KENT COUNTY, MARYLAND
PLANNING AND ZONING

The Kent County Planning Commission met in regular session on Thursday, September 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; 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.

APPLICATIONS FOR REVIEW

Nelson Clayton / Judith Hogan / Needham Mushroom Farm – Final Site Plan Review – Arthur Needham is requesting final site plan approval for a mushroom farm production facility on a 314.08 acre farm located at 12206 Galena Road in the First Election District near Massey. The farm is currently owned by Nelson Clayton and Judith Hogan and is zoned Agricultural Zoning District and Industrial. The proposal consists of a substrate preparation area in the Industrial District and growing rooms in the Agricultural Zoning District.

Present and duly sworn were Carla Martin, Community Planner, Arthur Needham, Ken Lomax, University of Delaware and Steve Layden, McCrone.

Ms. Martin presented the Staff Report to include applicable law Article V, Section 15.6 which requires any industrial use established after August 1, 1989 to meet the performance standards; Article V, Section 15.8 establishes environmental standards for the Industrial District for the protection of natural resources; Article V, Section 15.8.B.7 and Article VI, Section 10 states that no person shall develop any land for institutional uses without having provided for appropriate stormwater management measures that control or manage runoff from such development; and Article V, Section 15.9 establishes the design standards which address site access, parking, lighting and landscaping. Staff recommends granting final approval contingent upon approval of stormwater management and sediment control and acceptance of letters of credit by the County Commissioners. There was no correspondence in this matter.

Mr. Layden explained what is proposed for the site. He explained the phasing of the project and explained that Phase One has been increased by fifty percent since preliminary review. He explained how the process would work with the proposed buildings. Mr. Layden stated that landscape buffers would be widened. Landscaping will also screen Route 313 and neighboring properties. Testing for the septic reserve area has been completed and approved by the Health Department. Detailed designs have been done for the pump station, pressure dosing system and trench and SRA. The proposal of 50,000 gallons of water per day is still the same. Wetland and stream impacts have not changed. They have been issued a permit for this work. An engineers report has been completed that addresses lighting, dust, vibration and odor impacts from the site.

Mr. Needham explained what the roofs on the buildings would look like. He stated that they will meet the height requirements.

Ms. Morris asked for audience comments. Kate O’Donnell identified herself as a member of the Kent County Historic Preservation Commission. She asked what was meant by the existing house will remain. She asked if it would be maintained. Mr. Needham stated that at this point he has no plans at this time. He said he does not know what to do with it since there is no need for it with his current plans for the property. Kate O’Donnell asked if Mr. Needham was aware of the preservation tax credit available. He said he was not. Ms. Morris said that they could talk about that after the meeting.

There were no further comments.

Ms. Morris asked what kind of mushrooms would be grown on the property. Mr. Needham stated that portabella mushrooms would be grown. She asked if they would sell anything other than mushroom in the store. Mr. Needham stated that he would like to sell other local items.

After a discussion Ms. Brown made a motion to approve the final site plan citing the following:

• This approval has the contingency that all Stormwater Management and Sediment Controls Plans be approved.
• Acceptance of Letters of Credit by the County Commissioners.

Findings:

• This project meets the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan to promote agriculture as a viable industry.
• The proposal meets all the required setbacks.
• A certified engineers report has been submitted showing compliance with the Land Use Ordinance.
• The traffic analysis shows that there is no change in current level service A.
• The MDE has issued a non-tidal wetlands permit for the 2 stream crossings and the stormwater outfall.
• One MDE permit needs to be obtained.

The motion was second and approved unanimously.

Betterton Annexation – The Mayor and Council of Betterton propose annexation of a 66.932 acre property on Howell Point Road adjacent to the Town. The proposed property is agricultural land and is currently zoned Agricultural Zoning District. It is shown on the Towns Land Use Map in the Comprehensive Plan as a part of the Towns greenbelt. If the annexation is approved by the Town, the applicants are requesting a zoning change to R-2 Residential Zoning with the Infill Development Overlay District. According to the annexation resolution this would allow residential development with an allowable density of not less than 3.5 dwelling units per acres. The resolution does indicate the maximum zoning densities.

Present and duly sworn were Gail Owings, Director of Planning, Housing and Zoning; Carolyn Sorge, Mayor Town of Betterton; and Dave Teal; Town Administrator Town of Betterton.

