GREATER SEVERNA PARK COUNCIL
GREATER SEVERNA PARK COUNCIL
Meeting
Severna Park Library
August 9, 2011
Minutes
Go to:
www.GSPCouncil.Org
The meeting was called to
order at 7:35 pm by President Jerry Pesterfield.
Mr. Pesterfield welcomed delegates attending, Diane Jennings, Legislative
Assistant to Dick Ladd, and Dana Eckert, Severna Park Chamber of Commerce.
Secretary’s Report:
President Pesterfield motioned for approval of the July 12, 2011 Minutes
distributed by email to the full membership. Motion to approve the Secretary’s
Report was unanimously approved as submitted and filed for the record.
Treasurer’s Report:
Treasurer Steve Poland provided the Treasurer’s Report as of July 31,
2011, and noted the following dues received and deposited for Chartwell and CD’s
purchased in the amount of $10,000. Director
John Norville confirmed the accounting audit is being organized.
Motion to approve the Treasurer’s Report was unanimously approved as
submitted and filed for the record for audit purposes.
See
AppendixA for Treasurer’s Report as
of August 9, 2011.
See
Appendix B for Membership Update as
of August 9, 2011.
Speaker: Al Johnston, GSPC Vice
President, Comprehensive Rezoning-Anne Arundel County:
President Pesterfield
noted that a few months ago a video was prepared of each of the 38 properties up
for comprehensive zoning. Communities received and were able to see what was
happening and could respond. Mr.
Pesterfield emphasized that the process is community driven and supported by
GSPC. He also noted that if the
GSPC doesn’t receive responses including objections or, if unclear and outside
the General Development Plan guidelines, then the GSPC will step up and take a
position. They have received
comments from almost all communities, and it is extremely important for
communities to show up at the County Council meetings.
The GSPC will support the positions of each community via letters to the
County Council.
Mr. Johnston provided an overview
of each of the 38 properties on the Master GSPC Comprehensive Rezoning Watchlist
attached as
Appendix C.
The recap of the 21 GSPC communities
voting upon conclusion of Mr. Johnston’s overview is also highlighted in
Appendix C.
Mr. Johnston commented that page
117 of the General Development Plan (GDP) addresses the issues associated with
Item 13 - Watchlist number 1165 - which does not conform to the statutory
“Criteria for Comprehensive Zoning Changes” in the 2009 GDP.
He also noted that Item 17 – Watchlist number 1280 – brings up the issue
regarding impact of changing a C2 zoning area from residential since communities
do not want to change from residential and the impact on the abutting areas
including Severna Park Middle School do not conform to the GDP and spot zoning
ordinance.
Mr. Pesterfield noted that the
GSPC meets regularly with County Council Chairman Dick Ladd on the GSPC
comprehensive zoning position. Mr.
Johnson also noted that the GDP is only a guide and the General Assembly in 2009
passed House Bill 297 specifically since the guide does not control the General
Assembly decisions.
Go to County Website to view the
Comprehensive Zoning Proposals for Council Districts 2, 3, 5.
http://www.aacounty.org/PlanZone/LongRange/Resources/ZoningProposalsDistricts2-3-5_20110810.pdf
Request for Investigation Form:
Director John Norville advised members that The Department of Inspections
and Permits “Request for Investigation” Form used for all suspected
violations of the Building, Grading and Sediment Control, and Zoning Codes is
available at:
http://www.aacounty.org/IP/Resources/RequestInvestigation.pdf.
A copy of the form is attached as
Appendix D.
Public Works: No report.
Education Committee Report:
Director Brad Myers reminded delegates that school starts week of August 22nd.
Environmental Committee Report:
Submitted by Ann Jackson & Ed Krause, Watershed Stewards.
See Appendix E
for the full Committee Report including upcoming events.
Police-Community Relations Report:
No report.
Other
Community Business:
-
Chamber of Commerce Greater Severna
Park: Chamber
President Dana Eckert provided an update on the following scheduled upcoming
activities:
Upcoming activities:
-
Business Golf Tournament:
Monday, September 26 - Chartwell Country Club
-
Legislative Breakfast
–Anne
Arundel County Chambers:
Friday, September 30 – 8:30 a.m. Hella’s
Restaurant
- Heritage Day:
Sunday, October 2
- General Membership Luncheon:
Wednesday, October 5
Planning/Zoning/Legislative Committee:
See Appendix F for Mr.
Johnston’s detailed report for Legislation, Planning, Zoning and Capital
Projects; GSPC Issues before the Board of Appeals, and Circuit Court and Special
Appeals Cases and activities.
Unfinished Business:
None.
New
Business:
-
Gangs Presentation: President
Pesterfield advised delegates that he has confirmed that County Detective Mark
Finley will give a presentation on gangs at the September 13 GSPC general
meeting.
-
Property Management:
Delegates were requested to let President Pesterfield know if they have
any information they can share with Cypress Landing on Property Management.
Next
Meeting Dates:
-
Board of Directors Meeting: Wednesday,
August 24, 2011 - 7:30 pm - Severna
Park Library
-
General Meeting: Tuesday,
September 13, 2011 – 7:30 pm –
Severna Park Library:
Presentation on
Gangs by County Detective Mark Finley
The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 pm.
Very respectfully submitted:
Kathleen J. Michels, GSPC Secretary
August 21, 2011
Appendix A
GSPC General Meeting
Account balances (as of 07/31/2011)
BB&T checking
= $
6,289.46
SmithBarney money market
=
$... 849.20
SmithBarney CDs (3)
=
$25,000.00
Beautification Trust Fund balance (as of 07/31/2011)
BankAnnapolis
=
$ 2,475.15
______________________________________________________________
Account activity in July
BB&T
Dues deposited
= $
35.00
Checks cleared
--2183
= $
(4.88)
SmithBarney
Money Market
= $
0.00
Interest
= $
0.00
CD purchased
= $(10,000.00)
BankAnnapolis (Beautification Fund)
Interest
= $
0.00
Appendix B
The list of Greater
Severna Park Council communities and their membership status includes:
Late for 2011 (3)
[
no longer in “Good Standing” ].
Ben Oaks, McKinsey Park,
Severn Heights.
-------------------------------------------------
Paid 2011 dues (55)
(Most recent dues payments in red)
Arnold Preservation
Council, Belleview Estates,
Bendale, Berrywood,
Bluff Point,
Brittingham, Cape Arthur,
Carrollton Manor, Cattail
Passage,
Chartridge,
Chartwell,
Chartwood,
Colchester, County
Crusaders, Crain West,
Cypress Improvement,
Cypress Landing, Evergreen,
Fair Oaks,
Fairwinds,
Glen Oban,
Harlequin, Hollywood,
Jennings Road, Kensington,
Kilmarnock,
Lake Waterford,
Linstead, Lower Magothy,
Magothy Forest, Manhattan
Beach,
North Cape Arthur,
North Severna Park, Oakleigh
Forest, Olde Severna Park,
Point Field Landing,
Pointfield West, Round Bay,
Severna Enclave,
Severna Forest,
Severndale, Sheffield Park,
Shipley's Choice Community,
Shipley's Choice
Homeowners, Shipley’s Retreat
Homeowners, Swann Point,
Tam Glade,
Twin Harbors, Westridge,
West Severna Park,
Whitehurst,
Whitney's Landing,
Williams Woods, Woodberry
Farms, Woodbridge Forest.
-------------------------------------------------
For 2009 -- 11:
Berrywood Ridge, Berrywood
South,
East Earleigh Heights.
For 2008 -- 11:
Jones CA.
For 2007 -- 11:
Arundel Plaza, McKinsey
Woods.
Appendix C
GSPC Comprehensive
Zoning Application Watch List
Community
Annotations 6-17-11
Version 8-19-11
Boldface=Cases for
significant Investigation
The last number item
for each case is the Tax Map/Parcel Number, the current use is per applicant;
GSPC Communities are the last item in the listing.
GSPC
Comprehensive Zoning Ballot 8-19-11 -
Voting Recap - 21 Community Votes (Highlighted in
blue)
1.
