MEETING MINUTES September 4, 2024 Carroll County Planning and Zoning Commission Location: Reagan Room, 003 Michael Kane, Vice Chair Ralph Robertson Peter Lester Steven Smith Richard. J. Soisson, Alternate Tom Gordon III, Ex-officio Members Present: Janice R. Kirkner, Chair Members Absent: Matthew Hoff Present with the Commission were the following persons: Mary Lane, Bureau of Comprehensive Planning; Christopher Heyn and Brenda Dinne, Department of Planning and Land Management; Michelle Ostrander, Attorney; Daphne Daly, Planning and Zoning Commission Secretary; and, Denise Mathias, Clerk. CALLTOORDERDER/WELCOME Madam Chair Kirkner called the meeting to order at approximately 6:00 PM. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM Ms. Mathias took attendance and noted that seven members were present, and a quorum was established. REVIEW AND APPROVALOF, AGENDA On motion of Mr. Kane, seconded by Mr. Lester and carried, the Agenda was approved. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT A. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS Secretary Daly introduced Gail Hawkins as the new Administrative Assistant. She nominated Gail as the Clerk to the Planning and Zoning Commission (Commission), effective at the end of the meeting. On motion ofMr. Kane, seconded by Mr. Lester and carried, the Commission appointed Gail Hawkins as Clerk for the Planning and Zoning Commission. Planning and Zoning Commission Official Minutes B. OTHER September 4, 2024 Ms. Daly reported Chaberton Solar Pine Rock, LLC will be holding their second public meeting on October gth at 5:30 pm at Exploration Commons. The best source to make comments regarding this project is www.pscstate.md.us Under Quick Links, choose Ms. Daly reminded the Commission if they are attending the Maryland Planning Lastly, Ms. Daly informed the Commission about a joint work session with Board of County Commissioners regarding the Master Plan on September 17th at 1:00 pm CPCN Applications, and this project number is 9725. Association Conference in October, please inform Gail. Concept Site Plan- S-24-0017- - Hampstead Wastewater Treatment Plant, 2nd Amended -) Description: Expansion and upgrades to the plant; Owner/I Developer: County Commissioners of Carroll County Department of Public Works, Bureau ofUtilities; located at 4455 North Woods Trail., Hampstead, MD 21074; Tax Map 41, Grid 10, Parcel 58; C.D.2-CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW, NO. ACTION REQUIRED. (David Becraft) Contact dbecratt@carrollcountymd.gov-410-386-2134: (15 minutes) CONCEPT SITE PLAN REPORT Carroll County Planning and Zoning Commission David Becraft, Bureau of Development Review to the September 4, 2024 Prepared by SUBJECT: Amended LOCATION: C.D. 02 OWNER: DEVELOPER: SURVEYOR: ZONING: ACREAGE: WATERSHED: Reservoir FIRE DISTRICT: S-24-0017- Hampstead Wastewater Treatment Plant, 2nd 4455 North Woods Trail, Hampstead, MD 21074; Carroll County Commissioners, 225 N. Center Street, Carroll County Commissioners c/o Bureau ofUtilities, 225 N.Center Street, Westminster, MD 21157 Johnson, Mirmiran & Thompson, 40 Wight Avenue, Hunt Westminster, MD21157 Valley, MD 21030 Conservation 28.759 acres Loch Raven Hampstead Plan, 2019 Amended MASTER PLAN: Resource Conservation - 2014Carroll County Master PRIORITY FUNDING AREA: Outside DESIGNATED GROWTH AREA: Outside 2 Planning and Zoning Commission Official Minutes Action Required: September 4, 2024 The plan is before the Planning and Zoning Commission per Chapter 155 oft the Codeo of Public Local Laws and Ordinances ofCarroll County for review of a concept site plan. Thel Planlling Commission may consider delegating approval ofthe final site plan tot the Planning Commission Chair. Existing Conditions The subject property is a 28.759-acre parcel located at 4455 North Woods Trail. The property contains numerous buildings; the Hampstead Wastewater Treatment Plant is located on site.. A stream is on the southern portion ofthe property. There are two Forest Conservation Easements on the property: one along the southern property boundary and one along the western property boundary. A ground-mounted solar facility exists on the north side oft the property. All development on the property was approved with prior site The adjoining property to the south and west is the Roberts Field subdivision, located in the Town ofHampstead. Those lots are served by public water and public sewer system. The eastern property line is the Calrnll County/Baltimore County boundary line. The property to the north is a 58-acre tract of ground zoned both R-10,000 and The plant came online in 1971. In 1984 the plant underwent major upgrades and new equipment was added at that time. Additional filtration systems have been implemented over the years. Implementation of water reduction systems over the years has allowed the plant to remain well below the full capacity of the plant. A previous 1993 site plan was approved detailing wastewater treatment plant improvements. The solar facility was approved in 2017. An amended site development plan for an Enhanced Nutrient Removal (ENR) upgrade was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission in development plans. R-20,000 and under a rural legacy easement. 