KENT COUNTY, MARYLAND
PLANNING AND ZONING

MINUTES 

The Kent County Planning Commission met in regular session on Thursday, November 6, 2007, in the County Commissioner’s Hearing Room at 400 High Street, Chestertown, Maryland, with the following members in attendance: Elizabeth H. Morris, Chairman; William S. Sutton; Patricia Langenfelder; Rev. Ruben Freeman; F. Joseph Hickman; Marcy Brown; Jay Lancaster, G. Mitchell Mowell, Attorney; Gail W. Owings, Planning Director; Carla A. Martin, Community Planner; Amy Moredock, Environmental Planner and Kim Dixon, Secretary. 

Chairman Morris called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m.  She explained the procedure of the meeting. 

Ms. Morris made an announcement about the Chestertown Charrette regarding the Clark Farm on Route 291 and the Kent County Commissioners public hearing on November 13, 2007 regarding the Kennedyville Village Master Plan. 

MINUTES - Minutes of the October 4, 2007 meeting were approved with corrections. 

APPLICATIONS FOR REVIEW 

Millington Annexation  

The Mayor and Council of Millington have forwarded for your review, the proposed annexation of an approximately 260-acre area to the north and east of the Town of Millington.  The property is owned by Reynolds Farm Holding, LLC.  The proposed property is agricultural land and forest.  The pond, forest and surrounding wetlands are part of a green infrastructure hub.  This area includes some federally listed sensitive species and species of concern but without official status.  The property is currently zoned Village and Agricultural Zoning District.  If the annexation is approved by the Town, the applicants are requesting a zoning change for the area currently zoned Agricultural Zoning District to R-2 Residential Zoning which will increase the permitted housing density by more than 50%.  This increase will require a waiver of the five year rule. The area currently zoned Village is proposed to be zoned R-2 and LI-1.  The property is surrounded by agricultural land and development. 

Present and duly sworn were Gail Owings, Thomas Payne, Architect and Land Planner, and Dan Saunders, Council. 

Mr. Hickman stated that he had a business relationship with some of the people involved in the project. However, he does not feel this will impact his ability to make an impartial decision on the proposal. 

Ms. Owings presented the staff report noting applicable law including the new legislation passed in 2006 by the Maryland General Assembly dealing with planning.  One included specific guidance for annexation.  Most of the changes dealing with annexation apply to town requirements for annexation.  However, a change of the “5 year rule” is applicable to the County comments on annexation.  The new law developed a standard that prohibits any annexation that proposes different uses or substantially higher densities than that permitted by the existing county zoning for five years unless a waiver is granted by the County. 

Staff provided the following comments:  This proposed annexation could permit development at substantially higher densities and a change in uses than is currently permitted under the Agricultural Zoning District.  Therefore the five year rule would apply.  Staff notes that the annexation plan and agreement differ from the petition in the inclusion of potential business uses in the area closest to the existing town.  This should be clarified and could be a positive addition to the mix of business in the Millington area provided it is consistent with the Town Comprehensive Plan and economic development policies.   Staff also notes that several positive elements are included in the plan such as a pacing element limiting development to 10% of the total units per year and inclusion of payments for potential infrastructure and capital improvements in the Town.  However, neither the annexation plan nor the petition addresses the services and public facilities that must be provided by the County.  These include schools, emergency management, paramedics, corrections, and sheriff’s protection. 

Due to the nature of the surrounding area, staff recommends a waiver of the five year rule for the area closest to town which would be the area between the stream and little mill pond and the town but not the area north of the stream and little mill pond.  Staff would also recommend that any waiver be contingent upon working with the town to include a discussion and analysis of the county provided public facilities with fees, if appropriate, included in the annexation agreement. 

Ms. Morris stated that the Planning Commission would be sending a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners regarding the five year waiver of the zoning on this property. 

There was no correspondence in this matter. 

Mr. Saunders stated they are here to present the Wick family’s vision for this property.  This Annexation is not coming through a developer.  The Wick family owns and controls this property and it is not under any contract.  They feel the best way to do that is to get it through the annexation process first.  This property presents some challenges because there are marsh and floodplain areas on the property.   The issue of crossing the railroad tracks will be an issue and there are some environmental issues as well.  There may be some large areas that cannot be developed.  Mr. Saunders said it would be in the interest of the town and the owner to develop this property from the inside out. 

