road. All agency approvals have been received. Mr. Iseminger made a motion to grant preliminary and final plat approval. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Fortney Subdivision: co Mrs. pietro presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat "d"" for Fortney Subdivision lot 1. The subject site is located along ,.- the east side of U. S. Route 11. Zoning is Agricultural. The applicant is proposing to create a 4.5 acre lot to include the co mobile home sales office. A total of 10 acres will remain. The z site is currently served by public water and sewer. An existing access will serve the new lot via Route 11. The remaining lands ~ ~ill access by a panhandle strip off Route 11. All agency approvals have been received. A discussion was held regarding the proximity of this site with the Washington County Regional Airport. Mr. Iseminger made a motion to grant preliminary and final plat approval conditional on a statement being added to the plat and deed indicating the proximity of this site with the Airport. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered.

Preliminary Consultations:

Washington County Hospital Professional Medical Campus:

The written summary of the preliminary consultation for the Washington County Hospital Professional Medical Campus was presented to the Planning Commission with nothing to be added by the staff. No action was taken by the Planning Commission.

OTHER BUSINESS:

Maryland Environmental Service - Maryland Correctional Institute Water Line:

Mr. Lung informed the Commission that in January the Maryland Environmental Service (MES) requested that the County Commissioners endorse the construction of a new water line in order to improve the fire flow to the Maryland Correctional Institute complex in the biennial update of the Washington County Water and Sewerage Plan. This endorsement would allow MES to proceed with the construction of the new line to the MCI complex. MES plans to construct a 16 inch line from the vicinity of Halfway County Park along Maryland Route 632 and Wrench Road then cross country to the MCI complex. This construction would create a loop system which provides a more reliable form of service. This new line would have sufficient capacity to serve the growth area from I-70 to the south. The proposed construction will follow the guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan to serve the growth area. No action was taken by the Commission.

Work Program:

Forest Conservation Plan: 134

Mr. Goodrich informed the Commission that there is an April 30, 1992 deadline to submit the draft Forest Conservation Plan. Implementation of the Plan is January 1993. The Forest Conservation Act states that trees removed during the development process must be replaced. It also requires that if development occurs on a lot without trees, the developer must provide enough to cover 15 to 20% of the site depending on the type of development. The staff is trying to develop the Forest Conservation Plan to fit the current procedures in the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances. There is a bill in the legislature proposing a one year extension on the deadline for submittal. It was noted that all municipalities except for the City of Hagerstown have assigned their responsibilities to the County for implementation of the Forest Conservation Plan. After a discussion, no action was needed or taken by the Commission. Park Plan:

Mr. Arch stated that on Wednesday, March 4, 1992 a meeting will be held at the Washington County Sanitary District to discuss the concept plan for a park at the Rubble landfill.

Water and Sewerage Plan:

Mr. Lung informed the Commission that according to State law the Water and Sewerage Plan must be updated every two years. The State has granted an extension of time for the Plan to be adopted by July 1, 1992. The extension was requested in order to _incorporate the recommendations of the Hagerstown/Washington County Urban Growth Area Water and Sewer Study prepared by BCM Engineers. Due to items needed to be worked out between the City and County on the sewer portion of the recommendations, this item will probably not be included in the update. Most of the update information has been submitted by the service providing agencies and municipalities. The updated plan should go to public hearing during the month of May. No action was taken by the Commission.

Highway Interchange Study:

Mr. Arch stated that all of the interchanges have been preliminarily mapped at this time. He informed the Commission of a $30,000 grant that the County is attempting toobtain to support work on this project. After a discussion, no action was taken by the Commission.

House Numbering Program:

Mr. Arch stated that Smithsburg, the last area of the County, will be implemented by the end of March.

Mr. Arch informed Commission members that a new Floodplain Ordinance is being developed. Also, the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance will be required to be updated under the proposedlegislation under consideration by the State Legislature.

Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Status Report:

Mr. Arch distributed copies of the tables indicating student capacities for the past six months. The report also indicated the number of lots created with the exemption clause for schools and roads. No subdivisions were denied due to water and sewerage facilities. He reminded the Commission that the main problem with enforcing the Ordinance was existing roads. The County Engineer developed a draft policy to handle road adequacy determinations for existing roads in Washington County. After a brief discussion, Mr. Arch informed Commission members that according to Article 11, the Planning Commission must determine if there is a continuing need for the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. Mr. Spickler made a motion to encourage the County Commissioners to continue the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance with the possibility of adding impact fees and/or other fees and the establishment of a Board of Public Works if 135

necessary in order to implement impact fees. Seconded by Mr. Moser. Mr. West voted no. So ordered.

Agricultural Land Preservation District Applications:

Eugene R. Bowman AD-91-57:

The Bowman farm is located 1/4 mile north of Black Rock Road just 4 miles southeast of Hagerstown. The farm consists of 39.8 acres and has 87% qualifying soils. The farm qualifies for the Program since its contiguous to the Snyder Agricultural Preservation District. Mr. Moser made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that the Bowman farm be included in the Agricultural Land Preservation Program since it's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. Mr. Bowers abstained. So ordered.

Charles W. Green AD-91-48:

The Green farm lies along both sides of Maryland Route 68 at its intersection with Reichard Road just 3 miles south of Hagerstown. CD The farm consists of 203.21 acres and has 51% qualifying soils. "¢ Mrs. Johnson made a motion to recommend to the County ,.... Commissioners that the Green farm be included in the Agricultural Land Preservation Program since it's consistent with the CO Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Iseminger. Mr. Bowers Z abstained. So ordered. ~ OTHER BUSINESS:

Potomac Edison Rezoning Cases RZ-91-21:

Mr. Goodrich informed the Commission that they received the Staff Report Following the Public Hearing for the Potomac Edison rezoning case in their agenda material. He briefly reiterated comments from the staff report. After a discussion, Mr. Iseminger made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that they approve RZ-91-21 with the corrections made by the staff referencing Sections 12.6(e) and 12.2(a). Seconded by Mr. West. Mr. Moser and Mr. Bowers abstained. So ordered.

Mr. Iseminger made a motion that the County Attorney be consulted to determine if a second public hearing will be required if Section 12.2(a) is implemented as suggested by the staff. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. Mr. Moser and Mr. Bowers abstained. So ordered.

Washington County Sanitary District Water and Sewerage Plan Amendment WS-91-9:

Mr. Zombro stated that Mr. West will not be able to vote on this Water and Sewerage Plan amendment request since he did not attend the hearing or listen to the tapes, Mr. Iseminger and Mr. Bowers will be abstaining and that he will vote since he did listen to the tapes.

Mr. Goodrich informed the Commission that they received the Staff Report Following the Public Hearing in the agenda material. He briefly reviewed the comments stated in the staff report. Mr. Goodrich indicated the proposed service area for the S-3/W-3 classification on a map. After a discussion, Mr. Spickler made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that approval of WS-91-9 to change the service priority designation to W-3/S-3 would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. Mrs. Johnson and Mr. Moser voted no. It was noted that the County Commissioners will receive notification of the tied vote.

Demolition Permit #92-0464 - Barn at Cross Creek:

Mr. Goodrich stated that the barn located on the property known as Cross Creek along Maryland Route 65 is listed on the Historic 136

Sites Survey. The owner of the property is proposing to remove the barn which is part of the complex of 19th century buildings. The Historic District Commission recommended approval of the demolition permit. In conjunction with this approval, the HDC is requesting that the owner provide the opportunity to other parties to use the materials from this structure in other restorations throughout the County. After a discussion, by consensus, the Planning Commission is not opposed to the issuance of the demolition permit. Maryland Office of Planning:

Mr. Goodrich stated that representatives from the Maryland Office of Planning were unable to attend the meeting this evening to present a slide show on growth in Maryland.

By consensus, Commission members decided that this Commission meet with the Frederick County Planning Commission to discuss proposed developments located close to the Frederick/Washington County line. Mr. Arch said he would set up a meeting.

ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M. 7!}((~ Donald E. Zombro,~hairman 137

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING - MARCH 12, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held a special meeting on Thursday, March 12, 1992 in the third floor conference room of the County Administration Building. Members present were: Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Vice-Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Ex-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Bernard Moser, Donald Spickler and Steven West. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch. Carol Johnson was absent.

CALL TO ORDER:

The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 5:30 P.M. <.0 ..;:t The County Attorney briefed the Planning Commission on some legal ,-- aspects regarding the Water and Sewerage Plan amendment for the I:D Washington County Sanitary District. A discussion was held regarding the Planning Commission's By­ Z Laws. Based.on the criteria of the By-Laws, Mr. West made a ~ motion to waive the three-day notification of a hearing. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. Mr. Iseminger abstained. So ordered.

Mr. West made a motion to hold a special meeting on Monday, April 16, 1992 at 5:30 P.M. to make a recommendation to the County Commissioners on the Water and Sewerage Plan amendment for the Washington County Sanitary District. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. Mr. Iseminger abstained. So ordered.

ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:30 P.M. ~

138

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING - MARCH 16, 1992

Members present were: Chairman, Donald E. Zombro; Vice-Chairman, Bertrand L. Iseminger; Ex-Officio, Ronald L. Bowers, Bernard Moser, and Donald Spickler. Also present were County Attorney Ralph France and Planning Director Robert Arch. Commission members Carol Johnson and Steve West were absent.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 5:30 P.M. ... Water and sewerage Plan Amendment: Washington County Sanitary District WS-91-9: Mr. Arch reminded Commission members that during their regular meeting of March 2,1992, the Commission had a tied vote regarding the Water and Sewerage Plan amendment made by the Sanitary District. The County Attorney determined the Planning Commission needed to take action to certify that the amendment is consistent with the Washington County Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Bowers commented that hopefully there will be a point in time where the approval/denial process for Water and Sewerage Plan amendment requests can be clarified. In his opinion, he does not appreciate what the Planning Commission, citizens, etc. go through on a proposed request. It is not difficult to determine what the plan calls for. The Water and Sewerage Plan indicates that all amendment requests must be in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Spickler stated that in his opinion this request is consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The concern on this request is where the boundary of the Urban Growth Area lies. The Growth Area Boundary was drawn not to follow specific property lines but in a general area as to where growth should be directed. Mr. Zombro stated since there is a quorum, the Commission should take action on the request this evening. He added that the Water and Sewerage Plan is not being changed at this time. The Commission is certifying that the proposed request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Moser added that he would rather wait until the full Commission was present to take action. He added that his position on this proposal has been stated during previous meetings and has not changed.

Mr. Spickler made a motion to certify to the County Commissioners that the proposed request by the Washington County Sanitary District for WS-91-9 to establish a service priority designation of W-3/S-3 for Subdistrict #16 is consistent with the policies of the Washington County Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. The Commission is taking this action since the action taken during the March 2, 1992 meeting was insufficient with regard to meeting the requirements as stated in the Water and Sewerage Plan. On the call for the motion, Mr. Spickler, Mr. Zombro and Mr. Bowers voted yes, Mr. Moser voted no and Mr. Iseminger abstained. Motion passes.

Meeting with the City of Hagerstown Planning Commission: Mr. Arch informed members that the Hagerstown Planning Commission has requested that the County Planning Commission meet with them on Monday, April 13, 1992 at 7:30 P.M. in City Hall. 139

Meeting with Frederick County Planning Commission: Mr. Arch informed members that he spoke with the Planning Director of the Frederick County Planning Commission to inform him of the requested meeting between the two Commissions. The Frederick County Planning Director will be approaching his Commission to request the meeting date and will get back with him.

Mr. Bowers suggested reviewing the Town Growth Area with the Town of Smithsburg so adequate public facilities can be provided to businesses within that area.

ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:00 P.M.

1 .", ! I \, !JC; CD ili ~ ,.- OJ Z ~ 140

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING - MARCH 23, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held a special meeting on Monday, March 23, 1992 in the third floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members presen~ were: Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Vice-Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, EX-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Carol Johnson, Bernard Moser, and Donald Spickler. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Associate Planner; Lisa Kelly Pietro, and Secretary, Janet L. Walkley.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 5:30 P.M.

Mr. Zombro informed members that the County Commissioners requested the Planning Commission hold a special meeting to take action on the site plan for the proposed expansion to the General Electric warehouse.

General Electric Site Plan:

Mrs. Pietro presented the site plan for General Electric. The site is located along the north side of Shawley Drive, formerly Martin Road. Zoning is Highway Interchange. Total area of the property is 22.8 acres. The developer is proposing to construct a 150,000 square foot addition to the existing warehouse. ~wo access points will serve the site; one existing and one proposed. Public water and sewer also serve the site. The expansion will add total of 40 main shift employees for a total of 80 employees. A total of 76 parking spaces are provided with 40 spaces being new. A total of 40 trips per day for freight and delivery are expected. Solid waste is to be handled by an existing trash compactor not to exceed what is handled at this time. The development of a recycling plan was mentioned to the developer and it was noted that GE has no recycling plan at this time. If recycling needs to be added, there is sufficient room adjacent to the trash compactor for the recycling facilities. Landscaping will be added to shield the adjacent single-family dwelling, white pines will be added to the front of the property, and also along the parking islands. All agency approvals have been received. A preliminary grading plan and footers were approved by Gary Rohrer, Chief of Planning and Codes Administration, at General Electric's risk.

After a discussion, Mr. Spickler made a motion to grant site plan approval. Seconded by Mr. Moser. Mr. Iseminger abstained. So ordered.

Mr. Bowers informed members that the convenience store in Clear Spring does not appear to have been constructed as shown on the approved site plan. He requested that Paul Prodonovich check into the matter.

Meeting with Hagerstown Planning Commission:

Mr. Arch reminded members of the April 13, 1992 meeting with the Hagerstown Planning Commission to be held at City Hall at 7:00 P.M.

Meeting with Frederick County Planning Commission:

Mr. Arch stated that he still has not heard from the Director of the Frederick County Planning Commission regarding the requested meeting between the Washington County and Frederick County Commissions. 141

ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:00 P.M. l)~ Donald

CD ,.- (D""" z ~ 142

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 6, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Monday, April 6, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Vice-Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Ex-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Carol Johnson, Bernard Moser, and Steven West. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich, Associate Planners; Lisa Kelly Pietro, Edward Schreiber and Eric Seifarth, and secretary, Janet L. Walkley. Absent were Chairman Donald E. Zombro and Donald L. Spickler.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Vice-Chairman at 7:00 P.M.

MINUTES:

Mrs. Johnson made a motion to adopt the minutes of the regular meeting of March 2, 1992. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered.

Mr. Bowers made a motion to adopt the minutes of the special meeting of March 12, 1992. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Mr. Bowers made a motion to adopt the minutes of the special ~eeting of March 16, 1992. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Mr. Bowers made a motion to adopt the minutes of the special meeting of March 23, 1992. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Mr. Arch informed the Commission the David Fitzwater and Dwayne and Cheryl Gossard variance requests were withdrawn as well as Hill-n-Dale Acres under Other Business.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

Menno Martin Subdivision:

Mrs. Pietro reminded the Commission that in 1988 a site plan was approved for an existing 8 bay carwash. During the May 1991 meeting, Mr. Martin requested a one lot subdivision located along the south side of Maugans Avenue. The 1.09 acre lot would include the carwash. A total of 8 acres will remain which will include Mr. Martin's dwelling. During that meeting discussion was held regarding future right-Of-way dedication along the remaining lands and the subdivision plat was tabled. Mr. Martin is requesting that the Commission take action on the subdivision plat.

Mr. Fred Frederick, consultant, stated that last year the County Engineer, Mr. Martin and himself met in the field to establish an alignment for the right-of-way dedication. Mr. Frederick indicated that determining an exact measurement had not occurred because this item was not a high priority item on the County Engineer's Work Program. Mr. Martin indicated that he would consider working with the County if the exact amount of right-of­ way recommended for proposed improvements was exactly determined.

During a discussion, Mr. Bowers made a motion to table the request for subdivision until the May 1992 regular meeting. It was added to the motion that the County Engineer place this item on the Work Program and to meet with Fred Frederick to determine the exact amount of right-of-way needed for the proposed improvements. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered. 2

Variances:

Alvey Mowen: Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Alvey Mowen. The site is located along the south side of Broadfording Road approximately .5 miles west of the Conococheague Creek. The variance is being requested from Section 405.11.G.5. of the Subdivision Ordinance which stated that panhandle lengths shall not exceedl.400 feet. The applicant is proposing to create a 4 acre lot ~th a 575 foot panhandle and 2.4 acres remaining. The property will be conveyed to an immediate family member and will qualify for an exemption under Section 4.12 of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. Access to the lot will be via an existing driveway on the remaining lands, however, the applicant would like to have fee-simple road frontage. This request will also require a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals for a building infringing on the 15 foot side yard setback. Mr. Moser made a motion to grant the variance request. Seconded by Mr. CD Bowers. Mr. Iseminger abstained. So ordered. ~ "i'""" Jack and Rita Gertzog: en Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Jack and Rita z Gertzog. The site is located along the north side of Maryland Route 77. The variance is being requested from Section 405.2A of ::aE ~he Subdivision Ordinance which states that the location of new access points must conform to the County's Highway Plan. The Highway Plan classifies Route 77 as a Major Collector with 300 feet of spacing between new and existing points of access. The applicant is proposing to create a 4.36 acre lot with an access location 205 feet from an existing access. This distance has been recommended by the Maryland State Highway Administration in order to improve sight distance. Mr. West made a motion to grant the variance request. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Subdivisions:

Diversified Construction Services:

Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for Diversified Construction Services. The site is located along the south side of Breezehill Drive in the Airport Business Park. Zoning is Highway Interchange. A variance to create the remaining lands with the house on it and access via Citicorp Drive was granted by the Planning Commission on December 2, 1991. The applicant is proposing to create a 12,000 square foot office complex in the existing barn on 3.2 acres. Access to the site will be via Breezehill Drive. A total of 40 parking spaces are provided. Public water and sewer are existing in the area and will serve the site. Landscaping is proposed around the driveway and to the rear of the building. Solid waste will consist of one dumpster at the end of the parking area with provisions for recycling. Lights will be building mounted and a sign will be constructed at the entrance. All agency approvals have been received. Mr. Moser made a motion to grant preliminary and final plat approval. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered.

Cross Creek:

Mrs. Pietro reminded the Commission that the preliminary subdivision plat for Cross Creek was approved during the March 1992 meeting. Fox and Associates is requesting a waiver from the requirements that the Planning Commission review the final plat and grant the staff authority to approve the plat in house. Approvals are still outstanding from the County Engineer and State Highway Administration on the final plat. During review of the final plat, the staff had concerns regarding an additional tot lot and also the type of fence to be constructed between the railroad and townhouses. The developer was opposed to the suggestions made by the staff. 3 Mr. William Weikert explained to the Commission the proposed phasing schedule for Cross Creek and why it would be difficult to construct an additional tot lot. After a discussion with the Commission members and the developer, it was decided that additional play equipment to include slides and swings will be constructed and relocated once the developer reaches phase 2 of the development. It was also discussed that the construction of the tot lot must take place within a two year period. Mr. Bowers made a motion to grant the staff the authority to approve the final plat in house conditional on the construction of the tot lot within a two year period. It was noted that if the tot lot is not constructed within that time frame, the issuance of building permits will be delayed. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Site Plans: BFI - Browning, Ferris Industries:

Mrs. Pietro presented the site plan for Browning Ferris Industries. The site is located along the west side of Maryland Route 63. Zoning is Highway Interchange. The applicant is proposing to create a 9,000 square foot addition for a maintenance building and truck wash. Public water and sewer exists in the area and will serve the site. Two existing access ~ff Maryland Route 63 will serve the site. Lights will be building mounted. Landscaping is proposed around the median strip and stormwater management pond. No outside storage of materials is proposed. Provisions for solid waste storage and collection will be handled within the building and shipped out. The applicant is in the process of obtaining a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals to permit a 10,000 gallon above-ground fuel tank. All agency approvals have been received. Mr. Moser made a motion to grant site plan approval. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered. Phoenix Color Group:

Mrs. Pietro presented the site plan for Phoenix Color Group. The site is located along the south side of Tandy Drive in the Washington County Business Park. Zoning is Industrial General. The applicant is proposing to construct the facilities for printing book covers with an office and warehouse on 8.3 acres. Access to the site will be via Tandy Drive. Public water and sewer will serve the site. A total of 116 parking spaces are proposed including 3 handicap spaces. Lights will be building mounted. A sign will be constructed at the entrance location. Solid waste will consist of one dumpster with provisions for recycling. Landscaping is proposed around the building and along the front property line. All agency approvals have been received. Mrs. Johnson made a motion to grant site plan approval.

Preliminary Consultations:

Maple Valley Estates:

The written summary of the preliminary consultation for Maple Valley Estates was presented to the Commission with nothing being added by the staff. No action was taken by the Commission.

Saint Paul Estates:

The written summary of the preliminary consultation for Saint Paul Estates was presented to the Commission with nothing being added by the staff. No action was taken by the Commission. 4

Agricultural Land Preservation District Applications:

Gerald Cavanaugh:

The Cavanaugh farm lies along the south side of Maryland Route 63 approximately I mile southeast of Downsville. The farm consists of 237.758 acres and has 56.56% qualifying soils. Mrs. Johnson made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that the Cavanaugh farm be included in the Agricultural Preservation Program since its consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Moser. Mr. Bowers abstained. So ordered.

Oscar and Geraldine Hall:

The Hall farm is located 300 feet east of Dam No. 4 Road and borders the C & a Canal property to the south. The farm consists of 30.29 acres and is contiguous with an 186 acre District. The farm has 100% qualifying soils with forestry classification. This District application has not been approved by the co Agricultural Advisory Board due to the Board trying to determine how to handle parcels of "open space" land less than 100 acres in ,.- size with forestry classification. Mr. West made a motion to """ recommend to the County Commissioners that the Hall farm be ca included in the Agricultural Land Preservation Program since it's z consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Moser. ~ Mrs. Johnson opposed and Mr. Bowers abstained. So ordered. Walter Ludlam and C. L. Hirrlinger:

The Ludlam/Hirrlinger property is located along the east side of Harpers Ferry Road approximately 3 1/2 miles southeast of Sharpsburg. The farm consists of 40 acres and has 61.58% soils in forestry classification. This District application has not been approved by the Agricultural Advisory Board due to the Board trying to determine how to handle parcels of "open space" land less than 100 acres in size with forestry classification. Mr. West made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that the Ludlam/Hirrlinger farm be included in the Agricultural Land Preservation Program since it's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Moser. Mrs. Johnson opposed and Mr. Bowers abstained. So ordered.

