|
For quick access, click on a title here and jump to that article, below:
-
Editorial
-
City: Worman’s Mill Court Apartments
-
Mixed Use Development at 69-77 S. Market Street
-
Lucas Village
-
City: Westside Regional Workshop
-
City: East Street Redesign
-
City:
Board of Aldermen & Mayor Workshop: Resident Appointments and
Affordable Housing at The Junction and Madison on N. Market
-
More Luxury Condos Downtown
-
City: B&O Development, Lot 7
-
County: Property Tax Increase for School Construction
-
Hotels, Hotels, Hotels
-
Ongoing Data Center Concerns
-
Upcoming Meetings and Events
______________
CRG
is adding an editorial column beginning with this edition of our
newsletter. The intention is to expand what is offered to our readers in
addition to normal reporting on core issues and related
meetings throughout the City and County. Our hope is that you will find
these thought provoking and, in some cases, insightful.
EDITORIAL: Steve Jakubczyk
In praise of volunteers — you inspire us and help keep us going
In
the midst of partisan politics at every level in both the City and the
County — where in-fighting and close-mindedness, along with an apparent
disregard for transparency and public opinion — it is difficult
sometimes not to give in and walk away. It's especially difficult after
spending time going to meeting after meeting, organizing and moderating
dozens of non-partisan candidate forums, and constantly engaging with
neighbors throughout the community to better understand resident
concerns.
To observe that the City constantly hires consultants, but ignores their
recommendations and does the same with the commissions and committees
they appoint if the results don't reinforce their preconceived
positions, is very disheartening.
Hearing that quality individuals are denied jobs in the City, or an
opportunity to serve, because they won't rubber stamp staff
recommendations, or are loosely associated with civic organizations that
occasionally challenge the status quo, is chilling to the soul.
The recent denial of reappointment to the critical and vital City
Planning Commission because an individual fought too hard for the
residents, instead of for the development community, was especially
egregious.
However, I've met some lovely, dedicated people on this journey and
that's what keeps me going. These are people I respect and admire, who
are doing their best to address the challenges of a growing City for all
the right reasons; people who serve without ego, arrogance, or
grandstanding — those of you who actively participate in non-profits or
through church groups, and those who volunteer to help your neighbors
and community out of a desire to create a better Frederick through
improving the community at large.
You are the ones that inspire me each and every day — keep it up — we need you!
_____________
City: Worman’s Mill Court Apartments
The
3-building, 315-unit multi-family residential project, proposed by
Standard Communities, is either a tremendous addition to the stock of
affordable housing in Frederick — or an attempt to fit a square peg into
a round hole. At the first of two hearings on both a re-zoning
application and a master plan, the applicant noted that due to the
unique nature of the site (in terms of size, configuration, access to
public streets, bisection of the property by a portion of the RwT (Roads
with Trails), partial location within the Highway Noise Impact Overlay
(HNO), etc.), it is necessary for the ZBA (Zoning Board of Appeals) to
designate the site as MU (mixed-use) and the PC (Planning Commission) to
approve numerous requested modifications to the LMC (Land Management
Code). Issues and concerns raised at the hearing included, but are not
limited to:
Single public vehicular access to the site — Currently Worman’s Mill Court provides the only public access point to the property.
Limited 5000 sq. ft. non-residential building and its location
— Questions were raised about the location, size, and use of this
facility as it does not seem to meet the criteria for/nor intent of
mixed-use properties.
Minimal recreation area on site with payment by developer of a fee-in-lieu of parkland.
Landlocked pedestrians — Although the project is
located within walking distance of goods and services north of Rte. 26,
there is currently no safe, convenient way to access these facilities.
Hopefully, careful consideration of/decision about all modification
requests will assure it’s precisely what the City needs to fill at least
a small gap in the affordable housing market. And, we suggest, this
(and other future infill projects) would be more valuable to the City
and its residents if the projects are developed as mixed-income
communities rather than low/moderate income housing. A vote will be
taken at the next PC hearing on the rezoning recommendation and proposed
site plan.