2017. Plan Review: OnJuly 19,2024, an initial site development plan for the subject property was submitted to the Bureau ofl Development Review and distributed to technical review agencies. The plan proposes various improvements around the existing facility; most notably a 514 square foot expansion oft the sludge press facility, 654 square foot expansion of the PAC storage and metering facility, 1,764 square foot new maintenance and storage facility, and additional paving. Architectural elevations and renderings are provided within the plan set on sheets 15-21. Access to the site exists via a right-of-way onto North Woods Trail. The right-of-way overlays a roadway that is owned and maintained by The Town ofHampstead. The Town did not have any comments or suggestions regarding the proposed plan. The parking tabulation provided on sheet 1 identifies the total number of parking 3 Planning and Zoning Commission Official Minutes September 4, 2024 spaces required as 2. The parking standard is 1 space per1.5 employees on maximum The site development plan was subject to citizen involvement on August 26, 2024, during the Technical Review Committee meeting. No citizens were in attendance at Grading & Sediment Control and the Soil Conservation District have approved the concept plan. Engineering Review and the Town ofHampstead have approved the proposal with existing access to North Woods Trail. The proposal is exempt from the Floodplain Management Ordinance and the Forest Conservation Ordinance. Concept Stormwater Management approval has been granted. Stolmwater Management requirements for the site are being addressed with the existing facility on- shift. A total of7 parking spaces are provided on the site. that meeting. No written comments have been received. site and non-rooftop disconnects. Ina accordance with 158.049 oft the Carroll County Code of Public Local Laws and Ordinances: $158.049 COUNTY PUBLIC BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES, AND USES. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, uses ofland, buildings, structures, or premises by the County Commissioners, including the location, erection, reconstruction, extension, enlargement, conversion, or alteration ofbuildings or structures or parts thereofmay be located in any district as principal permitted uses and exempt from all subdivision regulations and bulk requirements. However, no land, building, structure, or premises owned or leased by the County Commissioners may be used without the approval ofthe County Planning Commission pursuant to Md. Code, Land Use Article, $ 3.205. The Bureau of Comprehensive Planning reviewed the proposal for consistency with the policies and recommendations contained in the CatToll County Master Plan, the CatToll County Master Plan for Water and Sewer, and other functional plans, as applicable. The subject property has a land-use designation of! Resource Conservation (the property is zoned Conservation). The development proposal is consistent with this designation. The site plan will be tested and reviewed for adequacy of public facilities in accordance with Chapter 155 ofthe Code of Public Laws and Ordinances ofCarroll This plan is consistent with all applicable plans. County Maryland. David Becraft presented the staff report. Ray Fischer and Steven Anderson with JMT, along with Andy Watcher, Bureau ChiefofUtilities were present. 