OTHER BUSINESS:

Demolition Permit - Richard G. Winger #92-1666:

Mr. Goodrich informed the Commission that a demolition permit has been received from Mr. Stine regarding property owned by Mr. Richard Winger and located along the east side of Maryland Route 65 approximately 600 feet south of Leslie Drive. The permit is to demolish a spring house associated with a 19th century farm complex which is listed on the Washington County Historic Sites Survey. The Historic District Commission reviewed the permit application during its April 1 meeting and voted to present no opposition to the demolition. Mr. Goodrich summarized the details of the HDC's action and said that each member would receive a copy of the letter. During the discussion, Mr. Stine informed HDC members that he will be removing materials from the spring house and transporting them to his own property on Taylor's Landing Road for reconstruction. The Stine property is also listed on the Historic Sites Survey. Mr. Bowers made a motion to concur with the recommendation made by the Historic District Commission. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. 5 Certification for Agricultural Preservation: Mr. Seifarth presented information to the Planning Commission concerning Washington County's application for certification to receive an additional 42% of the Agricultural Transfer Tax. At this time the State has tabled the application pending additional steps they feel the County needs to take. Specifically, the State would like more detail in our Comprehensive Plan outlining a strategy for Agricultural Land Preservation to take place. The Planning Commission members were not pleased with the responses we have received from the State. They feel that we have met the requirements of the Certification Program and we do not need to change the Comprehensive Plan at this time. The Planning Commission recommended sending a letter to the Maryland Office of Planning and the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation stating our feelings and to set up a workshop to work out our differences. Floodplain Management Ordinance: Mr. Arch informed members that they received a draft copy of the Floodplain Management Ordinance. It was suggested to the Commission that if they had comments after reviewing the draft copy that they be forwarded to the Planning Office to be incorporated prior to taking the draft to public hearing. No action was taken by the Commission. Forest Conservation Ordinance: Mr. Goodrich distributed copies of the draft Forest Conservation Ordinance to the Commission. He informed members that the draft was based on a model received from the Department of Natural Resources. No action was taken by the Commission. Rezoning Cases: By consensus, the rezoning cases will be discussed during the May regular meeting. Meeting with Hagerstown Planning Commission: Mr. Arch reminded members that the joint meeting with the Hagerstown Planning Commission will be held on Monday, April 13 at 7 :00 P.M. in City Hall. Meeting with Frederick County Planning Commission: Mr. Arch informed members that a tentative date has been set to meet with the Frederick County Planning Commission on May 18. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M. ~ Donald E. 151

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - MAY 4, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Monday, May 4, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Vice-Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Carol Johnson, Bernard Moser, Donald Spickler and Steven West. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Associate Planners; Timothy A. Lung, Lisa Kelly Pietro, Edward Schreiber and Eric Seifarth, and Secretary, Janet L. Walkley. Absent was Ex-Officio Ronald L. Bowers.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:00 P.M. ELECTION OF OFFICERS:

Mr. Zombro made a motion to nominate Bertrand Iseminger as CD Chairman of the Planning Commission. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. ~ Mr. Zombro made a motion to close the nominations for Chairman. ,.... Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered. Mr. Iseminger will be m Chairman of the Planning Commission beginning June 1, 1992. Mr. Iseminger made a motion to nominate Donald Zombro as Vice­ z Chairman of the Planning Commission. Seconded by Mr. Moser. Mr. ::2: Iseminger made a motion to close the nominations for Vice­ Chairman. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered. Mr. Zombro will be Vice-Chairman of the Planning Commission beginning June 1, 1992.

MINUTES:

Mr. Iseminger noted that the minutes of the April 6, 1992 meeting should reflect that he turned the meeting over to Steve West for the Alvey Mowen variance request.

Mr. Moser made a motion to adopt the minutes as corrected for the April 6, 1992 regular meeting. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Menno Martin Subdivision:

Mrs. Pietro reminded the Commission of previous discussion regarding the Menno Martin subdivision that occurred during the April meeting. Mrs. Pietro distributed a letter received from Mr. William Wantz to all Commission members.

Mr. William Wantz, Attorney for Mr. Martin, stated that during a field visit with the County Engineer, it was not noted as to whether the County would require 50 feet versus 40 feet for the right-of-way. Mr. Wantz added that the centerline for the Maugans Avenue extension should be determined prior to requiring Mr. Martin to dedicate 50 feet to the County.

After a discussion, Mr. Iseminger made a motion to grant preliminary and final plat approval conditional on the statement that was included in Mr. Wantz's letter be included on the subdivision plat. Seconded by Mr. West. So ordered. 152

NEW BUSINESS: Variances:

Greg Pittinger and Jeffrey Renner: Mrs. Pietro presented the variance request for Greg Pittinger and Jeffrey Renner. The site is located along the east side of Da Wrong Lane just east of the Downsville Pike. A private right-of­ way which serves three existing dwellings will serve the property. Zoning is Agricultural. The owners are proposing to create 2 1.5 acre lots from their 3 acre parcel. The variance is being requested from Section 405.11.B which states that subdivided lots have public road frontage. After a brief discussion, Mr. Iseminger suggested that the 10-year family member statement be added to the plat. Mr. West made a motion to grant the variance request with the condition that the 10-year family member statement be added to the plan. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered.

Dwayne and Cheryl Gossard:

Mr. Schreiber informed Commission members that the variance request for the Gossards has been withdrawn from this evening's agenda.

Lloyd and Mary Emswiler:

Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Lloyd and Mary Emswiler. The site is located along the south side of Lehmans Mill Road. The owners are proposing to create a 1.6 acre lot and convey it to an immediate family member. The variance is being requested from Section 405.11.B of the Subdivision Ordinance which states that lots for a family member without public road frontage shall front on an existing lane. Mr. Schreiber noted that he suggested to the Emswilers that the 1.6 acre lot could be created with a fee-simple panhandle, less than 400 feet in length and 25 feet in width, with fee-.simple frontage. He added that with that proposal, the Emswilers would not be required to sign the 10-year family member statement, the proposed lot would have its own frontage, and the lot in front of the proposed lot wouldn't be incumbered. After a discussion, Mr. Iseminger made a motion to grant the variance request. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Geraldine Rogers:

Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Geraldine Rogers. The site is located along the east side of Herman Myers Road. The applicant is proposing to create a 4 acre lot for a family member without public road frontage and without it fronting on an existing lane. The variance is being requested from Section 405.1l.B which states that lots for immediate family members without public road frontage shall front on an existing lane or right-of-way. The 10-year family member statement has been added to the plan. Mrs. Johnson made a motion to grant the variance request. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. Subdivisions:

Wildflower Meadows:

Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for Wildflower Meadows, lots 5 through 11. The subject site is located along the east side of St. Pauls Road just north of Maryland Route 494. Zoning is Agricultural. The owner is proposing to create 7 residential lots with sizes ranging from .92 to 2.2 acres. Access will be via St. Pauls Road. Individual wells and septic systems will serve the lots. All agency approvals have been received. Mr. Moser made a motion to grant preliminary and final plat approval. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. 153

Robinwood Medical Campus: Mr. Lung presented the preliminary plat and site plan for the Robinwood Medical Campus, Lot 1. Total acreage of the campus is 105 acres. The site is located along the north side of Robinwood Drive just east of Mt. Aetna Road and is zoned RS. An appeal for a Special Exception to establish a medical mall on this property was approved on October 11, 1991 with conditions being for specific uses and that the Appeals Board has the authority to hold additional hearings if the approved concept plan is deviated from. This plan is for the first phase of the medical mall and will consist of one building to house medical offices and labs along with outpatient services. The building will contain 140,000 square feet on a 17.03 acre lot. Landscaping is superlative. Stormwater management will be handled on site with a stormwater management pond that will be owned and maintained by the Hospital Association. Access to the site will be off Robinwood Drive via a new County owned and maintained street to be called Wellness Way. The Engineering Department is requiring a traffic study be prepared during review of Phase 2. Public sewer is available to the site via an existing 10 inch force main CD that comes from the Hagerstown Junior College pumping station. A ~ new sewer line will be constructed in Wellness Way along with a ,..- pumping station. This infrastructure will be designed and inspected by the Water Pollution Control with private ownership. OJ A recent policy has been adopted by the Mayor and Council that z any sewer allocation over 5,000 gallons be approved by the Mayor and Council prior to issuance of permits. Public water is :::E available via a proposed extension of an existing 16 inch water main located in Mt. Aetna Road. The extension of this main will ultimately be part of a new loop system to serve the easter part of Hagerstown. Written approval from the Water Department is pending due to finalization of an agreement between the Elks Club and the Water Department for an easement across the Elks' property. The applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission grant preliminary plat and site plan approval conditional upon receipt of all written agency approvals and grant the staff the authority to approve the final plat in house. Mr. Iseminger made a motion to grant preliminary subdivision plat and site plan approval conditioned on receipt of agency approvals, that the sewer allocation be approved by the Mayor and Council, a traffic study be conducted for Phase 2 and to give the staff the authority to approve the final plat in house. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Agricultural Land Preservation District Applications:

Samuel J. Winters, Jr. AD-92-2:

The Winters farm lies along both sides of Maryland Route 66, 3/8 of a mile south of its intersection with Maryland Route 64. The farm consists of 175 acres with 96% Class I, II and III soils. Mr. Spickler made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that the Winters farm be included in the Agricultural Land Preservation Program since it's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Samuel J. and Barbara D. Winters AD-92-3:

The Winters farm is located along the west side of Maryland Route 66, 3/4 of a mile south of its intersection with Maryland Route 64. The farm consists of 57.09 acres and has 89% Class I, II and III soils. The farm is contiguous with AD-92-2. Mr. Spickler made a motion to recommend to the Commissioners that the Winters farm be included in the Agricultural Land Preservation Program since its consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. 154

Ralph W. and Patricia A. Shank AD-92-4: The Shank farm lies along the south side of Wagaman Road, 1/3 mile east of its intersection with Maryland Route 65. The farm consists of 167.5 acres and has 67.55 Class I, II and III soils. Mr. Spickler made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that the Shank farm be included in the Agricultural Land Preservation Program since its consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Ralph W. and Patricia A. Shank AD-92-5:

The Shank farm lies 600 feet east of Maryland Route 65, 1/2 miles south of Funkstown. The farm consists of 115.9 acres and has 87% Class I, II and III soils. Mr. Spickler made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that the Shank farm be included in the Agricultural Land Preservation Program since its consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. Mr. Iseminger instructed the staff to investigate turn-around provisions for the neighboring subdivisions.

Ralph W. Shank, Jr. and Teresa A. Shank AD-92-6:

The Shank farm lies along the north side of Wagaman Road, 3/4 miles south of Funkstown. The farm consists of 32.10 acres and has 62% qualifying soils and is contiguous to AD-92-4. Mr. Spickler made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that the Shank farm be included in the Agricultural Land ~reservation Program since its consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Mr. Seifarth updated Commission members on the request for 75% of the agricultural transfer tax. After a discussion, Commission members requested Mr. Seifarth to send a letter to the State asking why Washington County has not become certified.

Preliminary Consultations:

North Village Development Company, Inc.

The written summary for North Village Development Company was presented to the Commission with nothing to be added by the staff. No action was taken by the Commission.

OTHER BUSINESS:

Septic Easement for Rodney Sowers:

Mr. Schreiber informed Commission members that a request has been received from Rodney Sowers to create a lot without anyon-site septic reserve area. In lieu of an on-site septic system, Mr. Sowers is proposing that a 10,000 square foot septic reserve area be placed on the remaining lands from which this lot is being created. In this particular case, the remaining lands is currently owned and farmed by his father. Mr. Spickler suggested that additional land be conveyed so the septic area is within the approved lot. After a discussion between Commission members and Mr. Sowers, Mr. Sowers withdrew his request for septic easement. No action was taken by the Commission. Comprehensive Plan for the City of Hagerstown:

The Commission received a copy of the revised Comprehensive Development Plan for the City of Hagerstown for its information. No action was taken by the Commission. 155

Ewing Oil Highway Interchange Setback Determination: Mr. Arch informed Commission members that a request has been received to determine if additional setbacks or buffers will be required for a commercial use to be located along Maryland Route 65. After a brief discussion, Mr. West made a motion that no additional setbacks or buffers are required. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. Rezoning Cases:

William Dutton RZ-92-1:

After consideration of the testimony during the public hearing, written comments received during the 10-day comment period, and staff reports, Mr. West made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that RZ-92-1 be approved. The Planning Commission's approval was based on a finding of a change in the characterof the neighborhood. Along with this recommendation, the Commission is requesting that the County Commissioners give consideration to Section 27.4 of the Washington County Zoning (0 Ordinance on specifics relative to setbacks, screening, etc. .q- Seconded by Mr. Spickler. Mr. Iseminger abstained. So ordered . ,- ((l Kenneth Clements Rz-92-2: z After consideration of the testimony during the public hearing, written comments received during the 10-day comment period, and ~ staff reports, Mr. West made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that RZ-92-2 be approved. The Planning Commission's approval was based on a finding of a change in the character of the neighborhood. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. On a call for the vote, Mrs. Johnson and Mr. Moser voted no; and Mr. Iseminger, Mr. Spickler and Mr. West voted yes. So ordered. Washington County Planning Commission RZ-92-5:

After consideration of the testimony during the public hearing, written comments received during the lO-day comment period, and staff reports, Mr. Spickler made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that RZ-92-5 be approved. Seconded by Mr. Iseminger. So ordered.

Washington County Planning Commission RZ-92-5:

After consideration of the testimony during the public hearing, written comments received during the 10-day comment period, and staff reports, Mr. Spickler made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that RZ-92-5 be withdrawn at this time. This action was predicated upon the comments by both the County Commissioners and Planning Commission during the public hearing which appeared to indicate a desire to allow more flexibility and options that the current text amendment proposes. The Planning Commission is recommending that the staff revisit this recycling issue and develop an alternative amendment. Seconded by Mr. Iseminger. So ordered. ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:10 P.M. 156

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - JUNE 1, 1991

The Washington County Planning Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Monday, June 1, 1991 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, EX-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Carol Johnson, Donald Spickler and Steven West. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich, Associate Planners; Timothy A. Lung and Edward Schreiber and Secretary, Janet L. Walkley. Bernard Moser was absent.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:00 P.M.

MINUTES: Mr. Zombro made a motion to adopt the minutes of the May 4, 1992 regular meeting as written. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. NEW BUSINESS:

Variances:

Andrew Birnbaum:

Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Andrew Birnbaum. The site is located along the west side of Mt. Briar Road. The variance is being requested from Section 405.11.G.5 of the Subdivision Ordinance which states that all panhandles shall not exceed 400 feet in length. The applicant is proposing to create a 5 acre agricultural lot via the simplified plat process to be served by a 1000 foot panhandle. Mr. Schlossberg made a presentation as to why the applicants are requesting the variance. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant the variance request. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. Mrs. Johnson abstained. So ordered.

Subdivisions:

Roy Harnish:

Mr. Goodrich presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for Roy Harnish. The site is located along the south side of Maugans Avenue just west of I-81. The applicant is proposing to create a 2.5 acre lot with 1.1 acres remaining. A portion of the existing parking lot for the Family Time Restaurant on lot #1 will be located on the remaining lands. The site is served by public water and sewer. Landscaping and signs are existing. The staff informed the Commission that any development on the remaining lands, other than residential, will be restricted due to the required buffers in the Highway Interchange zoning district. All agency approvals have been received. Mr. West made a motion to grant preliminary and final plat approval. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered.

South Pointe:

Mr. Goodrich pr~sented .the final plat for South Pointe Phase I Block A.,.1,9t.s .. l through 46, Blpck D lots 1 through 50 and Block H lots 1 through 30. The site is located along the north side of East Oak Ridge Drive. The property was rezoned to PUD in May 1990. The Planning Commission approved the final development plan in February 1992. These proposed sections will consist of one and two-story townhouses and single-family dwellings. Block A includes the entrance road and 46 single-story townhouses, Block D consists of 50 two-story townhouses and Block H consists of 30 single-family lots for a total of 126 dwelling units. 157

Public water and sewer will serve the property. The developer is requesting that the staff be granted the authority to approve the final plat once all agency approvals have been received. Approvals are outstanding from the Engineering Department, Water Department and Water pollution control regarding many technical issues and a few which may require modifications to the plan. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant the staff the authority to approve the final plat once all agency approvals have been received. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. Mr. Bowers suggested that a status report be given during the Commission's regular meeting to update members on agency comments during the course of this development.

Preliminary Consultations:

Clean Rock Industries Highway Interchange Determination:

Mr. Arch informed members that Fred Papa, consultant for the (0 developer, is requesting that the Commission review the site plan --t for Clean Rock Industries during this meeting. He added that .,.... several items need to be determined; especially if the proposal is consistent with the Solid Waste Management Plan for Washington co County. The County Commissioners requested a 30 day extension which has been granted by the Maryland Department of the z Environment in order to determine consistency with the Solid ~ Waste Management Plan.

Mr. Iseminger informed Mr. Papa that the Commission is hesitant in adding items to the agenda especially for caseS which the Commission has not received items prior to the meeting. Mr. Spickler made a motion not to accept the site plan for Clean Rock Industries at this time. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered.

The written summary of the preliminary consultation for Clean Rock Industries was presented to the Commission with nothing being added by the staff. Mr. Arch informed members that a determination needs to be made regarding the setback requirements since the property is located in the Highway Interchange zoning district. The similar use for the proposed facility would fall within the requirements of the Industrial Restricted zoning district. The "IR" district requires 50 foot front yard setbacks, 25 foot side and rear yard setbacks and a 75 foot buffer when adjacent to a dwelling. The proposed site plan appears to be in conformance with those setbacks. The Planning Commission has the authority to establish additional setbacks.

Mr. Iseminger stated, in his opinion, the proposed facility will not fall under the requirements of the "IR" district. In his opinion, the facility would be considered a Special Exception under the "IG" district. Mr. Prodonovich said the Zoning Ordinance indicates that the uses permitted in the Highway Interchange district are the same as the Business Local, Business General and the Industrial Restricted districts. Based on the modifications of the process by Clean Rock Industries, it was determined that the proposed processing facility fell under a Principle Permitted Use in the "IR" district.

Mr. Bowers asked what the process of Clean Rock is and Mr. Richard Jamison briefly described what Clean Rock Industries does. Mr. Bowers submitted a tape on a landfill conversion which was aired on This Olde House. 158

Mr. Iseminger said the Commissioners are deliberating on whether or not the proposal is in conformance with the Solid Waste Management Plan. He added, in his opinion, he would like the determination by the Commissioners prior to making a decision on additional setbacks. Mr. West added that the Planning Commission reserves the right to require additional setbacks once the County Commissioners determines if the proposal is consistent with the Solid Waste Management Plan. Mr. West made a motion to postpone action on the determination of setbacks in the Highway Interchange districts pending completion of the information being sought by the County Commissioners on the consistency of the Solid Waste Management Plan. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered.

OTHER BUSINESS: Hazardous Waste Amendment RZ-92-8: Mr. Iseminger stated that Commission members just received additional information regarding the proposed amendment. By consensus, the recommendation on the hazardous waste amendment will be deferred to a special meeting so Commission members can review the information just received. The Commission will hold a Special Meeting on Monday June 8, 1992 at 5:30 P.M. to make a recommendation to the Commissioners on the proposed hazardous waste amendment.

Letter from Gerald Cump - Woodbridge Section A:

Mr. Lung informed members that Mr. Cump is requesting preliminary plat approval for a 154 lot single-family subdivision which is located on the northeast side of Robinwood Drive called Woodbridge Section A. The preliminary plat was originally submitted in November 1990. To this date, approvals have been received from the Health Department, Hagerstown Water Department, Hagerstown Water Pollution Control, Soil Conservation, Permits and Inspections, and comments from the Planning Department staff. The County Engineer's approval is outstanding. Through November of 1991, the County Engineer was reviewing this project for stormwater management based on a system that would handle the stormwater on-site for Sections A and B of Woodbridge. The County Engineer has not approved the design of the proposed on­ site stormwater management system for Section A or B. Since 1991, the County Engineer has been exploring the possibility of a regional stormwater management system to handle runoff for a number of proposed developments in the Youngstoun/Hagerstown Junior College/Robinwood Drive area. The Woodbridge development is included in the regional plan. The County Engineer was taking in consideration past stormwater management experiences in the County and is his opinion the best way to handle stormwater management in this area is a regional approach rather than numerous, small facilities that the County would be responsible for maintaining. Based on the County's preliminary design, the regional facility would involve the cooperation of at least three developers in the area (Mr. Sheedy - developer of Woodbridge; Mr. Valentine - developer of Kings Crest PUD and Mr. Shaool ­ developer of a proposed development lying behind Black Rock Estates). The County Engineer has met with all the parties involved to discuss the proposal, however, there are still agreements and issues between the developers and the County which need to be resolved. The County Administrator and Commissioners are aware of the proposed regional stormwater management facility. Mr. Sheedy is requesting that the Planning Commission approve the plat for Woodbridge without the County Engineer's approval. The staff is recommending that no action specific to this application be taken because of the regional concern for stormwater management in this area. The Commission may want to take some action to endorse the County Engineer's proposal in order to help encourage the developers to participate in the regional facility. 159

Mr. West asked what the status of the other projects are. Mr. Lung stated that the Commission approved a PUD concept plan for Kings Crest. The staff is currently reviewing the plan at the preliminary development plan stage. No comments have been received from the County Engineer regarding stormwater management. Mr. Shaool's development is in the preliminary stages; a preliminary consultation has not been held.

Mr. Sheedy approached the Commission and explained why he is not willing to participate in the regional stormwater management facility.

After a discussion, it was decided that this issue be brought up during the Commissioners meeting on June 2, 1992 with the County Engineer being present to answer questions. The status of that meeting will be brought to the Planning Commission during its Special Meeting on June 8, 1992. Julian Oliver Proposed Concept Plan - Common Septic System: Mr. Lung informed Commission members that Julian Oliver is CD requesting the review of a proposed development which is located "'d" along the west side of St. Pauls Road between Route 40 and I-70 ,- which consists of 111 acres. Zoning is Agriculture. Mr. Oliver is proposing to create 72 single-family lots to be served by CO internal roads and individual accesses along St. Pauls Road. z Approximately 50 lots located on the east side of the property would have individual wells and on-site septic systems. The ::2: other 22 lots to the west side of the property would have individual wells but and would utilize a common septic area. Septage would be collected by an 8 inch gravity collector line system flowing into a large septic tank area then pumped into the common septic field. The Health Department believes this type of system would function environmentally the same as individual on­ lot septic systems. This type of system is addressed in the County's On-Site Sewage Disposal Ordinance making it a viable system. The Health Department has indicated that based on the soil types in the reserve area, this type of system could work, however, the design would be complicated and costly. Nothing to this scale has been done in Washington County before. The County Health Department and Maryland Department of the Environment would be involved in the regulatory process. Under the criteria of the County's Water and Sewerage Plan, this system would be considered a community sewage system and would require an amendment to the Water and Sewerage Plan to establish a service area and priority designation. Based on Appendix D of the Water and Sewerage plan, which is a policy for interim and permanent community water and sewerage systems, the Sanitary District would be responsible to own and operate the system. From a planning standpoint, the staff is concerned that approval of this type of concept could possibly set a precedent for other areas that may tend to encourage development on land that could not be developed to such a density with individual septic systems. Some jurisdictions are considering common septic systems with cluster plans. In cluster subdivisions, the same number of dwelling units are allowed on much smaller lots with the remaining lands reserved for agricultural purposes or open space. Some type of community water system would also be necessary for this type of development. After a discussion, the Planning Commission determined that this proposed development would not be appropriate, however, possibilities for alternative forms of development may exist for this property that would be balanced with preservation of the rural character and agriculturally productive land. The Commission directed the staff to work with the developer.

