Vol. 1, No. 1 6/07/22
Newsletter from the Citizens for Responsible Growth
- Neighborhood Advisory Committees: Revitalization
- City Safety and Exhale
- East Street Redevelopment
- Visitation Academy
- County APFO Revision
Many Frederick residents want to know but
cannot find information about or participate in discussions of important local
issues. The City and County generally hold meetings from 3-10 PM, making it
impossible for most of us to attend meetings or weigh in on issues of interest.
Our mission with this monthly newsletter is to highlight City and County
activities so you can learn more and, with your limited time, weigh in on areas
of growth and development, City and County policies, and other local
activities. Occasionally, opinions or longer stories will be offered by
knowledgeable experts/readers. We welcome suggestions for articles focused on specific
topics. Contact Kevin Sellner (kgsellner@gmail) or Marge Rosensweig
(marjorie803@comcast.net) for consideration of your issue.
1. Neighborhood Advisory Committees: Revitalization?
The City established 12 Neighborhood Advisory
Committees (NACs) during Jennifer Dougherty’s (2002-2006) mayoral term, to
provide resident feedback to City staff and officials on all matters. Staff and
alderpersons would attend individual NAC meetings to provide updates on police
activity, development, and other pending City efforts, relaying resident
feedback to the administration. Since that time, the importance of the NACs in
influencing City actions and policies has declined, and, during the
pandemic, the NACs have essentially disappeared. The City is currently
searching for a NAC communications staff member who could, according to staff,
revitalize the former NAC role. Alternatively, on-going discussions between
Alderman Shackelford and Allen Etzler, City Communications Manager, could
result in a consolidation effort of active NACs with less active NACs to ensure
cross-City representation. More to come…
One key role for NACs has been a requirement that City planning staff and the developer for a new construction project attend and present their proposed but already City-accepted project to residents within the affected NAC for feedback. Instead, City staff have proposed development presentations to residents through one monthly multi-hour meeting, an all-NAC meeting, but few residents have the time nor fortitude to sit through 3-4 hours of staff presentations on development projects already permitted within the City. One project alone can last >1 hour, and multiple projects in each NAC might be covered. Residents have proposed returning to individual NAC meetings that would include staff and the developer for a summary of a proposed development BEFORE it has been accepted by the City, thereby allowing possible revisions to proposed new construction that reflect local resident concerns on design, architecture, heights, parking, schools, stormwater, green space, etc. This approach was described for Mt. Airy in today’s FNP (6/6/22) for a large development proposed in that town. A City response (Board of Aldermen, mayor) has not been received on this suggested pre-application review process and, as a result, City staff have announced that their all-NAC meeting will remain in place to receive public comment on permitted new development projects. Note, these presentations are on projects that City staff have already tacitly permitted through continuous discussions between staff and the developer, without any resident input. The project is a ‘done deal’ and the meeting that allows public comment simply checks a box that the public has been informed.
As the City budget is nearly completed, we are hopeful that elected officials will return to the important role of the NACs and pre-application review so we will keep everyone informed on possible help in returning resident influence to City decisions.
2. City Safety and Exhale
On Friday May 21st, residents’ worst fears were realized when an intoxicated crowd from Exhale Hookah Lounge flooded the streets and alleys in the N. Market and 4th Street area to continue with an after party. Dozens of shots were fired leaving one person wounded and needing medical attention at the hospital, and another pushed to the ground in the melee. Residents have called the FPD multiple times over the past several months, reporting on these rowdy crowds with the police asserting they can do nothing. While it is true that Exhale does not sell alcohol products and is, therefore, not subject to state alcohol laws governing overservice or underage service, the establishment invites patrons to BYOB, does not ID for age, nor does it monitor excessive drinking. The result is a “liquored-up” clientele that explodes onto the streets after closing hours, violating several ordinances (drinking in public, noise, public lewdness, illegal parking, trespassing, etc.). The FPD Chief has met with residents resulting in an increased police presence outside the lounge problem. While extra patrolling has been put in place, the only real solution is legislative, on the order of Baltimore County’s ordinance that requires hookah lounges to be closed between midnight and 6 am. Even better would be an ordinance that regulates BYOB policies at hookah lounges, though sponsors of the Baltimore County legislation withdrew this provision from their proposed law for concerns about the wider impact on restaurants and bars. A Towson ordinance in now under consideration for possible adoption in the City. Stay tuned and speak up!!!