Ms. Owings presented the Staff Report to include the history and applicable law. Staff commented this proposed annexation could permit development at substantially higher densities than currently permitted under the Agricultural Zoning District. Therefore the five year rule would apply. Staff does not know if a determination has been made by the Betterton Planning commission as to the proposals consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. However, staff would defer to that decision. Staff believes that a waiver is appropriate for the portion of the property along Howell Point Road to a depth equal to the southern town boundary on the Bond property. However, the annexation plan does not describe why the request is for R-2 not the least dense R-1. A waiver on the remaining property would be appropriate only if the proposed zoning is revised to a resource or agricultural type zoning that would fulfill the greenbelt designation as recommended by the Betterton Comprehensive Plan.

Ms. Owings read a letter submitted by Jeanie and Henry Smith regarding this matter.

Ms. Owings explained to the Planning Commission that their role is to make a recommendation to the County Commissioners on strictly on the waiver, not to make a recommendation as to whether something should be annexed or not annexed it is strictly on the change of zoning.

Ms. Sorge stated that the Blevins family approached the Town and asked for this annexation. The maps show that the majority of this property is contiguous already within the Town limits. She feels that annexing this land into the Town would make a continuous Town. They already have water and sewer lines running past this property. They feel that with this property in Town limits their zoning and Comprehensive Plan addresses the fact that there should be open space and green space and they would be controlling that for any future development. At this time the request only presents one dwelling unit however there is a possibility that is could be subdivided in the future. The Town of Betterton has an impact fee and a water/sewer connection charge. Anyone annexed in will pay the same rate that the current residents pay.

Ms. Brown said that when she looks at the map of Betterton there is so much vacant land that has already been annexed into the land and she is not sure why they would want more especially since the land is currently zoned agriculture. She asked if the current water and sewer would handle any potential build-out of that land and the current vacant land in the Town. Mr. Teal testified they know the potential build-out. There could be 300 homes. He said that the current treatment system would not handle it. In the next 5 – 10 years they will have build a completely brand new treatment plant with a cost of about four million dollars or more. Therefore part of the reason for working with developers is because of the allocation fees of $17,500.00 for water and sewer connections. With new development could build the new wastewater treatment facility and some expansion of the water plant without current taxpayers funding it. He stated that they are not asking for a zoning waiver because they don’t see any need for any higher density perhaps within five years.

Ms. Morris asked for audience comments. Walter Bowie of Still Pond how an annexation could take place without a plan. He feels that there is no plan here except for the one lot. He feels the County should be a part of the planning and have some input if it is going to be taken away from them. They should have a say as to how it will be used. As it is now there is no proposal of how it will be used at all. The measure passed through the Mayor and Council without any recommendation or study from their own Planning and Zoning Board. If an annexation is not relevant to the Planning and Zoning Board isn’t the Planning and Zoning Board itself irrelevant. He wonders if a Planning and Zoning Board that exists only on paper has the ability to manage an annexation at all. He feels Betterton already has enough land.

Joanne Jewett, Betterton, MD was duly sworn and testified she is a member of the Betterton Planning Commission and they have not reviewed this project.

Ms. Brown made a motion to send a recommendation to the County Commission to deny the waiver to increase the zoning beyond the current zoning citing the following:

• Zoning should be the same as the current Agriculture zoning.
• The request is not needed according to the applicant.
• The zoning change is not requested by the Town
• Betterton Planning Commission should have reviewed this project to provide feedback.

The motion was second and approved unanimously.

Knights Landing II – Major Subdivision – Preliminary and Final Review – Country Living LLC and the Kent County Department of Water and Wastewater request approval to amend the Knights Landing II, Section II – Phase VI by adding one additional lot which will be conveyed to the County Commissioners. A water tower will be constructed on the lot. The lot, number 87, is located on Heather Lane and is 10,484 square feet in size. Access to MD Rt. 298 will be via Plum Drive. The property is zoned Village and adjoins several farms as well as single family dwellings.

Present and duly sworn were Wayne Morris, Department of Water and Wastewater; Barry Ebersol, McCrone; and Gail Owings, Director of Planning Housing and Zoning.