Leroy Myers Demolition Permit:

The Commission was informed that this demolition permit has been withdrawn from this evening's agenda.

Teamsters Local Office Building 160

Highway Interchange Determination: Mr. Lung informed Commission members that a preliminary plat/site plan for the Teamsters Local Office building has been received. The site is located in the Cross Creek development along the east side of Maryland Route 65. Zoning is Highway Interchange. The proposed office building will be located on a new 2 acre lot. Access to the property will be via Battlecreek Boulevard. The Highway Interchange section of the Zoning Ordinance provides for a 75 foot screened buffer when commercial development is located adjacent to residential uses. This section also gives the Planning Commission the authority to establish additional setbacks and other requirements where deemed appropriate. With this proposal, a 75 foot buffer is required along the northern property line due to an adjacent dwelling located to the north. The developer is proposing to provide vegetative screened planting between the office building and property line. The staff is of the opinion that the 75 foot buffer being provided with the screen planting is adequate. The Zoning Administrator and Planning staff is of the opinion that the stormwater management pond be fenced for safety purposes. The Engineering Department's standards do not require fencing for this pond, however, with the pond being located approximately 20 feet from a residential dwelling; the staff is of the opinion that it should be fenced for safety purposes. Mr. Lung noted that there are some existing trees and a hedge row along the northern property line. The plan does not indicate if this is to remain.

Mr. Hilton Smith, developer of the site, requested preliminary plat/site plan be reviewed for approval at this time. Mr. Zombro made a motion that the preliminary plat/site plan for Teamsters Local Office building be presented at this time. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered.

Mr. Lung presented the preliminary plat/site plan for the Teamsters Local Office Building to be located on a new lot designated as lot #2. The developer is proposing to construct an 80' x 30' office building with provisions for future expansion to double the size. The future expansion will require an additional site plan prior to construction. Parking is provided to the east with access off Battlecreek Boulevard. The property will be served by public water and sewer. The Maryland State Highway Administration has approved the subdivision and site plan with no direct access onto Maryland Route 65. The Zoning Administrator has indicated that a handicap sign detail needs to be added to the site plan. The trees in the buffer yard need to be moved one foot above the 100 foot flood elevation. The staff informed the Commission that this subdivision will create two additional lots that will require future site plans. Lot #3 has been designed with its only means of access via a 50 foot right-of-way provided across lot #2. This access may be adequate for most type uses, however, there could be some high traffic generating uses that may not be permitted on lot #3 due to its access limitations. Another access along Battlecreek Boulevard would probably not be acceptable to the County Engineer since it's too close to the intersection with Maryland Route 65.

Mr. Iseminger stated that it was his opinion that the developer work out the details on the planting and fence with the Planning staff regarding the stormwater management facility.

Regarding the fencing of the stormwater management pond, Mr. Smith stated that he thought a chain link fence would detract from the appearance of the site, however, he would comply if asked to. 161

Mr. Prodonovich explained his reasoning for a fence around the stormwater management pond and stated that there are alternatives to a chain link fence. He also recommended that the proposed white pine screen planting be replaced with a more upright and compact type of evergreen tree. The trees must be a minimum of 6 feet in height at the time of planting.

Mr. Smith and his consultant, Mr. Weikert, both stated that the existing tree line and hedge row along the northern property line would not be disturbed and would remain.

Following a discussion, Mr. Bowers made a motion to grant preliminary plat/site plan approval with the conditions and stipulations outlined by the staff and that the Planning Commission reserves the right to require the fencing of the stormwater management pond in the future if warranted by future development. The staff was given the authority to approve the final plat. Seconded by Mr. West. So ordered.

ADJOURNMENT: CD There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at ~ 9:30 P.M. T'"'" OJ z an :2: 162

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING - JUNE 8, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held a special meeting on Monday, June 8, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building. Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Ex-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Carol Johnson, and Steven West. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch and Secretary, Janet L. Walkley. Bernard Moser and Donald Spickler were absent.

CALL TO ORDER:

The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 5:30 P.M.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

, .,.~. '0" RZ-92-8 Hazardous Waste Amendment: .Mr. Iseminger informed the audience that this isa public meeting and not a public hearing and no additional testimony will be ·taken regarding the proposed amendment.

Mr. Arch stated that Commission members received copies of the staff reports. He added that the proposed amendment addresses three sections of the Zoning Ordinance; Definitions, General Provisions and Specific Provisions. He added that the sections ·of the specific zoning classifications which deal with storage conflict with the language in the General Provisions section. This needs to be clarified so that the language in both section agrees.

Mr. Ralph France, County Attorney, said the wording in Sections 13.7, 14.7 and 15.5 are identical. He recommended adding the words "in kilns on site" after the word "incineration" to the sentence; "Facilities or structures for the purpose of receiving, storing, or processing hazardous waste or controlled hazardous substances for the purpose of incineration (in kilns on site) are prohibited." In Mr. France's opinion, the change is not substantial and will not warrant an additional public hearing.

After a discussion by the Commission, Mr. West made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that rezoning case RZ-92-8 be approved with the wording as recommended by the County Attorney since the amendments are in the best interest of the County and meet the needs of the Comprehensive Plan for Washington County. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. Mr. Bowers abstained. So ordered. It is being noted that Mr. Iseminger voted in favor of the amendment.

Woodbridge Section A:

Mr. Arch reminded the Commission that Mr. Dan Sheedy made a request that the Commission approve Section A of Woodbridge independent of the development of the regional stormwater management pond. He added that the Commission will not be able to act on this requeBt at this time. The Board of County Commissioners is giving their blessing to Mr. Sheedy to proceed as an individual with the condition that the County will not take over the stormwater management pond until a determination has been made regarding the regional stormwater management facility. The County Engineer has not reviewed the stormwater management facility for Section A of Woodbridge on an individual basis at this time. No action was taken by the Commission. 163

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP MEETING - JUNE 22, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held a workshop meeting on Monday, June 22, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building to discuss the Agricultural Land Preservation Certification for Washington County.

Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Carol Johnson. Planning staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich and Associate Planner, Eric Seifarth. Also present were Leonard Lowry, Charles Wiles and Jere DeBaugh ~ Washington County Agricultural Advisory Board, Joe Tassone and Pat Goucher - Maryland Office of Planning and Paul Scheidt and Iva Frantz - Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation.

CALL TO ORDER: CD oc;:t The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 5:30 P.M. T""" The workshop opened with Joe Tassone giving a summary of the two CO main reasons why Washington County has not yet been certified to Z receive a 75% of the Agricultural Transfer Tax. First, the Maryland Office of Planning questioned whether or not our Program ~ .would be effective in preserving Agricultural land. The second outstanding issue deal with targeting priority areas for preservation. The Maryland Office of Planning feels that we have not effectively done this. Enclosed is an outline which describes these two areas in greater detail.

Mr. Tassone pointed out that while our Comprehensive Plan lists preserving Agricultural land as one of our goals, we need to show the steps we will be taking to actually preserve Agricultural land. He went on to say that the Maryland Office of Planning has observed Agricultural land preservation efforts in the metro counties. They had to define specific areas for preservation and then focus their resources on those defined areas. Washington County has not done that. Mr. Tassone said that the State spends money on counties they think will be successful in preserving Agricultural land.

Mr. Iseminger countered by saying that it is tough for Washington County to define specific preservation areas since we are still basically a rural county. All our farmland is important. Mr. Iseminger stated that he feels that we went well beyond the scope of what should be expected for certification. What we really need is money for our Program. Mr. DeBaugh added that we need to act now and not wait until development gets bad enough.

Mr. Arch pointed out that we are trying to encourage the preservation of farming and not just preservation of farmland. We need economic incentives to keep people farming.

After other discussions, Mr. Iseminger stated that the Maryland Office of Planning has a strong commitment from Washington County to wisely use additional Agricultural Transfer Tax money we receive as a result of certification. Mr. Tassone said that our commitment should include long-term steps we plan to take and how those steps relate back to our Comprehensive Plan. In addition, we need to have the mechanism in place to preserve Agricultural land. Mr. Seifarth stated that in the next week Washington County would purchase it's first easement thereby establishing the necessary mechanisms. 164

NEW BUSINESS: Rubble Landfill Conversion to Paving Tape:

The Commission reviewed the tape presented by Vinny Iuliano of Clean Rock Industries and also a program which aired on "This Olde House". No action was taken by the Commission.

Meeting Date - Certification of Agricultural Land Preservation:

The Commission will hold a special meeting to discuss the certification of Agricultural Land Preservation with representatives of the Maryland Office of Planning on Monday, June 22, 1992 at 5:30 P.M.

ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:30 P.M. 167

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - JULY 13, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Monday, July 13, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, EX-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Bernard Moser, and Donald Spickler. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich, Associate Planners; Timothy A. Lung, Lisa Kelly Pietro, Edward Schreiber and Secretary, Janet L. Walkley. Absent were Carol Johnson and Steven West.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:00 P.M.

MINUTES: Mr. Iseminger stated that the minutes of the June 1, 1992 meeting <0 under the Hazardous Waste Amendment RZ-92-B it should state that -q- the Planning Commission just received additional information ....- which was submitted during the 10-day comment period as well as recent receipt of the Staff Analysis. Mr. Zombro made a motion OJ to adopt the minutes of the June 1, 1992 regular meeting as Z revised. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. ~ Mr. Zombro made a motion to adopt the minutes of the June 8, 1992 special meeting as written. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered.

Mr. Moser stated that he should be listed as being present for the June 22, 1992 workshop meeting. Mr. Moser made a motion to adopt the minutes as revised for the June 22, 1992 workshop meeting. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. So ordered.

NEW BUSINESS:

Variances:

Lowell and Linda Harty:

Mrs. Pietro presented the variance request for Lowell and Linda Harty. The site is located along the north side of Cascade Road. Zoning is Rural Residential. The owners are proposing to create 2 single-family lots and convey them to immediate family members without the required frontage on an existing private lane. Proposed lot sizes will be 1.8 acres. The variance is being requested from Section 405.11.B.l of the Subdivision Ordinance which states that land may be conveyed to immediate family members, however, the subdivided lots must front on a private road or right-of-way existing at the time of the original parcel's acquisition by the current owner. Mr. Bowers made a motion to grant the variance. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. So ordered.

Steven Kendle:

Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Steven Kendle. The site is located along the south side of Cool Hollow Road. Zoning is Agricultural. The owner is proposing to create a 3.2 acre lot to be served by a 1500 foot long panhandle. The new lot will be conveyed to an immediate family member. The variance is being requested from Section 405.1l.G.5 of the Subdivision Ordinance which states that panhandles shall not exceed 400 feet in length. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant the variance. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered. 168

Hugh Snively: Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Hugh Snively. The site is located along the south side of U.S. Route 40, 2000 feet of the Conococheague Creek. zoning is Agricultural. The owner is proposing to create a 30 acre lot to be served by a 1000 foot long panhandle. The variance is being requested from Section 405.ll.G.5 of the Subdivision Ordinance which states that panhandles shall not exceed 400 feet in length. Mr. Moser made a motion to grant the variance request. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. Ewing Food Lion: Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Ewing Food Lion. The site is located along the east side of Eastern Boulevard, 1000 feet south of Maryland Route 64. The variance is being requested from Section 405.11.E which states that no lot shall be divided by a municipal boundary. The City of Hagerstown has been contacted and has no problem with the variance request. After a . discussion, Mr. Spickler made a motion to grant the variance request based on receipt of a written response from the City of Hagerstown. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered. Site Plans: Ewing Food Lion: Mr. Schreiber presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat and site plan for Ewing Food Lion. The site is located along the east side of Eastern Boulevard. The applicant is proposing to create 4 lots. Lots 1 and 2 have no plans for development at this time, lot 3 will house the Food Lion Grocery Store and lot 4 will be for the stormwater management pond. Total area of the subdivision is 7.62 acres. Public water and sewer will serve the site. Eastern Boulevard is classified as a Minor Arterial roadway by the County's Highway Plan. The staff is requesting an additional 10 foot right-of-way along the frontage for future widening. The staff is also requesting an additional 50 foot right-of-way from the centerline of Jefferson Boulevard and the City of Hagerstown is requesting 30 foot right­ of-way from centerline along Diamond Drive. As stated previously, lot #3 will house the Food Lion Grocery Store and encompasses 3.12 acres. No access is permitted onto Maryland Route 64. One access is proposed off Eastern Boulevard as well as Diamond Drive. A total of 123 parking spaces are required by the Zoning Ordinance, however, 145 spaces are proposed. Ninety percent maximum impervious area is proposed and required. Building and pole mounted signs and lighting appear to be adequate. The loading area is located to the rear of the site. During a discussion, Commission members suggested that the truck traffic should be out of the customer parking area. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant preliminary and final subdivision plat and site plan approval conditional on the variance request being approved by the City of Hagerstown. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. Conococheague Pre-Treatment Facility ­ Washington County Sanitary District: Mrs. Pietro presented the site plan for the Conococheague Pre­ Treatment Facility for the Washington County Sanitary District. The site is located along the northwest side of Elliott Parkway in the I-70 Industrial Park. The Sanitary District is proposing to create a wastewater treatment facility on 30 acres to be located directly behind its existing office building. The existing stormwater management pond will handle the drainage from this facility. Public water and sewer are existing on site and will serve the new facility. No new landscaping is proposed for the wastewater facility. An existing tree buffer surrounding the property will remain. Lighting is proposed to be building and pole mounted. A sign will be added to the existing domestic 169

treatment plan sign where adequate space is available. During site plan review, a portion of the building was determined to be located in the 100-year floodplain. The Sanitary District is in the process of getting the floodplain maps amended. Jim Bishop with the Sanitary District stated that the Army Corp of Engineers made a site visit and determined that no wetlands were present. The document has been submitted to the Corp with approval expected within the next two weeks. The delineation of the floodplain will be changed on the maps once approval is granted. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant site plan approval conditional on the approval of the floodplain delineation. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. Clean Rock Industries:

Please see attached copy of transcript.

Subdivisions: CD ~ North Village: ....- Mr. Schreiber presented the preliminary and final subdivision aJ plat for North Village lots 1 through 58. The site is located Z along the north side of Maugans Avenue Extended. Zoning is Residential Suburban. The owner is proposing to create 58 lots ~ qn 21.73 acres. Public water and sewer will serve the site. New 60 foot wide County maintained streets will be provided through the development with curb and gutter being required. Sidewalks are not being proposed. Verbal approval has been received from the Health Department, conditional approval has been received from the County Engineer, Sanitary District has conditionally approved the subdivision yet construction drawings haven't been approved. The City of Hagerstown has given verbal approval on the water service. Mr. Spickler made a motion to grant preliminary and final plat approval conditional on all agency approvals. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

John Martin: Mr. Schreiber presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for John Martin, lots 2 through 5. The site is located along the west side of Franks Run Road and the east side of Maryland Route 64. Zoning is Agriculture. The owner is proposing to create 4 residential lots with sizes ranging between 1.2 to 2.26 acres. Total area of the site is 7.5 acres. The lots will be served by individual wells and septic systems. All agency approvals have been received. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant preliminary and final plat approval. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Hill-N-Dale Acres:

Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary subdivision plat for Hill-N-Dale Acres, lots 19 through 44. The site is located along the west side of Resh Road and the north side of Mt. Tabor Road. Zoning is Agricultural. The Water and Sewerage Plan was amended in November 1991 to change the water classification from W-7 to W-5. The developer is proposing to create 26 single-family lots with sizes between .9 to 2 acres. Total area of the site is 43 acres. Access will be via Resh and Mt. Tabor Roads. Lot #36 will have its access onto Kiser Ridge Road. The lots will be served by public water and individual septic systems. During a discussion, Commission members had concerns with the access to lot #36 with recommendation that lot #36's access be via the interior street. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant preliminary plat approval. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. 170

Ronald and Debra Ellis: Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for Ronald and Debra Ellis, lots I through 4. The site is located along the west side of Porterstown Road just south of its intersection with Maryland Route 34. Zoning is Agricultural. The owners are proposing to create 4 single-family lots with sizes ranging from 2 to 4 acres. Total area of the site is 11.5 acres. The lots will be served by individual wells and septic systems. All agency approvals have been received. The subject property is located in the AO-3 Zone. Tree cover is indicated on the plat and consists mainly of hardwood species. Any tree cutting activity shall be done in accordance with Section 20A.4 of the Zoning Ordinance. A discussion was held regarding the Forest Conservation Act and the percentage of trees that can be removed for construction and the percentage that needs to be replanted after construction. During the discussion,

....'...... Commission members expressed concern regarding the removal of trees along the western property line. Russ Townsely with Fox and Associates stated that a note could be added to the plat indicating that the trees along the western property line be retained. Mr. Spickler made a motion to grant preliminary and final plat approval conditional on a note being added to the plat indicating that trees along the western property line be retained and that dwellings on lots 3 and 4 be located along the east side. ?econded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered. Goodwyn Contractors: Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for Goodwyn Contractors, lots 1 through 3. The subject site is located along the west side of Mt. Laurel Road. Zoning is Agricultural. The owners are proposing to create 3 single-family lots on 5 acres. Individual wells and septic systems will serve the proposed lots. Access to the three lots will be via Mt. Laurel Road. Lots 2 and 3 will be served by panhandles which meet the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. All agency approvals have been received. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant preliminary and final plat approval. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. Preliminary Consultations: Kenneth Myers: The written summary of the consultation was presented to the Planning Commission with nothing be added by the staff. Charles Lohman - Intensive Swine Operation: The written summary of the consultation was presented to the Planning Commission. The staff informed the Commission that during the consultation, no recommendations for additional requirements were made by the reviewing agencies and that the proposed expansion meets all of the minimum building setbacks established in Division IX. The County Extension Agent intends to issue a letter stating that based on arrangements that Mr. Lohman has made with other farmers, sufficient acreage is available for the proper utilization of the manure which will be generated by this facility. Waste Management Plans and Nutrient Management Plans will be prepared for each of the receiving farms. Planning Commission approval is requested as submitted conditional upon receipt of a letter of recommendation of approval by the Soil Conservation District, a signed Waste Management Plan by Mr. Lohman, Nutrient Management/Waste Management Plans for the receiving farms and letters from the owners of the receiving farms being obtained. After a discussion, Mr. Zombro made a motion to approve of the 171

expansion of the intensive swine facility for Mr. Lohman conditional on Nutrient Management/Waste Management Plans being prepared and implemented for the receiving farms and the receipt of an approval letter from the Soil Conservation District. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered.

Agricultural Land Preservation District Applications:

Harry F. Kendle & Imogene A. Kendle AD-92-7:

Mr. Goodrich presented the Agricultural Land Preservation District application for Harry and Imogene Kendle. The farm is located along the north side of Beaver Creek Road, 2 miles southeast of Hagerstown. The farm consists of 85 acres and has 95.13% qualifying soils. This farm qualifies for the Program under the State's definition of extraordinary Agricultural capability since it's less than 100 acres. Mr. Spickler made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that the Kendle farm be included in the Agricultural Land Preservation Program since it's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Moser. Mr. Bowers abstained. So ordered. CD ~ Lynn B. Kendle and Paula Kendle AD-92-8: v- Mr. Goodrich presented the Agricultural Land Preservation al District application for Lynn and Paula Kendle. The farm is Z located along the north side of Beaver Creek Road, 2 1/4 miles east of Hagerstown. The farm consists of 10 acres and has 80% ::E qualifying soils. This farm qualifies for the Program under the State's definition of extraordinary Agricultural capability since it's less than 100 acres. The Kendle farms are operated jointly. Mr. Spickler made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners that the Kendle farm be included in the Agricultural Land Preservation Program since it's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Seconded by Mr. Moser. Mr. Bowers abstained. So ordered.

OTHER BUSINESS:

Sterling Oaks Preliminary Approval Extension Reguest: Mr. Goodrich informed the Commission that Carrie Cosner with Milcar Construction has requested a one year extension of the preliminary plat approval date for the Sterling Oaks subdivision. If approved, the expiration date would be July 19, 1993. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant the one year extension for Sterling Oaks. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered.

Schedule Workshop Meeting - Water and Sewerage Plan Update:

Mr. Lung briefly updated the Commission on the status of the biennial update of the Water and Sewerage Plan. The Commission set a workshop meeting for August 10, 1992 at 5:00 P.M. to discuss procedures for the Water and Sewerage Plan.

Highway Interchange Setback Determination - Chevron Station:

Mr. Arch informed Commission members that a request has been made for a Highway Interchange setback determination for the Chevron service station along Route 11. Mr. Fulton, owner of the station, will be requesting a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals for the existing kerosene pump and oil tank pump. They are to remain as located on the site. During a discussion, it was noted that an adjacent property owner, Mrs. Shank, has concerns with parking along Brookmead Drive. The Commission expressed concern regarding parking and traffic flow patterns through the site. As part of the discussion with regard to the site plan, the Planning Commission, in concurrence with the property owner, requested that the driveway on the east side of the existing building be extended to meet the gravel driveway on the northwest side of the building. Mr. Zombro made a motion that no additional setbacks are required for this site. Seconded 172

by Mr. Moser. So ordered. Boonsboro By-pass:

Mr. Arch informed members that they received a copy of the request to the County Commissioners to incorporate the Boonsboro By-Pass in the County's Highway Plan. After a discussion, no action was taken by the Commission. CIP Distribution:

Planning Commission members received copies of the adopted Capital Improvements Program for FY 1993-1998.