#1032, Ritchie Way Ltd Partnership,
825 Ritchie H’way, 21146, R2 to C4, Car Wash Service, 32E/412
Approve_1_,
Disapprove_3_, Approved as
discussed_17_
Belleview Estates; Manhattan Beach; Severn Heights; Arnold Preservation
Council; Jones Community Assn. Non
GSPC: Swan Point; Swan Point Estates, Old County Estates; Manhattan Manor;
Windrush Farm; Dividing Creek, Arnold Preservation
Team
*Requested
Zoning Commentary: Requests
change from C4 Non conforming (P&Z corrected to
R2) to C4.
Applicant notes: “We (Ritchie Way Ltd. Partnership) have operated this facility
as C-4
Use continuously (without interruption) for 16 years.
The property’s previously owners also operated a
C-4 business.
The property was originally zoned C-4 without a nonconforming title.
No use, other than a C-4 permissible use, has existed on this property”.
*Current
Zoning History: Current
zoning map shows subject property to be in an R2 zone.
A
review of the 1997 Severna Park Small Area Plan and the
2009 General Development Plan identify
no discussion of the subject property.
As of July 2, 2011, an investigation of the situation is pending.
*Abutting
Zoning Commentary: North: R2 with close proximity to Open Space, West:
faces Ritchie
Highway with large area of C3
Property containing Pete’s Cycle has applied for C4 zoning within the C3
area. East: R2 with close proximity to Open Space. South: R2 driveway to Kris
Leigh Assisted & Independent Living, beyond driveway is an automobile repair and
truck rental facility.
*General
Development Plan (GDP)
a) GDP: Application does not confirm to the 1997 Severna Park Small
Area Plan and does not conform to the statutory “Criteria for Comprehensive
Zoning Changes” in the 2009 General Development Plan. It should be noted that
the facility was operating and in existence while both the SAP and GDP were
under consideration. Additional
research indicated.
*P/Zoning Recommendation:
Change to C3. There are existing
commercial districts to the north and across MD 2 from this site and the area is
contained from further commercial expansion by surrounding floodplain areas.
These properties contain existing commercial businesses. Also rezone P.422
adjacent to the south.
2.
#1042, K. Dale Willians,
8099 Veterans H’way, 21108, R2 to C4, Benfield Service Center 22/475
Approve_11,
Disapprove_2_, Approved as
discussed_8_
Crain West, Pointfield Landing, Pointfield West; Ben Oaks; Shipley’s
Choice Homeowners
*Requested
Zoning Commentary:
Applicant requests change from C3 to C4.
Not mentioned in the
Application but Zoning Code now requires C4 for vehicle
rentals which has been carried on at this
location for well over 30 years.
Applicant commentary: “This full service gas station/full garage has
been, and still a locally owned
family business, as opposed to a corporate controlled, out of state business.
The building and business was started in the early 1950’s and the current
owners have owned and operated the business since March 1, 1981.
The current owners have lived in Anne Arundel County for over 50 years”.
*Current Zoning History:
Current Zoning Map shows C3 covering subject property on the NE
Corner of Veterans and West Benfield.
Application notes a prior Comprehensive Zoning Application but the date
of 1990 has been crossed out leaving a question as to whether a prior request
existed.
*Abutting Zoning Commentary: North: R2 and Crain West.
West: Faces
extended C2.
East: R2 and Crain West.
South of West Benfield: R2 and Pointfield West.
*General
Development Plan (GDP)
a) GDP: Application conforms to the Severna Park Small Area Plan as
incorporated into the 2009
General Development Plan.
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. There is no demonstrated need to establish a heavy commercial district
at this location which is surrounded by commercial office and single family
residential uses. C3 zoning is more compatible with the area and the existing
business on the site has legal nonconforming status to operate under its current
C3 zoning.
3.
#1074, Robert Rodriguez,
84
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_19, Approved as
discussed_2_
Lake Waterford; Brittingham; Non GSPC: Shelby Grove; Pasadena Manor;
Huntsmore; The Dales
*P/Zoning Recommendation:
No Change. There is no demonstrated need
to establish a new commercial district at this location on Ritchie Highway, and
adopted plans do not recommend creation of a new commercial district at this
location.
4.
#1094, James Chappell,
848 Ritchie H’way, 21146, R5 to C3, Residential, 32E/417.
Approve_1_,
Disapprove_5_, Approved as
discussed_15
Jones Community Assn; Belleview Estates; Manhattan Beach; Severn Heights;
Arnold Preservation Council
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. The property is not developed with commercial uses, and
there is no demonstrated need to expand the abutting commercial district onto
this property.
5.
#1103, Offett/Watts & Johnson, 930 Ritchie H’way, 21146 R5&R2 to Commercial,
Residential,
32H/35
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_14, Approved as
discussed_7_
Belleview Estates; Manhattan Beach; Severn Heights; Arnold Preservation
Council; Jones Community Assn. Non
GSPC: Swan Point; Swan Point Estates, Old County Estates; Manhattan Manor;
Windrush Farm; Dividing Creek; Arnold Preservation
Team
*P/Zoning
Recommendation: No Change. There
is no demonstrated need to establish a new commercial district at this location
on Ritchie Highway, and adopted plans do not recommend creation of a new
commercial district at this location. This parcel is zoned consistently with
abutting residential properties.
6.
#1104, Offett/Warner
Johnson, 21 Hoyle Ln, 21146, R5 to Commercial, Residential, 32H/108
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_17, Approved as
discussed_4_
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. There is no demonstrated need to establish a new commercial district at
this location, and adopted plans do not recommend creation of a new commercial
district at this location. This parcel does not have direct road frontage and is
zoned consistently with abutting residential properties.
7.
#1105, Offett/ Warner
Johnson, 973 B&A Blvd, 21146, R5 to Commercial, Residential, 32H/112
Same as #5
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_17, Approved as
discussed_4_
*P/Zoning
Recommendation: No Change. There is no demonstrated need to establish a
new commercial
district at this location, and adopted plans do not recommend creation of a new
commercial district at this location. This parcel does not have direct road
frontage and is zoned consistently with abutting residential properties.
8.
#1106, Offett/ Claudette
White, 50 Hoyle Ln, 21146, R5 to Commercial, Unimproved, 32H/105
Same as #5
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_16, Approved as
discussed_5_
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. There is no demonstrated need to establish a new commercial district at
this location on Ritchie Highway, and adopted plans do not recommend creation of
a new commercial district at this location. This parcel is zoned consistently
with abutting residential properties.
9.
#1112, Robert Yesker,
383 Ritchie H’way, 21146, R2 to C3, Sea Food Carry Out, 24/428
Approve_2_,
Disapprove_7_, Approved as
discussed_12
Berrywood; Berrywood South;
County Crusaders; Cattail Passage; Cypress Landing;
Woodberry Farms
*Requested
Zoning Commentary:
Requested R2 to C3.
Applicant Commentary: “This property was zoned commercial until 1973
when it was rezoned to residential.
A business was on the site prior to 1960 and has continued since. In 1989 I
tried to have a nonconforming status for the site and in 1992 was approved as
non conforming. In 2002 I talked
with Zoning Officer Mike Fox and was told it would have been rezoned the last
time comprehensive Zoning took place if I would have applied.
This business has been on this property since before it was rezoned in
1973 and will continue for the foreseeable future.
At this point I cannot expand my business in any way and I would like the
chance to expand in the future. All
properties around this was rezoned the last comprehensive zoning.”
*Current Zoning
History: The subject
property is at the NE corner of Rt.
648 at Ritchie Highway and is a rough right triangle with the height facing
Ritchie Highway and the base fronting on Rt. 648. The hypotenuse abuts a small
branch of Cattail Creek. Current
Zoning is R2 and GSPC was involved in rezoning it to R2 in 1973 as noted in
paragraph 5 above. The Mike Fox
conversation quotation in paragraph 5 above is an accurate assessment based on
other cases where GSPC was involved.
Those other cases at this intersection were
upzoned from R2 to C3. Mike Fox was the Lead Planner for the Severna Park
Small Area Plan, Given the
existing business, R1 could be considered the appropriate zoning and may be the
suggestion by Planning & Zoning in crafting the legislation.
*Abutting Zoning
Commentary: North: Cattail Branch and C2,
East: Cattail Branch entire length
except
for a small corner parcel created by establishing Rt. 648.
South: Rt. 648.
West: C1 across
General
Development Plan (GDP)
a)
GDP:
Given the commentary in
paragraphs 5, 6 and 7, the request is in conformity with the GDP and SAP.
