The Kent County Planning Commission met in regular session
on Thursday, January 6, 2005, in the County Commissioners Hearing
Room at 400 High Street, Chestertown, Maryland, with the following
members in attendance: Elizabeth H. Morris, Chairman; William
S. Sutton; Patricia Langenfelder; Marcy Brown; Rev. Rubin Freeman; F. Joseph Hickman;
Jay Lancaster; G. Mitchell Mowell, Attorney;
Gail Webb Owings, Planning Director; Carla A. Martin, Community
Planner; Amy G. Moredock, Environmental
Planner; and Elizabeth Carroll, Secretary.
APPLICATIONS
FOR REVIEW
#04-123 County Commissioners of Kent County - Major Subdivision, 4 Lots (Concept) - The County Commissioners of Kent County propose to create four lots from their 14.2 acre parcel
located on Commerce
Road
and MD Route 297 near Worton. The lots will range in size from 2.2 acres
to 5.3 acres. All entrances
to the lots will be from Commerce
Lane. Public water and sewer will serve the lots.
The lots are in an industrial area with farmland across
the road and beyond the railroad tracks. The property is zoned AI@ Industrial.
Chairman Morris advised she is an adjoining property
owner but does not feel that it will influence her decision.
Jim Wright, County Engineer and Dave Powers, McCrone were
present and sworn in with staff by Chairman Morris.
Mrs. Owings reviewed the staff report noting this parcel
is a part of the Parson=s property that has been subject to many subdivisions
over the years including the parcel owned by CFF and KRM.
Applicable law is found in Article V, Section 15. of the Land Use Ordinance which addresses relevant issues.
Staff recommended the following:
- The County should consider reducing the front yard setback
along Commerce
Lane
and the side yard setback as a means to provide more flexibility
in the site design of future property owners.
- The proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
the design standards set forth in the Land Use Ordinance.
- Commerce Lane is capable of handling the traffic generated
by the four lots.
- The Department of Water and Wastewater will need to grant
water and sewer allocation to the lots.
The infrastructure to serve the lots was installed during
road construction.
- Forest Conservation and landscaping plans will be required
- Lighting should be dark sky compatible
- The County will need to work with the Soil Conservation District
to address stormwater management and
water quality.
Chairman Morris invited the applicants to comment.
Mr. Dave Powers presented a revised site plan for review
by the Planning Commission and explained that the subdivision
is now four lots with the size of Lot
1 being reduced and open space that will be jointly owned and
maintained by Lots 1-4. The
lots will have the ability and access to use of the railroad.
Mr. Powers commented on stormwater
management plans and how Ahot spot@ runoff
will be addressed. Mr.
Powers reviewed the landscape plan showing the Board the location
of plantings. Additional landscaping will be required by the
individual lot owners as they present their plan for their building
lots. Discussion continued.
Mr. Wright advised the front setback has been reduced
to 50 feet and they have eliminated the internal side building
restriction lines as recommended by planning staff.
Mr. Wright also addressed water quality issues.
Mr. Wright noted they would like to place on the plat,
a table that shows the maximum impervious surface allowed on each
lot. The buyer will then be aware of what he can
do with the parcel. The
Economic Development Director has informed the applicants that
there are several people interested in the lots.
There were no comments from the audience.
Summarizing their review, the Planning Commission noted
the following:
<
This subdivision
must be compatible with the KRM site.
<
Provide 10-foot
easement along Worton
Road
<
The front
yard setback has been reduced to allow more flexibility in site
design for future property owners.
<
The proposal
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the design standards
set forth in the Land Use Ordinance.
<
Verify availability
of water and sewer allocation to lots.
<
Commerce Lane
is adequate to serve the new lots.
<
Finalize Forest
Conservation plans and landscaping plans
<
Lighting should
be dark sky compatible
<
Obtain approval
from the Soil Conservation District to for stormwater
management and water quality.
Mr. Wright advised the County Commissioners expect to be seeking preliminary and final site plan
approval at the next Planning Commission meeting.
#04-147 Kent School, Inc. - Impervious Surface Variance - Kent School is requesting an impervious variance to construct three
additions to the existing school located at the end of Wilkins Lane and the Chester River, in the Seventh Election District. The 8.01 acre parcel is zoned ARCD@ Resource Conservation District and a small portion of
the property zoned AAZD@ Agricultural Zoning District.
Mr. Sutton advised a relative is employed at Kent School but he does not feel that will influence his review
or recommendation since his decision will be based on findings
of facts.