Mr. Payne gave a Power Point presentation.  The presentation showed an overview of the property and showed examples of types of houses and street design proposed.  He stated that they would like to maintain the gateway into town.  He noted that open space will be in large areas not just small areas set in many different places.  They would like to dam the big pond and flood it for use by non motor boats.  This area would be available for everyone in the town to use.   

Mr. Saunders said they have had discussions with the state about the pond.  They would like to preserve as much of the wetlands onsite as possible.  They understand there will be environmental challenges with this property.  They would like to place businesses in the light industrial area of the property.  They feel this will be desirable to area businesses.  The idea is to attract employers to this area that will have employees that will live in the proposed development.   

There were no audience comments.  

The Planning Commission was concerned that they do not have enough information to make an informed recommendation to the County Commissioners because they have not heard from the Millington Planning Commission. 

After a discussion by the Board, Ms. Brown made a motion to send a recommendation to the County Commissioners on the annexation of the Reynolds Farm into the Town of Millington recommending a waiver for the land that is south of the Little Mill Stream and to deny a waiver for the land that is north of the Little Mill Stream.  Further, we ask Millington consider the County provided public facilities its studies and within its annexation agreement.   We ask that they consider fees appropriate to off set county provided services as well as those provided by the Town. 

The motion was seconded by Ms. Langenfelder. 

Ms. Morris called for a vote on the motion.  The motion did not pass by a vote of three in favor and four opposing.  Reverend Freeman, Mr. Lancaster, Mr. Hickman and Mr. Sutton voted against the motion. 

Mr. Sutton made a motion to make no recommendation due to the fact that there is not enough information and information from the Town. 

The motion was second by Reverend Freeman.  The motion passed by a vote of four in favor and three opposing.  Mr. Lancaster, Mr. Hickman and Ms. Brown voted against the motion.           

            The Planning Commission had a discussion regarding Annexation in general.  They feel that a public hearing should be held prior to the Kent County Planning Commission hearing on the application.  They feel that they need more information regarding what the feeling of the town and the citizens are before they are asked to make a decision.  They understand that they are making a recommendation only however they feel they need the proper information to make an informed recommendation. 

Andover Acres – Major Subdivision – Preliminary Review 

John Stoltzfus is requesting preliminary approval of Phase II of Andover River Acres (lots 18-49).  The subdivision is located just east of Millington on MD Rt. 291 in the First Election District and is zoned Community Residential.  The property has only a little frontage on Rt. 291 but extends to Andover Branch.  The original parcel consisted of 126 acres, and the remainder following Phase I consisted of 106.42 acres.   Approximately half of the property is forested or contains non-tidal wetlands and floodplain.  The surrounding area includes houses. 

 Present and duly sworn were Carla Martin, Community Planner; David Stoltzfus and Virginia Dadds, McCrone Engineering. 

Ms. Martin presented the staff report noting applicable law including  Kent County Land Use Ordinance Article V, Section 6.6 which establishes open space requirements for subdivisions; Article V, Section 6.7.B.2 and Article VI, Section 8 which establishes the requirements for forest conservation; Article V, Section 6.8 establishes design standards for the Community Residential District; Article VI, Section 10 requires that all new development or redevelopment  reduce pollutant loadings from the site and comply with stormwater management regulations; Article VI, Section 6.3.B.15 subdivision review standards.   

Staff recommends approval of the preliminary plan.  Prior to final approval the applicant will need to submit a corrected Forest Conservation Worksheet; a traffic study; deed restrictions and information on Homeowner’s Association; letters of credit or other surety for landscaping, stormwater and sediment control and roads. 

Correspondence was received from Susan and Robert Smith, 10130 Daisy Drive, Millington, MD 21651.  Ms. Martin read the correspondence into the record. 

Ms. Morris addressed one of the issues addressed by the Smith’s regarding the time of day that the hearing is held.  She explained that all Kent County Planning Commission meetings begin at 1:30 p.m. on the first Thursday of each month and they have no control as to what applications are submitted for review.  The agenda is set by the applications received.   

Ms. Morris asked Mr. Mowell to comment on the instillation of the propane tanks without a permit. She said she firmly believes that you need permission not forgiveness when you build things.  Mr. Mowell said there is no question about that and if there is a structure that was built without a permit it needs to come down or a permit needs to be applied for and issued.  As far as whether you can go ahead with the application, I think you can, I think it is a matter of enforcement that the nonconforming existing structure is a separate issue.   

Mr. Stoltzfus stated that his understanding that it is a utility.  He said is it a benefit to have central gas and they said that it is an advantage to the homeowners.  Ms. Dadds said Poore’s is required to get a permit from the State of Maryland to install the tanks. Ms. Dadds said it was not part of the subdivision; it was something that came in after the subdivision.  Mr. Mowell said then there should have been an amended plat.   