*P/Zoning Recommendation:
Change to C1. C1 zoning is more appropriate for this property located at a
commercial intersection on Ritchie Highway. This will create a more uniform
commercial district with abutting commercial properties. The site is currently
used by a commercial business. Also rezone P.734 adjacent to the south.
10.
#1120, Frank
Eastman/Forked Creek Yacht Club,
31/414.
Approve_14,
Disapprove_1_, Approved as
discussed_6_
Bluff Pointe; Colchester;
Rivendell; Severndale; Kensington; Severna Forest.
*P/Zoning Recommendation:
Change to MA3. This zoning change will address the need to expand the county's
maritime land inventory in suitable locations to support the marina industry.
The Forked Creek Yacht Club is an established yacht club in the community.
11.
#1126, Mark vanReuth, 924 B&A Blvd, 21146, R2 to R5, Residential, 32/94.
Approve_4_,
Disapprove_5_, Approved as
discussed_12
Jones Community Assn; Round Bay;
Non GSPC: Swan Point; Swan Point Estates;
Old County Estates
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. This property is zoned consistently with the surrounding area.
There is no demonstrated need to increase residential densities in this
area.
12.
#1143, Habib Malik,
___Ritchie H’way, 21146, R2 to C4
or C3, Vacant, 32H/29
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_16, Approved as
discussed_5_
Belleview Estates; Manhattan
Beach; Severn Heights; Arnold
Preservation Council;
Jones Community Assn. Non
GSPC: Swan Point; Swan Point Estates, Old County
Estates; Manhattan Manor; Windrush Farm; Dividing Creek, Arnold Preservation
Team
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. There is no demonstrated need to establish a new commercial district at
this location on Ritchie Highway, and adopted plans do not recommend expansion
of commercial zoning in this area. This parcel is zoned consistently with
abutting residential properties.
13.
#1165, Kathleen Bye,
238 Ritchie H’way, 21146, R2 to SB, Home Occupation, 23/756.
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_18, Approved as
discussed_3_
Cattail Passage, County
Crusaders, Woodberry Farm, Cypress Landing
*Requested
Zoning Commentary: “Requested Zoning: Small Business District”.
“Explanation and
Justification for Requested Zoning: The premise has been used as a insurance
agent’s office for 24 years. The
requested zoning will permit utilization of the entire square footage footprint
as my business grows. The in turn
will add jobs in
The
occupancy as an office is compatible with surrounding land use and is the
outlined plan for Greater Severna Park.
An office exposure of this nature is pleasant in appearance and belongs
with the neighboring environment.
Zoning changes for adjacent area’s along Ritchie H’way to the immediate north
and the south are outlined in the Small area plan for the
We operate under traditional business hours with little to no evening and
weekend disturbance. In addition
this is a business that exhibits very low noise thereby not adding to the
present noise levels of Ritchie H’way, a road with high volume traffic density.
*Current Zoning
History: Current Zoning of
Property R2. Use of Property: Home
Occupation. A
Home Occupation with resident Licensed Insurance Agent(s) and one non
resident employee is a very common and permitted conditional Land Use in all
residential zones. The Small Business District on the other hand permits some 42
classically commercial retail sales oriented C1 uses from Adult Day Care Center
to Volunteer Fire Station. The
ideal use for this classification is adjacent to an existing commercial zone
where there is existing signage and customer parking.
It is an inappropriate land use where all abutting properties are zoned
R2. Beginning in 1973 Residential
Land Use for this section of
“The
Long Range Planning Division of the Office of Planning and Zoning reviewed this
request for rezoning and commented in a memo dated 9/5/08:
The
This Small Business District zoning classification did not
exist at the time of the Severna Park Small Area Plan enacted in Bill 5-02,
On the other hand, it did exist at the time of the 2009 General
Development Plan. Bill 54-09 enacted the 2009GDP and re-enacted the Severna Park
Small Area Plan. The enacted GDP
contained a list of Land Use changes. That list did not contain any reference to
the subject property. On that note,
the subject property does not comply
with the General Development Plan or the
*Abutting Zoning
Commentary: North: R2; West: R2; East: Across Ritchie Highway R2; South: R2.
*General
Development Plan (GDP)
a) GDP/SAP: The subject
property along with all the properties on both sides of
The 2009 GDP considered and made Land Use changes in the Severna Park Small
Area Plan but retained residential Land Use for the subject property and all
abutting properties. On that note the Application does not confirm to the
updated Severna Park Small Area Plan re-enacted with the 2009 GDP.
b)
The 2009 General Development Plan on page 117, establishes the criteria
for changes during the Comprehensive Zoning process as follows: “Policy:
Comprehensive zoning changes must demonstrate the following criteria:
1)
The Change in zoning will further one or more o f the
established goals and
Policies in the adopted GDP or
Small Area Plan;
2)
The change in zoning will not be contrary to an
established goal or policy
In the adopted GDP or Small Area
Plan;
3)
The change in zoning will allow a land use that is
compatible with the
Surrounding land uses, so as to
promote the health, safety and welfare of
Present and future residents.”
The Application in the section,
Explanation and Justification for
Requested Zoning, contains no
reference to any Goal or Policy in the GDP or the Small Area Plan with which it
complies. Quite to the contrary,
the request for the commercially oriented Small Business District is in direct
violation of the GDP and updated Small Area Plan.
In addition, given the potential Land Uses in the Small Business District
there would be very significant reduction of land values for the surrounding
single family residences to the west communities of Cattail Passage, County
Crusaders and Jennings Road; to the north community of Cypress Landing; to the
east community of Woodberry Farms and many single family homes; to the south
community of County Crusaders and many single family homes.
On that note, the subject property
does not conform to the statutory
“Criteria for Comprehensive Zoning Changes” in the 2009 General Development
Plan.
c)
Spot Zoning. Application
also appears to be prohibited per the Court of Special Appeals definition of
Spot Zoning. In view of the fact
that all abutting properties and properties abutting the abutting properties are
zoned R2, the Application would have the County Council insert an island of a
Small Business zone within the larger R2 zone.
Although there is no statutory prohibition, there is long standing case
law to the effect that such action is prohibited per the following citation from
the Maryland Court of Special Appeals,
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. There is no demonstrated need to establish a new commercial district at
this location on Ritchie Highway, and adopted plans do not recommend creation of
a new commercial district at this location. The existing home occupation is
permitted in the R2 district.
14.
#1190, Najeeb Sarwar.
Approve_1_,
Disapprove_19, Approved as
discussed_1_
Brittingham, Cypress Landing, Non GSPC:
Pasadena Methodist Church
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. There is no demonstrated need to establish a new commercial district at
this location on Ritchie Highway, and adopted plans do not recommend creation of
a new commercial district at this location.
15.
#1228, Robert Warren,
Approve_2_,
Disapprove_15, Approved as
discussed_4
Lower Magothy Beach. Non
GSPC: Magothy River Assn.
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. This property is not developed as and does not operate as a fullscale
commercial marina currently, and due to site coverage limitations under the
Critical Area LDA overlay, it is not a suitable location to establish a new MA2
district. The owner currently operates a marine railway and crane to lift boats
for limited boat repair on the property, and can continue that operation under
its
legal non-conforming status.
16.
#1278, Leach Development Corp, 798-800 Ritchie, H’way, 21146, C3 to
C4, Motorcycle Sales,
32/731-770.
Approve_7_,
Disapprove_11, Approved as
discussed_3_
Belleview Estates; Manhattan Beach; Severn Heights; Arnold Preservation
Council; Jones Community Assn. Non
GSPC: Swan Point; Swan Point Estates, Old County Estates; Manhattan Manor;
Windrush Farm; Dividing Creek, Arnold Preservation
Team
*P/Zoning Recommendation:
Change to C4. These two parcels are located on adjoining C3 and C4 districts and
are split-zoned, and contain a heavy commercial use. Rezone to C4 so the
properties are zoned consistently.
17.
#1280, Bob Blanchfield, 478 Jumpers Hole Rd, 21146, R2 to C2.
Nursery, 23/156-422, 31/221-
222.