Planning Commission Policy Manual Addendum:

Planning Commission members received a copy of the policy addendum as prepared by the Planning Director concerning the submission of construction drawings. After a brief discussion, Mr. Spickler made a motion to include this addendum as Policy #9 in the Washington County Planning Commission's Policy Manual. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Work Program Schedule:

Mr. Arch informed members that he is in the process of preparing a work program to be adopted by the Commission. The work program is currently being revised to include the Highway Interchange Study.

Upcoming Meetings:

Mr. Arch informed members that a special joint public hearing will be held between the County Commissioners and the Planning Commission on Tuesday, August 4 at 7:00 P.M. in Court Room No.1 regarding the essential utility text amendment.

ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, Mr. Zombro moved and Mr. Moser seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting at 11:00 P.M. 173

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - AUGUST 3, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Monday, August 3, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. zombro, EX-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, and Carol Johnson. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich, Associate Planners; Timothy A. Lung, Lisa Kelly Pietro, Edward Schreiber and Secretary, Janet L. Walkley. Absent were Bernard Moser, Donald Spickler and Steven West.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:25 P.M.

MINUTES: CD Mr. Zombro made a motion to adopt the minutes of the July 13, -e::t 1992 regular meeting as written. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ,.- ordered. OJ NEW BUSINESS: z ~ Subdivisions: Fulton Food Lion:

Mr. Schreiber presented the preliminary subdivision plat and site plan for Fulton Food Lion. The site is located in the northwest quadrant of Virginia Avenue and Halfway Boulevard. Zoning is Business Local. The owner is proposing to create 2 lots; one 1 acre lot and the second encompassing 4.3 acres. A total of 3 acres will remain. Public water and sewer will serve the site. The proposed use for lot #2 will be the Food Lion grocery store. This lot is not affected by the floodplain, however, existing drainage has adverse impacts on the Greenberry Road/Virginia Avenue intersection. The stormwater management facility for this site should help to alleviate the problems at that intersection. The proposed stormwater management pond will be a detention system. Access to lot #2 will be via a 50 foot panhandle which will also serve lot #1. Parking is adequate with 145 spaces being provided. Lighting will be provided by pole and building mounted lights. A six foot high fence will be constructed along the northern property line with a chainlink fence around the stormwater management pond. The proposed dumpster will be located on the north side of the building. The staff requested that the dumpster be relocated to the south side of the building, however, for Health Department reasons, the dumpster needed to be on the north side of the building. There is an existing traffic problem at the Halfway Blvd./Virginia Avenue intersection. Three items need to be looked at more closely; (1) the Planning staff requested a traffic study for the Halfway Blvd./Virginia Avenue intersection when the plan was first submitted. The developer's consultant indicated that the intersection is currently working at a level of service of either 'A' or 'B', which is very good for this size intersection with a projected operating level of 'C' with the addition of the project and background traffic. Some revised counts from the State Highway Administration were just r~eeived' A preliminary review of those number indicates that ang with background traffic and project traffic, the County ...... •.. ngineering Department dete.rmined the intersection will be workin ,at a level of service of 'D' or 'E'; which is failing in the ey~ of the State Highway Administration and County policies. (2) The ingress and egress to Route 11 currently has problems with the Home Federal Bank property which will be further compounded with the proposed Food Lion site. The staff suggested a 'right-in' only for the bank site with traffic flowing through the Food Lion site to exit the property. (3) The ingress and 174

egress for the bank traffic flowing through the Food Lion site needs to be discussed. Nothing can be worked out with the bank personnel.

The staff is requesting that the Planning Commission require Food Lion to redo the traffic study based on the revised numbers for the intersection of Halfway Blvd./Virginia Avenue. This will indicate to what improvements will be necessary to bring the intersection to a level of service '0' which is acceptable under the requirements of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. The biggest problem at this point is the access onto Virginia Avenue and the actual intersection of Halfway Blvd. and Virginia Avenue. Mr. Bowers suggested that the Planning staff come up with a way to put an overlay on the project to move the entrance for Food Lion and access through the bank property and remove the entrance off of Virginia Avenue. Mr. Davis added that there is a problem with the access to the bank and nothing will alleviate that problem until the state grants the access onto Halfway Boulevard.

Mr. Randall Bell with Food Lion stated that he spoke with Ed Norris with the State Highway Administration. Mr. Norris informed him that the State errored in its traffic study and will be revising it. There was a discussion regarding the accuracy of the traffic studies for the Food Lion site. Mr. Iseminger said there are problems with this intersection and there should be some type of analysis on the intersection done using the revised numbers from the State.

A discussion was held indicating that Home Federal should be contacted to try to work out an agreement with Food Lion and the bank's access through the site.

Mr. Zombro made a motion to defer any action on the Food Lion property until the special meeting on August 10, 1992. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered.

Preliminary Consultations:

Edward Brewer:

The written summary of the preliminary consultation for Edward Brewer was presented to the Commission with nothing being added by the staff. No action was taken by the Commission.

Millvville:

The written summary of the preliminary consultation for Millyville was presented to the Commission with clarification being added by the staff. No action was taken by the Commission.

Highland Manor East:

Mr. Lung presented the concept plan for Highland Manor East. He informed the Commission that this will be the subject of a PUD rezoning application during the public hearing on September 21, 1992. The site is located along the east side of Maryland Route 63, south of Huyetts Crossroads, currently zoned Agricultural and located in the Urban Growth Area. Public water and sewer is available. The developer is proposing to create 55 single-family lots on 7500 square foot lot sizes, 39 two-family or semi-detached dwelling lots, 112 unit apartments, 5.5 acres for commercial use and 14 acres of open space. There will be 245 total dwelling units on 55.93 acres. Gross density will be 4.38 dwelling units per acre; the maximum density allowed is 12 dwelling units per acre. The commercial area amounts to 9.85 of the total area, 10% is the maximum allowed. There is 25% common open space proposed which is the minimum.

The developer has not indicated what amenities would be provided. The floodplain map shows a large area of lOO-year floodplain on the site; most of it being contained within the open space area. 175

The staff expressed several concerns dealing with the proposed design. (1) The plan does not show any amenities or creativity in design beyond what is provided for in the conventional zoning district. (2) Only eight of the individual lots front directly onto the open space. The open space should be more accessible to all of the lots. (3) Housing types are segregated into different areas. (4) A commercial area amounting to nearly 10% of the site may be too large in light of the relatively low density of the development. The staff suggested that individual lot sizes could be reduced to provide for more usable open space. Zero lot lines and closer clustering of buildings could reduce infrastructure costs. The two-family and single-family dwellings could be mixed together. The Planning Commission concurred with the staff's comments and suggestions.

Mr. Merle Holsinger, consultant for the developer, indicated that after the consultation he met with his client and discussed revisions to the proposal. He added that the consideration of loop roads and mixing the housing types was discussed. He requested revising the concept plan and bringing it back to the Commission at the September 14 meeting prior to taking it to <0 public hearing. No action was taken by the Commission. ~ ,..- St. James Manor: CIl Mr. Goodrich presented the concept plan for St. James Manor to the Commission. He informed the Commission that this will also Z be presented as a PUD application during the rezoning hearing on ~ September 21, 1992. The site is located along College Road and Maryland Route 65. Current zoning of the site is Residential Rural. The developer is proposing to create 263 single-family dwelling lots, 44 semi-detached dwelling lots, and 6.5 acres for commercial uses. The preliminary consultation will be held on August 6, 1992. The staff will be suggesting an additional entrance to the commercial area from the internal street system. The staff will also be requesting additional information on the open space and recreational amenities. The staff is of the opinion that this proposal does not take full advantage of the intent of a PUD zoning classification since this proposal could be established with the current RR zoning district.

The Commission agreed with the staff's suggestion that there should be more information provided int he proposed use in the open space areas. It also stressed the desire that the open space be useable and in appropriate locations and not an after thought for left-over pieces of land scattered around the development. They also suggested eliminating some of the long cul-de-sacs by extending roads to create loops. An additional entrance needs to be provided to the commercial area via the internal road system.

Sandy Hook Clusters:

Mr. Goodrich presented the concept plan for Sandy Hook clusters. The site is located at the intersection of Keep Tryst and Sandy Hook Roads. Zoning is Conservation. The Planning Commission needs to determine if this proposal is appropriate for the cluster provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. The developer is proposing two clusters with 25 units per cluster on approximately 44 acres. The developer is proposing a condominium type arrangement where the individual will own the unit and a homeowners association will maintain the property. The property would be served by a common health facility; either the public system in Sandy Hook or design and construction of a community system for this site only. An amendment to the Water and Sewerage Plan would be required prior to hooking up to the Sandy Hook system.

Mr. Merle Holsinger indicated that the developer is proposing to use 1/4 of the property for the cluster units and the remaining land will be for open space. 176

The Commission was reluctant to act on the request to use the cluster provisions of the Zoning Ordinance because it felt it needed additional information. Following a brief discussion, it was determined that the information that would be submitted with an application for a Water and sewerage Plan amendment would be appropriate. The Commission stressed that it was not requiring or requesting the Plan amendment at this time.

OTHER BUSINESS:

Elmo Michael: Mrs. Pietro informed the Commission that a request has been received from Elmo Michael to create a lot without an on-site septic reserve area. The subdivision plat indicates that the 10,000 square foot septic reserve area will be placed approximately 100 feet from lot #3's rear property line. The Health Department has determined that the proposed reserve area location is preferable due to topographic constraints and to the presence of hydric soils. Mr. Bowers made a motion to grant the septic easement for Elmo Michael. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. So ordered. Warrenfeltz Subdivision - Septic Easement:

Mr. Schreiber indicated that a request has been received from Mary Warrenfeltz to permit a septic easement on an adjacent lot. Due to lot constraints, a 10,000 square foot area could not be obtained for this proposed lot. The Health Department has performed the testing for the easement and have approved both the tests and concept. Mr. Iseminger asked if the adjacent owner would be notified that an easement is being placed on their property. Mr. Schreiber indicated that they have been notified and are willing to sign the plat. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant the septic easement for the Warrenfeltz. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered.

Preliminary Consultations:

Crosspoint:

Mr. Goodrich presented the concept plan for Crosspoint. The subject site is located to the south of the Valley Mall and north of Virginia Avenue. The developers are proposing 734 units with 588 being utilized for apartments or condominiums. There are 14 acres of development for the elderly on Sections 5 and 7 which will be some type of nursing care and assisted living arrangements. There is also a small area dedicated for commercial use along Virginia Avenue and proposed Massey Boulevard. During the consultation there were requirements that a traffic study needs to be prepared prior to the final design standards for the development. Massey Boulevard is intended to connect with the portion of Massey Boulevard at the Valley Mall. A portion of this site is proposed to be rezoned. The case will be presented during the September 21, 1992 public hearing. During the consultation it was determined that some of the townhouse lots may not front a public road and a variance may be required. The Forest Conservation Act was also discussed during the consultation. After a brief discussion, no action was taken by the Commission. 177

OTHER BUSINESS: Plan Approval:

Mr. Goodrich informed the Commission that several County departments met previously with representatives of Economic Development Commission and a prospect who is interested in locating its business in Washington County. It appears that the plan review schedules (subdivision, site plan and grading plan approvals) will playa critical role in the organization's decision making process. Each County agency has evaluated its portion of the plan review process and, together, mapped out a strategy to meet a very compressed schedule while still conducting a thorough review. The Planning Commission's role in the plan review process will be subdivision and site plan review. The Planning Department indicated that it could arrange a special Planning Commission meeting for review and approval of plans at the earliest possible time. As a second alternative, the Planning Commission could grant authority to the staff to grant the approvals. After a discussion, the Commission, by consensus, informed the staff to do whatever was necessary to try to meet the proposed schedule. It was noted that if any problems should <0 arise, the Planning Commission should be informed. ~,..... co Solid Waste Plan Public Informational Meetings: Mr. Arch informed Commission members that public informational z meetings have been set up to take public input on the Solid Waste Plan prior to the biennial update. The first meeting will be :::2: -held on Wednesday, August 12, 1992 at the Clear Spring Municipal Building, the second meeting will be held on August 26, 1992 in the County Administration Building and the third meeting will be held on September 9, 1992 at Boonsboro High School.

Letter from Boonsboro Planning Commission:

Mr. Arch informed members that the letter from the Boonsboro Planning Commission was for informational purposes only and no action was needed.

Meeting Dates with Boonsboro Planning Commission:

The Commission decided to set a tentative meeting date for a Monday evening during the month of October. Mr. Arch is to contact the Boonsboro Planning Commission and get back with this Commission to confirm.

APFO Report:

The Commission decided to discuss the APFO report during the special meeting of August 10, 1992.

ADJOURNMENT:

On a motion by Mr. Zombro, seconded by Mrs. Johnson, the meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M. 179

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING - AUGUST 10, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held a special meeting on Monday, August 10, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Carol Johnson, Bernard Moser, Donald Spickler and Steven West. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, and Associate Planner; Timothy A. Lung. Absent was Ronald Bowers. CALL TO ORDER:

The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 5:35 P.M. UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

Fulton Food Lion Preliminary Plat/Site Plan: CD Mr. Arch informed the Commission that there was a meeting between ~ the County Engineering staff, the developer's engineer and .,.... traffic engineer concerning the traffic numbers provided by the State Highway Administration. Additional numbers need to be OJ obtained and the County has done some traffic counts. Another Z meeting scheduled for this week with the State Traffic Engineer, George Small. This meeting should resolve the issues concerning ~ ~hich numbers should be used in the traffic study. No action is necessary by the Planning Commission at this time. Mr. Iseminger requested that a special meeting be scheduled for next Monday, August 17, 1992 if the additional information is available at that time for the Planning Commission to take action. If not, the Planning Director may cancel the meeting until such time that the developer requests a special meeting.

Mrs. Johnson made a motion to hold a special meeting on Monday, August 17, 1992 at 5:30 P.M. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered.

At this time, Mr. Steven West arrived.

OTHER BUSINESS:

APFO Status Report:

The Planning Commission had been given a copy of the six month status report. Mr. Zombro made a motion to re-affirm to the County Commissioners that the APFO should be continued. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered. Work Program:

Mr. Arch handed out copies of the work program. He explained the format of the work program which breaks down special projects and the routine work over an 18 month period. He pointed out some new additions. The Transportation Plan and the development of a schedule to conform with the State Planning Act of 1992 to address the visions and to update the Comprehensive Plan and other Ordinances.

There was a discussion concerning the abandoned railroad survey, the traffic model/traffic plan and the Forest Conservation Plan. Mr. Arch informed the Commission that Steve Goodrich is working on the Forest Conservation project. Workshop meetings and public information meeting with regard to the Forest Conservation Ordinance are tentatively scheduled for October and November. Public hearings and adoption by late November. The Ordinance must be officially adopted by December 31, 1992.

Water and Sewerage Plan: 180

Mr. Lung informed the Commission that the State requires that the Plan be updated every two years. He sUlnmarized the technical changes that are being proposed. He also stated that there is a need to address some policy issues within the Plan. The purpose of this discussion is to get the Commission's input as to the staff's proposals regarding these policy issues. The staff is considering changes in procedures that would streamline the review process for extending facilities within the Urban Growth Area. Mr. Lung stated that this could be accomplished by assigning a priority designation to all land areas within the Growth Area and it may involve the creation of a new service priority designation. Mr. Moser endorsed the idea and suggested that the town's be made aware of this change. Mr. Iseminger stated that higher priority designations should be given to specific areas within the Growth Area where the County wants growth to be directed. It was pointed out that giving an area a priority designation does not obligate the County or anyone else to the actual construction of the facilities within a certain time frame.

Mr. Lung stated that another issue that should be addressed within the Plan is a policy concerning connection to water and/or sewer lines that are located outside of the Growth Areas along with growth pressures created by the availability of facilities in the rural area and the resulting increase in density. Mr. Lung pointed out examples in the Sharpsburg/Keedysville area, Sandy Hook and Martins Crossroads and suggested that some sort of new service area designation may need to be devised to control qccess to these lines. The Planning Commission concurred with the staff that some sort of control is necessary. The Commission also recognized that it is far better for homes to be connected to public facilities than to depend on private wells and septic systems.

There was a discussion on how much development and at what density is acceptable in the rural areas along with the concept of clustering. The Commission asked the staff to explore the issue further and corne up with some alternatives to be presented to the Planning Commission at another meeting.

ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:00 P.M. 181

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING - AUGUST 17, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held a special meeting on Monday, August 17, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Carol Johnson, Bernard Moser, and Donald Spickler. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Associate Planner; Edward Schreiber and Secretary, Janet L. Walkley. Also present was County Engineer; Terrence McGee. Absent were Ronald L. Bowers and Steven West.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 5:35 P.M.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS: CD Food Lion Grocery Store: -q- ,...... Mr. Schreiber reminded Commission members that the Food Lion site is located at the Halfway Boulevard/Virginia Avenue intersection CO and gave a brief history of the plan. He stated that the Washington County Engineering Department completed a traffic z study which generated similar results to the consultant's study ~ and which indicated acceptable levels of service for that intersection. During a meeting with the State Highway Administration, County Engineer and consultant it was determined that the intersection of Halfway Boulevard/Virginia Avenue does work at an acceptable level of service. The problem is not with the actual intersection, it's with the access location for Home Federal Bank being to close to the intersection causing left turning movements in and out of the bank site to significantly impact traffiv flow through the intersection. The County is requesting that the developer provide a connection from Virginia Avenue via a right-of-way or easement through the Food Lion site for access to the bank property for cross flow traffic purposes, with the ultimate intent of providing the Food Lion and Home Federal Bank combined access to Halfway Boulevard in the future. If and when Home Federal requests modification to its site for an access onto Halfway Boulevard, its existing access onto Virginia Avenue would be revised to a right-turn in only as well as a right out only onto Halfway Boulevard. All other traffic movement for the bank property would need to access Food Lion through the right-of-way.

Mr. McGee briefly explained the existing problems with the access location for the bank with Virginia Avenue and how the Engineering Department came up with the level of service for the Halfway Boulevard/Virginia Avenue intersection. Mr. McGee informed the Commission that the State Highway Administration is requiring an accel/decel lane and by-pass lane along Route 11. Route 11 will be widened from Pizza Hut to Greenberry Road on the east side from the Home Federal Bank property line to Greenberry Road on the west side of Virginia Avenue.

Mr. Schreiber reviewed the proposed site plan for Commission members. Mr. Iseminger suggested that screening be provided along the western property line to shield the site from the adjacent RU zoning district as well as along Halfway Boulevard. Mr. Schreiber stated that the property slopes and is difficult to see from Halfway Boulevard, therefore, screening may not be required. Mr. Iseminger asked if there will be vegetative screening along the fence. Mr. Schreiber said no since the fence will be around the stormwater management pond. 182

Mr. Schreiber stated the developer is requesting preliminary subdivision and site plan approval. The staff is requesting the Commission grant staff authority to approve the final subdivision plat once all agencies are satisfied. Residents of Greenberry Road were present and submitted a petition. Residents of the area expressed concern for additional traffic, noice and additional commercial development in the area. They stated that the six foot high fence will not keep the noise and lights from the residential areas.

After a discussion, Mr. Zomhro made a motion to grant preliminary subdivision plat and site plan and grant the staff the authority to approve the final subdivision plat conditional on screening being provided along the western property line, trash pickup be limited to the hours between 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. and a statement being added to the plat regarding the easement and joint sharing in the construction of the access to Halfway Boulevard. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered.

EXECUTIVE SESSION:

Mr. Moser made a motion to go into Executive Session. Seconded by Mr. Zomhro.

AA-?VIA /' 183

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - SEPTEMBER 14, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Monday, September 14, 1992 in the first floor oonference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, EX-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Bernard Moser, and Donald Spickler. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich, Associate Planners; James P. Brittain, Timothy A. Lung, Lisa Kelly Pietro, Edward Schreiber and Secretary, Janet L. Walkley.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:00 P.M.

MINUTES:

<.0 Mr. Zombro made a motion to adopt the minutes of the August 3, "'¢ 1992 Regular Meeting as written. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ,- ordered. co Mr. Zombro made a motion to adopt the minutes of the August 10 z Special Meeting at written. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. ~ Mr. Iseminger stated that for the minutes of the Special Meeting 'of August 17, a sentence should be added to the motion indicating that an out parcel is being created with denied access to Virginia Avenue. Mr. Spickler made a motion to adopt the minutes of the August 17 Special Meeting as amended. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Mr. Bowers commented on the outcome of the Board of Zoning Appeals hearing regarding the Clean Rock Industries site plan. He added that in his opinion, the Board of Zoning Appeals should not have been able to approve the incomplete site plan. After a discussion, it was decided that a special meeting will be held at 6:15 P.M. on Monday, September 21, 1992 prior to the rezoning hearing to meet with Ralph France on the status of the Clean Rock site plan. The Planning Commission also requested that Zoning Administrator, Paul Prodonovich be asked to attend this meeting.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

Highland Manor East:

Mr. Lung reminded the Commission that during last month's meeting they reviewed the preliminary consultation and PUD concept for Highland Manor East. At that time, the written summary of the preliminary consultation was not available but has been sent out with the rezoning staff report. The County Engineer submitted some minor corrections to his comments regarding stormwater management for this development. During last month's meeting, the staff expressed concerns regarding the need for amenities and creativity in design, that only eight lots fronted on the open space area, housing types were segregated and that the commercial area was too large based on the density of the residential area. The consultant has revised the concept plan to address these concerns. The road layout has been revised to eliminate three of the four oul-de-sacs, the individual lot sizes have been reduoed and the oommon open space area has been inoreased, more of the lots are direotly oontiguous to the oommon open spaoe areas and a pedestrian system has been provided for aooess, more detail has been provided as to the layout of the apartment buildings, the proposed reoreation faoilities have been shown on the plan and some off-street parking areas have been provided. The number of lots has been inoreased to 276 total dwelling units. The applioant is also proposing a reduotion in front yard setback for the single-family lots as part of the PUD applioation. 184

Mr. Mer~e Holsinger, consultant, indicated that the revised plan shows the looping of roads through the development to permit additional access to the open space areas. He suggested that the County may be interested in a possible County park on the 12 acres of open space. Commission members expressed concern for future development adjacent to this development and Mr. Lung briefly explained the proposed Hunters Green development.

Mr. Lung informed the Commission that after the preliminary consultation written comments were received from the Maryland State Highway Administration requesting a provision for a connection off the road system for future development. A connection would be difficult due to the floodplain on the property and the difficulty in determining the type of development that could be proposed due to the adjacent property being zoned Highway Interchange. After a discussion it was decided that Mr. Lung contact the State Highway Administration and remind them of the proposed access for Hunters Green. The Commission expressed satisfaction with the revised concept and did not recommend any changes prior to the Public Hearing.