Present and duly sworn was James Smith, 10185 Daisy Drive, Millington, MD.  He stated that the plat that was in place when he purchased his lot did not show any gas lines in the development.  He said that he never signed papers stating he agreed to purchase from Poore’s.   

Present and duly sworn was Suzanne McKee, 32810 Sunflower Drive, Millington, MD.  She testified there were several homeowners that were not presented with the clause stating you must have Poore’s supply your gas.  She stated that two to three weeks after settlement they received papers in the mail about the homeowners and Poore’s Propane.   

Ms. Morris stated that the Planning Commission does not like structures being built without proper permits.  She feels this is too big of an issue to go any further with this application.  Ms. Brown stated she does not think the Planning Commission go ahead and try to do anything with Phase Two until they have at least made sure that Phase One has been done properly.   

Mr. Stoltzfus asked for this application to be tabled.  The Planning Commission agreed to table the application.   

Choptank Electric – Special Exception for a Public Utility   

Choptank Electric is requesting a special exception to construct an electrical substation on a proposed 5.64 acre lot located off MD 290 in the First Election District.  The surrounding area is characterized by residential uses to the west and farmland to the east.  The proposed substation is intended to supply long-term service to the area and will be built in phases over the next 30-40 years.  The area utilized for the subdivision will encompass 1.6 acre fenced area.  Phase 1 will include all site work and the construction of one A-frame transformer tower (52’ tall), one 13’ x 10’ transformer array (18’ tall), two 12’ x 12’ bus cabinets (5’ tall), two 12’ x 12’ feeder breaker cabinets (5’tall) and one 12’ x 8’ control shed (10’ tall).  Phase II, which includes equipment identical to Phase I, will be built as the need arises, possibly within 5-10 years.  Phase III would be constructed of two additional A-Frame towers in the 20-40 year horizon. 

Present and duly sworn was: Carla Martin, Community Planner; Stephen Lee, Century Engineering; Todd Byerly, Choptank Electric. 

Ms. Martin reviewed the staff report noting applicable law Kent County Land Use Ordinance Article VII, Section 7.41 which permits as a special exception public utilities and structures as defined in Article XI of the Ordinance; Article VII, Section 2 directs the Board of Appeals to make findings on specific issues; Article VI, Section 5.3.B contains a list of objectives the Planning Commission must consider when reviewing plans.  Ms. Martin stated that the Historic Preservation Commission will review this application at its November 8, 2007 meeting.   

Staff recommended a favorable recommendation to the Board of Appeals on the special exception for a public utility and granting of preliminary site plan approval.  Prior to final site plan approval, the applicant will need to obtain final approval of sediment control, stormwater management and forest conservation plans, submit letters of credit, and satisfy any other requirements of the Land Use Ordinance or other applicable laws and regulations. 

There was no correspondence in this matter. 

Mr. Lee that this substation will be used to supply the area surrounding Galena.  He presented a plan showing the site when completed.  He stated that this area is where the need for a substation is located.  This is a multi phase project which will take over forty years to complete.  Part of the location is due to the distance from Route 301 and the line of site to limit the amount of visibility.  He said the landscape has been designed so that it will not grow up and interfere with the power lines. 

Mr. Lancaster asked what the tallest structure that will be on the site.  Mr. Lee stated that it will be a 52-foot “A” frame tower that will be constructed in Phase One.  Mr. Lancaster asked if the gentleman across the road flies airplanes.  Mr. Byerly stated that was correct and he has had a meeting with Mr. Schlosser who owns the nursery and he stated that he is closer to the transmission line than he will be to where this tower is going to be placed.  Mr. Sutton asked if there would be other 52-foot towers in future phases.  Mr. Lee said there will be a total of four within the thirty year time period if the growth calls for it.   

Ms. Brown asked if electricity be distributed in the same manner in the future as it is now.  Mr. Byerly stated the biggest change could in twenty to thirty years each person may have a fuel cell sitting at their house that is powered by propane and does a chemical conversion rather than burning the propane to generate electricity.  They would probably still be connected to the grid for reliability reasons but for the most part we can see that happening down the road but right now fuel cells are so incredibly expensive that it doesn’t pay to have one.    

Ms. Morris asked for audience comments. 