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_21, Approved as
discussed_0_
Kensington, Chartwell, Chartridge, Carrollton Manor, Hollywood, Fair
Oaks,
Whitney’s Landing
*Requested Zoning Commentary:
Applicant is requesting C2 zoning to achieve a density of 120 units for
an upscale senior condominium in four buildings.
Applicant has verbally agreed to covenants to restrict use of property to
a senior condominium for tax map properties 31/221 & 222, 23/156 & 422.
SDAT valuation at R2 is $904,000 actual and at C2 is $22,202,240
estimate. At C1 valuation is $15.476 480 estimate.
Estimates not audited.
*Current Zoning History:
Current R2 with uses as a non conforming nursery, a law office in a prior
residence, and several single family residences in the four parcel property.
There is a history of reported storage of C3 storage construction
equipments and large diesel trucks which arguably would be a violation of the
non conforming use...
*Abutting Zoning Commentary: North:
* General Development Plan (GDP):
a) GDP:
Application does not confirm to the Severna Park Small Area Plan.
It also does not conform to the 2009 General Development Plan approved
Land Use changes and does not conform to the statutory “Criteria for
Comprehensive Zoning Changes” in the GDP.
b) Spot Zoning
Application also appears to be
prohibited per Court of Appeals definition of Spot Zoning,
“It is, therefore, universally held that a `spot zoning' ordinance, which
singles out a parcel of land within the limits of a use district and marks it
off into a separate district for the benefit of the owner, thereby
permitting a use of that parcel inconsistent with the use permitted in the rest
of the district, is invalid if it is not in accordance with the comprehensive
zoning plan and is merely for private gain.”
*P/Zoning Recommendation:
Change to R5. There is no demonstrated need to establish a commercial district
at this location. A change to R5 zoning will permit residential development
compatible with nearby residential densities. Also rezone adjacent P.357 & 436.
18.
#1289, Steve Curtis, 8657 Veterans H’way, 21108, R2 to C4, Contractor
Storage, 22/183.
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_21, Approved as
discussed_0_
Crain West, Ben Oaks, Pointfield Landing, West Pointfield, Shipley’s
Homeowners
*Requested
Zoning Commentary: Applicant
requests a change from R1 to C4,
Applicant’s commentary in response to the following three questions on page 2 of
the Application:
5.1.
Application’s consistency with GDP Policies/Goals;
5.2.
Which specific GDP Policy/Goal is implemented by Application;
5.3.
Would requested change be compatible with surrounding land uses and community:
“Enclose you
will find the application for rezoning of property owned by Mr. Steven M. Curtis
located at
The Property is comprised of approximately 3.1 acres and is currently
zoned R-2. The Property is oriented
to
The change of character in the neighborhood of
The requested rezoning to C-4 conforms to the General Development Plan,
as amended by the Severna Park Small Area Plan (“the Plan”).
In conformance with one of the Plan’s goals for the location of new
develop-ment, the Property is in an existing area for water, and a planned area
for sewer. In addition, rezoning of
the Property for commercial uses will be in conformity with the Plan’s concept
to create a commercial revitalization corridor along
Finally, the requested rezoning will be compatible with the surrounding
land uses. Except for the Crain
West Residences, which neither front on nor toward
In conclusion, I asked that the Council rezone the Property at
If anything further is required, please advise.
Sincerely, Seven M. Curtis”.
*Current Zoning
History: The land
use for the subject property has probably been the object of more individual
legal actions than any other property of interest to the Greater Severna Park
Council. The subject property was
the “farmhouse” area for the Pumphery family and retains one of several barns
used during a much earlier time.
Recent history begins with the construction of I-97 project and the relocation
of
In order to prevent the Consent Order to be enforced, Mr. Curtis
initiated a request for Administrative Rezoning to C2 Commercial on the basis of
mistake in the 2002 Comprehensive Rezoning.
That request was not recommended by Planning and Zoning, denied by the
Administrative Hearing Officer, the Board of Appeals, the Anne Arundel Circuit
Court and finally in the Court of Special Appeals.
The County, after two failed attempts, obtained a Court Order to cease
non residential activities and a $250.00 fine.
Not surprisingly, Mr. Curtis submitted an Application for C4 Commercial
Zoning during the current Comprehensive Zoning process.
Should the Office of Planning and Zoning approve the application and
include the application in the Bill for Districts 2, 3 and 5, there will a
hearing before the County Council scheduled for October 3, 2011.
If not included in the Administration Bill, Mr. Curtis can submit a
request to the County Council to amend the Bill.
Any Member of the County Council can introduce such an amendment.
*Abutting Zoning
Commentary: North: Open Space, negotiated to protect Crain West and
other residentially zoned property from “commercial creep”.
East: four residential dwellings within Crain West, South, one
residential dwelling within Crain West: West,
*General
Development Plan (GDP)
a) GDP/SAP: The subject
property along with all the properties on both sides of
The 2009 GDP considered and made Land Use changes in the Severna Park Small
Area Plan, and at a
b)
The 2009 General Development Plan on page 117, establishes the criteria
for changes during the Comprehensive Zoning process as follows: “Policy:
Comprehensive zoning changes must demonstrate the following criteria:
1)
The Change in zoning will further one or more o f the
established goals and
Policies in the adopted GDP or
Small Area Plan;
2)
The change in zoning will not be contrary to an
established goal or policy
In the adopted GDP or Small Area
Plan;
3)
The change in zoning will allow a land use that is
compatible with the
Surrounding land uses, so as to
promote the health, safety and welfare of
Present and future residents.”
The Application in the section,
Explanation and Justification for
Requested Zoning, contains no
accurate reference to any specific Goal or Policy in the GDP or the Small Area
Plan with which it complies. Quite
to the contrary, the request for the C4 Commercial Highway District is in direct
violation of the 2009 GDP and updated Small Area Plan Land Uses.
In addition, both the Administrative Hearing Officer and the Board of
Appeals made a specific finding of non compatibility with the surrounding Land
Uses and a failure “to promote the health, safety and welfare of present and
future residents.” On that note, the subject property
does not conform to the Bill 59-10
statutory “Criteria for Comprehensive Zoning Changes” in the 2009 General
Development Plan.
*P/Zoning
Recommendation: Change to C2. This block of Veterans Highway is
primarily developed with
commercial office uses. This property fronts onto and has access from Veterans
Highway, and C2 zoning will allow for future use that is compatible with that
commercial district.
19.
#1308, Peter Moscker, 302
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_21, Approved as
discussed_0_
Cattail Passage, County Crusaders, Woodberry Farm, Cypress Landing
*Requested
Zoning Commentary: R2 to C3. Applicant’s Commentary:
“The applicants, Peter and Terry Moscker, seek a C3 classification to
allow for the continuation and expansion of the long standing commercial use of
the subject site. Their property is
comprised of 2.48 acres and fronts on the west side of the southbound lanes of
Ritchie Highway (MD. Rte. 2).
Although the property is zoned R2-Residential, it has been used for commercial
purposes since at least 1951, as established bay 1952 Administrative Decision in
Case No. NC 74-78which classified that use as a nonconforming C3 type use.
By special exception of January 1993 (Case S-339-92), previous owners of
the property secured approval to expand the improvements by the maximum 30%
allowed by Code. A C3
classification would b e consistent with th3e existing commercial uses and would
allow additional expansion for the office use, while maintaining the display and
retail sales of the outdoor playground equipment.
The traffic volume on
The Severna Park SAP recognized the need to provide
expanded or redeveloped commercial area (p 23).
The SAP’ existing Land Use Map recognizes the property as retain, but the
proposed Land Use Map projects it as residential.
This is in keeping with the Plan’s summary and recommendations which note
that the areas not shown as commercial on the proposed Land Use Map include
transitional residential commercial areas that have developed independently and
serve local commercial and convenience needs. (p.13)
this
concept is continued at page 116 or the 2009 GDP which notes that in cases where
more than one specific land use might be acceptable on a given parcel the zoning
classification for that parcel should be determined on a case by case basis.
As the site is located in a Managed Growth Area, the 2009 GDP’s policy of
promoting retention and expansion of existing businesses (p. 126) is applicable.
The long term commercial use of the property has proven to be compatible
with the surrounding neighborhood which, for the most part, has been developed
subsequent to the commercial development and use of the site.