Ms. Owings presented the staff report which included the history, applicable law Article V, Section 7.5 which established the density height, area and yard requirements, Article V, Section 7.8C1 sets forth the site access standards for new development, Article VI, Section 6.3B15 directs the Planning Commission to prepare finds of fact concerning the reasonable fulfillment of objectives. Staff made the following comments: The proposal complies with the minimum lot size and width requirements. Public utilities are permitted uses in the Village District; Access is directly to Route 298 which is a primary road; The Comprehensive Plan encourages development in and around existing towns and villages. It identifies Worton as a village with public water and sewer and thus a growth area. The plan continues to state that new development complement and enhance the character of the existing village and avoid sprawling subdivisions. The proposal complies with the density and bulk requirements of the Ordinance. This is a continuation of an existing subdivision. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary and final plan.

Ms. Owings read a letter submitted by the Kent County Commissioners.

Mr. Morris stated that they would like to subdivide this lot to accommodate a water tower.

Ms. Morris asked for audience comments. Bill Crowding asked if this is part of the moratorium. Ms. Owings state that she did not think it is. Mr. Mowell stated confirmed that the moratorium did not apply.

After a discussion Ms. Brown made a motion to grant preliminary and final approval for Lot 87 citing:

• It is a part of an already established subdivision.
• All necessary sewer and water allocation have been received.
• It is a continuation of an existing subdivision.
• Complies with the density and bulk requirements of the Ordinance.
• Comprehensive Plan encourages development in and around existing towns and villages.

The motion was second and approved unanimously.

Lawrence and Associates – Prestwick Woods – Resubdivision – Major Subdivision – Concept Plan - Lawrence and Associates request concept review of their 12 lot resubdivision/major subdivision, Prestwick Woods, on Lovers Lane, near Chestertown in the Seventh Election District. The lots range in size from approximately 1.011 to 2.529 acres and are arranged to minimize disturbance to the steep ravines, wetlands and specimen and other significant trees on the site. Approximately 16 acres of open space is provided. Open space is provided along Lovers Lane and in the area of wetlands, the stream protection corridor, and the ravine which extends well into the property. A proposed public road ( Prestwick Woods Road) enters from Lovers Lane. Two roads ( Turnberry Way and Muirfield Court) branch from the main road and end in a cul-de-sac. The main road generally follows the existing logging road thus minimizing further disturbance to the forest and wetlands. Public sewer and private wells are proposed. With the exception of the northeastern most portion of the property and the existing home site, the entire site is forested. Non-tidal wetlands and steep ravines are also on the property. A stream which drains into the Country Club pond is located along the south western boundary line. The property is zoned Rural Residential and is located within the Stories of the Chesapeake Heritage Area. The Country Club golf course consisting of wooded area and turf is immediately to the west and north of

the property. Single family dwellings sited among wetlands and forests are to the east of the property. Farmland is to the south of the property.

Present and duly sworn were Kent Lawrence and Gail Owings, Director of Planning Housing and Zoning. There was no correspondence in this matter.

Ms. Owings presented the staff report to include the history; Applicable law Article V, Section 4.5 which establishes the area, density, and width requirements; Article V, Section 4.6 lists the general requirements; Article XI, Section 2.223 defines opens space as those areas suitable for common recreational use or which provides visual relief to developed areas; Article V, Section 4.7A and Section 4.7B establishes the general environmental standards; Article V, Section 4.7 establishes the forest conservation requirements; Article V, Section 4.8 sets forth the general design standards; Article V, Section 4.8B1 sets forth the site access standards for new development; Article VI, Section 6.3A states that the Planning Commission shall review the subdivision and supporting documents taking into consideration reasonable objects; Article VI, Section 6.3B states that the concept review process will review at a conceptual level, the feasibility, deign and environmental characteristics of the proposal. Staff made the following comments: The Comprehensive Plan encourages development in and around existing towns and supports the use of conservation subdivision techniques; The proposal complies with the density, bulk, environmental and design requirements of the Land Use Ordinance; The County Engineer has provided a letter stating that Lovers Lane is capable of handling traffic generated at the site. Proposed roads and the walking paths will provide safe vehicular and pedestrian circulation throughout the subdivision; The Chestertown sewer system is capable of handling the proposed subdivision. The development should not have a substantial impact on other infrastructure such as libraries, schools, or parks. Staff will meet with the Chestertown Fire Company to discuss the impacts of this project; Care must be taken during construction to achieve positive drainage and still maintain the quality of the existing wetlands and steep slope; The removal of forest has been minimized. Attention should be paid to afforestation; The applicant has made an admirable effort to integrate the subdivision into the existing landscape through the retention of forest and non-tidal wetlands along Lovers Lane and throughout the subdivision.