Mixed Use Development at 69–77 S. Market Street
By
a vote of 3–1, the HPC Commissioners agreed that 77 S. Market St is a
non-contributing building which leads the way to its demolition.
However, the developer, Ausherman Properties, must submit a new and
updated Replacement Plan (to replace the 12/11/23 submission) before the
HPC Commission approves the actual demolition. A representative of the
Union Steam Fire Engine Co. #3 at 79 S. Market Street reminded
Commissioners that a nearby concrete block building on W. South Street
had been designated as a contributing structure and wondered why 77 S.
Market was not afforded the same designation. As well, several neighbors
provided public comment on the project, noting the massing and scale of
the (original) design for the replacement and its negative impact on
their properties, including loss of light, privacy, and parking, and
increased noise generated from HVAC units and other mechanicals once the
replacement building is constructed. Although the neighbors’ comments
focused mainly on the replacement rather than the demolition, these
issues cannot be separated as documented by the HPC decision to delay
demolition approval until the revised replacement plan is presented.
After the meeting, the developer’s representative offered to meet with
neighbors who have become a cohesive and active group. UPDATE: As of
April 23, 2024, the developer had not submitted a revised replacement
plan nor met with neighbors. We will keep you posted when this item is
scheduled for discussion.
Lucas Village
The
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Environment recently approved “the
demolition of the entire Lucas Village community,” a public residential
neighborhood comprised of 88 units and various community buildings,
determining that the site is “high-risk for the formation of sinkholes”
and the units are “unsuitable for housing purposes.” Under a plan
proposed by the Housing Authority of the City of Frederick (the owner
and property manager of the area) families in the affordable housing
community are being displaced so the village can be demolished to
protect against future sinkholes, associated damages, or injuries, and
“imminent health hazards.” Although protection of all families is
critical, the Board of Aldermen (BOA) is requesting additional
information on how the developer will ensure that the replacement
construction will be ‘safe’ from future sinkholes. Further, ensuring
temporary housing for the displaced families is critical, as are options
for the residents to return to the property at affordable rates.
CRG applauds the restraint shown by the aldermen in taking this
precaution for the safety of the future residents (see Lucas Village,
Relocation and Redevelopment presentation made to the BOA on April 17th)
but requests that other concerns for the specific area be discussed
(objectionable summer odors, impact from quarry explosions, proximity to
train tracks) and remedies offered.
Board of Aldermen meeting video and documents:
https://cityoffrederick.granicus.com/player/clip/5924?view_id=45&redirect=true
City: Westside Regional Workshop
On
May 1st, a workshop was held for the initial presentation by the Sports
Facilities Corporation, the consultant for the design and projected
uses of Westside Regional Park. The bulk of the meeting was a recap of
the two public meetings held April 1st and 2nd, plus updates on a recent
online survey.
For CRG there were two major takeaways:
The overwhelming public response was a preference for Community Services
at the park along with passive outdoor space. This was in stark
contrast to previous and now outdated plans that called for a
revenue-generating sportsplex that did little to benefit the surrounding
community. CRG strongly supports the choice of the residents for a
Community Center to house the needed Community Services.
The presentation left many answered questions and, in some cases, seemed
to put the proverbial ‘cart before the horse’. There were too many
questions by the BOA that should have been addressed prior to the
workshop or the work by the Consultant. There was no information
provided about any City objectives for the park, no real discussion on
any "must have" amenities, and no clear understanding of the physical
and practical limitations of what can or cannot be constructed in the
park. All we really know is that the public wants an accessible park and
not a sports complex!
It is concerning that such a major opportunity to enrich the lives of
the residents of the City and in particular the often underserved
community on the west side was not been more thoroughly vetted prior to
the start of this process. Clear objectives must be brought forth
recognizing that the local community has evolved over the last decade
and as such must be the top priority.