Mr. Chris McClary was present
on behalf of Kent School and was sworn in with staff by the Chairman.
Ms. Moredock reviewed the staff
report noting the history of the property. She addressed relevant issues and applicable
law found in Article V, Section 2 of the Land Use Ordinance. Currently the impervious
surface on-site totals 53,707.9 square feet. The impervious surface limit within the RCD
District on-site is 46,045 square feet putting Kent School over their impervious surface limit by 7,662 square
feet. The three additions
proposed total 3,750 square feet putting the total proposed impervious
surface over the limit by 10,416.9 square feet.
Ms. Moredock recommended approval of the impervious surface variance
contingent on the following:
$
Any tree removal
to accommodate the additions should be replanted based on square
footage of canopy removed
$
Any replanting
plan should consist of a mix of native trees and shrubs
$
Stormwater runoff from proposed additions should be directed to
stable vegetation
$
A net improvement
in water quality must be demonstrated.
Correspondence has been received from the Critical Areas
Commission stating, based on information provided by the Planning
Office, the additions will increase the overall impervious area
by one percent, therefore they do not oppose the requested variance. They do
recommend additional stormwater management
measures to address the surplus runoff created by the additions.
Mr. McClary reviewed the variance
request with the Planning Commission.
He explained that school has looked at several options. Structurally the existing building
are not designed for a second story. They tried to do an
adjustment of lot lines with a neighboring property owner but
that farm is in a conservation easement.
Unfortunately they will have to remove a large mature tree
and another tree and will attempt to replant at another location.
The Board reviewed the site plan.
There were no comments from the audience.
After review and discussion, Ms. Brown made a motion
to forward a favorable recommendation to the Board of Appeals
recommending approval of a variance to allow Kent School, Inc.
To construct three additions to the existing school, contingent
on:
<
Stormwater runoff should be directed to stable vegetation
<
Ten percent
water quality improvement should be met to offset effects of additional
impervious surface
<
Any proposed
tree removal will require a replanting plan
The
Planning Commission made the following findings:
<
There will
be no substantial detriment to neighboring properties nor will
it change the character of the neighborhood.
<
A lot line
adjustment is not an option at this time.
<
While there
is a concrete driveway and concrete pad which could be removed,
this removal would not result in a net reduction of impervious
surface due to the nature of their use.
<
The variance
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and intent of the ordinance.
<
The practical
difficulty is caused by the current impervious surface total which
exceeds the 15% limit on the parcel. This impervious cover was
present was present in 1985. Kent School has exhausted its options for expansion.
<
The proposed
expansion meets community educational needs.
The
motion was seconded and the vote unanimous.
#04-159 John Kostick - Impervious
Surface Variance - Mr. Kostick is requesting
an impervious surface variance to construct a 30-foot by 80-foot
building on a 7.559 acre lot presently owned by John Stoltzfus. The property is located on West Edge Road, in the First Election District, and is zoned ACCA@ Commercial Critical Area. Currently the parcel has 141,352 square feet
of impervious surface (43%). Mr.
Kostick proposes to add 3,571 square feet of impervious surfaces,
increasing the total impervious surfaces to 144,923 square feet
or 44 percent. If a variance
is granted, Mr. Kostick plans to create a .54 acre lot from the Stoltzfus property for his house painting business.
Mr. Edward Fitzgerald, foreman for Mr. Kostick was present on Mr. Kostick=s behalf. Mr.
Fitzgerald and Ms. Moredock were sworn
in by Chairman Morris.
Ms. Moredock reviewed the history
of this property noting that at the May 2003 meeting, the Planning
Commission reviewed the application of John Kostick
for a variance to construct a 30 by 80 foot building on the lands
of John Stoltzfus. The Planning
Commission recommended the Board of Appeals approve the variance
request with conditions, specifically:
<
Vegetation
mitigation of 3:1 for disturbance with a mixture of native species
<
Stormwater runoff should be directed to stabilize vegetation
<
Ten-percent
water quality improvement should be met to off-set effects of
additional impervious surface
<
Subdivision
must be finalized
<
No trees should
be removed from Lot 2
<
Within one
year, the amount of impervious surface on Lot 1 (7.015 acres
belonging to Mr. Stoltzfus) must be
reduced to the total percentage which existed in 1988 plus the
proposed impervious surface calculation on Lot 2 (3,571 square feet on lot to be owned by Mr. Kostick after the subdivision)
<
A separate
site plan must be submitted for proposed development to Lot
2.