3. East Street Redevelopment
City officials, staff, residents, and business owners have been interested in defining what East Street might look like in the future. As one gateway to the City and the border to the historic district and well developed feeder streets up to Thomas Johnson High School, East Street offers an excellent opportunity to plan for an area that attracts multi-use development, perhaps with street-facing retail topped with 2-3 stories of housing, surrounded by green infrastructure of tree canopy, median strips, pedestrian sidewalks, trails, and open air cafes, bike lanes, reduced truck traffic, better public transit options, and ample crosswalks, signals, and greenspace. The City has hired consultants to provide recommendations on traffic opportunities as well as possible future street building designs. The consultants have made 2 presentations on options for City consideration, with the latest presentation available at https://www.cityof frederickmd. gov/DocumentCenter/View/20126. The recommendations have been made to inform a more thorough study of vehicular traffic in the area and development of form-based zoning, a zoning strategy that determines/guides external building designs rather than specific land use (e.g., residential, industrial, retail, parkland, etc.) of a parcel dictated by current City Euclidean zoning. City staff will begin form-based informational meetings with officials and the public in June-July.
One outcome of the study’s recommendations is to create a more uniform experience all along the corridor. While much of the current pavement is wide enough to accommodate 4 lanes of traffic, the study is recommending a 2 lane corridor with multiple North-South segments including a center turn lane. The other primary outcome of the study is the incorporation of continuous bicycle trails along the entire corridor. Yet to be resolved is whether the reduction in lanes will result in a road system that can carry the anticipated growth in traffic volume.
4. Visitation Academy
As everyone is likely aware, the Visitation Academy (VA) is under renovation at an estimated cost of $20M. The campus will include a boutique hotel, restaurant, and luxury condominiums. The redevelopment required agreement by the MD Historical Trust, National Park Service, City staff, the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC), and Planning Commission, with a required presentation from staff and the developer at a NAC11 meeting prior to the pandemic. At that meeting, the developer assured residents that the Academy’s exterior design would remain largely ‘as is’ and that all new construction that would front E. 2nd, E. Church, and Chapel Alley would complement the design and facade of the restored main building with red brick and white, double 6x6 multi-mullioned windows. Promises made, promises not kept. Under City staff Administrative Authority and encouragement according to the developer, the designs and facades of the proposed buildings on the VA campus are now ‘contemporary’, and no longer resemble the original VA building nor the area’s historic buildings. Building #1, now under construction, has a modern façade of gray fabricated cement panels, non-white double hung and casement window frames, floor-to-ceiling windows on 3rd and 4th floors, steel-supported glass panel balconies, and ground level garages, not reflective of the charm and character of the historic district. Even more disturbing, the modern façade is being used to justify a similar design and facade for a 5-story Building #2, again, dissimilar to the large VA building. None of this complements the surrounding neighborhood residence facades, thereby ignoring the surrounding character of the historic homes on E. Church and E. 2nd Streets. Although difficult to assess, we are hopeful that there may be some suggested revisions to this design by at least 2 HPC members at the next commission meeting, perhaps resulting in several required changes. Resident input may be needed to voice concerns on the final campus design.
5. County APFO Revision
County Council members Mackay and Hagen have proposed legislation for stricter commitments by developers of future County developments to reduce likely traffic congestion on local roadways. These would include funds for new signals and access lanes as well as placing funds in escrow for roadway upgrades as development continues to increase in areas beyond the extent of the new development. This forward-thinking legislation seeks to reduce congestion that is more and more apparent as the County (and City) continues new construction to accommodate the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments’ projection of 406,000 County inhabitants by 2040. The Frederick County Building Industry Association objects, citing 1) the County commitment to future development be built near existing roadways so why add this additional burden when roads are already in place and 2) increased costs that would then have to be passed on to buyers. The legislation is highly relevant to City decisions as well as the current City policy is to review each development on a case-by-case basis rather than cumulative impact of more housing and the accompanying vehicular traffic. Stay tuned for additional workshops and hearings.
Content Contributors: S. Jakubczyk, R. Robey, M. Rosenweig, K. Sellner