Reference to the attached site plan reveals that the orientation of the
commercial use to
*Current Zoning
History: Administrative Zoning
Case 2008-0260-R wherein this Applicant had applied for Administrative C3
zoning was heard and denied by the Administrative Hearing Officer on February
19, 2009. In that hearing, Planner
William Ethridge, on behalf of the Office of Planning & Zoning, provided the
following history at the hearing.
“The current R2-Resdential
classification of the subject property was received as a result of the adoption
of the zoning maps for the Severna Park Small Area Plan effective May 5, 2002.
There were no pre-files or amendments made for the subject property
during the Small Area Planning process.
Prior to the Small Area Planning process, the site was zoning
R2-Residential as a result of the
second comprehensive rezoning process for the Southern Third Assessment District
effective September 11, 1889. Prior
to 1989 the subject property was zoned
R-1 Residential as a result of the comprehensive rezoning for the Southern
Third Assessment District effective May 6, 1973.
Prior to 1972, the property was zoned A-301 Agricultural as of the 1952
original zoning.”
Mr. Ethridge also included in his commentary the following:
“The Long Range Planning Division
of the Office of Planning and Zoning reviewed this request for rezoning and
commented in a memo dated 9/5/08: The
The subject property lies in the
Residential Low Density land use as adopted by the County.
All neighboring parcels of the subject property on both side of
The application to rezone the property
from R2 to C3 is consistent with the existing commercial uses of the property,
but in inconsistent with the 2004 adopted land use of the parcel and with the
land use goals policies in the adopted Small Area Plan.
The subject property was granted a Non Conforming Use in
Case 1978-0074-N as a “Garden Center and Variety of Retail Business”.
The subject property was also granted a Special Exception to expand the
garage area in Case 1992-0339-S
*Abutting Zoning
Commentary: All
abutting properties, North, South, West and East across Ritchie Highway are
zoned R2.
a) GDP/SAP: The subject
property along with all the properties on both sides of
Bill 64-09 enacted the 2009 GDP which considered and made Land Use changes in
the Severna Park Small Area Plan but retained residential Land Use for the
subject property and all abutting properties. On that note the Application does
not confirm to the updated Severna Park Small Area Plan re-enacted with the 2009
GDP.
The 2009 General Development Plan on page 117, establishes
the criteria for changes during the Comprehensive Zoning process as follows:
“Policy:
Comprehensive zoning changes must demonstrate the following criteria:
1)
The Change in zoning will further one or more o f the
established goals and
Policies in the adopted GDP or
Small Area Plan;
2)
The change in zoning will not be contrary to an
established goal or policy
In the adopted GDP or Small Area
Plan;
3)
The change in zoning will allow a land use that is
compatible with the
Surrounding land uses, so as to
promote the health, safety and welfare of
Present and future residents.”
In case 2008-0260-R, where this applicant applied to have
the Administrative Hearing Officer establish an Administrative C3 Zoning, the
Hearing Officer noted on page 12:
“However, the
On that finding by the Administrative Hearing Officer, the
application should be rejected as failing to conform to the second statutory
requirements of the 2009 General Development Plan.
Also in case 2008-0260-R, where this applicant had also
applied to have the Administrative Hearing Officer establish Administrative C3
Zoning, the Hearing Officer noted on page 13,
“I find that such possible uses would not be compatible with the surrounding
area nor promote the health, safety, and welfare of the present and future
resident of the County.”
b)
Spot Zoning This C3 application with R-2 zoning on all sides
would suggest a case of “spot zoning”.
On this note the Application appears to be prohibited per Court of Appeals
definition of Spot Zoning:
“It is, therefore, universally held that
a `spot zoning' ordinance, which singles out a parcel of land within the limits
of a use district and marks it off into a separate district for the
benefit of the owner, thereby permitting a use of that parcel inconsistent with
the use permitted in the rest of the district, is invalid if it is not in
accordance with the comprehensive zoning plan and is merely for private gain.”
*P/Zoning Recommendation:
No Change. There is no demonstrated need to establish a new
commercial
district at this location on Ritchie Highway, and adopted plans do not recommend
creation of a new commercial district at this location. The current use has
legal non-conforming status and can continue operation.
20.
#1309, Harms Corp, 92 Ritchie H’way, 21122, R2 to C2, Residential
rental, 23/403.
Approve_4_,
Disapprove_12, Approved as
discussed_5_
Non GSPC:
Elvaton, Elvaton Acres
*P/Zoning Recommendation:
Change to C2. Rezone P.403 and the front portion of P.554 to C2. This will
eliminate the split zoning on P.554 and form a more cohesive C2 district with
the commercial office use to the rear.
21.
#1334, Valley Hi, LLC, ___Ritchie H’way, 21122, R5 to C3,
Vacant, 24/396.
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_20, Approved as
discussed_1_
Berrywood, Berrywood South, Non
GSPC: Magothy River Assn.
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. There is no demonstrated need to expand commercial uses at this
location. The SAP promotes revitalization of the Severna Park Village commercial
center to the south, as opposed to rezoning other non-commercial properties in
this area.
22.
#1346, Michael McGurk, 236 Ritchie H’way, 21146, R2 to SB or C1, Home
Office, 23/757.
Approve_1_,
Disapprove_19, Approved as
discussed_1_
Cattail Passage, County Crusaders, Woodberry Farm, Cypress Landing
*Requested
Zoning Commentary: Requested:
R2 to Small Business or C1,
Applicant Commentary:
“I am
writing this letter to respectfully request to have our property located at
My
understanding is that the idea behind “Small Business District Zoning” was to be
able to take an area that would be ideal for small businesses to exist while
still retaining a residential look and feel.
I believe this strip of Route 2 – Ritchie Highway between these two above
mentioned intersections is ideal for this type of zoning as there are already
many businesses located around our property and yet it is currently not overly
developed in a commercial sense.
I
personally have no qualms with other parts of the county that are very
commercial in look and feel, as there is no doubt a need and a purpose for such
areas. I also greatly enjoy driving
thorough an area that has that more underdeveloped residential look and feeling.
The main
thing that I would like to get across is the reality that this area of
If you
would allow this zoning change, I believe it would be completely compatible with
the outlined small area plan for Greater Severna Park and the other surrounding
properties current land use. As far
as our paint company is concerned, all of our crew supervisors drive their work
truck home in the evening and do not park on our property.
The only people that stay at the property for an extended amount of time
are two salesmen and a secretary.
Even the salesmen are out on the road quite a bit.
We as a company go out to our customer’s homes and businesses; they do
not come to us. We operate our
office under traditional business hours of 8am to 4pem, with no evening or
weekend office hours.
Here is
a partial list of existing businesses that are currently adjacent to, or are
surrounding our property:
(A list of 17 businesses follows located in the commercial node at
As you can see listed above it is apparent that quite a few of our
neighbors are businesses. If
granted this zoning change, our property would continue to remain the same in
residential appearance so as to align with the idea behind the “Small Business
District; layout.
If you would need to get a hold of me for any questions or clasificaions,
I can be reached anytime on my cellular phone at 410-270-4928.
I greatly appreciate your kind consideration in this matter and look
forward to hearing back from you.”
*Current Zoning
History: Current Zoning of
Property R2. Use of Property: Home
Occupation. A
Home Occupation with resident operator of the business and
one non resident employee is a very
common and permitted conditional Land Use in all residential zones. The Small
Business District on the other hand permits some 42 classically commercial
retail sales oriented C1 uses from Adult Day Care Center to Volunteer Fire
Station. The ideal use for this
classification is adjacent to an existing commercial zone where there is
existing signage and customer parking.
It is an inappropriate land use where all abutting properties are zoned
R2. Beginning in 1973 Residential
Land Use for this section of
“The
Long Range Planning Division of the Office of Planning and Zoning reviewed this
request for rezoning and commented in a memo dated 9/5/08:
The
This Small Business District zoning classification did not
exist at the time the Severna Park Small Area Plan Committee was meeting.
That Plan was specifically placed on hold while the Small Business
District provision was added to the
*Abutting Zoning
Commentary: North: R2; West: R2; East: Across Ritchie Highway R2; South: R2.