Mr. Lawrence showed the Board a color coded plat of his property. He said this would give them a better visual representation of the project. He said that there is an existing buffer around the property and that would remain. Ms. Brown asked how the person on lot nine was to get to their property across the steep ravine. Mr. Lawrence said they have not worked out the details on that yet. He said that issue would be addressed at preliminary review. Mr. Lawrence said he has obtained allocations so this project will be on public sewer. Mr. Lawrence showed pictures from a target neighborhood in Annapolis that he is using as a guide for buffer trees and vegetation. Ms. Brown asked if there would be a homeowners association to maintain the open space. Mr. Lawrence said there would be. Ms. Brown asked if Mr. Lawrence was planning to live on one of these lots. He said yes lot 9. He stated that he will be retaining the specimen trees on the property. Ms. Morris asked if he would be the builder. Mr. Lawrence replied no.

Ms. Morris asked for audience comments.

Judith Oberholtzer asked if they were to assume that everyone on the road would be able to partake of the new town sewage system as well. Ms. Morris informed her that that was not something this board has control over. She was told she would need to speak with Wayne Morris.

George Smith stated that he is concerned about the sewage system and where it will run. He said he is also concerned about the very narrow bridge and the traffic that would be created by this project. Ms. Morris again said that the sewer system was a water and wastewater project and would have to be taken up with them.

Ms. Brown asked Mr. Lawrence if he was intending to widen Lover’s Lane in front of his property. Mr. Lawrence said it would be a turn lane for safety purposes.

James Kimble being duly sworn testified that his recent deceased grandmother owns the property behind the Lawrence property and that they do not want to see this property developed. He is concerned about the roads ability to handle the additional traffic.

Jim Smith being duly sworn testified that plat for this property has an error. He is also concerned about the environmental impact this development would have on the area and wildlife. He said that the traffic on this road is bad now and a development would only make it worse. He said that if the sewer is run there for Mr. Lawrence then everyone on that road should be able to connect to it.

George Smith being duly sworn testified that he is opposed to this development and feels that the Board should review what is presented to them very carefully.

Mr. Hickman said he is concerned about the bridge and traffic on this road. After a discussion it was decided that a traffic study would be needed to find out how many cars actually use this road

Mr. Lawrence stated that he had an expert come out and walk the property and it was determined that development of this property would have little or no impact on the forest dwelling birds.

After a discussion it was decided that a traffic analysis needs to be done. Ms. Owings said she would continue to attempt to set up a meeting with the fire department to discuss this project.

Mr. Lawrence said he would take all of the comments under advisement and bring changes back at preliminary.

Worton Station, LLC and Barry Feaga – Preliminary Subdivision Plan; Conceptual Site Plan and Road Waiver – Barry and Stacey Feaga have submitted the Worton Station mixed use project. The development is proposed on an approximately 41-acre property owned by the applicants on Porters Grove Road and Maryland 297 in Worton. This project and request for review contains requests for preliminary subdivision review, conceptual site plan review and a road waiver. The preliminary subdivision plan includes 91 lots designed for single family dwellings, approximately 5.7 acres of open space which includes an approximately 1.2 acre green and 1.9 acre stormwater / open space area and a series of connecting paths some of which are a width of 50 feet or more. Five public roads which will be dedicated to the County and a sixth private lane proposed to serve two lots. The conceptual plan includes an approximately 7 acre commercial area facing Route 297 from Porters Grove Road to the proposed road into two separate areas. According to the plan the five commercial buildings will have a combined floor area of 33,000 square feet. Three of the buildings will be one story, one will be one and a half story and another will be two stories. The second commercial area is adjacent to the property owned by the County and contains a stormwater / landscape pond, a 5,000 square foot commercial building, four parallel parking spaces and 40 space parking lot. The proposal includes a request for two road waivers. The first waiver is to permit lots 11 and 12 to be served by a private right of way. The second waiver is to reduce the required right of way for this private lane from 50 feet to 20 feet. Access to the subdivision is from entrances on Route 297. An entrance is provided from Porters Grove Road for emergency access only. The property is zoned Village and is served by public water and sewer.

Present and duly sworn were Barry Feaga, Kevin Shearon, DMS and Gail Owings, Director of Planning, Housing and Zoning. Joe Hickman excused himself from this hearing.

