|
The Kent County Planning Commission met in regular
session on Thursday, July 1, 2004, in the County Commissioners Hearing
Room at 400 High Street, Chestertown, Maryland, with the following
members in attendance: Elizabeth Morris, Chairman; Marcy Brown;
Rev. Ruben Freeman; Patricia Langenfelder, Jay Lancaster; F. Joseph
Hickman; G. Mitchell Mowell, Attorney; Gail Webb Owings, Planning
Director; Carla Martin, Community Planner; Amy G. Moredock, Environmental
Planner; and Elizabeth Carroll, Secretary.
APPLICATIONS FOR REVIEW
#04-60 Gretchen
Stroh - Variance (front yard) - Mrs. Stroh is requesting
a variance to construct a 56 square foot deck and steps 6 feet from
the front property line. The .24 acre parcel is located on Hillmont
Drive in the Fifth Election District. The property is zoned "CAR"
Critical Area Residential.
Mrs. Stroh was present and sworn in with staff by
Chairman Morris.
Ms. Moredock informed the Planning Commission that
Mrs. Stroh's dwelling was substantially damaged during Hurricane
Isabel in 2003. The dwelling did not meet the side or front yard
setback requirements at the time of the storm, but was permitted
to be replaced in the same footprint at the proper elevation. A
permit was issued to elevate the dwelling in compliance with floodplain
requirements. In order to receive an occupancy permit for the elevated
dwelling, safe egress must be provided to the front door to meet
building code requirements, otherwise the front door must be blocked
off from use.
Ms. Moredock reviewed applicable law found in Article
V, Section 2 of the Land Use Ordinance. A variance of 44 feet is
needed to construct the steps and deck. Article IX, Section 2.2
of the Ordinance sets forth the criteria for granting variances.
Ms. Mordock recommended approval of the variance and that 6 inches
of pea gravel be placed beneath the steps and deck.
Chairman Morris invited Mrs. Stroh to speak. Mrs.
Stroh informed the Planning Commission that they have redesigned
in order to minimize disturbance as much as possible. They are trying
to recreate what was there before the flood. She reviewed the site
plan with the Board. The Board expressed concern about the closeness
of the steps and deck to the road. Mrs. Stroh noted the road is
a private road.
There were no comments from the audience. Notices
were sent to adjoining property owners but the office has had no
response from neighbors.
After a lengthy discussion, Ms. Brown made a motion
to forward an unfavorable recommendation to the Board of Appeals
on the front yard setback variance for the steps citing:
- -A variance to place steps 6 feet from the road may create
an unsafe situation.
- -There will be no substantial detriment to neighboring properties,
nor will it change the character of the neighborhood.
- -The practical difficulty is caused by the substantial damage
incurred as a result of Hurricane Isabel and the requirement
to elevate the structure.
Should the Board be so inclined to approve the variance,
then 6 inches of pea gravel should be placed beneath the steps.
The motion was seconded and after some discussion
Chairman Morris called for the vote. The motion carried by a 3-2
vote.
Ms. Brown made a motion to forward a favorable recommendation
to the Board of Appeals recommending approval of a variance to allow
construct of the proposed deck, provided:
- -The deck is limited to 8 feet in width and be located no
closer than 10 feet from the front property line.
- -Six inches of pea gravel must be placed under the deck.
This recommendation is based on the following findings:
- -There will be no substantial detriment to neighboring properties,
nor will it change the character of the neighborhood.
- -The variance is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
intent of the Ordinance.
- -The practical difficulty is caused by the substantial damage
incurred as a result of Hurricane Isabel and the subsequent
floodplain requirement to elevate the structure.
- -The need for a variance was not caused by the applicant's
own actions. It is felt a variance to place a deck 6 feet from
the road may create an unsafe situation, therefore the deck
should be reduced in size to meet a 20 foot setback from the
front property line.
The motion was seconded. The chairman called for the
vote. The motion carried by an unanimous vote.
#04-67 The
Worton Project, Lot 1 - Alger Oil, Inc. - Site Plan Review
- KRM Development Corporation and Alger Oil, Inc. request preliminary
site plan approval to construct a 4000 square foot office building
with an attached 4000 square foot warehouse area and fuel and propane
storage areas on their 3.417 acre parcel on Commerce Road near Worton
in the Third Election District. Commerce Road, a public road, will
serve as access to the site. The property is zoned Industrial.