NEW BUSINESS: Variances:

David Bowers ISV-92-016):

Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for David Bowers. "The site is located along the north side of Bowers Farm Lane just west of Maryland Route 632. The variance is being requested from Section 405.11.B of the Subdivision Ordinance which states all lots shall have a minimum of 25 feet of public road frontage. The applicant is proposing to create 1 lot without public road frontage. The lot will not be conveyed to an immediate family member. The existing gravel lane will serve the new lot and also serves two existing dwellings. Mr. Russ Townsley, consultant, gave a brief overview of the property. Mr. Moser made a motion to grant the variance. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. So ordered. It was noted that David Bowers is not a relative of Ron Bowers.

Edward Norman ISV-92-017):

Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Edward Norman. The site is located along the south side of Lappans Road (Maryland Route 68) approximately I mile west of Route 65. The variance is being requested from Section 405.11.B.1 of the Subdivision Ordinance which states lots created for family members shall front on an existing lane or right-of-way. The applicant is proposing to create a 1.1 acre lot and convey it to an immediate family member. The lot would ultimately use the existing access to Maryland Route 68. Topographic conditions would not permit a typical subdivision. The plat will have the 10-year family member statement. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant the variance request. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

John R. Oliver - Northbrook Estates, Section B ISV-92-014): Mrs. Pietro presented the variance request for John R. Oliver. The site is located along the south side of Maryland Route 60. The variance is requested to reduce the future dedicated right­ of-way from 75 feet to 40 feet from centerline for the final plat of Northbrook Estates, Section B, Lots 62 through 113. Section 402 of the Subdivision Ordinance states all subdivision should conform with the requirements of the County's Highway Plan. The applicant was unaware of the 75 foot requirements until the submittal of the final plat for Northbrook Estates. A memo was received from the State Highway Administration recommending the 75 feet in order to widen Route 60 to a dual lane highway in the future. A discussion was held regarding the acquisition of right-of-way for the State Highway Administration to widen Route 60. Mr. Zombro made a motion to defer action on the variance for Northbrook Estates until additional information 185

can be obtained from the State Highway Administration. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered.

John Benisek (SV-92-015): Mrs. Pietro presented the variance request for John Benisek. The site is located along the north side of Virginia Avenue just west of Nursery Road. The variance is being requested to create a combined entrance serving two single-family lots that is within the 500 foot minimum distance for points of access. The proposed access for the single-family dwellings is approximately 200 feet from an existing access. The State Highway Administration has no problem with the request. The agency has stated that site distance is adequate. Mr. Moser made a motion to grant the variance request. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered.

Subdivisions:

Mary Warrenfeltz:

Mr. Schreiber presented the preliminary and final subdivision c.o plat for Mary Warrenfeltz, lots 1 through 4. The site is located along the northwest side of Newcomer Road approximately 1000 feet

~ west of Maryland Route 64. The applicant is proposing to create "" 4 lots on 3.71 acres. Zoning is Agricultural. The lots will be co served by individual wells and septic systems. All agency z approvals have been received. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant preliminary and final plat approval. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ~ ordered.

Mary Trumpower:

Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for Mary Trumpower, lots 5 through 9. The site is located along the south side of Barnhart Road just west of st. Pauls Church Road. Zoning is Agricultural. The applicant is proposing to create five single-family lots on approximately 5 acres. Proposed lot sizes will be .92 acres. Individual wells and septic systems will serve the lots. Access will be via Barnhart Road. All agency approvals have been received. Mr. Spickler made a motion to grant preliminary and final plat approval. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Rosewood Estates:

Mrs. Pietro presented the subdivision plat for Rosewood Estates; preliminary approval for lots 1 through 74 and final approval for lots 1 through 35. The site is located along the north side of Robinwood Drive. Total area of the site is 38 acres. Section A consists of 21 acres and is zoned Residential Suburban. The lots will be served by public water and sewer. All lots will be served by new public streets with varsity Lane connecting with Robinwood Drive. A 60 foot easement has been reserved for a possible connection to a proposed road that is shown on the County's Highway Plan. This road will connect Robinwood Drive with Eastern Boulevard. All agency approvals have been received. Mr. Bowers requested that an overview of the entire area be submitted when a large development is proposed. Mr. Bowers made a motion to grant preliminary approval for lots 1 through 74 and final approval for lots 1 through 34 for Rosewood Estates. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. Cedar Hills:

Mr. Iseminger informed the audience that he received numerous letters from the residents in the area and copies will be forwarded to all Commission members.

Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for Cedar Hills lots 1 through 20. The site is located along the east side of Old Forge Road. Zoning is Agricultural. The applicant is proposing to create 20 single-family lots with sizes 186

ranging from 1.2 to 11 acres. Total area of Phase I is 56 acres. A total of 180 acres remain. The lots will be served by individual wells and septic systems. The development has been scaled back due to the inadequacy of Old Forge Road. The developer will need to meet all requirements of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance in order to obtain more than 20 lots. All written agency approvals have been received except for the Health Department. The Health Department is in the process of testing two wells and written approval is conditional on the results of those wells.

Mr. Terrence McGee, County Engineer discussed the adequacy of Old Forge Road and the two bridges. He also discussed the requirements of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance that will need to be met prior to the creation of more than 20 lots. Mr. McGee added the County has concerns for the bridges on Old Forge Road and has plans to upgrade the one towards Route 62. He indicated the County has no plans for any improvements to Old Forge Road at this time. Mr. McGee indicated that Glenn Dull had previously approved twenty lots for development prior to the APFO.

Mr. Bowers expressed concern that the developer may not be able to make the project financially feasible if 60 lots are going to be subject to the APFO and therefore the developer may want to reconsider the entire proposed development. At this time Mr. Iseminger accepted comments from the residents "of the area.

Mr. Craig Clevenger asked if the development of 20 lots would be approved this evening, would the developer be permitted to develop the additional 60 lots without Planning Commission approval? Mr. Iseminger informed Mr. Clevenger that if the Commission were to grant approval of the 20 lots this evening, it would be for only 20 lots. Any additional development would need to meet the requirements of the APFO before obtaining Planning Commission approval.

Dr. Paul Waldman expressed concerns on the adequacy of Clopper Road since the County is of the opinion that most of the traffic will travel that direction to Maryland Route 62. He also expressed concern with expanding residential development close to the Independent Cement Corporation boundary line. He added that citizens in that area have been concerned with the burning of hazardous waste by ICC over the past year and adding additional residential development will only affect more citizens.

Pat Schooley informed the Commission that the Urban Growth Area boundary is approximately 2 to 3 miles away from this property. She indicated that a letter from Glenn Dull indicated that he would permit twelve lots but that he intended to change the daily trips per day from five to eight thus permitting the creation of 20 lots. Mrs. Schooley suggested that Mr. Shaool development 12 to 15 farmettes on his property in order to keep the Agricultural atmosphere pervasive in the area.

Mr. Clinton Stouffer, Deputy Fire Chief with the Leitersburg volunteer Fire Company, expressed concern with the bridges and the crossing of fire engines. He also expressed concern with the lack of fire hydrants in the Leitersburg area noting that the closest hydrant is approximately 3 miles away. 187

Dr. George Engstrom indicated he's concerned with the entire area and that the Shaool property should not be grandfathered in. It's Dr. Engstrom's opinion that granting this request will set a precedent for additional development in the area on inadequate roads.

After a discussion, Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant preliminary plat approval for 20 lots with final approval to be considered during the October Planning Commission meeting.* The Planning Commission indicated the developer should be contacted to ascertain that he is aware of the responsibilities required under the APFO after 20 lots are approved. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered.

Site Plans:

Coss Country Market: Mr. Lung presented the site plan for Coss Country Market. The site is located along the west side of Maryland Route 60 and is <.0 zoned Agricultural. The applicant is proposing to construct a "¢ 40' x 60' building for a produce stand. There is an existing .,.- building on the site which will be used for an indoor produce stand. The existing entrance off Route 60 will be used and has en been approved by the State Highway Administration. The existing z well and septic system will also be used. A variance was granted ~ by the Board of Zoning Appeals for a reduction in lot width, lot -area and side yard setback. Additional vegetative screen plantings along the northern and southern property lines due to adjacent dwellings has been provided as requested by the staff. All agency approvals have been received. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant site plan approv~l. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered.

Washington County Business Park, Lot "L" - Jeffcourt Realty:

Mr. Lung presented the preliminary subdivision plat and site plan for the Washington County Business Park Lot L. The site is located along the south side of Western Maryland Parkway. Zoning is Industrial General. The applicant is proposing to create an 80' x 80' office building on 2.03 acres. A total of 15 employees is proposed with 15 to 20 customers per day. A total of 25 parking spaces are provided. The parking area and main entrance to the building is located to the rear of the building. Public water and sewer will serve the site. All written agency approvals have been received except for the Health Department and County Engineer. The Health Department needs availability letters. The site plan has been revised per comments from the Zoning Administrator and needs to be reviewed by the Permits Department. The staff is requesting preliminary subdivision plat and site plan approval conditional on receipt of approval from the Health Department, County Engineer and review by the Permits Department. The staff is also requesting authority to approve the final subdivision plat. Mr. Spickler made a motion to grant preliminary plat and site plan approval conditional on Health Department, and County Engineer approval and review by the Permits Department. The Commission is also granting staff authority to approve the final plat. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

*Per Planning Commission meeting of October 5, 1992, preliminary approval is conditional upon Health Department approval. 188

Preliminary Consultation:

Julian Oliver: The written summary of the preliminary consultation was presented to the Commission with nothing being added by the staff. No action was taken by the Commission.

Byers Meadows of Downsville:

The written summary of the preliminary consultation was presented to the Commission with nothing being added by the staff. No action was taken by the Commission.

John Benisek: The written summary of the preliminary consultation was presented to the Commission with nothing being added by the staff. No action was taken by the Commission. Sandy Hook:

Mr. Goodrich distributed a letter from an adjacent property owner who has concerns regarding this development. The written summary of the preliminary consultation was presented to the Commission with nothing being added by the staff. No action was taken by "the Commission.

Crosspoint:

The written summary of the preliminary consultation was presented to the Commission with nothing being added by the staff. No action was taken by the Commission .

. St. James Manor:

Mr. Brittain reminded the Commission that during last month's meeting the Commission was informed of the staff's concerns regarding the under utilization of the PUD, the lack of looping roads and designation of the open space areas. He stated that comments have been received from the Historic District Commission suggesting the reuse of the buildings on the site. It was the HOC's opinion that the developer should be more sensitive to the historic significance of the site. Adequate land should be reserved around the structure.

Mr. Iseminger indicated that in large developments which generate a significant number of children in the surrounding schools, areas; possibly portions of the open space areas, could be reserved for future schools. A discussion followed and no action was taken by the Commission.

OTHER BUSINESS:

Towne Oak Village Home Owner's Association:

Mr. Goodrich stated that an arrangement has been made for the Home Owners' Association of Towne Oak Village to take title to and manage the common open space areas in the development. There is a statement on the plat for Towne Oak Village indicating Planning Commission approval is required prior to any transfer of responsibilities from the developer. Mr. Ralph France, County Attorney, has reviewed the Home Owners' Association documents and gave his approval. Mr. Zombro made a motion to approve transfer of ownership and maintenance responsibilities of the common open space area for Towne Oak Village to the Home Owners' Association. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. 189

Crosspoint Pre-Site Plan Concept:

Mr. Goodrich informed the Commission that the developer of Crosspoint is requesting the Commission's approval to submit a preliminary site plan for the Crosspoint development. Mr. Goodrich explained this request is permitted by the Zoning Ordinance but is not a common practice. A discussion was held regarding the construction of Massey Boulevard Extended and the elimination of Cole Road. Mr. Zombro made a motion to allow submittal of a preliminary site plan on the entire Crosspoint development. Seconded Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Highway Interchange Setback Determination: Thompson Towing Service:

Mr. Arch informed the Commission that a Highway Interchange setback determination needs to be made for Thompson Towing Service located in Clear Spring. Three uses are involved with c.o the property: 1) towing and recovery service which requires ~ approval by the Board of Zoning Appeals; 2) parking of school buses on the site which is a principle permitted use and 3) the ~ storage of trucks as a truck terminal which is also a principle co permitted use. The Planning Commission may want to require additional screening around the front of the property. Mr. Ken z Grove, Attorney for the applicants, gave a brief overview of the ~ property. Mr. Iseminger suggested additional screening be ·provided around the existing fence. Mr. Bowers made a motion that no additional setbacks will be required but additional screening along the fence should be shown on the site plan. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. Potomac Valley Farms Supply:

Mr. Arch stated that the applicant is proposing to add a building to an existing structure. The required setback in the HI district is 75 feet, however, there is only 40 feet available. The applicant will be approaching the Appeals Board for a reduction in the 75 foot setback. After a discussion, Mr. Spickler made a motion that no additional setbacks will be required and that site plan approval is granted to the staff. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered.

ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, Mr. Zombro made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:45 P.M. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. 191

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING - SEPTEMBER 21, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held a special meeting on Monday September 21, 1992 in Court Room One of the Court House. Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Ex-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Bernard Moser, Donald Spickler. Carol Johnson was absent. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch. County Attorney; Ralph France. Permits and Inspections: Director; Paul Prodonovich.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 6:15 P.M.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Cleanrock and the Decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals: Mr. France referred to the statutes and County ordinances, which CD were passed out to the Commission members. Mr. France referred to ..q Section 109 (Appeal) of the Washington County Subdivision v- Ordinance and read the definition aloud. He stated that pursuant to the terms of the Washington County Subdivision Ordinance an ee appeal from the Planning Commission can be made to the Board of z Zoning Appeals. Mr. France then referred to page 128, which is a copy of Article 25 relating the Board of Zoning Appeals and :2: establishes their powers and duties as stated in Article 66B Annotated Code of Maryland, he stated in addition to that they have powers and duties as stated in Section 25.2 and read aloud their powers and stated that it is a very general power. Mr. France then referred to page 129 Section 25.4 regarding an appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals and page 606, Article 66B of the Annotated Code. He pointed out to the last page, Item H. (Decision of the Board), which specified the powers of the Board of Appeals. Mr. France stated that in order for the Planning Commission to contend that the Board of Zoning Appeals does not have the authority to rule on a Site Plan determination made by the Planning Commission, they need to find a law that is contrary to what he has just reviewed. Mr. France then stated that a question was raised of whether the Planning Commission could take an appeal to the Circuit Court from the Board of Zoning Appeals decision and referred to a similar situation that took place a few years ago. Mr. France stated that the Planning Commission could take a contrary position, but would have to find a basis for it. Mr. Iseminger asked if what he was saying was that the Board of Zoning Appeals in fact had the right to act as the Planning Commission to reverse the Planning Commission decision and at the same time approve the site plan. Mr. France stated that under the State statutes and County ordinances, they did have the authority to do that and stated that once an appeal is taken from the Planning Commission decision, from that point on the Planning Commission is out of the case. Mr. Arch asked if the Planning Commission or Planning Staff should be at a Zoning Board of Appeals hearing. Mr. France stated no, once the appeal is made the Planning Commission and Staff is out of the case. Mr. Moser asked if at the Board of Zoning Appeals hearing if in deed site plan approval was given. Mr. France stated he believed the Board of Zoning Appeals approved the Site Plan as submitted. A discussion followed regarding if the site plan was approved, since the Board of Zoning Appeals did not sign it and several other points that are normally addressed, were not. Mr. Prodonovich stated that at the time he was first invited to the Planning Commission to discuss Clean Rock, the purpose was to discuss setbacks. He felt the biggest mistake made by the Planning Commission was in not filing a charge against him based on administrative error, since the Commission felt so strongly about him making the determination as he did. Since that was not done, the plan continued through the process and when it came back before the Commission they tried to deny it based on screening, traffic study and an environmental 192

impact study. He stated that only one of them had been discussed from the beginning (screening). The other two issues were not brought up before and that is what Clean Rock appealed. Mr. Iseminger disagreed about the environmental impact study, and stated that the State had requested one be done during the Preliminary Consultation. A discussion followed. Mr. Iseminger stated that the purpose of the meeting was to determine where they stand with this case. Mr. France stated that the Planning Commission is no longer part of the case, if the case has not been appealed by today, the next step would be for one party to appeal within 30 days of the Board of Zoning Appeals decision, then the Circuit Court would have to determine whether or not the decision stands. Mr. France will check into the approval signature on the plat. ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, Mr. Moser made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 6:35 P.M. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered

B' 193 WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - OCTOBER 5, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Monday, October 5, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Bernard Moser, Donald Spickler, Carol Johnson and Robert Ernst, II. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich, Associate Planners; TimothyA. Lung, Lisa Kelly Pietro, Edward Schreiber, Eric Seifarth and Secretary, Deborah S. Kirkpatrick.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:00 P.M. Before proceeding with the minutes the Board welcomed their new member, Robert E. Ernst, II and introduced the new secretary. Mr. Arch requested that an item be added to the agenda and one be deleted. Under subdivisions, Item 2 Donald Kershner, has been withdrawn by the consultant pending changes and based on the changes may be handled as a minor subdivision. Request to add CD Ralph Stotler, 1-4 lot subdivision, preliminary and final plat. At "¢ the time the agenda was prepared not all of the approvals had been received. The approvals are now in. The request is for expedition ~ purposes. Mr. Zombro made a motion to accept it as a preliminary OJ and final plat. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. Z MINUTES: ~ "Mr. Zombro stated that for the minutes of September 14, a sentence should be added to the motion granting preliminary plat approval to Cedar Hills Subdivision', that this is conditional on Health Department approval. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS!

John R. Oliver (Northbrook Estates, Section B):

Mrs. Pietro reminded the Commission that during last month's meeting, a variance was presented for Northbrook Estates Section B, Final Plat. The variance was for the reduction in the future dedication of the 75 foot right-of-way from the centerline to 40 feet. Mrs. Pietro explained that since this was the last section of the development, it was too late to get the extra right-of-way, since the entrances, lots, and public streets have been put in. State Highway has not changed their position. They do not know when they will expand Route 60 but would like to have the right-of­ way if they needed it. At this time, nothing is planned. No money has been set aside. Mrs. Pietro stated she would like to present the final plat for Northbrook Estates for approval, even though it is not on the agenda, since per the last Planning Commission meeting, the members requested that it be brought back. Mrs. Pietro asked if the Commission would like to see the plat now or wait until subdivisions. The Commission decided to proceed. Mrs. Pietro presented the plat to the Commission. The site is located on the east side of Leitersburg Pike (MD Route 60). The developer is proposing 52 single family lots. Total area of Section B is 42 acres. The preliminary plat was approved in March of 1991. At that time the Planning Commission requested that all final plats for Northbrook Estates be brought back for approval. All lots are to be served by public water and sewer and all the needed agency approvals have been received. All the needed permits for the wetlands and floodplain have been taken care of. The only thing pending is the future dedicated right-of-way. Mr. Iseminger questioned if preliminary and final approval was given to Section A. Mrs. Pietro answered yes and that it is under construction. There was some discussion regarding the right-of-way in Section A. Mr. Iseminger asked if wetlands fall within the 70 foot right-of­ way. The developer, Mr. Oliver, stated that they do and pointed to their location on the plat, for only a 10 or 15 foot wide strip. 194 Mr. Oliver was given the opportunity to add anything else. Mr. Iseminger stated that at the previous meeting Mr. Bowers was to ask the Commissioners if they had any plans to dualize the road. Mrs. Pietro stated that she has not heard anything. A discussion was held regarding the right-of-way. Mr. Spickler moved to grant the variance. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. So moved. Mr. Ernst and Mrs. Johnson both abstained. Mr. Moser moved to grant final approval for Section B. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. Cedar Hills East:

Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for Cedar Hills East lots 1 through 20. The site is located along the east side of Old Forge Road. All the agency approvals are in. They are still awaiting the results of the Health Department well test. Mr. Johnson of Davis, Renn and Associates, Inc. stated that he has contacted the company testing the wells and they should have the results sometime next week. There was some discussion regarding the location of the bridge. Mr. Iseminger stated that final approval was being withheld, in order to give Mrs. Pietro the time to notify the developer and be sure the developer is aware of all of the constraints involved with application of the APFO. Mr. Shaool stated that he understands what is involved. Mr. Johnson, consultant, stated that they were looking for final approval this evening contingent upon the results of the well test. There was a discussion regarding what would happen if the test failed. Mr. Iseminger expressed the concerns of the commission regarding the capacity of the old bridge. Mr. Iseminger stated that the Commission would only act on the first 20 lots. Mr. Zombro moved to grant final approval of the 20 lots contingent on Health Department approval. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. Mr. Moser voted no and Mrs. Johnson abstained.

NEW BUSINESS: Variances:

Steve Gatz (SV-92-18l: Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Steve Gatz. The site is located on the west side of Crystal Falls Drive, approximately 3,000 feet south of Mt. Aetna Road. The classification of Crystal Falls Drive is local. The variance is being requested from Section 405.11.G.5 of the Subdivision Ordinance. This request is to create a 2.6 acre lot with an 830 foot panhandle due to the irregular shape of the lot. There will be approximately 3 acres remaining. The property is zoned Conservation, however, there is public water available from the Mt. Aetna Water Company so the lot size and setbacks can follow the Agricultural zone requirements. There was some discussion regarding the water hookup and if this was a hardship case. Mr. Schreiber stated that the hardship was the irregular shape of the lot. There was further discussion regarding the origination of the lot and the water hookup and if there are any other lots with similar configuration in the area. Mr. Schreiber stated that there are other lots in the area that could be resubdivided. Mr. Iseminger stated he was concerned in setting a precedent in that area if this variance was granted. The Commission felt that these lots were originally created under Conservation zoning with the intent that they would be larger than 3 acres. Mr. Spickler made a motion to deny the variance. Seconded by Carol Johnson. So ordered.

Gloria Wolford (SV-92-19):

Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Gloria Wolford. The site is located on the north side of Mt. Tabor Church Road, approximately 300 feet west of Kaiser Ridge Road. The applicable restriction in this case is when a lot is created for family members without road frontage, the lot shall stay in the family for a period of 5 years. This is contrary to what is now in effect. It is now 10 years as per Section 405.11.B.l of the Subdivision Ordinance. This request is for the current owners, who are members of the Gloria Wolford family, to convey the lot outside of the immediate family with approximately 1 year and 9 months remaining . 195 out of the original agreement that was signed by Gloria Wolford in 1989. Their hardship is enclosed in the packet handed out. A discussion was held regarding the right-of-way involved. Mr. Zombro moved to grant the variance request. Seconded by Mrs. Johnson. So ordered.