The Planning Commission=s decision
of May 1, 2003, was based on findings of fact, specifically:
<
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 current impervious surface total which
exceeds the 15-percent limit on the 7.559 acre parcel
<
The need for
the variance was not caused by the applicant=s own actions.
The Board of Appeals granted Mr. Kostick=s variance on July 2, 2003. No action was
taken within a year of that decision and the variance expired.
Mr. Stoltzfus submitted a concept
plan for a proposed hotel and convenience store for review by
the Technical Advisory Committee in 1994 and again in 1998 through
2003. TAC has reviewed Mr. Stoltzfus= plans at least seven times. The Planning Commission has also reviewed the
concept plan which shows reduction in the amount of impervious
surface on the hotel and convenience store to that amount of impervious
surface existing on the site as of the effective date of the Critical
Area Program. Mr. Stoltzfus= plan was never submitted for review in 2004.
No correspondence has been received on this proposal.
Ms. Moredock noted relevant
issues and applicable law found in Article V, Section 12.7 of
the Land Use Ordinance, as well as Article IX, Section 2. Of the
ordinance which addresses the criteria for granting a variance.
Staff noted that if a commercial site is going to be
developed, then an impervious surface variance is required. If the Board of Appeals is inclined to approve
the application, the approval should be contingent upon the following:
<
No trees should
be removed to accommodate a building and an afforestation
plan should be required consisting of a mix of native trees and
shrubs
<
Stormwater runoff from proposed structure should be directed to
stable vegetation
<
Ten percent
water quality improvements should be required to offset additional
impervious surface. It
should be further noted that a favorable recommendation does not
confer upon the applicant site plan approval.
The applicant must submit a separate site plan for proposed
development.
Chairman Morris invited Mr. Fitzgerald to speak. He noted this property is directly across the
street from Mr. Kostick=s home.
Mr. Kostick needs storage for
equipment and parking for ten employees. The pine trees will remain on site as a buffer
for his building. Mr. Kostick has looked at other properties but has been unable
to purchase.
Ms. Brown asked the status of Mr. Stoltzfus= property. Staff
has been informed that the deli-restaurant is closed and the property
is for sale, but that has not been confirmed.
Mr. Lancaster asked for clarification of the impervious
surface situation. When the law became effective in 1985, Mr.
Stoltzfus was already over the permitted impervious surface.
Mr. Stoltzfus was told when he
came before the Planning Commission with his site plan, he would
have to reduce the existing impervious surface. Staff has not
heard from him since that meeting. Stoltzfus
has not officially asked the office to remove his hotel and convenience
store site plan from our active file. The impervious surface issue
will continue to be an issue unless the area where the trucks
are parking is removed, or if the existing buildings are removed.
The property continues to be in violation.
Attorney Mowell stated there
will be a further increase in the impervious surface on this parcel
with the addition of Mr. Kostick=s building.
This is an example of when properties are offered for sale without
an approved subdivision. Mr.
Kostick has a pending contract with Mr. Stoltzfus. This places the Planning Commission in a difficult
situation. Discussion continued.
There were no comments from the audience.
Ms. Brown made a motion to recommend denial of the variance
request and to notify the Board of Appeals of the unfavorable
recommendation to allow an impervious surface variance to John
Kostick on lands currently owned by John Stoltzfus. 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 previous
application for an impervious surface variance in May 2003 was
heard while the Stoltzfus 7.559-acre parcel was being reviewed for a hotel
and convenience store. A part of that site plan review outlined
the removal of impervious surface with the end result of an impervious
surface square foot that was in place in 1985. Since May 2003,
the hotel/convenience store site plan has not returned to the
Planning Commission for project review and has not moved to come
into compliance with the impervious surface requirements set forth
in the Board of Appeals decision.
<
The applicant,
John Kostick, does not own the lot in
question.
<
The variance
is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and intent of the ordinance
(the proposed development is consistent with the promotion of
local businesses in this zone.)
<
The practical
difficulty is caused by the current impervious surface total which
exceeds the 15-percent limit on the 7.559 acre parcel.
<
The need for
the variance was not caused by the applicant=s own actions,
but by current non-compliance with the ordinance.
Should the Board of Appeals grant the variance, the Planning
Commission recommends the approval be contingent upon the following:
<
Vegetation
mitigation of 3:1 for disturbance with a mixture of native species.