Bruce Wright, engineer for the project, was present
and sworn in with staff by the Chairman.
Mrs. Owings noted the history of this property. She
reviewed applicable law found in Article V, Section 15 of the Land
Use Ordinance which establishes criteria for development in the
Industrial District. She further noted the property is served by
the Worton public sewer and water systems.
Additional comments by staff included the following:
- -The proposal complies with the Comprehensive Plan.
- -Both vehicular and pedestrian movement is adequate on the
site.
- -Off street parking and loading exceeds the requirements.
- -Lighting is to be by surface mounted lights on the building.
These lights should be dark sky compatible.
- -The demands placed on public services will be dependent
upon the ultimate users of the building.
- -The Maryland Department of the Environment must review the
stormwater management plan due to the nature of the use.
- -At the time of subdivision the owners paid into forest conservation
fund as a means to comply with the Forest Conservation Act.
Landscape plans need to be submitted.
- -Building elevations need to be submitted.
- -The sign location needs to be included in the final plat.
Staff recommended approval if conceptual landscaping
and building elevations are submitted.
Chairman Morris invited Mr. Wright to speak on behalf
of his clients. Mr. Wright reviewed the plans with the Planning
Commission describing the proposed structures and their uses. Mr.
Wright reviewed the site plan with the Board. Discussion ensued.
The Chairman asked for public comments. Mr. Bill
Clark, plant manager for Vesicol Chemical noted they have no objections
to the proposed project. Mr. Clark asked the maximum number of employees
in the office and warehouse at any given time. He asked about the
type of materials to be stored in the warehouse. Mr. Wright replied
the number of employees on site would be eleven which includes five
truck drivers on the road during the day; two in the warehouse;
and the rest office staff. Storage will include HVAC equipment for
heating and cooling and small supplies.
After review and discussion, Ms. Brown made a motion
to grant preliminary site plan approval for a 4000 square foot office/warehouse
building with fuel and propane sales and storage areas on the property
owned by KRM Development Corporation on Commerce Drive in Worton,
contingent on the following:
- -Water and sewer allocation is obtained
- -Proposed landscaping is enhanced and includes native species
or cultivars
- -The site plan indicates locations and screening for household
propane tanks
- -Plans are approved by the Fire Marshall
- -Lights are dark sky compatible
- -Submittal of front, side and real elevations of the proposed
buildings
- -Stormwater management plans are approved.
The Planning Commission took a five-minute break
and upon returning began review on a proposed text amendment.
Zoning Text
Amendment - Minimum Lot Size in the Village District - Carl
Wright of Wright Land Development, LLC has submitted a text amendment
to amend the Land Use Ordinance, specifically: Article V, Section
7.5:
The minimum lot size shall be reduced to 5,500 square
feet when the applicant conducts a charrette. A charrette is defined
as an intensive 2 or 3 day planning workshop in which residents,
business owners civic leaders, county planners, officials, and/or
other interested parties meet with the applicant and their design
team of architects, planners and designers.
Developers Stuart Sirota of Baltimore, Maryland and
Carl Wright of Swathmore, Pennsylvania were present and sworn in
with staff by Chairman Morris.
Mrs. Owings reviewed her staff report informing the
Planning Commission of the procedure for amending the Land Use Ordinance.
Mrs. Owings noted the County's Comprehensive Plan and that it encourages
flexibility in the design of subdivisions in or adjacent to our
towns and villages. The Planning Commission has previously said
they would like the flexibility of altering development plans when
a Village Master Plan has been completed for a village. A charrette
pretty much does a majority of what would be involved in developing
a village master plan. Mrs. Owings further noted the proposed amendment
requires the Planning Commission to reduce lot size without providing
assurances that an acceptable development reflects the character
of the area will result. Staff, therefore recommended denial of
the text amendment as presented.
Mrs. Owings read staff's recommended change to the
proposed amendment to Article V, Section 7.5 Neighborhood Development,
and the addition of Article V, Section 7.8C13 Traditional Neighborhood
Development.
Mr. Sirota gave a power point presentation showing
a traditional neighborhood development and their ideas to protect
a town and keep growth from a suburban type development. He related
the slide presentation to the proposed text amendment. A key to
their development strategy is a document produced by the Maryland
Department of Planning, "Design Characteristics of Maryland's Traditional
Settlements."