City: East Street Redesign
On
May 1st, City staff conducted another public charrette on the redesign
of East Street from 4th to 8th Streets where citizens were able to
express their opinion on proposed realignment of traffic. Unfortunately,
this effort seems to be moving the ball backward from the Re-envision
East Street study conducted a year ago. The focus seemed to be on the
creation of dual bike lanes on the east side of the street. City Staff
agreed that the rails and trails path would be designed to accommodate
both pedestrians and bicyclists. CRG believes that the rails and trails
concept should continue down to 4th Street thereby moving the dedicated
bike lanes off the busy street and providing room for trees and a
stormwater right-of-way. CRG is also encouraging the city to establish a
right-of-way for the eventual burial of the current above ground
utilities.
A long-range plan for the East Street Corridor should be distributed
quickly before any decision is made on the 4th–8th Street redesign. The
4th–8th street traffic lanes, bike and pedestrian use, stormwater
options, and relocation of the current and future utilities can then be
assessed as part of a planned corridor continuum with implementation of
the redesign as development criteria and resources are available.
City:
Board of Aldermen & Mayor Workshop: Resident Appointments and
Affordable Housing at The Junction and Madison on N. Market
On
May 2nd, the City discussed two important topics important to
residents. The first was appointments of various citizens to important
City commissions including Sustainability (ideally guiding our urban
climate program) and Planning (the most important venue for resident
examination of proposed development). CRG looks forward to continued
dialog between the general public, these commission members, and the
City administration. A surprise was the absence of the proposed
reappointment of the most experienced member of the Planning Commission,
initially nominated to serve again but absent in the final agenda. The
loss of the dedicated, informed, and always prepared member of the
Planning Commission jeopardizes the high credibility it has earned over
the past several years. We hope an explanation for this omission will be
provided in the coming weeks.
In the remainder of the workshop, multiple agreements were discussed,
many focusing on use of City revenues collected from developers who have
chosen not to build City-required moderately priced dwelling units
(MPDUs) and instead have paid a fee in-lieu (FIL) that the City has
accumulated to more than $6M. Several agreements provide portions of
these fees to jump-start two affordable housing projects (the Jefferson
Junction project and Madison on N. Market). CRG wholeheartedly welcomes
this long overdue use of City housing construction funds, matched with
County funds, to move the Junction project forward. A downside is that
both projects provide support for residents at no more than 60% of the
area median income (AMI), leaving lower income ALICE residents without
housing opportunities in these two projects. Additionally, the BOA
agreed to seek lower property taxes from the affordable complex at the
Junction, thereby reducing the annual property tax burden on the
developer enabling lower fiscal demand on the developer to move the
project forward.
In the future, CRG believes that all collected FIL be used solely for
affordable housing construction with City General Funds covering sorely
needed assistance to the homeless and rental assistance for
fiscally-challenged lower income families. The two social programs are
essential, but the City should indicate its multi-decade support through
repeated annual allocation of a portion of property taxes collected to
these programs and not reduce housing construction funds collected to
actually provide yearly building of a portion of the estimated
12,000–15,000 units needed across the City and County.
More Luxury Condos Downtown
The
first condominium on the former Visitation Academy property is fully
occupied. The second, a 7-unit condominium building between the first
building and E. 2nd Street, will get underway when four units are under
contract (two are currently under contract). Neighbors are concerned
about the state of road degradation in front of the entrance to the
condominiums and the developers promise to inspect the road, and work
with the City on any repairs that would take place until after the
construction of the second building. Another concern expressed by
(primarily) E. Second Street residents is the brightness of the vertical
lights on the condominium façade which will impact residents of the
second condominium building.
City: B&O Development, Lot 7
On
April 25th, the Historic Preservation Committee received testimony from
applicants for construction of 5 new townhouses behind the historic and
renovated B&O buildings near the MARC Train Station off East
Street. The developers propose 4-story townhouses, with renderings
showing gray facades (where’s the red brick to match the linear park
buildings or the current B&O townhouses?), two bay garages (not
permitted facing public streets), and second story balconies (are there
any in that area?).