*General
Development Plan (GDP)
a) GDP/SAP: The subject
property along with all the properties on both sides of
The 2009 GDP considered and made Land Use changes in the Severna Park Small
Area Plan but retained residential Land Use for the subject property and all
abutting properties. On that note the
Application does not confirm to the 2009 updated Severna Park Small Area Plan
re-enacted with the 2009 GDP.
b)
The 2009 General Development Plan on page 117, establishes the criteria
for changes during the Comprehensive Zoning process as follows: “Policy:
Comprehensive zoning changes must demonstrate the following criteria:
1)
The Change in zoning will further one or more o f the
established goals and
Policies in the adopted GDP or
Small Area Plan;
2)
The change in zoning will not be contrary to an
established goal or policy
In the adopted GDP or Small Area
Plan;
3)
The change in zoning will allow a land use that is
compatible with the
Surrounding land uses, so as to
promote the health, safety and welfare of
Present and future residents.”
The Application in the section,
Explanation and Justification for
Requested Zoning, contains no
reference to any Goal or Policy in the GDP or the Small Area Plan with which it
complies. Quite to the contrary,
the request for the commercially oriented Small Business District is in direct
violation of the GDP and updated Small Area Plan.
In addition, given the potential Land Uses in the Small Business District
there would be very significant reduction of land values for the surrounding
single family residences to the west communities of Cattail Passage, County
Crusaders and Jennings Road; to the north community of Cypress Landing; to the
east community of Woodberry Farms and many single family homes; to the south
community of County Crusaders and many single family homes.
On that note, the subject property
does not conform to the statutory
“Criteria for Comprehensive Zoning Changes” in the 2009 General Development
Plan.
c)
Spot Zoning. Application
also appears to be prohibited per the Court of Special Appeals definition of
Spot Zoning. In view of the fact
that all abutting properties and properties abutting the abutting properties are
zoned R2, the Application would have the County Council insert an island of a
Small Business zone within the larger R2 zone.
Although there is no statutory prohibition, there is long standing case
law to the effect that such action is prohibited per the following citation from
the Maryland Court of Special Appeals,
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. There is no demonstrated need to establish a new commercial
district at this location on Ritchie Highway, and adopted plans do not recommend
creation of a new commercial district at this location. The existing home office
occupation is permitted in the R2 district.
23.
#1378, Riveria Development/Musselman & Crosby, 8301 & 8307 Veterans
H’way, 21108, R2 to
C2,
Vacant & Residence, 22/429 & 430.
Approve_11,
Disapprove_3_, Approved as
discussed_7_
Shipley’s Retreat, Shipley’s Choice Homewowners, Non GSPC: Brightview,
Millrace
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. These parcels were rezoned to R2 during the Severna Park SAP to be
consistent with the adjoining residential community to the east and south. There
is no demonstrated need to increase the residential densities in this area at
this time.
24.
#1387, Kathy Galli/Bee’s Nest,
LLC,
Approve_7_,
Disapprove_5_, Approved as
discussed_9_
Bluff Point, Colchester,
Fairwinds, Carrollton Manor, Whitney’s Landing
*P/Zoning Recommendation:
Change to MA2. This zoning change will address the need to expand the county's
maritime land inventory in suitable locations to support the marina industry.
The Bee's Nest Marina is an established commercial marina. Do not support MC as
it would allow more intense uses than what currently exists.
25.
#1438, David Canty,
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_16,
Approved as discussed_5_
Carrollton Manor
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. These properties are zoned consistently with the surrounding R5 area in
an established community of single family homes. There is no basis for rezoning
of these lots.
26.
#1016, Francis Smith, 226
Hallman Rd, 21146, R1 to R2, Residence, 23/226.
Approve_15,
Disapprove_0_, Approved as
discussed_6_
Woodbridge Forest, East Earleigh
Heights. No organized community
near subject
property. Rezoning
appropriate.
27.
#1139, Kenneth Fligsten,
507 West Dr, 21146, R5 to C1, Commercial Office, 31/38,
Approve_15,
Disapprove_0_, Approved as
discussed_6_
Carrollton Manor
*P/Zoning Recommendation:
Change to C1. C1 zoning is consistent with the existing commercial district
abutting on two sides of the property. This will create a more uniform
commercial district. The property contains an existing office use.
28.
#1189, John Boring, 8355 B&A
Blvd, 21122, R1 to C3, Residential, 24/5.
Approve_6_,
Disapprove_1_, Approved as
discussed_14
Lake Waterford
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. The Severna Park SAP examined this segment of B&A Boulevard for further
commercial potential, but the adopted plan did not recommend establishing or
expanding a retail commercial district in this area. The adopted plan promotes
focusing retail commercial uses in the Severna Park Village or at designated
commercial intersections on Ritchie Highway.
29.
#1208, WAWA, Inc, 8304 & 8308
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_20, Approved as
discussed_1_
Brittingham, Cypress Landing, Lake Waterford
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. These parcels are located within an existing local commercial district
zoned C1. There is no demonstrated need to rezone this portion of the C1
district to C4. The use suggested by the applicant can be developed in C1 with
an approved special exception.
30.
#1276, Five
Pumphrey’s Partnership, LLC, 8450 Elvaton Rd, 21122, R1&OS to C3, Luckie’s,
16/882
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_19, Approved as
discussed_2_
No GSPC Community
*P/Zoning Recommendation:
Change to C1. C1 zoning is appropriate for this site bordered by heavy and
retail commercial uses along the B&A Trail and residential uses across Jumpers
Hole Road. The site contains a former convenience store. Retain the OS zoning on
floodplain areas of the property.
31.
#1301, Betsy Slicker, 8211 Elvaton Dr, 21122, R1 & OS to R2, R1, OS,
Residential, 16/351.
Approve_6_,
Disapprove_0_, Approved as
discussed_15
No GSPC Community
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. This property is zoned R1 consistently will other residential properties
on this section of Elvaton Road and there is no demonstrated need to increase
densities.
32.
#1310, 8300 Ritchie, LLC,
8300 Ritchie H’way, 21122, C1 & R1 to C1, Vacant, 23/37.
Approve_13,
Disapprove_0_, Approved as
discussed_8_
Brittingham, Cypress Landing,
Lake Waterford
*P/Zoning Recommendation:
Change to C1. This is a correction of a split-zoned parcel on which the majority
of the property is currently zoned C1.
33.
#1329, Daljit Sawhney, ___Hallman Rd, 21122, R1 to R2, Vacant, 23/228.
Approve_9_,
Disapprove_1_, Approved as
discussed_11
No GSPC Community
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. This property is part of a larger R1 district developed with single
family homes. Adopted plans do not recommend an increase in residential
densities in this area along Magothy Bridge Road and there is no demonstrated
need to upzone one parcel. The parcel has future subdivision potential under the
current R1 zoning.
34.
#1354, Jamie Jacobs, 807 East Pasadena Rd, 21122, R1 to R2, Residential,
23/343.
Approve_4_,
Disapprove_0_, Approved as
discussed_17
Lake Waterford
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. These parcels are part of a larger R1 district developed with single
family homes. Adopted plans do not recommend an increase in residential
densities in this area and there is no demonstrated need to upzone properties in
this area.
35.
#1416, Peter Leimbach, 8419
B&A Blvd, 21122, R1 to C4, Vacant, 24/886.
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_6_, Approved as
discussed_15
No GSPC Community
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. The Severna Park SAP examined this segment of B&A Boulevard for further
commercial potential, but the adopted plan did not recommend establishing a
heavy commercial district in this area. The adopted plan promotes focusing
commercial uses in the Severna Park Village or at designated commercial
intersections on Ritchie Highway.
36.
#1425, Gary Cooper, 97
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_20, Approved as
discussed_1_
Woodberry Farms, Woodbridge Forest, Cypress Landing, Jennings
*Requested
Zoning Commentary: Application requests change from R1 to C4.
Applicant’s
commentary in response to the three questions on page 2 of the Application: 5.1.
Appli-cation’s consistency with GDP Policies/Goals; 5.2. Which specific GDP
Policy/Goal is implemented by Application; 5.3. Would requested change be
compatible with surrounding land uses and community:
“Linda
F. Cooper is the owner of the property known as
Currently, the Property is being utilized as a contractor’s yard, primarily for
the parking and storage of commercial vehicles related to the Cooper family’s
paving business. The Property was
originally zoned Light Commercial under the 1952 Zoning Map.