FMW Partnership: Mr. Goodrich presented the variance request for FMW Partnership, the developers of Crosspoint. The site is bounded on the west by I-8l, on the east by U.S. Rt. II/Conrail, on the north by Cole Road and the Valley Mall and on the south by Eckstine Road. The variance is requested for Section 4 of Crosspoint. The request is to create 54+ townhouse lots without public road frontage. The lots will be fronting on the interior access roads in the development. This design and request for variance are not unusual. Mr. Goodrich stated that the common areas will be maintained by the homeowners association. Mr. Moser stated that the Commission has granted this type of variance before. It was suggested that the staff investigate an amendment to the Subdivision Ordinance to address the situation. There was a discussion regarding reviewing the proposed homeowner's association covenants and driveway and parking standards. Mr. Moser made a motion to grant the variance. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. So ordered. <.0 "¢ Millyyille (SV-92-20\: ,.- Mr. Schreiber explained the variance request for Ted Kretzer. The co site is located on the south side of U.S. Route 40 about one-half z mile west of Ashton Road. The variance is being requested from Section 405.2.A all new accesses along minor collectors shall be ~ .spaced at 500 foot intervals. The request is to reduce the 500 foot separation down to approximately 150 feet to serve 4 lots. Mr. Schreiber explained what had been previously reviewed in the preliminary consultation. There was a discussion regarding the other properties in the area, the site distance and environmental constraints and other design options. There was a discussion concerning if this is a hardship and if the owner plans to subdivide the remaining land. Mr. Moser moved to deny the variance. Seconded by Carol Johnson. So ordered. Subdivisions: Woodbridge: Mr. Lung presented the subdivision plat for Woodbridge, Section A for preliminary approval. The site is located on the northeast side of Robinwood Drive. The applicant is proposing to create 156 single family lots and a commercial lot in this phase. A revised P.U.D. concept plan was approved in February 1990. The lot requirements for a P.U.D. were explained. Public water and sewer will serve the lots. The required off-site improvements and the County Engineer's request that provision be made for the possible future connection of Rambling Pines Place (a cul-de-sac) to Keefer Funk Road were discussed. Storm water management will be handled by two on site facilities. The commercial parcel will require site plan approval before any development can be approved. The P.U.D. requirements for phasing the commercial development to the residential development were discussed. There is a 5 acre parcel in the middle of the development, which belongs to the Washington County Association of Retarded Citizens. A stipulation when the concept plan was given approval, was that this 5 acre parcel be provided road frontage, which has been done via a simplified conveyance. All agency approvals have been received. Applicant is requesting preliminary subdivision approval. There was a discussion regarding the purpose of the future connection to Keefer Funk Road. Mr. Spickler made a motion to grant preliminary approval. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. 196 Locust Place:

Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for Locust Place, lots 1 through 5. The site is located on the north side of Robinwood Drive, zoning is Residential. These 5 lots are located at the bottom of Varsity Lane, which is part of Rosewood. The developer is proposing 5 single family lots. Total area of the subdivision is 2 acres. There are no existing structures on the property, public sewer and water will serve the property. AIlS lots will access onto Varsity Lane. All approvals have been received. There was a discussion regarding the location of the property. Mr. Zombro moved to grant preliminary and final plat approval. Seconded by Carol Johnson. So ordered. Richard Huntzberry: Mrs. Pietro presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for Richard Huntzberry, for lots I through 3. The site is located on the north side of Republican Avenue, west of Rt. 66 near Cavetown. The zoning is agriculture. The developer is proposing to create 3 lots, sizes between 2.5 and 3 acres with a 3 acre remainder. There are no existing houses on the proposed lots. There is a duplex on the remainder. All lots will be served by individual wells and septic systems. The 2 panhandle lots meet all the requirements. All agency approvals have been received. There was a discussion regarding what had been previously proposed and how this present plat has been changed. Mr. Zombro made a motion to grant preliminary and final plat approval. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. Ralph Stotler: Mr. Schreiber presented the preliminary and final subdivision plat for Ralph Stotler, lots 1 through 4 and parcel A. The site is located on the northeast corner of Whitehall Road and Mt. Aetna Road. Zoning is Agricultural. The comprehensive plan designation is Rural Agricultural. The site consists of 14 acres. The lots will range from 1 to 8.3 acres. White Hall Road is a local road. Twenty-five feet of road dedication will be required. The site will utilize Greenbriar Elementary, Smithsburg Middle and Smithsburg High Schools. It is utilizing private well and septic systems and is exempt from adequate facilities ordinance by Section 5.B of the Road Adequacy Policy. All agency approvals have been received. The remaining lands are 14.6 acres. There was a discussion regarding the exemption from the Adequate Facilities Ordinance. Mr. Zombro moved to grant preliminary and final approval. Seconded by Carol Johnson. So ordered.

Agricultural Land Preservation District Applications:

Mr. Seifarth presented two requests for agricultural land preservation districts. The first request was for Maurice and Betty Williams (AD 92-9). This is a dairy operation and is located in the Big Spring area and is contiguous to two other Ag Districts and consists of 100.75 acres. The property is located outside of the urban and town growth areas and has no water and sewer. It has been approved by the Advisory Board.

The second request is for Lisa Leather (AD 92-10). This is a dairy operation and is located along the north side of Spielman Road (MD 63) 1 mile east of Downsville and consists of 178.91 acres. The property is outside of the urban and town growth areas and has no water and sewer. Mr. Spickler moved to recommend the two districts to the Commissioners. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Mr. Iseminger asked Mr. Seifarth to give an update on the Agricultural Program Certification whereby the County will receive an additional 42 percent of agricultural transfer tax money. Mr. Seifarth stated, since the meeting he, Mr. Arch and Mr. Goodrich had with the State Planning, he has been in touch with the State numerous times in the past two months. The State is concerned with our zoning ordinance regulations as they pertain to agriculture. They do not feel the designated areas are restrictive enough. Mr. Seifarth explained what he has done to comply with their requests. 197 They will meet again in October. The State has been informed that the Planning Commission would like to be certified by the end of the year. The State does not see a problem. There was some discussion on the State being low on funding. Mr. Spickler discussed reconvening the blue ribbon Study Committee that was in existence two years ago. The Planning Commission will write a letter to the Board of County Commissioners to request the reconvening of the Study Committee. There was a discussion regarding a special meeting with the Ag Preservation group and the Planning Commission. Mr. Seifarth will call the Chairman of the Ag Preservation group to arrange this. Other Business

James Wade Site Plan: Mr. Goodrich referred to a letter from Fred Frederick, consultant, regarding a proposed liquor store on the west side of Sharpsburg Pike, south of the interchange with Interstate 70. Mr. Frederick is requesting that the Commission give the staff the authority to grant site plan approval when it is ready to be approved instead of waiting until a regularly scheduled meeting. Mr. Frederick explained the history of the site, what they have gone through with (0 the Board of Zoning Appeals and other agencies, and changes which ~ have been made to the site plan and what changes and improvements ,..- will be made to the property. There was some discussion regarding the location and screening. Mr. Spickler moved to approve the site OJ plan contingent upon all requirements being met. Seconded by Mrs. Z Johnson. Mr. Ernst abstained. So ordered. ~ Continental Investment Corporation: Mr. Iseminger referred to the letter from Mr. Mosher regarding Continental Investment Corporation, for information purposes only. So noted.

Recycling Text Amendment: Mr. Goodrich presented the current proposed wording for the amendment to the zoning ordinance, which would go into the section describing Site Plan requirements, Section 4.11 of the zoning Ordinance. There was some discussion regarding the wording. Mr. Spickler suggested changing the word "may" to "will" and eliminate the last sentence. The revision will be presented to the Solid Waste Advisory Board and then presented at the upcoming workshop meeting. The text amendment will be presented at the November 9th rezoning hearing, schedules permitting.

Millyyille:

Mr. Ted Kretzer, the owner of Millyville, arrived after his variance had been heard. The Planning Commission informed him that his request was denied due to lack of hardship. Mr. Kretzer was advised if he had any questions to speak to the planning staff.

Board of Education Request:

Mr. Arch presented the Board of Education's request for permission to use the preliminary site plan approval process for the renovation of the Paramount School. There was a similar request at the last meeting, which was granted. There was a discussion regarding the benefits to Paramount School by proceeding this way. Mr. Moser moved to grant permission. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. Workshop Meeting:

Mr. Arch reviewed with the Commission the upcoming items: forest conservation, solid waste management plan, sewer and water plan, rezoning hearings, the joint meeting with the Boonsboro Planning Commission on October 19th, trying to schedule a meeting with Frederick County Planning Commission and in December they will start with the Public meetings for the Highway Interchange Study. 198 There was some discussion regarding the items which need to be covered at a workshop. Mr. Arch discussed the State deadlines for meeting the first two requirements of the new Planning Act. The workshop meeting was scheduled for Monday, October 26, 1992 at 5:30 P.M. first floor conference room. There was further discussion regarding scheduling the meeting with Frederick County.

Mr. Arch discussed the copy the City of Hagerstown Downtown Improvement Study and asked if there were any comments. Neither the staff nor the Planning Commission had any comments.

Adjournment:

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:30 P.M.

Be IsemingerY Chairman 199

JOINT MEETING WASHINGTON COUNTY AND BOONSBORO PLANNING COMMISSIONS OCTOBER 19, 1992

The Washington County and Boonsboro Planning Commissions held a joint meeting on Monday October 19, 1992 at 7:00 P.M. in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building. Members present were: (Washington County) Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice-Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Ex-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Bernard Moser, Donald Spickler, Robert Ernst, II and Carol Johnson. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Associate Planner; Jim Brittain. (Boonsboro) Bob Synder, Dick Gross, Linda Green and John Clark.

CALL TO ORDER:

The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:00 P.M.

(0 OTHER BUSINESS: ~ ,.- Mr. Arch stated the purpose of this joint meeting was to exchange ideas on mutually similar problems and issues including amendments co to the Transportation Plan for the Boonsboro by-pass and the z addressing of the requirements of the Planning Act of 1992. ~ Amendment to the Transportation Plan for the Boonsboro By-Pass:

Mr. Brittain referred to copies of the Planning Act and other municipal related material, which had been distributed. Mr. Brittain presented a portion of the County Highway Plan for the Boonsboro area showing the 5 minor arterials that lead into Boonsboro and proceeded to explain the proposed plan in detail and gave a description of the proposed by-pass around Boonsboro. Mr. Brittain stated that in discussions with the Boonsboro Planning Commission they tried to determine their primary objective and decided they needed a method to move traffic from MD Rt. 67 to MD Rt. 68. Secondary consideration was Alt. Rt. 40 to MD Rt. 66 and MD Rt. 67 to Alt. Rt. 40. Mr. Brittain stated they took into consideration the economic and environmental impact when evaluating the alignment. The Commission did not want an alignment that would affect existing houses but could be incorporated into proposed developments. He pointed to several parcels that are currently vacant, but stated there are several potential developments in those areas. Mr. Brittain further stated that if these properties were utilized, a road could be run from MD Rt. 67 to MD Rt. 68. Mr. Brittain stated that the growth pattern and the development of utilities lends itself to the area he suggested for the by-pass. Mrs. Johnson asked how the by-pass around Boonsboro would impact on the Town's economy. Mr. Brittain stated that Boonsboro's Main Street is congested but they are currently handling the traffic. When the tracts of land (previously referred to) are developed, the Town would be able to connect them with the road and by-pass Main Street. He stated the purpose is to have a road run parallel to Rt. 40A to serve the growth area and reduce future impacts on the downtown area. Mr. Brittain felt there would still be enough traffic to support the downtown businesses. He indicated that until additional parking is available in the downtown area revitalization will be restricted and referred to Leroy Burtner of EDC for further comments.

Mr. Synder commented that the Town Center zoning is locked in and cannot grow any larger. He stated Boonsboro currently has nearly 100 percent occupancy and felt that by-passing the downtown may actually help as far as parking is concerned. Mr. Iseminger asked if there are sufficient services available in the immediate area to service the residents of Boonsboro. Mr. Synder stated yes and that the areas Mr. Brittain pointed out for future development would include commercial areas, i.e. grocery stores, etc. Mr. Brittain referred to the Town's Comprehensive Plan along the by-pass 200 corridor, stating that there are indications to provide commercial zoning. Mr. Iseminger asked if this was the only alignment studied. Mr. Brittain stated that three were reviewed. Mr. Brittain stated he recently met with Gary Rohrer, Terry McGee and Bob Arch regarding the alignment. It was felt that step 1 should be to set a general alignment that all parties can agree upon. Terry McGee's recommendation is a corridor about 300 feet in width based on the·proposed alignment. Aerial photogrammetry would be obtained so he could engineer and set an alignment. After agreement is obtained on the centerline, a public hearing would have to be held to amend the County Highway Plan.

Mr. Arch pointed out that the property involved is primarily in the County and that is why it is before a joint meeting. Mr. Iseminger stated he is not sure if the by-pass will achieve what they are hoping for and is afraid it will be like Eastern Boulevard and do nothing but encourage development along the new road. Mr. Iseminger stated the by-pass should go from Rt. 40A to Rt. 40A, by shifting it out. A discussion followed. Mr. Moser stated that what is being proposed is actually to handle the growth and alleviate some of the existing traffic conditions. He asked if the Town is looking for developer participation in the by-pass. A discussion followed regarding what the Town of Boonsboro was trying to achieve by using this design and future developments. Mr. Synder stated the Town of Boonsboro feels the most important opjective is to get a dedicated right-of-way. A discussion followed regarding road construction and who will pay for it. Mr. Brittain stated it is the intention of the Town of Boonsboro to have the developers construct the portion traversing their parcel. Mr. Synder stated there may be a section that will not tie to Rt. 34 and years from now that section may have to be built with public funds. Mr. Brittain stated it is felt that all parcels along the by-pass will be annexed into the Town at some future date. The entire corridor is within the Boonsboro TGA. The Town will request each developer to provide a 100 foot right-of-way and construct the road (paving width) to handle their development. As the Town and County grow, the average daily traffic will increase to the point where Government will have to widen the road at some point. Mr. Iseminger suggested planning now to have the agreements in place with the people who will be widening the road at some point. Mr. Moser asked if what they wanted was a 100 foot right-of-way with 60 feet of it being constructed by the developer. Mr. Brittain stated the developer's requirement would be based upon the level of development. Mr. Synder stated the Town of Boonsboro wants the alignment set and built as development requires. He stated as far as setting a time frame for when this road should be built depends on how fast development comes in. Mr. Iseminger asked if any action was required by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission is in favor of what was presented. No action was required at this time. Mr. Arch stated the staff is currently working with the County Engineer to set an alignment. Once that is done, they will set up a public hearing. Deadlines:

Mr. Arch stated that on December 1, 1992 both the Town and the County must have in place a mechanism for looking at potential Capital Improvement projects for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan.

Mr. Arch stated that by December 31, 1992 both the Town and the County must have to the State an outline of a schedule for meeting the implementation requirements for the new visions. Forest Conservation Bill:

The next item discussed was the Forest Conservation Bill, which will be presented at the October 26, 1992 special meeting. Mr. Arch reviewed the items that will be on that agenda. One of them 201

interested in establishing a larger committee. Mr. Moser wanted to know, regarding the Water and Sewer Plan, if the Town of Boonsboro requested water and sewer designation for the remainder of the growth area outside the town. Mr. Brittain indicated designations were proposed only for proposed development and not the entire area. A discussion followed. Mr. Arch stated that they are looking to create two new classifications within the Water and Sewer Plan update. The first one will address areas outside the Urban Growth and Town Growth areas. The second item is to create another designation inside the Urban Growth area. This would give a blanket classification. A discussion followed. Mr. Iseminger asked if the Boonsboro Planning Commission had any questions. Mr. Synder stated no, and thanked the Commission for giving them the opportunity to air their concerns regarding the bypass.

ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:00 P.M. (0 ..q-,.... CD B Z ~ 203

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING - OCTOBER 26, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held a special meeting on Monday, October 26, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Bernard Moser, Donald Spickler, Carol Johnson and Robert Ernst, II. Ronald L. Bowers was absent. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich and Secretary, Deborah S. Kirkpatrick.

CALL TO ORDER:

The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 5:30 P.M.

CD FIRST ITEM: ~ ,.- Demolition Permits: CO Mr. Goodrich explained the County Commissioner's policy of 1989 Z regarding the review of demolition permit applications. Mr. ~ Goodrich stated the two applications being presented tonight are on -the Historic Site Survey and have been reviewed by the Historic District Commission. Mr. Goodrich reviewed the applications as follows:

1) 92-6568 - Church of the Brethren Campground on Taylors Landing Road. The Historic District Commission voted to voice no opposition to the demolition. Mr. Spickler made a motion to accept the recommendation to not oppose the demolition permit. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. So ordered.

2) 92-6809 - The Estate of Irene B. Fulton, 17718 Virginia Avenue. Mr. Goodrich stated that this house is located on part of the site that is to be developed as the Virginia Avenue Food Lion. The Historic District Commission is not in favor of demolition. Mr. Goodrich stated that Mr. Fulton, representing the owner, did not have a chance to speak at that meeting. Mr. Goodrich stated that the Historic District Commission felt that it was not necessary for the building to come down at all. Mr. Goodrich explained the purpose of the County Survey. There was a discussion regarding the location of the house and whether it has historical significance. Mr. Fulton, representing the owner, stated that he grew up next to the subject house and was not aware of any historical significance. He also stated that the subject house had been used as a rental property, is in poor condition and felt that it is not compatible with the surrounding area. There was a discussion regarding the purpose of the County Survey, the demolition permit policy and whether the property had potential for restoration. Mr. Fulton stated the property had no restoration potential. He pointed out that the property had previously gone before the Commission for site plan approval (granted), had been rezoned and at that time everyone was aware the property would be torn down. A discussion followed. Mr. Iseminger stated that the comments of the Historic District Commission and the Planning Commission regarding the demolition permit are not binding to the owner and are for information only, so that the owner can think about other courses of action. Mr. Iseminger stated that in light of the development in the area, he felt there is not much value in retaining the structure. A discussion followed regarding the grading and siting of Food Lion on the property. Mr. Zombro moved to not endorse the Historic District Commission's decision. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. Mr. Ernst abstained. So ordered. 204

Letter from Agricultural Advisory Board:

Mr. Arch reviewed the letter with the Commission. Mr. Arch stated that the Advisory Board is not interested in reconvening a large committee. Mr. Spickler stated that was not the point of the Planning Commission's request. The Planning Commission wanted the Advisory Board to consider the alternatives to the Agriculture Land Preservation Program, since the State program is in demise and there other things the County can do. After a discussion, Mr. Arch suggested going on record to express concerns and forward it to the Advisory Board for consideration. There was further discussion regarding the memo and what the Planning Commission wanted to achieve and alternatives to down zoning. Mr. Iseminger stated that should be the subject of another workshop meeting. Mr. Spickler suggested waiting until next year. Mr. Arch stated that there is another meeting coming up on the State certification. Mr. Goodrich discussed what Eric Seifarth has done to date and what they are waiting on. A discussion followed.

Mr. Iseminger stated that even though it is not on the agenda, he wanted to mention there is a Public Information hearing on the Forest Conservation Plan tentatively scheduled for November 16. Mr. Arch stated that this hearing is for information only and that the formal hearing would be at a later date. Mr. Goodrich stated that the purpose of the public information hearing was to distribute the ordinance and allow the public to hear a general explanation of the bill and ask questions. There was a discussion concerning the date of the information hearing and other items that need to be addressed. Mr. Zombro suggested having the public information hearing on Tuesday, November 17, 1992. Mr. Goodrich stated he will make arrangements to hold the meeting at the Jr. College. Mr. Iseminger asked if the memo from Rich Kautz regarding the Comprehensive Plan is just for information. Mr. Arch answered yes. Forest Conservation: Mr. Goodrich passed out a second copy of the draft of the Forest Conservation Ordinance to the Planning Commission noting it was printed without the additions and deletions. Mr. Goodrich stated that the draft he previously gave to the Commission was the State's model with the Planning Department's deletions and completions. Mr. Goodrich stated that in 1991 the State adopted the Forest Conservation Act. The act required each county to adopt a local forest conservation program by January 1993. Mr. Goodrich further stated that the Planning Department was unable to start working on it until final regulations were adopted in February of 1992. Mr. Goodrich explained the purpose of the law. He stated there are three factors that govern what must be done: 1) The type of development 2) Whether there are trees on the site (the criteria is different if there are no trees) and 3) How many of the trees are planned to be removed during development. These three items will govern how many trees can be taken out and how many have to be planted. Mr. Goodrich stated that the purpose of the meeting tonight was to give the Planning Commission a general overview of how the program works and concentrate on some of the Commission'S responsibilities. Mr. Goodrich asked the Commission to think about the possibility of how this ordinance can be used to further the Comprehensive Plan goals.

Mr. Goodrich reviewed several of the terms that are often used in the Plan such as Forest Stand Delineation, Forest Conservation plan, Declaration of Intent, Maintenance Agreement and Protective Agreement.

Mr. Goodrich presented a general overview of the Plan. He referred to page 11, Section 3.1A where it specifies the applicability of the Ordinance to subdivisions, site plans or site grading on parcels of land that are 40,000 square feet or greater. 205

There are 16 exemptions. He reviewed some of the more pertinent ones such as activity on lots that are less than 40,000 square feet, simplified subdivisions, and applications that are made before the effective date of the ordinance. There was a lengthy discussion regarding the difference between the County draft, which would exempt land use proposals from the Ordinance if a Preliminary Consultation was held before the effective date and the State model, which indicates preliminary plan submittal as the goal to meet before January 1993 for exemption. Some Commission members appeared ready to remove the Preliminary Consultation as an exempting step while others wished to complete the review before deciding.

Mr. Goodrich stated that some of the other exemptions are: lots that go to immediate family members, disturbing less than 40,000 square feet of forest; and development on an existing single lot of any size if you disturb less than 40,000 square feet of forest. Agricultural activities are also exempt under certain conditions.

(0 Mr. Goodrich stated that there would be a checklist for the Planning Department and Permits Office to use in determining v applicants. He said that once it is determined that the ordinance ,..... is applicable, the owner must present a Forest Stand delineation, co which is an inventory and prioritization of the tree cover on the site. The delineation is set up as a separate step, so priorities z can be determined before design of the subdivision or a site plan. :::2: The Delineation is to be approved by the Department, meaning the "Planning Commission. Mr. Iseminger asked who prepares the delineation plan. Mr. Goodrich stated that this plan is prepared by landscape architects, foresters and several other professionals that meet specific qualification stated in the Ordinance. There was discussion regarding who prepared the manual and if there was a need for the Planning Commission to hire additional staff. Mr. Arch stated that at this time the Planners will have to handle this and that the staff will undergo additional training. There was a discussion regarding the Planning Commission going to a DNR workshop.