Ms. Owings presented the Staff Report to include applicable law Article V, Section 7.5 which establishes the density height, area and yard requirements for the Village District; Article V, Section 7.6 establishes open space requirements; Article V, Section 7.6 4 states the Planning Commission may require unobstructed easements of at least 10 feet for walkways to commercial facilities, community areas, parks, schools and other public areas; Article XI, Section 2.223 defines open space as those areas suitable for common recreational use or which provide visual relief to developed areas, exclusive of

flood control channel right of ways, areas devoted to parking vehicular traffic, or private land and any other area which does not significantly lend itself to the overall benefit of either the particular development or surrounding environment; Article V, Section 7.7 establishes the environmental standards for the Village District; Article V, Section 7.8 A and Section 7.8 B sets forth the general design standards; Article V, Section 7.8C1 sets forth the site access standards for new development; Article VI, Section 6.3B15 directs the Planning Commission to prepare findings of fact concerning the reasonable fulfillment of the objectives; Article V, Section 7.5 establishes the density height, area and yard requirements; Article 7.8C sets forth the Village Specific Design Standards; Article VI, Section 5 sets forth the standards for conceptual site plan review; Article V, Section 7.8cf requires that all new lots abut upon and have access to a public road or approved private road.

Staff made the following recommendations:

• The Planning Commission request a redesign of the subdivision to include the provision of the majority, if not all of the required open space on-site. The open space should replace commercial area #2 as previously shown on the conceptual plan. Projected project phasing should be included on the preliminary plan. The forest conservation plan is acceptable. The proposal to place garages is commendable and should be included in the deed restrictions.
• Staff will present its recommendation on the road waiver after the meeting with the fire company.

There was no correspondence in this matter.

Mr. Shearon testified that the width reduction waiver request is to reduce the fifty foot wide right of way to a twenty foot wide right of way. The pavement and road way would stay consistent with the private road standards. He stated that the open space provided in the residential area is about 5.7 acres. The commercial area has been designed to include open space. The commercial opens space area is 3.9 acres with a total for the project to 9.67 acres which exceeds the requirement of 9.1 acres.

Mr. Feaga stated that there will be small seeded areas outside all the buildings. There will be walk ways between the buildings where people can come and eat lunch. These areas will be heavily landscaped.

Mr. Shearon said that the traffic report included all the intersections around the site. Ms. Brown asked when the traffic report was one. Mr. Shearon stated that it was completed August 30, 2007. Ms. Brown said that a study should have been done when the schools were in session. She said the time of day for a study like this is important as well.

Mr. Shearon said they have not determined a phasing schedule. Most likely it would be split down the middle. Mr. Feaga stated that his goal is to phase the left side toward Porters Grove first but try to phase the roadways so that the people who are already living there are not receiving construction traffic while they are living there. Ms. Morris asked when the commercial section would be phased in. Mr. Feaga said it would be designed along with the rest of it. It would then become an economic decision how fast and what buildings go when.

Ms. Morris asked for audience comments.

John Nunn being duly sworn asked who will own the commercial area and how will they be managed.

Mr. Feaga stated that the open space will be addressed through the deed. A management company would take care of the open spaces, sidewalks, parking lots and ponds are deed restricted. Mr. Mowell asked who would own it. Mr. Feaga stated in the beginning he would. How that would transfer to a community association he is not sure. Mr. Mowell stated that if the open space in the commercial area is being counted towards the residential open space it cannot be separated

Mr. Nunn testified asked if somebody in the neighborhood want to play football in the lots and the restaurant doesn’t want them there who are going manage it and who will be responsible for it. Mr. Feaga at this point I am not sure. Mr. Nunn stated that the Ordinance states that 50% of the open space must be in a chunk, it is not a matter of calculating acres. If the open space requirements are met he doesn’t have a problem with this plan. But the open space has significantly changed since the concept plan. He is asking the Planning Commission to adhere to the open space requirements.

Ms. Morris asked for any more comments.

Bill Crowding being duly sworn testified his is concerned that the road waiver meets the requirements. He said if you loose two lots you would not need a road waiver. He said that the open space should be in bigger chunks not little pieces here and little pieces there. He thinks that the requirements for the private road waiver are not being met. He further stated that this project would double the existing community and he feels that a better plan would make it not so over powering for such a small village. He said the traffic counts were done at off times. It should have been done when school is in session or that something is going on at the park.