Present and duly sworn was Randy Jenkins.  He stated that he owns the historic site that is to the east of this property.  He feels that this is not a good site for the project.  He feels that the view from Rt. 301 is not one that we want visitors to Kent County to see.  He stated that this project will not impact his house or property however it will have a negative impact on the viewshed from Route 301.  He is concerned about the safety of this site because there was recently a vehicle that caught on fire on Rt. 301 and the propane tanks exploded.  This caught the adjoining corn field on fire, five and one-half acres burned.  He feels that putting this site this close to Rt. 301 is a safety issue.   

Craig O’Donnell, Kent News, asked if Choptank Electric has talked to the Historic Preservation Commission.  Ms. Martin stated that the Historic Preservation will send a recommendation to the Board of Appeals.           

Mr. Lee stated they feel they have shown why this substation needs to be located where it is proposed.  They had another site in the area and it was found to be inappropriate.  He said the Massey site is a breaker station that is not suitable for this project and this is not where the need exists. 

After a lengthy discussion, Mr. Lancaster made a motion to send a favorable recommendation to the Board of Appeals concerning Choptank Electric’s Special Exception on Maryland 290 and Maryland 299 in the First Election District citing:

·         There is a public need for reliable electricity, specifically in the Galena area and the outlying areas of Galena and any further growth that might occur there.

·         The traffic patterns will not be affected because only occasional visits to the site are necessary.

·         The surrounding area is farm land.

·         It is adjacent to the 301 corridor relatively close and by testimony and by actual fact it is visible from 301 to a certain extent.

·         Through the testimony of the Choptank engineers, it is clear that a reasonable effort has been made to find a site that is close to an area that allows the efficient distribution of the electricity.  They are limited to where they can put these types of structures.

·         The impact on development is very minimal.  There isn’t much construction that is involved in this proposal.

·         The proposal is sequential over a very long extended time with the proposal stating the decades from now the site could be in fact several times larger than it is now, not in terms of the structure but in terms of the scope.

·         They will meet the environmental standards

·         This will not diminish property values in the area.

·         It is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 

The motion was seconded by Ms. Brown and was approved unanimously. 

Choptank Electric – Major Subdivision – Site Plan Preliminary Review 

Choptank Electric is requesting preliminary approval of a major subdivision for a proposed 5.64 acre lot off Tract 3 of the farm owned by Marcia Frank and Carol Ann Huff located on Fox Hole Road in the First Election District.   The farm was split into three tracts when US 301 was constructed.  Tract 3 is bound by US 301 to the west, Route 290 to the south and the old Fox Hole Roadbed to the north and east.   The proposed lot is for the construction of a new electric substation Choptank is developing to serve the long-term needs of residents in the Sassafras area.  The surrounding area is characterized by residential uses to the west and farmland to the east. 

Present and duly sworn was: Carla Martin, Community Planner; Stephen Lee, Century Engineering; Todd Byerly, Choptank Electric. 

Ms. Martin presented the staff report noting the applicable law including the Kent County Land Use Ordinance, Article V, Section 1.7 which sets forth environmental standards for the Agricultural Zoning District and Article VI, subdivision and site plan review standards. 

Staff presented the following comments:

·         Compliance with the Forest Conservation Act is required. 

·         Stormwater management and sediment control are being addressed as part of the site plan.

·         There are no environmentally sensitive areas on the site.

·         The subdivision complies with the general intent of the Ordinance.

 Staff recommends granting preliminary approval.  Prior to final approval the applicant must submit deed restrictions and letters of credit for landscaping, forest conservation, stormwater and sediment control. 

There was no correspondence in this matter. 

Mr. Lee stated that the site is 5.6 acres of a 15 acre parcel.  He pointed out that there will be approximately 10 acres left along Route 301.  The lot was designed to leave as much viable agricultural land as possible.  He said the Afforestation Plan is wider than the original plan.  The existing two acre power line easement which currently runs through that area has been eliminated and now is within the proposed site.  The Afforestation for the site is proposed to be triple what is required.  He stated the plantings will be done on a random grid.  They are trying to create a natural appearing woodland.  He said the transmission lines that currently exist on the site will be move to within this site.   

Mr. Sutton asked who the hedge row belongs to, what if they want to trim half or all of it.  Mr. Lee said it belongs to both landowners.   

Ms. Brown stated that she feels there needs to be more evergreen trees planted with the deciduous trees.  

After a discussion Ms. Brown made a motion to grant preliminary approval of the Major Sub-division on MD 290 in the First Election District finding: 

·         The area is characterized by residential uses to the west and farmland to the east.

·         This subdivision will be used for a substation for Choptank Electric.