Construction on the site is inevitable, but the developers seek
exemptions to ensure reasonable returns on sales. CRG encourages the HPC
to insist that developers meet the requirements of City HPC guidelines
rather than comply with developer-requested exemptions that will ensure
profit for them in the new market. For example, build smaller, with
styles and materials that complement the Union Mills and existing
B&O townhome facades.
County: Property Tax Increase for School Construction
County
Executive Fitzwater is requesting a 4.7% increase in property taxes for
school construction. With the rapid growth rate and constant
construction of new residential units, and the already
overcrowded/overcapacity schools, it’s obvious new schools must be built
in order to provide quality educational opportunities for all. CRG
generally supports the property tax increase initiative and recognizes
it as a good starting point to keep from falling even further behind.
As stated on our call-to-action email last week, only with an
all-hands-on-deck approach — leveraging all potential funding options
and statewide partnerships — can we hope to resolve this crisis.
Frederick News Post article on the tax increase:
https://www.fredericknewspost.com/news/education/funding/fitzwater-proposes-4-7-property-tax-rate-increase-for-fy25-to-fund-school-construction/article_ec4c3ee1-6b07-5580-89d7-b1b3858c2a6f.html
Hotels, Hotels, Hotels
Many
Fredericktonians have been following the “downtown hotel” saga for what
seems like years. Currently, there are no operating hotels in the
downtown core. However, one is on the brink of opening; another has
passed a few necessary milestones. The first, Visitation Hotel, is
scheduled to open August 15, 2024. Final agreement has been reached with
Brian Voltaggio, who will be the creative chef for the hotel
restaurant. The first major event at the hotel will be a wedding in
mid-October.
The second, the long-planned/promised downtown hotel and conference
center, was the discussion topic at a recent community meeting on the
site plan. The presentation focused mainly on entrances and surface
parking. Some attendees were surprised to learn that the hotel is now
set back behind the existing FNP (Frederick News Post) building,
although no demolition plans were presented for the rear of the existing
building. A primary entrance to the hotel would be off Carroll Street
with a drive through the hotel space on the first floor to the existing
parking lot (i.e., the former FNP parking lot) on East Patrick across
from the Post Office. Among the issues of concern are:
Traffic: There has not yet been a traffic analysis as required by the APFO (Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance).
Adherence to FBC (form-based code): Although the
project may/may not be in the East Frederick FBC overlay, large street
facing parking lots were discouraged. Attendees suggested design of
physical screening.
The owner of 226 and 230 East Patrick Street expressed concern about a 5-story building 20 feet from his rear property line. It does not seem as though the HPC can help alleviate his concern.
Ongoing Data Center Concerns
On
April 4th, Quantum Loophole contractors violated State and County
regulations for illegal discharges from their horizontal drilling
operations. Without necessary permits or notification to officials,
discharges of drilling clay and the drilling fluid were released into a
Monocacy tributary, yielding, in the County’s wording, ‘environmental
hazards’. Despite repeated corporation promises for rigorous and
continuous oversight, Quantum Loophole has failed again to safeguard the
natural landscape and watersheds of the County, raising substantial
concern for fulfilling past promises on their role as ‘good neighbors’
during center construction and operations. This continuing casual
commitment to protecting local lands and waters seems to reinforce the
governor’s and legislature’s recent adoption of weakened environmental
protections for this new industry for our area. CRG is amazed that
projected annual revenues — insufficient for building even one
elementary school — have negatively affected officials’ ability to
safeguard what defines a large portion of our County: our lands and
waterways.
Upcoming Meetings and Events
County Planning Commission, Winchester Hall, May 8, 9:30 AM: Site plans for a natural burial cemetery and 2 solar facilities (Walkersville, Keymar)
|
