KENT COUNTY, MARYLAND
COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S

PUBLIC HEARING - 10/14/2003

APPLICATION FOR ZONING MAP AMENDMENT

A Public Hearing was held on Tuesday, October 14, 2003, at 10:00 a.m..in the County Commissioners' Hearing Room, County Government Center, Chestertown, Maryland on an application for zoning map amendment filed by Arthur and Anne Foster to reclassify their 66 acre- property from the "RR" (Rural Residential) to "CR" (Community Residential District) located on Maryland Route 213 near Hopewell Corner, north of Chestertown in the Fourth Election District.

County Commissioners Roy W. Crow and William W. Pickrum were in attendance as well as Susanne Hayman, County Attorney, T. Edward Robinson, County Administrator, Gail Owings, Director, Planning and Zoning Administration, Carla Martin, Community Planner, Arthur Foster, Harris Murphy, Esq., representing Anne and Arthur Foster, and Herschell Claggett, Realtor. Scott D. Livie was not in attendance due to a previous commitment for family vacation.

Notice of the public hearing was read into the record by Commissioner Pickrum as well as the procedure for testifying. Arthur Foster, Gail Owings, and Herschell Claggett were sworn-in by Ms. Hayman in order to testify. Ms. Hayman inquired of Mr. Murphy as to whether or not he would like the Commissioners to be sworn-in, to which Mr. Murphy respectfully declined.

Exhibits were presented as follows: Exhibit No. 1 - Copy of District 4, Tax Map 37, Parcel 105 and its environs indicating previous zoning. Exhibit No. 2 - Copy of District 4, Tax Map 37, Parcel 105 and its environs indicating present zoning.

Commissioner Pickrum referred to correspondence from Elizabeth H. Morris, Chairperson, County Planning Commission, sent to the Commissioners, dated August 25, 2003, Commissioner Pickrum reviewed the decision made by the County Planning Commission at its August 7, 2003 meeting when it voted unanimously to recommend denial of the application. According to that correspondence, the Planning Commission indicated that they based their decision on the following:

- The property is located at an important gateway into Chestertown;

- The property acts as a transition between the town of Chestertown and prime agricultural land. The Leaverton Farm, which is north of the property (but not immediately adjacent to the property) is protected by a MD Agricultural Land Preservation easement;

- Both the County and Chestertown Comprehensive Plans direct growth into the Town and discourage growth at the edge of the town's gateways;

- A change in the zoning would not be consistent with the Chestertown Comprehensive Plan or the County Comprehensive Plan;

- The County did not make a mistake in the original zoning of Rural Residential (1dwelling unit per 3 acres);

- A change in the neighborhood did not occur since the last rezoning;

- The Planning Commission does not find a public need for the zoning map amendment.

Mr. Murphy outlined the history of the Fosters' purchase of the property in question, reporting that the property was purchased in 1995 with a 1-1 acre zoning and that the Foster's are seeking to retain the 1-1 zoning.. Given the current zoning laws, which increases this density to three acres, the number of dwellings which could be built on the Fosters' property value, in his opinion, would be reduced by 66% and would, therefore, constitute a significant loss in the value of said property. Additionally, it was Mr. Murphy's opinion that a further loss in the value of the property would result from the proposed by-pass and the State's entrance requirements.

Ms. Hayman reviewed the original intent of the zoning change and emphasized that there was no mistake made in the original zoning of Rural Residential, and that, therefore, the applicant must make a threshold showing that there was either (1) a mistake in the last comprehensive zoning, or (2) that substantial changes have occurred in the neighborhood around the property since the last rezoning.

Commissioner Crow asked if the Foster's issued any comment during the time of the deliberations regarding the update of the Zoning Ordinance, to which Ms. Owings reported that the Foster's son did speak in opposition when the proposed zoning of 1 dwelling per 20 acres was under deliberation. Commissioner Crow asked if at that time the zoning was changed from 1dwelling per 3 acres, to which Ms. Owings responded in the affirmative as a compromise to the original proposed change.

Commissioner Pickrum asked if there were any other questions or concerns to be brought forward, to which Mr. Claggett requested to testify. After being sworn-in, Mr. Claggett reported that because the Foster's were unaware that deliberations concerning zoning changes were taking place, they had only one day to make their objection. He appealed to the County to allow the original zoning to remain the same, advising that, in his opinion, with the proposed change in zoning, he alleged the Foster's would suffer a large reduction in their property value. In light of that reduction, he felt property owners should then be compensated.

The Commissioners will review this request with Commissioner Livie prior to taking any action.

This hearing was taped for reference and adjourned at 10:30 a.m.

THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF KENT COUNTY, MARYLAND

Janice F. Fletcher
Executive Assistant

Approved:
William W. Pickrum, President