Mr. Sirota further explained their ideas for development
of a village.
The Planning Commission asked various questions of
the applicants. Several members of the Planning Commission attended
the charette. They felt that a development should not hinge on having
a charette. The Board felt they could not support the text amendment
as presented by Wright Land Development LLC.
After some discussion, the applicants asked that
this amendment be tabled at this time. They will resubmit a revised
text amendment for further consideration, however they asked for
additional discussion of staff's suggestions. Discussion continued.
The audience was invited to comment. Mrs. Airlee
Johnson feels the proposal is a great concept. With different builders
and various plans, it may avoid a cookie cutter type development.
Ann Hoon asked what percentage of the Kennedyville
area residents attended the charette. It was estimated that over
the course of the three days 60 to 80 people attended.
Elizabeth Watson, speaking as a private citizen,
encouraged this approach which is an effort to match Kennedyville.
Find flexibility but at the same time protect property rights.
After some discussion, Mr. Sirota pointed out reasons
for reducing lot size.
- Houses closer together in a similar pattern as in traditional
villages gives a more sense of place
- Reducing the infrastructure costs and reducing lot size helps
to make homes more affordable
- Frees developer up to higher quality construction.
The Planning Commission discussed further the Village
Master Plan concept. Chairman Morris advised the applicants that
they may prepare a new amendment as may the Planning Commission.
The Board encouraged the applicants to consider today's comments
in preparing a new text amendment.
Stories
of the Chesapeake Heritage Area - Elizabeth Watson was present
and spoke to the Planning Commission explaining the purpose of this
project.
"The plan will set the standard for saving the character
of communities and sites in Caroline, Kent, Queen Anne's and Talbot
Counties for generations to come. Its recommendations will help
to direct decisions on public investment and future policies affecting
natural, historic and cultural resources. For this plan, grassroots
supporters have identified 160 heritage-related projects, from restoring
historic structures to creating educational programs."
Today, Ms. Watson is requesting the support of the
Planning Commission in the form of a resolution. Mrs. Owings explained
the benefits of participating in the program.
Following some discussion, Rev. Freeman made a motion
to support the Chesapeake Heritage Area Program by using the sample
resolution for certification given to the Planning Commission, however
the resolution should be written saying " the County may
amend the Kent County Comprehensive Plan to adopt the portions of
the Management Plan relevant to the Comprehensive Plan as a strategy
to implement the Comprehensive Plan;" The motion was seconded and
the vote unanimous.
Mrs. Langenfelder made a motion to forward a favorable
recommendation to the County Commissioners recommending they accept
and approve a "Resolution for Certification for the Stories fo the
Chesapeake Area" and the establishment of a Certified Maryland Heritage
Area. The motion was seconded and the vote unanimous.
Comprehensive
Plan Review Committee Schedule - Mrs. Owings discussed with
the Planning Commission a draft schedule prepared by staff and confirmed
dates. The Board will begin its review process Tuesday, July 6,
2004 at 7:00 p.m, at which time they will discuss the "Overview
of the Visioning Session." They will meet again on Tuesday, July
20. The Planning Commission agreed to accept written comments from
the public for review and consideration.
The Board is considering reviewing the Comprehensive
Plan by sections as follows:
- Economy - Countryside - Environment
- Towns and Villages - Housing - Transportation
- Community Facilities and Public Services - Historic and
Cultural Preservation
There being no further business, Chairman Morris
adjourned the meeting at 4:45 pm.
__________________________________
Elizabeth H. Morris, Chairman
__________________________________
Elizabeth E. Carroll, Secretary
Kent County Department of Planning &
Zoning
County Government Center
400 High Street
Chestertown, MD 21620
Tel: (410) 778-7475
Fax: (410) 810-2932
E-mail:gowings@kentgov.org
© Kent County, Maryland, U.S.A.
Information is for personal use only. Any redistribution of this
information is strictly prohibited without permission from Kent
County, Maryland.
Kent County shall make all efforts
to ensure that the Kent County Planning Commission Home Page and
its links are accurate and up-to-date. However, Kent County shall
not be liable for any errors, inaccuracies, omissions, or untimeliness
of the information contained herein.
|