Ms. Morris asked if anyone else would like to speak about this application. There were none.

Mr. Feaga stated that the houses on Porter’s Grove Road were not allowed to have driveways onto Porter’s Grove Road so he had to put a road in. He feels that they are very close on the required open space requirements. Ms. Morris asked who would be responsible for the maintenance of this road if it is granted. It would be deeded to each homeowner and there would be an agreement between the homeowners. Ms. Brown stated that she doesn’t see anything that looks like Worton here. This stands in contrast to the existing area. Ms. Brown said this doesn’t look like a rural development; it looks more like a suburban development.

After a discussion Ms. Brown made a motion to not grant the road waiver citing the following:

• Even though the waiver will not cause a substantial determent to adjacent properties, there is no extraordinary hardship.
• The Comprehensive Plan is silent on this
• There is not an extraordinary hardship
• There is no usual topography
• The denial of the application would not prohibit the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, the Village Master Plan or Ordinance.

Therefore there is not enough hardship for the road waiver to be granted.

The motion was second and approve unanimously.

After a discussion Mr. Feaga requested that the Preliminary Site Plan be tabled.

There was a brief discussion regarding the concept commercial plan. It was decided to leave it as it is for now.

Dane DeSouza – Major Subdivision – Final Site Plan – Mr. DeSouza requested to be removed from the agenda prior to the meeting.

Choptank Electric – Major Subdivision, Special Exception and Concept Site plan – Choptank Electric is requesting concept review of a major subdivision for a proposed 4.0 acre lot of 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 Hold 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.

Special Exception – Choptank Electric is also requesting a Special Exception to construct an electrical substation on a proposed 4.0 acre lot located off Fox Hole Road 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. Phase 1 will include all site work and the construction of one A-frame transformer tower (52’ tall), one 13’ x 10’ transformer pad, two 12’ x 12’ bus cabinets, two 12’ x 12’ feeder breaker cabinets, and one 12’ x 8’ control shed.

Concept Site Plan Review – Choptank Electric is also requesting concept review of a site plan to construct an electrical substation on a proposed 4.0 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. Phase 1 will include all site work and the construction of one A-frame transformer tower, one 13’ x 12’ bus cabinet, two 12’ x 12’ feeder breaker cabinets, and one 12’ x 8’ control shed.

Present and duly sworn were Carla Martin, Community Planner; Todd Byerly, Choptank Electric; and Steve Lee, Century Engineering.

Ms. Martin read a letter received by Mr. Slauther.

Ms. Martin presented the staff reports for each of the projects citing Applicable Law Article VI< Section 5.3.B which provides a list of objectives for the Planning Commission to consider when reviewing site plans; Article VII, Section 7.41 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.

Staff made the following comments:

• The proposed lot meets the minimum requirements.
• Compliance with the Forest Conservation Act is required. Afforestation will be required. The applicant intends to preserve the existing hedgerow and possibly enhance it. Other landscaping and screening will be provided.
• The proposed lot fronts onto MD Route 290. The applicant will work with SHA to obtain an entrance permit.
• The proposed site is currently a tilled field. Access will be from MD 290 near where the existing 69 Kv line crosses the road. The closest houses are over 700 feet away and no public facilities will be utilized or affected. The proposed equipment will be visible from US 301 and MD 290, but with screening of the ground equipment, the view will be softened. The proposal should not affect plant or wildlife habitat.
• As part of a system wide review Choptank determined a need to upgrade their network and locate a new substation in the Sassafras area. Following a review of potential sites and a citizen participation meeting, Choptank decided to pursue the current location. There are no environmentally sensitive features on this property. The site will have access from an existing public road. Once constructed, the site will only require monthly inspections and so on on-site facilities are necessary.
• Landscaping will be provided on three sides and will include a variety of plants.

Staff made the following recommendation:

• Staff recommends a favorable recommendation to the Board of Appeals on the special exception for a public utility.

Steve Lee testified that application had previously been tabled to allow for the investigation of other sites in the area. They have found an alternative location. He stated that the design has not changed from the original submittal, only the location. Todd Byerly testified why this location is ideal. They have tried to make other sites work but this is the site that will work the best. He explained how the electric delivery system works. He said this substation is designed to all for future growth that will be adequate for the next 30 to 40 years. Mr. Lee explained the equipment and the size of it.