·         They have complied with the Forest Conservation Act and will be foresting near the overhead transmission line.

·         It conforms to the Comprehensive Plan and all applicable rules and regulations of County and State Agencies.

·         There is safe access from Maryland 290 onto the site.

·         There is a reasonable demand placed on the public services and infrastructure.

·         There will be no sewer or refuge disposal.

·         Soil erosion will be minimal during and after construction.

·         The applicant has put this substation close to an existing hedgerow in order to soften its view and has landscaped it for the same situation.

·         Open Space has been addressed by paying the fee in lieu.

·         Prior to the final approval for the subdivision deed restrictions and letters of credit must be submitted for landscaping, forest conservation, stormwater management and sediment control. 

Reverend Freeman seconded the motion.  The motion passed unanimously. 

Ms. Brown made a motion to grant Preliminary Site Plan approval for Choptank Electric to construct an electrical substation on a proposed 5.64 acre plot located off Maryland 290 in the First Election District finding: 

·         The surrounding area is characterized by residential uses to the west and farmland to the east.

·         This proposed substation is intended to supply long term service to area and will be built in phases over the next thirty to forty years. 

·         Phase One will include all site work and the construction of one “A” frame transformer tower, one 13 x 10 transformer array (18’ tall), two 12’ x 12’ bus cabinets (5’ tall), two 12’ x 12’ feeder breaker cabinets (5’tall) and one 12’ x 8’ control shed (10’ tall). 

·         Phase II will be identical to Phase I but that will not be built until the need arises.

·         Phase III may not be built at all unless there is a new transmission line in Cecil County.

·         This is a special exception as a public utility.

·         There is a public need for this utility.

·         It will supply electricity to the area surrounding Galena.

·         The proposed site is of sufficient size to accommodate the landscaping it needs to soften the view of this site from the major highways and view of it from off site.

·         It has also been put next to an existing hedgerow which will be increased with afforestation and so this should blend in as much as a 52-foot tower can blend in.

·         The proximity of dwellings, houses of worship, schools and other places of public gathering is approximately four miles away.  The closest house is approximately 1000 feet from the site.

·         There is no impact on community services.

·         It is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan to provide public services.

·         It conforms to the Land Development Ordinance.

·         The Historic Preservation Commission will review this application at its November 8, 2007 Meeting and will provide comments to the Board of Appeals as to the special exception.

·         Prior to final site plan approval the applicant will need to obtain final approval of sediment control, stormwater management and forest conservation plans.

·         Letters of credit must be submitted and satisfy any other regulation or ordinance.

 The motion was seconded by Reverend Freeman.  The motion passed unanimously. 

Walter Corson – Buffer Variance for replacement dwelling 

Mr. Corson requests a variance to construct a replacement two-story single family dwelling within the Critical Area Buffer and on slopes greater than 15%.  The existing one-story dwelling is currently located entirely within the buffer and partially on slopes greater than 15%.  The .71 acre property is located on Vogeler Drive / Kitchell Terrace in the Sixth Election District and is zoned Critical Area Residential.  A vegetated buffer and steep slopes are present on the parcel.  The Critical Area Buffer is expanded due to the presence of slopes in excess of 15%.  The parcel is located along Fairlee Creek; the surrounding area is zoned RCD and CAR with a mixture of farmland and homes on small parcels.           

Present and duly sworn was Amy Moredock, Environmental Planner; Walter Corson; and Jeremy Burge. 

Ms. Moredock informed the Board they received two additional site plans, one is additional information and the other is a revised site plan based on Technical Advisory Committee Comments.  She will be amending her staff report as she gives it. 

Ms. Moredock reviewed the staff report noting applicable law Kent County Land Use Ordinance Article V, Section 2.5 which requires a minimum yard; Article V, Section 2.8.B3a addresses development in the buffer; Article IX, Section 2.2 authorizes the Board of Appeals to grant variances from the yard, height, bulk, parking, loading, shoreline cliff, 15% slope, pier length, impervious surface, stream protection corridor and buffer requirements so as to relieve practical difficulties or other injustices arising out of the strict application of the provision of the Ordinance. 

Staff recommends denial of the variance as proposed to impact slopes greater than 15% but approval as to the Buffer.  Staff recommends that the replacement dwelling be located in an alternate site which does not impact steep slopes.  If the Board is inclined to grant approval, then the application requires both buffer and slope variances.  Staff recommends that if tree removal is necessary, then replacement should occur at a ratio of 3:1 square feet of the Maryland Native vegetation with the buffer. 