In 1973, the Property and surrounding lots were down zoned from Light
Commercial to R-1 Residential. At
that time, the existing businesses along
A
review of the aerial photographs clearly shows the commercial nature of this
portion of
A
C-4 Zoning classification for this area conforms to the goals, policies and
recommendations in General Development Plan (“GDP”) in relation to the excising
use of the Property as well as that of the surrounding land use.
A long term goal of the 2009 GDP is to shift the focus to redevelopment
and revitalization (not in revitalization district).
This section of
The Community Enhancement section of the Severna Park Small Area Plan states
that a balance between housing, jobs and services in locations that are in close
proximity must be maintained, while making the best of existing uses.
The commercial use at
*Current Zoning
History: As noted in
Administrative Hearing Officer case 2008-0353-R, the initial 1952 split zoning
provided Light Commercial for the front
500 feet and Agricultural for the rear.
The 1973 comprehensive zoning changed property to R1.
The 1989 comprehensive zoning retained R1.
Although there was an application submitted for C2 zoning
during the 2002 comprehensive zoning, the County Council retained R1 zoning.
In case 2008-0353-R, heard on February 10, 2009, Applicant applied for C4
zoning through the Administrative Procedure. The Hearing Officer noted, “The
Property is being used as a storage/staging yard for the residential paving
business Mr. Cooper, Sr. started many years ago and which is now being run by
Mr. Cooper, Jr. and his brothers. The aerial photographs show heavy commercial
use. Testimony showed that the
Property was being used to store at least four dump trucks, a paving machine,
assorted other vehicles, and materials to be used in the paving business.”
The Administrative Hearing Officer found in his detailed analysis noting,
“Consequently, I find that rezoning the Property to C4 would not be compatible
wit the surrounding area nor promote the health, safety, and welfare of
present and future residents of the County.”
He ultimately concluded, “Therefore, f or the above reasons, I conclude
the application to rezone the property to C4 Commercial Highway District zoning
is denied.
The
Applicants appealed the Decision of the Administrative Hearing Officer to the
Board of Appeals. In case BA
20-09R, the Board voted unanimously to deny the application, noting, “The
Petitioners’ proposed zoning reclassification of
*Abutting Zoning
Commentary: All abutting
properties on the east side of Ritchie Highway are zoned R1.
To the immediate rear of the subject property is a
community of high value Residential Properties.
Land Records disclose that the abutting three acre property with the
largest abutting property line was recently purchased for $835,000.
Property facing the subject property across
*General
Development Plan (GDP)
a) GDP/SAP: The subject
property along with all the properties on both sides of
In paragraph 5 above the Applicant notes, “The executive Summary of the
Severna Park Small Area Plan identifies the primary goal of presenting a land
use plan that adjusts existing parcel to “reflect actual use.”
The 2002 Severna Park Small Area Plan Committee reviewed all of the
In paragraph 5 the Applicants mention
Non Conforming use 9-80 for the subject property.
That specific Use was terminated by Planning and Zoning as of June 7,
1998, under the provision of Section 14-107, because the “nonconforming use is
considered terminated when the use ceases operation for a period of 12
consecutive months.”
The 2009 GDP considered and made Land Use changes in the Severna Park Small
Area Plan but retained residential Land Use for the subject property and all
abutting properties. On that note the
Application does not confirm to the 2009 updated Severna Park Small Area Plan
Land Use Plan as amended by the 2009 GDP in Bill 59-10..
b)
The 2009 General Development Plan on page 117, establishes the criteria
for changes during the Comprehensive Zoning process as follows: “Policy:
Comprehensive zoning changes must demonstrate the following criteria:
1)
The Change in zoning will further one or more o f the
established goals and
Policies in the adopted GDP or
Small Area Plan;
2)
The change in zoning will not be contrary to an
established goal or policy
In the adopted GDP or Small Area
Plan;
3)
The change in zoning will allow a land use that is
compatible with the
Surrounding land uses, so as to
promote the health, safety and welfare of
Present and future residents.”
The Application in the section,
Explanation and Justification for
Requested Zoning, contains no
accurate reference to any specific Goal or Policy in the GDP or the Small Area
Plan with which it complies. Quite
to the contrary, the request for the C4 Commercial Highway District is in direct
violation of the GDP and updated Small Area Plan Land Uses.
In addition, both the Administrative Hearing Officer and the Board of
Appeals made a specific finding of non compatibility with the surrounding Land
Uses and a failure “to promote the health, safety and welfare of present and
future residents.” On that note, the subject property
does not conform to the Bill 59-10
statutory “Criteria for Comprehensive Zoning Changes” in the 2009 General
Development Plan.
c)
Spot Zoning. Application
also appears to be prohibited per the Court of Special Appeals definition of
Spot Zoning. In view of the fact
that all abutting properties and properties abutting the abutting properties are
zoned R1, the Application would have the County Council insert an island of
C4 Commercial within the larger R1 District..
Although there is no statutory prohibition, there is long standing case
law to the effect that such action is prohibited per the following citation from
the Maryland Court of Special Appeals,
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. There is no demonstrated need to establish a new commercial district at
this location on Ritchie Highway. The property was considered in the Severna
Park SAP and the adopted plan does not recommend creation of a heavy commercial
district at this location.
37.
#1426,
Keith Faulkner, 101
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_20, Approved as
discussed_1_
Woodberry Farms, Woodbridge
Forest, Cypress Landing, Jennings
*Requested
Zoning Commentary: Application requests change from R1 to C4.
Applicant’s
commentary in response to the three questions on page 2 of the Application:
5.1. Application’s consistency with GDP
Policies/Goals;
5.2. Which specific GDP Policy/Goal is
implemented by Application;
5.3. Would requested change be
compatible with surrounding land uses and community:
“Linda
F. Cooper is the owner of the property known as
Currently, the Property is being utilized as a contractor’s yard, primarily for
the parking and storage of commercial vehicles related to the Cooper family’s
paving business. The Property was
originally zoned Light Commercial under the 1952 Zoning Map.
In 1973, the Property and surrounding lots were down zoned from Light
Commercial to R-1 Residential. At
that time, the existing businesses along
A
review of the aerial photographs clearly shows the commercial nature of this
portion of
A
C-4 Zoning classification for this area conforms to the goals, policies and
recommendations in General Development Plan (“GDP”) in relation to the excising
use of the Property as well as that of the surrounding land use.
A long term goal of the 2009 GDP is to shift the focus to redevelopment
and revitalization (not in revitalization district).
This section of
The executive Summary of the Severna Park Small Area Plan
identifies the primary goal of presenting a land use plan that adjusts existing
parcel to “reflect actual use.”
While the vision statement of the Pasadena/Marley Neck Small Area Planning area
sets for a vision to better “defining commercial area and to develop policies
for improvements in their design and function and to allow an appropriate
expansion of residential and commercial development” What better way to conform
to the vision of the GDP and the follow the goals and visions of two small area
plans, than to rezone this property C4 and clearly define the where the
commercial uses exist. In addition
The Community Enhancement section of the Severna Park Small Area Plan states
that a balance between housing, jobs and services in locations that are in close
proximity must be maintained, while making the best of existing uses.
The commercial use at
*Current Zoning
History: As noted in
Administrative Hearing Officer case 2008-0353-R, the initial 1952 split zoning
provided Light Commercial for the front
500 feet and Agricultural for the rear.
The 1973 comprehensive zoning changed property to R1.
The 1989 comprehensive zoning retained R1.
Although there was an application submitted for C2 zoning during the 2002
comprehensive zoning, the County Council retained R1 zoning.
In case 2008-0353-R, heard on February 10, 2009, Applicant applied for C4
zoning through the Administrative Procedure. The Hearing Officer noted, “The
Property is being used as a storage/staging yard for the residential paving
business Mr. Cooper, Sr. started many years ago and which is now being run by
Mr. Cooper, Jr. and his brothers. The aerial photographs show heavy commercial
use. Testimony showed that the
Property was being used to store at least four dump trucks, a paving machine,
assorted other vehicles, and materials to be used in the paving business.”
The Administrative Hearing Officer found in his detailed analysis noting,
“Consequently, I find that rezoning the Property to C4 would not be compatible
wit the surrounding area nor promote the health, safety, and welfare of
present and future residents of the County.”