<
Stormwater runoff should be directed to stablize
vegetation. Ten-percent water quality improvement should be met to
off-set effects of additional impervious surface
<
Subdivision
must be finalized
<
No trees should
be removed from Lot 2
<
Within one
year, the amount of impervious surface on Lot 1 (7.015 acres
belonging to Mr. Stoltzfus) must be
reduced to the total percentage which existed in 1988 plus the
proposed impervious surface calculation on Lot 2 (3,571 square feet on lot to be owned by Mr. Kostick after the subdivision by Mr. Kostic)
<
A separate
site plan must be submitted for proposed development to Lot
2.
The
motion was seconded and the vote unanimous.
#04-153 Oddmund &
Hedvig Angell
- Major Subdivision, 9 Lots (Concept) - Oddmund and Hedvig Angell are requesting concept
review for a 10-lot subdivision located off Crosby Road (Route 288), in the Fifth Election District. The lots will have access to Crosby Road from a new cul-de-sac. The 10.7 acre parcel is zoned
AV@ Village. The
applicants wish to construct six semi-detached dwellings that
will front on Crosby Road but have rear entrances from the new road. Four detached single family dwellings will be
built on the back portion of the property.
Oddmund Angell and his surveyor Bill
Carroll were present and sworn in with staff by Chairman Morris.
Ms. Martin reviewed the staff report noting relevant
issues and applicable law found in Article V, Section 6 of the
Land Use Ordinance which sets forth the requirements in the Village
District. Ms. Martin said all lots contain suitable building
sites and the double frontage lots are deep enough to accommodate
a dwelling and accessory structures.
A narrative has been submitted.
A Citizen Participation Plan should be completed.
The applicants must contact the Department of Water and
Waste Water regarding water and sewer allocation.
Surveyor Bill Carroll explained the proposal and reviewed
the plat with the Planning Commission. Duplexes are proposed to
make the housing units more affordable.
Lots 1 - 6 will be duplexes, however
they may need to reduce to five lots if private wells are required. Lots 7 - 10 are half acre lots. The land has been determined to have no non-tidal
wetlands. Construction
will not impact the woods.
Mr. Angell commented further
on the proposed development noting there is a need for the development
and he is doing what he can to keep the homes affordable to the
community. A discussion ensued regarding the site and the
proposed development.
There were no comments from the audience and no correspondence
has been received in the Planning Office with regards to this
application.
The Planning Commission completed review of the concept
plan for the Oddmund Angell
Major Subdivision. Comments
expressed by the Board were:
<
The Planning
Commission supports the use of duplexes to reduce construction
costs and appreciates the developer=s willingness to orient the houses towards Crosby Road.
<
Consider design
restrictions that would prohibit the location of garages forward
of the front wall of the house.
<
A variance
will be needed for zero lot line for duplexes.
STAFF
REPORTS
Carla A. Martin, Community Planner - No report.
Amy G. Moredock, Environmental
Planner - Ms. Moredock advised she has
been working on two annual reports which she will have ready for
review by the Planning Commission at the February meeting.
G. Mitchell Mowell, Attorney - Mr. Mowell report the preliminary
site plan approval has been appealed by the Hoon
and Associates.
Attorney Mowell will be representing
Planning and Zoning in the violation
of Greg Joiner at hearing on February 10, 2005 at 1:15 pm
in District Court.
Gail Webb Owings, Planning Director - Citizens of Kennedyville held
meeting with regards to being an incorporated town and found out
they do not meet the criteria to become incorporated.
Comprehensive Plan Work Group will
meeting Tuesday, January 11 to discuss Affordable Housing. Jack Canan, Coordinator, Kent
County Housing and Community Development will attend the meeting.
COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN
Meetings have been scheduled with the towns as follows:
Betterton - January 10, 7:30 PM M. Brown &
E. Morris
Millington - January 21, 7 PM B. Sutton & E. Morris
Galena - January 31, 7 PM J.
Lancaster & P. Langenfelder
Chestertown - to be
scheduled
GENERAL
DISCUSSION
Chairman Morris expressed concern over the recent editorial
in the Kent News regarding Planning Commission meetings and time
scheduling. After some
discussion it was agreed to place a statement on the agenda that
the time for each agenda item is an estimated time.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned
at 4:45
PM.
_________________________________
Elizabeth
H. Morris, Chairman
_________________________________
Elizabeth
E. Carroll, Secretary