Mr. Goodrich stated that the next step is the Forest Conservation Plan. He said that this section is where the biggest Planning Commission responsibility lies. If the applicant proposes to make a payment instead of planting, the Commission must decide if that is appropriate. A discussion followed. Mr. Goodrich stated that the guidance for the Planning Commission to follow in deciding whether the developer pays or plants is contained in Articles 8 and 10. The rest of the ordinance was briefly discussed.

Mr. Arch stated that site inspection will be the responsibility of Engineering Department and bonding will be the responsibility of Permits Department. The Planners will do the plan review and client contact.

Mr. Goodrich next explained the numerical standards and how they apply to a particular site. He presented examples for both afforestation and reforestation, the breakeven point and the reforestation thresholds as per the guidelines of the ordinance. A discussion followed. Mr. Iseminger stated this seems to be contrary to what the Comprehensive Plan states. This leads to the question of whether the Planning Commission wished to use this ordinance to discourage development in the agricultural areas. The threshold and the minimum afforestation levels could be raised in the rural areas to a point where it would encourage developers to go to the growth areas. Mr. Iseminger stated his opinion that lands outside of the Urban Growth Area should have the thresholds increased. Mr. Spickler stated he does not feel that an ordinance designed to protect trees should be used to achieve another agenda. A discussion followed. Mr. Iseminger suggested adding to the agricultural resource areas definition the special planning areas, noted in the Comprehensive Plan such as water sheds, Appalachian Trail, Edgemont Reservoir. 206

Mr. Iseminger asked if special planning areas should be put in. There was a discussion regarding putting special areas in and the difficulty of implementing it and what areas would be included. Mr. Moser moved to delete the Preliminary Consultation as exempting submittals from requirement of the Ordinance from the draft. Seconded by Carol Johnson. So ordered. Mr. Iseminger proposed to add Special Planning areas to the same afforestation and reforestation levels as the agricultural and resource areas. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. Mr. Moser stated that he will not be attending the next regular Planning Commission Meeting to be held on November 2, 1992. There was a discussion regarding the rezoning cases and if there would be enough members in attendance. Mr. Iseminger stated, since they will be at the Rezoning meeting on the 10th that they should postpone hearing the rezoning cases until then. Mr. Arch stated that the staff reports will be handed out at the November 2, 1992 meeting. It was agreed to review the zoning cases at the November 10, 1992 meeting. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, Mr. Zombro made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:45 P.M. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. Stv~ ~_e:tfrand 207

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - NOVEMBER 2, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Monday, November 2, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building.

Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, EX-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Donald Spickler, Carol Johnson and Robert Ernst, II. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich, Associate Planners: Edward Schreiber, Lisa Kelly Pietro, Timothy A. Lung and Secretary, Deborah S. Kirkpatrick. Absent was Bernard Moser.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:00 P.M.

MINUTES:

Mr. Spickler referred to page 5 under James Wade Site Plan and co stated that the following be added after "requirements being met": oc::t "the staff given authority to approve". Mr. Iseminger stated ,- starting on page 2 so moved should be changed to so ordered. Steve co Gatz, Gloria Wolford, FMW partnership, Millyville, Locust Place, Huntzberry, Stotler, Agricultural Land Preservation District z Application, James Wade Site Plan, Board of Education Request. ~ Motion to approve. Seconded by Carol Johnson. So Ordered. Before proceeding, Mr. Arch stated that Mr. Fred Papa requested to add F&M Partnership under Other Business to next Tuesday'S agenda for the special meeting to look at the rezoning request. Mr. Arch stated that the other items on the agenda are items 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 under Other Business of tonight's agenda. Mr. Papa stated that the site plan was submitted a month ago and that the planning staff did not have time to review the plan in time to make the November agenda. Mr. Papa stated he does not want to wait until the December meeting in case there are significant changes. Mr. Iseminger asked the Commission how they felt about addressing this item before the rezoning meeting. Mr. Arch suggested answering this at the end of the rezoning meeting. Discussion followed. Mr. Iseminger stated his concern in taking action on a preliminary site plan until action takes place on the rezoning. Mr. Arch agreed. A discussion followed. Mr. Iseminger asked the Commission how they felt reviewing the site plan on November 17 before the public hearing. All Commission members agreed to review the site plan on November 17, 1992 at 6:30 p.m.

Mr. Iseminger stated that the rezonings for FMW Partnership, St. James Corporation, Potomac Edison Company, Wayne and Carol Gersen, Bowman Development and Essential Utilities will be heard on November 10, 1992 at 3:00 p.m. in the first floor conference room, after the joint session with the County Commissioners. Discussion followed.

NEW BUSINESS:

Variances:

Calvin Mills (SV-92-023):

Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Calvin Mills. The site is located on the north side of Maryland Route 68, approximately 400 feet west of Ashton Road. The classification of Maryland Route 68 is major collector. The variance is being requested from Section 405.2A of the Subdivision Ordinance. This request is to create another driveway within an existing driveway access (within 100 feet). The original lot consists of approximately 3 acres, 2 acres will be remaining, 1 acre in the new lot. Zoning is Agriculture. This request is not to avoid a safety problem. Mr. Frederick of Frederick, Seibert and Associates stated that Mr. Mills wants to convey the lot to his son. This property 208

cannot be further subdivided. Mr. Frederick stated that the hardship is that they have no more road frontage. Mr. Iseminger asked if they will put the stipulation on the plat that it is conveyed to a family member for at least 10 years. Mr. Mills stated he would do that. Mr. Bowers moved to grant the variance contingent on Mr. Mills agreeing to the ten year stipulation for a family member. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. So ordered. Kenneth L. Myers, Sr. (SV-92-0211: Mrs. Pietro presented the variance request for Kenneth L. Myers, Sr. The site is located on the south side of MD Route 56, (Big Pool Road) approximately 1800 feet west of Garrison Hollow Road. The classification of MD Route 56 is minor collector. The variance is being requested from Section 405.IIB of the Subdivision Ordinance. Mrs. Pietro reminded the planning Commission that a concept plan had been previously shown to them this past summer. Mrs. Pietro stated that State Highway had concerns about poor site distance for Lot 6. A copy of their comments is enclosed in the agenda packet. Regarding the remainder, State Highway is concerned about limiting the number of accesses along the road for any future use. There are no future plans at this time for expansion, What is being proposed is that Lot 6 have access off the combined entrance serving Lots 9 and 8 and come to the rear of Lot 6. That is what State Highway recommended. State Highway has approved the accesses for the other 4 lots. Mr. Iseminger asked if there is any other way to create the lots. Mr. Daniel Gehr, consultant, stated this is the only way and that Mr. Wolford from State Highway . Administration recommended the design on this plat. A discussion followed regarding access of the lots and further subdivision. Mr. Iseminger proposed granting the variance contingent upon a 50 foot right-of-way being reserved to serve lots 6, 8 and 9 and any future subdivision. If the property is further subdivided, the road will be built at that time according to County standards. Mr. Myers agreed to do so. Mr. Gehr asked if they will have to change their design to accomodate the right-of-way. Mr. Iseminger answered yes. A discussion followed. Mr. Zombro moved to grant the variance contingent upon reserving a 50 foot right-of-way and if the property was further subdivided that the road be built at that time according to County standards. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered. Subdivision:

Woodbridge Section B- Preliminary Plat and Site Plan:

Mr. Lung presented the Preliminary Plat and Site Plan for Woodbridge, Section B, Townhouse section. The site is located on the east side of Robinwood Drive, north of the Jr. College. Mr. Lung stated that a revised PUD concept plan for the entire development was approved in February 1990, the preliminary subdivision plat for Section A was approved at the September meeting (156 single family lots and commercial site). Mr. Lung stated that the townhouse section consists of 116 townhouses to be located on a total of 14 acres. Access to the development will be from Woodbridge Drive, which is a public road to be built to collector standards. The townhouse section will be developed in three clusters, with each cluster having access off Woodbridge Drive. The access roads to each cluster will be private and built by the developer and upon completion of the development will become the responsibility of a homeowners association for ownership and maintenance. Mr. Lung explained that the Planning Commission approved a variance in February 1990 to allow the townhouse lots to front on a private street. There is a total of 20 townhouse blocks with 4 to 8 townhouses in each block. The average lot measures approximately 80' x 20' and contains 1600 square feet of land. The end lots are larger. Landscaping will be provided on the individual lots as well as throughout the common open space areas. The site plan shows existing trees and vegetation that will remain where practical. Diagonal parking is provided in front of the townhouse lots. There is also recreational vehicle parking interspersed within the main parking area, Lighting is provided in 209

the parking lots as well as along the pedestrian walkways throughout the development. Mr. Lung stated his concern that there is no pedestrian access provided to the commercial area. Public water and sewer will be provided. The Homeowners Association will be responsible for the ownership and maintenance of the private access roads, parking areas, open space, play areas, etc. The Homeowners Association documents have been reviewed by the County Attorney and have been approved. Stormwater management is being taken care of on site, as indicated on the plat. All the appropriate agencies have responded with approvals to the Preliminary Subdivision plat except for the County Engineer, which is still outstanding. Engineering has signed off on the site plan. Water Department and Soil Conservation signatures are also needed for the site plan. Mr. Lung stated the applicant "is requesting approval contingent on the outstanding approval letters and signatures being received. Mr. Iseminger asked about provision for trash collection. The plat indicates collection will be on an individual basis. A discussion followed regarding trash collection. Mr. Holsinger stated that he would work with the planning staff to find areas within the development to locate dumpsters. A discussion followed regarding the location of the CD sidewalks and school bus stop. Based on discussions with the Board ~ of County Commissioners, the developer will share in the cost of a ...... new traffic signal at Robinwood Drive. A discussion followed. Mr. CO Iseminger stated that crosswalks should be marked on the pavement where sidewalks cross the road. There was a discussion regarding Z the location of the storm water management facilities and their ~ closeness to the play areas. Mr. Holsinger stated that the basins are shallow in depth and stated that the County Engineer has not recommended fencing. Mr. Iseminger asked Mr. Holsinger if he was willing to work with the planning staff on the various issues discussed. Mr. Holsinger stated that they would find space for dumpsters, saw no problem with marking the crosswalks and provision for pedestrian access to the commercial area. Mr. Bowers moved to approve the Preliminary Plat and Site Plan contingent on approvals from Engineering Department, Water Department, Soil Conservation and that the comments expressed by the Commission to be addressed. If it is not to the Planning Staff's satisfaction, the plan shall come back to the Planning Commission. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. So Ordered. Site Plan:

Hetzer Shale Mine: Mr. Schreiber presented the site plan for Hetzer Shale Mine. The site is located on the south side of Clear Spring Road (MD Rt. 68), approximately 1.5 miles west of Conococheague Creek. Zoning is 1M. The proposed land use is for a shale mine consisting of 32.8 acres, with 148 acres remaining. The site contains Martinsburg Shale. Clear Spring Road is a major collector. State Highway Administration has issued an entrance permit. Mr. Hetzer will provide an acceleration and deceleration lane onto MD Route 68 with curb and gutter. In constructing the road, approximately 1.98 acres of wetlands will be disturbed and a wetlands permit has been approved and the Department of Natural Resources has issued a mining permit. Mr. Schreiber stated that some of the main concerns are with the setbacks from MD Route 68 and any adjacent properties. Mr. Schreiber referred to the plat showing where the mining will begin and according to the elevations, what will be seen from the road. Mr. Schreiber explained the further west you go on the property, the closer the mining operation is to the road and is more eye level at that point. Mr. Schreiber stated that the section west of the haul road should have additional landscaping and pointed to the areas on the plat. Mr. Schreiber stated that one of the adjacent properties is a Washington County Property ­ Pinesburg Softball Field. The Parks Department is looking to expand it in the future. Mr. Hetzer has agreed to dedicate an area in exchange for them to mine out the shale first. The County in addition to receiving land, would also be getting a flat site. Mr. Schreiber referred to the agreement, which he handed out to the Planning Commission. Mr. Schreiber stated that the Parks 210

Department and the Board of County Commissioners need to address some of the items. Mr. Schreiber stated that in order to do what is shown on the plat, they will be grading within the 100 foot buffer line. The Board of Zoning Appeals will need to approve the above mentioned. A discussion followed regarding the elevation and mining. Mr. Hetzer requested that the Commission accept their basic grading plan for the mining operation, which has been approved by everyone else concerned. A discussion followed regarding what is involved with the permit process and wetland area. Mr. Bowers moved to approve the site plan. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. Mr. Ernst abstained. The approval is contingent upon additional landscaping being provided on the north section of the property along MD Route 68 and working out details on the ballfield area as outlined in the proposed agreement. So ordered.

Preliminary Consultations: Theodore Reeder:

Mr. Schreiber stated he had nothing else to add to his written report and asked if there were any questions. No action was taken by the Commission. Mr. Iseminger had a general comment pertaining to all Preliminary Consultations. He wanted to know if the staff was making it clear to the developer that when the Preliminary Consultation is brought before the Planning Commission that it is only for review and comment. That the Preliminary Consultation is not the last word "and that they do have an opportunity to comment on it at their earliest convenience. Mr. Iseminger stated that he wants it made clear to the consultant and developer that the Planning Commission will review and may make additional comments. Beckons Ridge:

Mr. Lung presented the consultation plan and noted that a preliminary plat has been submitted with the name changed to Smithfield Estates. He also noted that the number of lots has been reduced to 23 due to perc test results. Mr. Lung referred to Maryland State Highway's comment in the summary regarding the access of Lot 4 onto MD Route 62. According to the revised plat, Lots 4 and 6 have been combined with the new lot having interior road frontage as well as frontage onto MD Route 62 (Lot 5). Mr. Iseminger agreed with State Highway's recommendation to deny access onto MD Route 62, since there is a means to accomodate interior access and due to the fact that MD Route 62 is a heavily traveled road. Fred Frederick, consultant reviewed the concept with the Planning Commission. He stated that Lot 5 has excellent site distance at MD Route 62 in both directions and feels that it is unfair to deny access since this lot meets all the criteria. He stated that if only this one lot was being subdivided at this time, it would be approved for access to MD Route 62. He stated that most people would want to build on the high point of the property and the prospective purchaser should have the option to face the house towards MD Route 62. A discussion followed. Mr. Iseminger stated that the Planning Commission feels that for safety reasons, lots should come off interior streets whenever possible rather than accessing existing major roads in the County and agrees with State Highway Administration to deny access onto MD Route 62. 211

Oakley Acres:

Mr. Lung stated he had nothing else to add to the summary. Mr. Iseminger had some questions regarding the Historic Advisory Committee's comments, which were answered by Mr. Goodrich. Mr. Iseminger asked about the comments regarding improvements to the road and bridge. Mr. Lung stated that the County Engineer asked for a traffic impact study if the design of the development stays above 25 lots. If the design goes below 25 lots, then they will not be required to do the study. A discussion followed regarding future subdivision and the VOC problem with wells in the area. Mr. Iseminger stated his only other concern is whether this is this part of the Beaver Creek special planning area. Mr. Lung stated no. No action was taken by the Commission.

Michael Development: Mr. Schreiber stated that this is Mr. Brittain's preliminary consultation, which was held on October 19. Mr. Schreiber explained there was not enough time to include it in the agenda co packet. Mr. Zombro stated that he thought they had set a policy ~ not review and preliminary consultation unless they had a summary ,.- to review. Mr. Schreiber stated that these are the last 4 lots of OJ the remaining lands to be developed. Mr. Iseminger stated he agreed with Mr. Zombro and that in the future if they miss the Z deadline, they will have to ask to be added to the agenda. ~ Mr. Schreiber stated that the site for Michael Development is on the north side of MD Route 56. The zoning is Agricultural. Private well and septic systems are proposed for the site, it is outside of any urban or town growth areas. There are 5 other lots that front MD Rt. 56. Mr. Schreiber stated that the only problems that did arise is that the SRA changed their original letter approving 4 lots with 2 joint use driveways to recommending 1 driveway to serve 4 lots. That recommendation would go against planning staff policy by creating a private street. Mr. Schreiber stated that the 2 driveway concept as shown is okay except for the Potomac Edison storage station which has a driveway within 100 feet of an existing driveway on a minor collector. This reduction in access spacing would not harm the site due to the limited use of the existing P.E. driveway. Mr. Schreiber stated the written summary will be prepared in the next two days, Jim is working on it. Mr. Iseminger asked Fred what he would like to see. Mr. Frederick stated that he does not want to see private roads and likes it the way it is shown. Mr. Frederick stated that the P.E. substation is used maybe once a week and 87 feet of access spacing would be more than adequate for the existing use. No action was taken by the Commission. Other Business:

Memo from Historic District Commission: Mr. Goodrich referred to the memo he wrote regarding the Historic District Commission's request to be provided the same opportunity to input on subdivision and site plan review at the same time as the other agencies and have their comments to the Planning Commission carry additional weight in plan approval. This would be in an advisory capacity only. They would like to talk to the Planning Commission more about it. Mr. Iseminger asked if the staff had any problem with this request. Mr. Goodrich stated that it would be one more agency involved in the review process and it would likely call for more work for the Historic Commission. Mr. Goodrich also stated that it appears that historic resources are becoming more of a mainstream concern. He stated that if these are of concern to the citizens of Washington County, then the Planning Commission should consider including it as part of the review process. A discussion followed. A concern for increasing the review period was expressed. There was further discussion. Mr. Goodrich stated he will convey the Planning Commission's thoughts and concerns to the Historic District Commission. 212

Lakeside Mobile Home Park:

Mr. Arch explained that this is a request to replat a Mobile Home Park Plat, which was recorded many years ago. The request is to add 11 mobile home spaces. The location of these spaces are at points originally recorded as parking areas. The developer is asking that they be eliminated as parking spaces so that they can put mobile homes there. Mr. Arch stated that he has spoken to Paul Prodonovich and reviewed the history of Lakeside Park, summary enclosed in the agenda packet, and briefly reviewed it with the Planning Commission. There are basically two questions before the Planning Commission: 1) The authority of the Planning Commission to act on this request was reiterated. Mr. Arch stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals granted expansion of the nonconforming use for 61 lots. The applicant used up a portion of that grant when a plan was approved by the Planning Commission for 40 lots. There are still 21 lots available for expansion. Mr. Arch referred to a letter drafted in 85 - 86 by Barry Teach, where the Board of Commissioners had discussed the original intent when they eliminated mobile home parks from the Zoning Ordinance. This letter could also be construed as providing authority for the Planning Commission to act on this request. 2) Regarding the actual impact on the residents, it was noted that petitions opposing the request have been submitted. It is estimated that approximately 132 parking spaces will be eliminated. The Zoning Ordinance requirement for mobile home parks are 1.25 "parking spaces for each unit. Based on the number of units approved, a total of 418 spaces is required. Most mobile home units have 2 parking spaces, plus there are additional parking spaces in the cul-de-sacs. Mr. Arch stated that new units going in will have 2 spaces each plus the owner of the park has stated they will work with the adjacent property owners and anyone who needs additional spaces. There does not appear to be negative impact, based on the current parking space requirements for the park.

Pat Reffner, representing the developer spoke, explaining what was involved in determining the need for additional parking spaces for the residents. Mr. Spickler had a question about the Board of Zoning Appeals decision. Mr. Arch stated that 61 units had been granted, 40 had been used and 21 are now available. Mr. Spickler asked why the development is not being expanded instead of increasing the density of the development, since expansion was the original intention of the Board of Zoning Appeals decision. Ms. Reffner stated that they did not want to develop raw land, since all the amenities are present in the existing development. A discussion followed regarding the original intention of the Board of Zoning Appeals decision. Ms. Reffner stated that it was the developer's understanding that the empty spaces were actually developable lots, which they used as parking spaces. Mr. Arch stated that the recorded plan shows them as parking areas. A discussion followed. Ms. Reffner stated that the developer has planned to provide better parking for the mobile units affected by the request then they have now. She stated they are not taking anything away from them, in fact they will get more than they now have. A discussion followed.

Mr. Bowers stated that, at the time that the owner can come to an agreement with the tenants, then at that time the Planning Commission can look at the developer's request. Mr. Arch suggested the Planning Commission make a site inspection to better understand the request. The Commission members agreed that the developer should meet with the tenants, come to an agreement and then the Commission will re-examine the request. Mr. Spickler made a motion to postpone action until the December meeting. All in agreement. So ordered. Mrs. Johnson moved to postpone hearing the rezoning cases until November 10, 1992. Seconded by Don Spickler. So Ordered.

Mr. Arch made a correction of item 2 under Upcoming Meetings. The 213

Forest Conservation Information meeting should be November 17. The dates for the upcoming meetings were reviewed.

Mr. Iseminger asked about the status of the Ag Certification. Mr. Arch stated they had a meeting last week with the state and the staff in submitting additional information to address issues discussed at that meeting. Mr. Goodrich passed out text for the recycling amendment to the Commission members. This text is slightly different from last meeting based on input from the Solid waste Advisory Committee. Adjournment:

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:45 P.M. ~"~~!J~ Be rand~minq~' <.0 ..q,..... co z :?: 215

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING - NOVEMBER 10, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held a special meeting on Tuesday, November 10, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building. Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, Bernard Moser, and Donald Spickler. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich, Associate Planners: Edward schreiber, James Brittain, Lisa Kelly Pietro, Timothy Lung and Secretary, Deborah S. Kirkpatrick. Absent were Ronald L. Bowers, Carol Johnson and Robert E. Ernst, II.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 3:30 P.M. The special meeting is being held to consider rezoning cases heard CD on September 21, 1992 and also the Essential Utilities Ordinance amendment heard on August 4, 1992. """,..- 00 UNFINISHED BUSINESS: z Rezoning Cases: ~ Before proceeding there was a discussion regarding the need for a voting quorum on all cases. The Planning Commission determined that since a quorum of the Planning Commission members were present, the meeting could begin and any member who may have a conflict with a case should abstain. It was noted that neither Article 66B or the Zoning Ordinance addressed this issue since the Planning Commission is only making a recommendation.

Essential Utilities - Rz-92-9: Mr. Moser stated that he could not vote on this case. Mr. Iseminger stated since they did not have a quorum they would postpone it until the December meeting. Mr. Spickler made a motion in light of the testimony, to rewrite and re-advertise. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. So Ordered. Mr. Iseminger stated that the Ordinance will be rewritten by the Staff and re-advertised for public hearing.