He ultimately concluded, “Therefore, f or the above reasons, I conclude
the application to rezone the property to C4 Commercial Highway District zoning
is denied.
The
Applicants appealed the Decision of the Administrative Hearing Officer to the
Board of Appeals. In case BA
20-09R, the Board voted unanimously to deny the application, noting, “The
Petitioners’ proposed zoning reclassification of
*Abutting Zoning
Commentary: All abutting
properties on the east side of Ritchie Highway are zoned R1.
To the immediate rear of the subject property is a
community of high value Residential Properties.
Land Records disclose that the abutting three acre property with the
largest abutting property line was recently purchased for $835,000.
Property facing the subject property across
*General
Development Plan (GDP)
a) GDP/SAP: The subject
property along with all the properties on both sides of
In paragraph 5 above the Applicant notes, “The executive Summary of the
Severna Park Small Area Plan identifies the primary goal of presenting a land
use plan that adjusts existing parcel to “reflect actual use.”
The 2002 Severna Park Small Area Plan Committee reviewed all of the
In paragraph 5 the Applicants mention
Non Conforming use 9-80 for the subject property.
That specific Use was terminated by Planning and Zoning as of June 7,
1998, under the provision of Section 14-107, because the “nonconforming use is
considered terminated when the use ceases operation for a period of 12
consecutive months.”
The 2009 GDP considered and made Land Use changes in the Severna Park Small
Area Plan but retained residential Land Use for the subject property and all
abutting properties. On that note the
Application does not confirm to the 2009 updated Severna Park Small Area Plan
Land Use Plan as amended by the 2009 GDP in Bill 59-10..
b)
The 2009 General Development Plan on page 117, establishes the criteria
for changes during the Comprehensive Zoning process as follows: “Policy:
Comprehensive zoning changes must demonstrate the following criteria:
1)
The Change in zoning will further one or more o f the
established goals and
Policies in the adopted GDP or
Small Area Plan;
2)
The change in zoning will not be contrary to an
established goal or policy
In the adopted GDP or Small Area
Plan;
3)
The change in zoning will allow a land use that is
compatible with the
Surrounding land uses, so as to
promote the health, safety and welfare of
Present and future residents.”
The Application in the section,
Explanation and Justification for
Requested Zoning, contains no
accurate reference to any specific Goal or Policy in the GDP or the Small Area
Plan with which it complies. Quite
to the contrary, the request for the C4 Commercial Highway District is in direct
violation of the GDP and updated Small Area Plan Land Uses.
In addition, both the Administrative Hearing Officer and the Board of
Appeals made a specific finding of non compatibility with the surrounding Land
Uses and a failure “to promote the health, safety and welfare of present and
future residents.” On that note, the subject property
does not conform to the Bill 59-10
statutory “Criteria for Comprehensive Zoning Changes” in the 2009 General
Development Plan.
c)
Spot Zoning. Application
also appears to be prohibited per the Court of Special Appeals definition of
Spot Zoning. In view of the fact
that all abutting properties and properties abutting the abutting properties are
zoned R1, the Application would have the County Council insert an island of
C4 Commercial within the larger R1 District..
Although there is no statutory prohibition, there is long standing case
law to the effect that such action is prohibited per the following citation from
the Maryland Court of Special Appeals,
*P/Zoning Recommendation: No
Change. There is no demonstrated need to establish a new commercial district at
this location on Ritchie Highway and the SAP does not recommend creation of a
heavy commercial district at this location. The existing business was recently
granted legal nonconforming status to continue operation.
38.
#1160, Magothy Associates,
157 Ritchie H’way, 21122, C! & R1 to C1 or C3.
Approve_0_,
Disapprove_12, Approved as
discussed_9_
Woodberry Farms, Woodbridge
Forest, Cypress Landing, Jennings,
Earleigh Heights Volunteer Fire Company.
*P/Zoning Recommendation:
Change to C1. Expand the C1 zoning on P.179 and 217 (Lot A) to eliminate the R1
split-zoning on these parcels and facilitate redevelopment of this local
commercial hub at the intersection of Magothy Bridge Road and Ritchie Highway.
Retain R1 zoning on P.566 as it does not have direct road access and abuts
residential properties on three sides
Appendix D
Appendix
E
Appendix E
Appendix F
GSPC
Zoning/Legislation Agenda 8-9-11, Boldface=Your Attention,
Regular Typeface=
Information/follow.
Legislation, Planning,
Zoning and Capital Projects:
Charter Revision
Commission Report 7-18-11, Councilmanic Redistricting.
Comprehensive Rezoning
for Severna Park SAP,
38 Applications in District 5 and District 3.
District 5
Schedule
Change 6-21-11: Notice to Applicants 7-6 8-10, Web posting
7-13, 8-17, PAB Hearings
7-27, 8-31,
Bill
introduction 8-1, 9-6-,
Council Work Session 8-9, 9-12 Council Hearings 9-6, 9-19,
10-3, 10-17, 11-7,
11-17.
Evaluation Sheets for individual application under preparation.
Bill 44-11
Comprehensive Zoning, Districts VI & VII,
48 Elements, 57 Amendments,
Amendments that
violate GDP and SAP’s.
GAN letter 7-18-11 to BOARD, GAN
Research Effort-Article 66B.
Bill 53-11
Crematories and Funeral Establishments. GSPC Supported
at hearing, Amended 8-1-11.
Provides:
Conditioned in W2 & W3. Accessory
use for Funeral Establishment.
Special Exception in C2,
C3, & C4 on Collector or
Arterial Road. Funeral
establishments on a Collector or Arterial without
crematory permitted in C2, C3, & C4.
Congressional and
General Assembly Redistricting, Public Testimony-AACC, 8-31-11.
Administrative Hearing
Officer, Board of Appeals, MDE, Corps of Engineers, Complaints:
Webpage for AHO:
http://www.aacounty.org/AdminHear/Calendar.cfm, Webpage for Board of
Appeals:
http://www.aacounty.org/BdofAppeals/Calendar.cfm
GSPC Status before the Board
of Appeals—Analysis pending.
2011-0170 Kelly Heinz,
8-11-11 9:30AM,
No other details available on
2011-0171-V Mark Schaefer,
8-16-11, 10:00AM,
“
2011-0180-V Norman Snyder,
8-16-11 11:00AM
“
2011-0175-V
2011-190-V Christopher
Driver, 9-1-11 9:30AM
“
2011-0194-V William
Harrison, 9-1-11 10:00AM
“
BA 16-11V Gary Ross, 8-11-11
5:30PM
BA 01-11A
Ferry Point Marina
dba Magothy Seafood Restaurant 700 Mill Creek Rd,
Hearings completed,
Written Closing
Arguments pending. (Manhattan Beach) Permit B02264223 issued 12-2-10 for
pavilion—
parking,
critical area use issues. Memorandum of Understanding zoning violations 4 years
in the Critical Area,
3 years
elsewhere…
BA 3-07V & 4-07V D. Clickner, Remand
C-07-128211, Standing not discussed in any detail during the
presentation of
The case or at the Deliberations.
Board Voted 5-1 to grant the
variances on 7-7-11.
(Strothman was
absent for Deliberations). Member
Moulden will prepare his own dissent following the Arrow
Cove rationale.
He also noted that “Stringing out the variances without knowing the size of the
house was a
concern.
Perhaps an excellent legal
maneuver but an inappropriate procedure as he viewed the case. He
concluded that
approving variances before sizing the house amounted to “getting the cart before
the horse”.
BA 30 & 33-11A
Maryland Crematory, LLC,
8-17-11 6:30PM, 8-24-11
6:30PM
406 Headquarters Dr Suite
10, Millersville, MDE permit
pending.
SCHO appeal of Building Permit.
Board of Appeals
Deliberations 7-7-11, No cases
in
Circuit
Court Cases (Clerk
of Court 222-1431)
Court of Special Appeals Cases,
Clerk
410 260-1450, Court of
Subdivisions & Pre-submission Meetings:
http://www.aacounty.org/LandUse/CalendarPreSub.cfm
Shelter Development Assisted Living,
Construction late 2011 or early 2012.
Covenants to be reviewed by
Kensington
in September.
C:\gspc\agenda\zlagenda\zlagenda 8-9-11, Al Johnston 410 647-1380,
j202gspc@comcast.net
jleopold@aacounty.org;