There was no correspondence in this matter. 

Mr. Burge stated he had originally submitted an application to build a replacement dwelling on the exact footprint of the existing dwelling.  Based on the TAC comments they were advised it would be better to turn the house and pull it back off of the cliff.   We are more than happy to pull the house back and turn it and not have to go through the structural aspect of the existing footprint.   

Ms. Morris asked if the new plan is the same as the original proposal.  Mr. Burge said it would be the same size.  Ms. Brown asked why the existing structure is being replaced.  Mr. Corson stated it is a one bedroom house and it is on pilings and not in the ground.  He said it is unstable.  He stated the plumbing under the house is completely exposed.  Reverend Freeman asked if they could just go up and put a second story on the house.  Mr. Burge stated there is currently no foundation and a foundation would be needed to construct a second story.   

Mr. Burge stated that due to the septic reserve area and the location of the well they are very limited to what area of the property can be used for the proposed dwelling. 

After a discussion, Ms. Brown made a motion to send a favorable recommendation to the Board of Appeals for the Buffer Variance and 15% Slope Variance to construct a replacement single family two story dwelling within the Critical Area on Vogeler Drive in the Sixth Election District finding: 

·         The septic system and the septic reserve area are in the back of the property and the location has been approved by the Health Department.

·         There is a new well location which will be in the side yard of the property.

·         The existing footprint is within very steep slopes and the existing dwelling will be removed due to the fact that it is on pilings which right now are supported by a rotting log with rebar stuck through it to hold the log on the pilings.

·         The replacement dwelling will be off of the steepest slopes and will be pushed to the rear of the property as far as possible, considering the placement of the already approved areas for the septic and septic reserve.

·         The replacement dwelling will be almost the same size as the existing footprint.

·         Due to the topography of the land and the fact that almost all of the land is located within the expanded 100 foot buffer, the part of the land that is outside of the expanded one hundred foot buffer is actually part of the septic system and the septic reserve system.  There is no other place on this property to build a replacement dwelling other than within the 100 foot buffer.

·         Most of the property has over fifteen percent slopes.

·         The variance will not change the character of the neighborhood or the district.

·         The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the general intent of the Ordinance.

·         The unwarranted hardship is caused by the size and shape of the property and the extraordinary topographical features of the property.

·         The granting of the variance will not adversely affect water quality or adversely affect fish, wildlife or plant habitat.

·         If tree removal is necessary then replacement should be at a rate of 3 to 1 square feet using Maryland native vegetation.

The motion was seconded by Mr. Lancaster.  The motion passed unanimously. 

STAFF REPORTS: 

Carla Martin - Ms. Martin informed the group of the Public Hearing regarding the Kennedyville Village Master Plan to be held on November 13, 2007 at 6:00 p.m. in the Commissioner’s Hearing Room, 400 High Street, Chestertown, MD.  She also informed the group that the Agriculture Preservation and the Agricultural Advisory Boards will hold a joint meeting on November 6, 2007 at 7:00 p.m. 

Gail Owings - Ms. Owings stated that she had attended a meeting with the Maryland Department of Planning and the Maryland Department of the Environment concerning the water resources element which is an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, which is due to be included in the Comprehensive Plan by July 1, 2009.  This deals with water and sewer capacity and nonpoint source pollution and the capacity of the receiving waters.   

She further informed the Commission that the State approved the water and sewer amendments for the expansion of the Worton Plant.  That expansion is to accommodate the growth that is planned and it reflects the Village Master Plan not necessarily the additional growth of the Village Master Plan changes.     

The amendment for Drayton Manor has been approved to use a drip irrigation system which is a requirement to amend the water and sewer plan because of the amount of gallons per day that would be proposed.  The County Commissioners approved an amendment to the water and sewer plan to run the sewer line out to Drayton Manor from Worton. 

The Board of Appeals approved the Clayton Gravel pit and the variance for Worton Creek Marina.  They denied the Janney application next to the Country Club.  She advised the group that Mr. Saunders had asked the Board of Appeals to reconsider and they refused.  

The hearing date for the Stoltzfus Text Amendment is November 27, 2007.   

The Circuit Court of Kent County upheld a decision that was made by the Planning Director and then upheld by the Board of Appeals. 

GENERAL DISCUSSION 

The meeting was adjourned at 6:30 p.m. 

The next meeting will be held on December 6, 2007 at 1:30 p.m. 

________________________________________   

Elizabeth Morris, Chairman 

____________________________________

Kimberly Dixon, Clerk