FMW Partnership - RZ-92-3: Mr. Iseminger stated that Mr. Bowers is concerned about Cole Road being closed. Mr. Schreiber stated that the property could be built on regardless of the proposed rezoning and Cole Road would still remain open as proposed. Any closing of Cole Road would have to do with a piece of property directly south of the Valley Mall and east of the subject property. To date, the Planning Department has not received a formal request to develop that piece of property. If any proposals are received, a traffic study encompassing the entire road network and continuation of Massey Boulevard would have to be performed. The rezoning has no bearing on Cole Road since the applicant can build on the property as it is. Mr. Spickler stated that he agreed with the applicant that there is a change of character in the neighborhood. Mr. Iseminger stated he had a problem with the reason for claiming mistake and felt this would set a precedent by agreeing to it. Mr. Spickler agreed. Mr. Iseminger stated that the Planning Commission does not agree with the mistake claim and any motion would only address the change in character. Mr. Spickler moved to recommend to the County Commissioners the approval of RZ-92-3 for FMW Partnership because the applicant made a valid case regarding change in the character 216

of the neighborhood and the rezoning is appropriate and logical, and made reference to pages 5, 6 and 7 of the staff report. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. Mr. Iseminger stated that the Planning Commission is recommending that the parcel be rezoned based on the change in the character of the neighborhood and not a mistake.

St. James Corporation - RZ-92-10:

Mr. Iseminger asked if Mr. Brittain felt this PUD is in keeping with the ordinance. Mr. Brittain reviewed his staff report and discussed the density concern raised by the Commission. Mr. Spickler thought that it met all four criteria outlined in Section 16.0 of the Zoning Ordinance. A discussion followed regarding infrastructure. Mr. Spickler made a motion to recommend to the County Commissioners the approval of RZ-92-10 for St. James Corporation due to the fact that the proposed PUD is; a) in compliance with the purpose of the PUD district, b) consistent with the applicable policies of the adopted Comprehensive, c) compatible with adjacent or neighboring properties and d) to be served adequate community infrastructure either currently planned or existing. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Potomac Edison Company - RZ-92-11: . Mr. Zombro moved to recommend to the County Commissioners the approval of RZ-92-11 for Potomac Edison Company due to the staff's findings of both a mistake and change. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. Mr. Moser abstained. So ordered.

Wayne and Carol Gersen - RZ-92-12:

Mr. Zombro stated that at the rezoning hearing, it was his op~n~on that Mrs. Gersen was unduly harassed by some of the adjacent property owners. A discussion followed regarding the rezoning hearing. Mr. Spickler moved to recommend to the Commissioners the approval of RZ-92-12, for Wayne and Carol Gersen because it meets several of the criteria for establishment of the Historic Preservation overlay. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Bowman Development Company - RZ-92-13:

Mr. Lung stated that the Planning Department did receive some additional testimony during the 10 day comment period primarily from the residents of Highland Manner regarding existing storm water management problems in the area. A discussion followed regarding the applicability of the APFO on the subject development. Mr. Iseminger asked Mr. Holsinger, consultant if Mr. Bowman is aware that the existing storm water runoff situation will have to be corrected. Mr. Zombro moved to recommend to the Commissioners to approve the PUD zoning classification for RZ-92-13 Bowman Development Company and adopting the staff's findings. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. A discussion followed regarding the PUD zone.

Special Meeting:

The Planning Commission will hold a Special Meeting, Tuesday, November 17, 1992 at 6:30 P.M. at the Hagerstown Junior College to discuss FMW Partnership. 217

The Planning Commission will hold a public information meeting concerning the Forest Conservation Ordinance, Tuesday, November 17, 1992 at 7:00 P.M.

ADJOURNMENT:

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:05 P.M.

airman

CD ""d'" ,.- CO z ::2E 219

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING - NOVEMBER 17, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held a special meeting on Tuesday, November 17, 1992 in Room C-11 of the Hagerstown Junior College. Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. Zombro, EX-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Bernard Moser, Donald Spickler, Carol Johnson and Robert E. Ernst, II. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich and Associate Planner; Bill Stachoviak.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 6:40 P.M.

CD -.::t UNFINISHED BUSINESS: ....- FMW Partnership (Crosspoint): CO Mr. Iseminger stated that the rezoning presented to the County Z Commissioners had not yet been acted upon but he felt that it would ~ be appropriate to comment on the staff report and anything else the -consultant would like to add to this plan. Mr. Goodrich stated that several months ago the Planning Commission gave the developer permission to present the Preliminary Site Plan for the entire development. He stated that copies of the plat and a memo with a listing of items he had discussed with the consultant had been forwarded to each Commission member for their review along with copies of the site data tables and correspondence from the reviewing agencies up to November 12. Mr. Goodrich briefly went over the agency comments. He proceeded to review his list of items with the Planning Commission. He also stated that at this point he did not see any major obstacles to prevent a preliminary approval of the site plan unless the Planning Commission had concerns about the status of the rezoning case. The first item of concern was the staff's opinion that there is a need to enhance the planting along I-81. The staff also expressed concern about the location of 5 of the tot lots noted specifically in the memo to the Planning Commission. Mr. Goodrich referred to the suggestions they made for the walkways and pointed out the areas of concern on the plat. He stated the staff suggested adding buffers to several areas. The staff also asked for a sequence of development noting concern for the timing of the installation of the recreation area. All the individual sections meet the density requirements except Section 7, the elderly care facility. Mr. Goodrich discussed the variances that are required and stated that the developer is aware of what needs to be done. In referring to the site data charts, Mr. Goodrich stated that there are three areas that do not meet the required lot area. Mr. Goodrich still needs to speak with the County Engineer about the right-of-way dedication along Grosh and Beckley Avenues. This development design is dependent upon the rezoning.

Other than those comments and the understanding that when the individual sections are reviewed, there may be other things they may need to be changed. Based on that, the staff does not have a problem with granting preliminary site approval.

Mr. Moser asked if the developer is agreeable to making the changes recommended by the staff. Mr. Goodrich stated that the developer is agreeable with most of them. Mr. Zombro made a motion to address the fencing of the stormwater management pond in Section 9. Mr. Goodrich commented that it could also be moved. Mr. Belcher of Fox and Associates, spoke on behalf of his client and stated that changes will be made including fencing the pond. Mr. Spickler 220

regarding the walkways, Cole Road, trash collection, roads that will be built and the overburdening of the schools. Mr. Iseminger asked if the traffic impact study was still with the State and if they are still analyzing it. Mr. Arch stated that the State's latest counts are with the County Engineer. Based on the numbers in the Preliminary Study most of the intersections were in good condition. The main concern is the intersection of Massey Boulevard and Halfway. Mr. Bowers had a question regarding the road construction behind Valley Mall. He was concerned that when Massey Boulevard is connected to Virginia Avenue, Chesterfield Drive and Massey Boulevard would become a major thoroughfare to the Mall, before the remainder of Massey Boulevard was completed through the De Bartolo property. It was noted that the developer has agreed to block Chesterfield Drive to prevent this until Massey Boulevard is completed. Mr. Iseminger stated that since the County Commissioners had not acted on the rezoning, they will postpone action on this preliminary site plan until the December 7, 1992 regular Planning Commission meeting. Mrs. Johnson moved to postpone action until the December 7, 1992 meeting. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So moved.

ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, Mr. Moser made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:00 P.M. 221

WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - DECEMBER 7, 1992

The Washington County Planning Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Monday, December 7, 1992 in the first floor conference room of the County Administration Building. Members present were: Chairman; Bertrand L. Iseminger, Ex-Officio; Ronald L. Bowers, Donald Spickler, and Bernard Moser. Vice­ Chairman; Donald E. Zombro and Carol Johnson arrived late. Staff: Director; Robert C. Arch, Senior Planner; Stephen T. Goodrich, Associate Planners: Edward Schreiber, Lisa Kelly pietro, Timothy A. Lung, Jim Brittain and Secretary, Deborah S. Kirkpatrick. Absent was Robert Ernst.

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 7:05 P.M.

(0 MINUTES: Mr. Moser moved to approve the minutes of September 21, 1992, ,- Special Meeting. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered. """OJ Mr. Spickler moved to approve the minutes of October 26, 1992, Z Special Meeting. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. ~ Mr. Bowers moved to approve the minutes of November 2, 1992. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. Mr. Iseminger stated that in the minutes of November 10, 1992 the minutes stated that Robert Ernst was both present and absent. The minutes should state that he was absent. Under Essential utilities RZ-92-9 Mr. Moser stated he could not vote. Mr. Spickler moved to approve as corrected. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

Before proceeding, Mr. Arch stated there is a request for Walnut Point, RZ-92-14 to be added to tonight's agenda. Mr. Moser made a motion to defer action until the January meeting. He stated that all members should be present and they should have time to inspect the site. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS:

Lakeside Mobile Home Park:

Mr. Arch explained that at the November meeting he reviewed a memo, which was a site plan replat request from the park owner. The purpose of the request was to eliminate 11 parking spaces and turn them into mobile home spaces. The Commission moved to postpone action until the December meeting in order to give the park owner time to meet with the homeowners. Mr. Weinman, a partner in Lakeside Mobile Home Park was present. He stated that it was his understanding that the spaces in question were to be mobile home park spaces at the time the park was designed and that the park has always had 335 space numbers and there currently exists only 324 spaces. Mr. Weinman explained the history of the mobile home park and stated they would like to proceed in developing it. He also stated that he was given the go ahead by the powers at be to do this and that he had met with some of the adjacent residents. Mr. Weinman stated that it was always the intention of the mobile home park to meet with the residents and to work with them. He stated the surveying and design work was completed and submitted for permits. Mr. Moser asked Mr. Weinman who gave him the go ahead. Mr. Weinman stated he met with Paul Prodonovich, who researched it, and was told he thought it was okay. Mr. Weinman stated they would not have proceeded with the design work if he had been told otherwise. Mr. Iseminger stated that the original recorded site plan shows the spaces in question designated as parking spaces and any deviation from that Site Plan needs the Planning Commission approval. He stated that at this point the mobile home park did 222

not have the authority to eliminate the parking spaces and turn them into mobile home sites and asked if the park owners had a meeting with the homeowners. Mr. Weinman s.tated that they did have a meeting. Mr. Spickler stated that under the original grant from the Board of Zoning Appeals they were given 61 lots, 40 of which had been used, 21 left. He stated that at the last meeting the Planning Commission was working under the assumption that the park owners would be using 11 of the spots that the Board of Zoning Appeals had granted them in that section, since they are doing something that is not on the site plan and asked if they were using 11 of the 21 left. Mr. Weinman stated they were not and proceeded to explain the history of the mobile home park since he has owned it. A discussion followed regarding the current criteria and access. Mr. Iseminger stated that he feels they should deal with the current development and the 11 spaces in question. Two residents of the mobile home park spoke on behalf of the other residents. They stated the residents are opposed to the elimination of the parking spaces since they feel this would create an emergency access problem. One resident stated that up until 2 years ago, he paid rent for the use of a parking space. They also stated that all the lots except those used as parking spaces are numbered. The residents feel that these spaces were always intended to be used as parking spaces as shown on the original plans. Mr. Weinman discussed the proposed development of spaces and the new parking that will be provided. Mr. Bowers moved based on the recorded approved Site Plan, that the plan be denied. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. A discussion followed regarding appeal. NEW BUSINESS:

Variances: Clarence Horst (Kenneth DeLaughter 1(SV-92-026): Mrs. Pietro presented the variance request for Clarence Horst. The site is located on the west side of Grey Rock Road near Edgemont. Zoning is Conservation. The developer is requesting the variance from Section 405 .11B of the Subdivision Ordinance. This request is to create a 7 acre lot without public road frontage. The total size of the tract is 21.5 acres. The road classification is private. The developer is proposing to put 2 log houses on the 7 acre tract. Mrs. Pietro referred to a previous variance in the area a few years ago, which was denied. Mr. Iseminger stated that not only does this property not have public road frontage, this lot would be creating a long panhandle. Mr. Spickler stated he did not feel this was a hardship case. Mr. Horst, representing the owner briefly discussed the area and the previous variance. Mr. Horst stated the reason they are requesting the variance is that Grey Rock Road is a road of record that goes completely through the property and is passable. Mr. Iseminger stated that he was concerned with the road frontage and crossing. A discussion followed. Mr. Spickler moved to deny the variance. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. Lisa Staley (SV-92-024): Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for Lisa Staley. The site is located on the north side of MD Rt. 494. Maryland Rt. 494 is considered a major collector. The variance is being requested from Section 405.2A of the Subdivision Ordinance. This request is to create an access within 100 feet of an existing driveway. The reason the access is so close to the driveway, is that there is poor site distance and are limited in where subdivision can occur. There is one lot involved with 240 acres in the remaining lands. 223

Zoning is Agriculture. A discussion followed with the consultant, Fred Frederick regarding future development. Mr. Zombro moved to grant the variance. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered.

W.E.T.A (SV-92-025): Mr. Schreiber presented the variance request for W.E.T.A. The site is located on the top of Quirack Mountain. The request is to create a 10,000 sq. ft. lot without public road frontage, to be used for a radio tower. Zoning is Conservation. Mr. Schreiber stated that a special exception has been granted for the proposed use and a variance for the reduction of the setbacks from the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Iseminger asked if this has been run by Ft. Ritchie and if this type of tower would interfere with them. Mr. Joe Davis of W.E.T.A. stated that Chief Mary Wells, of the Army is aware of what they want to do and does not have a problem with it. Mr. Davis proceeded to explain the size of the tower. Mr. Davis stated they do have a construction permit issued by FAA and that the site would be unmanned and only maintenance vehicles would be entering the property. A discussion followed. Mr. Spickler moved to grant the variance. Seconded by Carol Johnson. So ordered. Mr. CD Schreiber stated that the applicant has requested when the "¢ Preliminary/Final plat is submitted, that it be administratively T"'" approved. Mr. Moser moved that the Preliminary/Final plat approval CO be handled by the staff. Seconded by Mr. Bowers. So ordered. Z Subdivisions: ~ Crosspoint Preliminary Plat/Site Plan:

Mr. Goodrich presented the Preliminary Site Plan for Crosspoint. He stated that it had been before the Commission at their October meeting. The development consists of 964 dwelling units on 81.5 acres and it is below the gross density limit of 16 units per acre. Mr. Goodrich stated that the development consists of 9 sections and identified each one. He also noted that when the staff reviewed this plan, they looked for items that would affect the overall site, such as the pedestrian system, traffic impact study, and the impact on the schools to name a few. Mr. Goodrich stated that upon completing their review, the staff presented a detailed list of suggested revisions during the Special Meeting of November 17, which the developer has agreed to comply with. Mr. Goodrich briefly reviewed the list and stated that the developer will need to apply for a variance for the density in the elderly section and some other items like that, which the developer has agreed to take care of. Mr. Goodrich stated that at the last meeting the Commission suggested locating play areas on the school property. The developer preferred not to pursue the suggestion due to liability problems. Mr. Goodrich stated that the other item the Planning Commission was concerned with at the last meeting was the rezoning which has now been approved. This rezoning affected Section 5, the commercial area. Mr. Goodrich stated that at this point the staff does not feel there are any obstacles in the way of granting approval for the preliminary site plan. The other agencies have responded. They are still working out a few details with the Water Department. He stated that a traffic study was done and that State Highway agrees with all findings and made some recommendations for improvements to the road system. A discussion followed regarding road expansion. Mr. Goodrich stated that the County Engineer has approved the overall development and Section 9. There was further discussion regarding road expansion, cost sharing and access. Mr. Spickler moved to grant Preliminary Site Plan approval. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. So ordered.

Crosspoint Section 9:

Mr. Goodrich presented the Preliminary Plat and Site Plan for Crosspoint, Section 9, which consists of 60 apartment units. He stated that this section includes the construction of the new road (Lafayette Court) and most of Chesterfield Drive which will provide public road access to Cole Road. The property is zoned Residential Multi-Family. There will be five 3 story buildings, with 12 units 224

each. Green space and parking requirements have been met. Public water and sewer will serve the development.

Mr. Goodrich stated that construction of a storm water management pond is included in Section 9. He said that the storm water management pond would be fenced with a chain link fence as required by the County Engineer which will also address the Commission's concern for children using the adjacent play area. He mentioned that the developer had attempted to relocate the play area further away from the pond but could not meet setback requirements at the alternate location. A discussion followed regarding access to the play area. The Planning Commission suggested adding a marked crosswalk. The staff requested a change of the location of the trash receptacles, which has been done.

Mr. Goodrich stated they are waiting on Health Department approval and the Water Department is working out some details. Approvals have been received from Sanitary Commission, Engineering and Soil Conservation. Mr. Goodrich stated the last item that needed to be worked out with the developer is one of parking that is not in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. He stated that the developer has complied with the other changes requested by the staff. Therefore, the staff is requesting Preliminary Plat Site Plan approval. A discussion followed. Mr. Moser asked if the Parks Commission should review the tot lots, since that had been done in the past. He felt the design criteria for the tot lots should be consistent. Discussion followed. The developer agreed to do so. Mr. Zombro moved for Preliminary Plat and Site Plan approval, with "staff having the authority to give approval when the items mentioned are addressed. Seconded by Carol Johnson. So ordered. Van Lear Manor Section 13 - Preliminary and Final Plat:

Mrs. Pietro presented the Preliminary and Final Plat for Van Lear Manor, Section 13, Lots 457 - 477. The site is located along south side of Virginia Avenue. The site is zoned Residential Rural. The developer is proposing a total of 21 lots. Thirteen of the lots will be single family with the rest being duplex lots. The total acreage of the subdivision is 10.30 with 57 acres remaining. All the lots will be served by public sewer and water and all of the lots will have access onto Anderson Drive. Mrs. Pietro referred to the storm water management area and wetlands shown on the plat. All the agency approvals have been received. State Highway approval has been received, but before giving final approval they need a bond and access permit. A discussion followed regarding the adjacent lands. Mr. Bowers moved to grant Preliminary and Final Plat approval. Seconded by Mr. Moser. So ordered. Van Lear Manor, Section 14:

Mr. Lung presented the Preliminary and Final plat for Van Lear Manor, Section 14. The development consists of 33 lots and new streets on a total of 19 acres located north of Sterling Road and east of Hershey Drive. The lots range in size from 15,000 square feet to 25,000 square feet. Zoning is Residential Rural (Urban Growth Area). Mr. Lung stated that the larger lots are partially in the flood plain and their building envelopes have been adjusted accordingly and that the consultant has received the appropriate federal agency approval of the flood plain delineation. There is a 3 acre storm water management lot, to be dedicated to the County. Public water and sewer are available to the site. The County Engineer has granted preliminary approval, with some comments to be addressed on the final plat; the Water Department and Sanitary District have given verbal preliminary approval. Mr. Lung stated that at this point the most appropriate action for the Planning Commission would be to consider granting Preliminary approval contingent upon receipt of all written approvals and requested that the staff be given the authority to grant final plat approval. Mr. Bowers moved to approve the Preliminary plat, with staff having the authority to grant final plat approval. Seconded by Carol Johnson. So ordered. A discussion followed regarding future development. 225

Smithfield Estates - Preliminary Plat: Mr. Lung presented the Preliminary Plat for Smithfield Estates. He stated that at the last meeting the Preliminary Consultation had been presented and at that time the subdivision was called Beckon's Ridge. The development consists of 23 single family lots and is located along the west side of Md Rt. 62, north of Old Forge Road. The zoning is Agriculture. The lots range in size from I acre to almost 5 acres. The lots will be served by wells and septics and two new streets. There will be no new entrances onto MD Rt. 62. A storm water management lot has been designated as requested by the County Engineer. State Highway approval has been received. There will be an accel/decel lane, as required, on MD Rt. 62. Approvals have been received from the County Engineer and the Health Department. Mr. Lung requested that the Planning Commission consider granting approval to the Preliminary Plat and granting staff the authority to approve the final plat. Mr. Bowers moved to approve the Preliminary Plat, with staff having the authority to approve the final plat. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. So ordered. CD Michael Development, Lots 13 - 16: ~ ,.- Mr. Brittain presented the preliminary/Final Plat for Michael al Development and referred to the Preliminary Consultation. It is a 4 lot subdivision located on the north side of MD Rt 56, north of Z the Hassett Road intersection. Zoning is Agriculture. The lot sizes range from 2 acres to 5 acres, with no remaining acreage. ::E The lots will be served by wells and septics. MD Rt 56 is classified as a minor collector, which requires 60 feet of right­ of-way (the dedication has been made). All agency approvals have been received. The staff recommends preliminary/Final approval. Mr. Moser moved to approve the Preliminary/Final plat. Seconded by Mr. Spickler. So ordered. Site Plan:

Fairplay Fire Hall: Mr. Brittain presented the site plan for Fairplay Fire Hall. Mr. Arch stated that this presentation is for information purposes only. Because the site is located in an Agricultural area there is no approval or disapproval from the Planning Commission. Mr. Arch stated that due to the size and scope of the project, the planning staff felt that it should be presented to the Planning Commission for review and comment. Mr. Brittain explained that a drawing must be submitted for planning staff review, but does not require a Site Plan. The Zoning Administrator has final approval. A discussion followed. Mr. Brittain reviewed the site plan, explaining the new structure, parking areas, landscaping and entrance. The site will be served by on site facilities. There will be a new septic system. A discussion followed regarding the parking and road improvements. Mr. Spickler had a question about the existing building and suggested separating the entrance and parking areas for the social hall and the fire hall. Mr. Bill Pennington, President of the Fire Company, stated that they originally wanted to do that, but the County Engineer turned it down. A discussion followed. Mr. Arch stated that the Planning Staff's comments to the Zoning Administrator will be that the plan meets all requirements. Other Business: Agricultural Preservation Memo: Mr. Arch referred to the memo and stated that additional information had been received and that the State is ready to certify the program by the end of the year, if the Planning Commission agrees to what is in the addendum. Mr. Spickler moved to approve the addendum. Seconded by Carol Johnson. So ordered. CIP Procedural Manual: Mr. Arch referred to the CIP Procedural Manual and explained the Planning Commission's role in the review process of the CIP. Work Program Guidelines: Mr. Arch stated that the Planning Act of 1992 requires that a letter be submitted to Governor Schaefer along with a copy of the work program, which must be adopted by January 1st. Mr. Arch proceeded to review the work program. Mr. Iseminger stated that the Planning Commission will review the work program and discuss it at the January meeting. Mr. Arch asked for a motion to be made on the work schedule, so that it could be presented to the Board of County Commissioners. Mrs. Johnson made a motion to approve the schedule. Seconded by Mr. Zombro. So ordered. Proposed Meeting Dates:

Mr. Arch asked the Planning Commission to take action on the proposed meeting dates for 1993. Mrs. Johnson moved to approve the proposed dates. Seconded by Mr. Moser.

A discussion followed regarding the growth management legislation and Lakeside Mobile Home Park.

ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 9:45 P.M.