Ms. Morris asked for audience comments.

Randy Jenkins testified that he and his wife own the Adventure which is a historic home and barn in the area, which is on national registry of historic places. His house is approximately 1500 feet from the proposed site. He said that he opposes the proposed location of this site because he feels that it is too close to his home and will ruin the view of his house. He also does not feel that people on Route 301 should see the tower.

Carl Di Cesarer being duly sworn testified that he live in the area. He said that he is opposed to the site for the same reasons with Mr. Jenkins.

Mr. Lee said that he feels that this is the best location and that with the landscaping he does not feel that this project will cause a problem for the neighboring properties.

Mr. Lee asked if the special exception could be tabled until a more definitive site could be established. He also would like to table the subdivision for the same reason. The Board agreed to table this application.

Clarence Hawkins – Major Subdivision – Concept Review – Clarence Hawkins request conceptual review of his proposed 10 lot subdivision on his 3.285 acre property on Martin Wagner and Courts Roads in Edesville in the fifth Election District. The proposed lots range in size from 9500 square feet to 9888 square feet. The lots vary in shape. A new one-way road will be built and dedicated to the County. The road will enter from Martin Wagner Road and exit on Courts Road. Approximately .72 acres of open space is provided. This open space is located in the center and the eastern edge of the Subdivision surrounding the existing drainage ditches. Forest does not exist on the site, therefore .49 acres of afforestation is proposed. Public water and sewer will serve the property. The property is zoned Village. A Church is located to the west of the property. Single family dwellings are located to the north and east of the property. Agricultural land is located across Martin Wagner Road to the south of the property.

Present and duly sworn were: Gail Owings, Director of Planning. Housing and Zoning; Clarence Hawkins, Sr. and Vera Hawkins.

Rev. Freeman recused himself from this hearing.

There was no correspondence in this matter.

Ms. Owings presented the staff report to include Applicable Law, Article V, Section 7.5 which establishes the density height, area and yard requirements for the Village District; Article V, Section 7.6 establishes open space requirements; Article V, Section 7.6 4 states that the Planning Commission may require unobstructed easements of at least 10 feet for walkways to commercial facilities, community areas, parks, schools and other public areas; Article XI, Section 2.223 defines opens space; Article V, Section 7.7 establishes the environmental standards; Article V, Section 7.8A and B sets forth the general design standards; Article V, Section 7.8C sets forth the design Standards; Article VI, Section 6.3A states the Planning Commission shall review the subdivision and supporting documents taking into consideration reasonable objectives;

• New buildings and homes should reflect the orientation and scale of the surrounding neighborhood.

Mr. Hawkins stated that he would like to provide housing for low income housing. These would possibly modular homes that are three bedrooms and two baths. He said he would like to build two at a time and then sell them. He said he currently has allocations for seven and these have been paid for.

Mr. Sollies asked if the allocations for the water and sewer that are proposed. How is there enough for this area. He is concerned about the water runoff. Ms. Morris explained that that would be reviewed at a larger stage of the process.

Rev. Freeman said that there was a public meeting held and 23 people attended and they were all in favor of this project.

Charles Sommer, being duly sworn this will be a help provide affordable housing. He feels the County needs these types of things on infill lots. He thinks this is a good project.

Mr. Hawkins stated that these will be low income houses not workforce house.

Stoltzfus Text Amendment – John Stoltzfus has submitted an application to amend Article III, Section 1 (Districts and District Maps – Establishment of Districts), Article V, Section 12.2 (Commercial Critical Area – Principal Permitted Uses and Structures), Article V, Section 12.7B (Commercial Critical Area Specific Environmental Standards) of the Kent County Land Use Ordinance. Specifically, Mr. Stoltzfus proposes the following:

• Amend Article III, Section 1 of the Kent County Land Use Ordinance by adding the following to the Intense Development Area – Retail and other intense commercial uses, including shopping centers that have received growth allocation .
• Amend Article V, Section 12.2 by adding the text in bold to the Commercial Critical Area Permitted Principle Uses and Structures.
• #12 Retail businesses, including shopping centers , supplying on the premises…
• #13 Retail and other intense commercial uses, including shopping centers that have received growth allocation in accordance with the Kent County Growth Allocation Policy. Upon aware of Growth Allocation, Development will not be required to meet the impervious limitations set forth in Section 12.7.B.8 herein below.
• Amend Article V, Section 12.7.B.8 Commercial Critical Area Specific Environmental Standards – Impervious Surfaces by adding the following: f. Properties granted growth allocation in accordance with the Kent County Growth Allocation Policy area exempt from the 15% impervious surface requirement.
• “Develop diverse retail opportunities that provide wide availability of goods and services with competitive selections and prices” page 13
• “Any retail development in the villages or their designated growth area must be compatible in size, scale and architecture with existing development and proposed design guidelines.” Page 13
• “Coordinate Planning for Growth in cooperation with the Towns and Villages” page 19
• “Encourage Stewardship of the Chesapeake Bay, its tributaries and their watersheds through Planning” page 33
• “Insure that future development, redevelopment, and infill is completed in an environmentally and context sensitive manner.” Page 21

Present and duly sworn were: David Stoltzfus, John Stoltzfus Company, Cindy McCann, Attorney for John Stoltzfus Company, Debbie Orr, John Stoltzfus Company and Gail Owings, Director of Planning, Housing and Zoning.

Ms. Owings read a letter that was received from the Town of Millington.

Ms. Owings presented the staff report to include Applicable Law Article Xii, Section 6 which establishes the standards for review and approval of a zoning text amendment.

Ms. McCann testified that this application would allow the owners to apply for growth allocation. The current ordinance does not allow for commercial in the critical area with an impervious surface of greater than 15 percent. This is a small lot for commercial development and with the 15 percent impervious surface limitation it creates an impediment to new commercial, and new is important or industrial development. Ms. Owings said that we are different from other counties because they have a critical area overlay zone which causes confusion beyond all measure because you have one set of permitted uses that say you are commercial and then you have an overlay zone that says well this says you can do it but you really can’t. So what Kent County did was say this is what you are and this is what you can do to avoid that kind of confusion.

Ms. Morris asked for audience comments.

Jerry Smith, being duly sworn testified that he is opposed to this request. He said the Critical Area specifically states that intensive development should be directed outside of the critical areas. There is a lot of area out there that is not in the critical area that could be used for some of the projects that have been mentioned. He strongly urged the Board to reject the amendment in the basic interest of the County, river and the bay.

There was no one else that wanted to speak.

After a discussion, Ms. Brown made a recommendation to send an unfavorable recommendation to the County Commissioners citing:

• There is no public need.
• If this was granted it would not encourage the stewardship of the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries and the watershed through planning.
• The future development / redevelopment infill is completed in an environmentally sensitive manner.
• It does not comply with the critical area law due to the fact that it would allow for intensive developed areas in the critical area.
• The Town of Millington has stated that they do not support this amendment because it would allow for more intense development outside of their town borders.

The motion was second and approve unanimously.

Windmill Text Amendment – In response to the Planning Commission’s request to address the limitations placed on residential windmills by the height regulations, staff proposes the following test amendment:

Add to Applicable Law Article VI, Section 3.2.1 of the Kent County Land Use Ordinance (Supplementary Regulations, Modifications of Height Regulations): “Windmills, private, residential, less than 45 feet in height.”

Ms. Moredock presented the staff report to include Applicable Law Article XII, Section 6 establishes the standards for the review and approval of a zoning text amendment.

Staff made the following comments:

• The Comprehensive Plan recognizes the need for and encourages the use of alternative energy sources such as solar, wind and biomass and the investigation of federal and state incentives such as tax credits for the use of alternative energy sources. To address this need and to support the use wind energy as an alternative energy source, a height modification is needed for to allow for private, residential windmills.

After a discussion Ms. Brown made a motion to send a favorable recommendation to the County Commissioners citing:

• There is a public need for the use of alternative energy sources and windmills are one.
• Most windmills will operate at 45 feet or less.
• The Comprehensive Plan encourages the design and operation of buildings to achieve the effect italicization of energy and water.
• The Land Development Ordinance is mute on the point of height although windmills are a permitted use as an accessory structure in residential areas.

The motion was second and passed by a 3 to 2 vote.

The Village Master Plans will be discussed at the meeting to be held on September 11, 2007.

There being no further business Reverend Freeman made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:42 p.m.

___________________________________

Elizabeth Morris, Chairman

___________________________________

Kim Dixon, Clerk

Home | Business | Community | Government | Top

© Chesapeake Bay Internet Associates - 1996-2000: All Rights Reserved.