4 Planning and Zoning Commission Official Minutes Discussion: September 4, 2024 Mr. Kane asked if the project expansion is due to capacity or aging issues. Mr. Watcher explained the primary need for the upgrade isi for the second slug press to the treatment process. One ofthe presses is 13 years old and it cannot keep up with the inflow coming into the plant. The plant is operating at about half On motion of Mr. Robertson, seconded by Mr. Kane and carried, the Commission voted to delegate final ofcapacity for the Town ofH Hampstead. approval to the Chair. Public Comment for Item #6: There was none. TextAmendment: Changes related tol HB538 Hannah Weber and Mary Lane presented the introduction of the Housing Expansion and the Affordability Act that was passed by the State this past legislative session. The legislated form of the amendment will be provided at the September 17h meeting. Discussion: Mr. Smith asked if the legislation's references to housing near rail stations includes light rail Mr. Kane questioned the date when the legislation if effective. The State website stated it would be effective October 1,2024, not January of 2025. Ms. Weber explained the October date was on an earlier document. The final version that was signed by the Governor stated January 2025. Mr. Kane asked if the density changes were explained anywhere. Ms. Weber explained that density increases and the type ofdevelopment that can go on aj project site are addressed in various Mr. Kane asked if it is known what the impact of the density changes could be. Ms. Weber explained the density increases pertain to middle housing units. The legislation does not say how much density could increase for qualified project, only that middle housing (townhouses, quad Mr. Kane asked ift this means tiny houses. Ms. Daly said it did not necessarily mean tiny houses, Ms. Daly went on to say the legislation does not define ini the amount ofdensity bonuses that could Mr. Robertson asked ift this is spot zoning. He wanted tol know ifa church buys a 100-acre farmi in an Agricultural zone how the number of middle housing units that could go on the property would be decided. Ms. Weber explained it would go through staff review. Additionally, qualified projects are subject to HB 236, which currently limits growth on private septic systems to seven stations. Ms. Weber confirmed light rail stations are included. places in the legislation. houses, triplexes, and cottage clusters) must be allowed. but more broadly different types ofhousing besides single family detached. be granted for a qualifying project. lots. 5 Planning and Zoning Commission Official Minutes September 4, 2024 Mr. Robertson asked what recourse the developer would havei ifthe Commission denied a qualified project. Ms. Daly explained the Planning and Zoning Commission determines how the development is going to look, but they need to allow for middle housing to be a part ofthe project. Ms. Lester asked if the State is looking for more affordable housing? Ms. Daly confirmed the Mr. Kane noted the legislation and the Developer's Rights and Responsibilities Agreement might Madam Chair Kirkner expressed there needs to be more affordable housing in the area. Mr. Lester asked how we define qualified affordable housing by the percentage of the average. Ms. Weber explained the percentage of qualified affordable housing is 40%. State is looking for affordable housing. be an opportunity to have discussions with the developer about housing. Public Comment for Item# 7 There was none. Text Amendment: Solar Site Design Requirements Discussion and Recommendation - Discussion and possible recommendation on changes to Chapter 158 that would establish site design requirements for solar projects proposed in all zoning districts Discussion: Ms. Weber, Mr. Heyn, and Brenda Dianne presented the Solar Site Design Requirements. Mr. Robertson asked what the guidelines are for the Public Service Commission (PSC) to approve Mr. Heyn said that staff will check the PSC website to see what criteria aj project needs to meet. There are 80 projects that have gone through the process and all 80 have been approved. There is a process applicants must go through; the PSC takes into consideration local zoning and the environmental Mr. Soisson asked whether the solar projects that have been approved by the State were initiated by projects. impact oft the proposed project. the property owner. Mr. Heyn stated they were initiated by the solar developer. Mr. Lester stated the plans the Commission has seen were asking the Commission to reduce the setbacks in some way. Most oft the comments the Commission heard were that people do not want to Mr. Kane confirmed all the negative feedback was about the visual sight oft the solar fields and the see the solar fields. maintenance. 6 Planning and Zoning Commission Official Minutes September 4, 2024 Mr. Heyn explained that the County needs basic guidelines that all projects can conform to, but these must be practical guidelines. The State has legal authority to preempt local decisions. This coming spring 2025, legislation likely will pass that will preempt these guidelines. The County needs tol have guidelines in place, sO when the State looks at the Codes in the jurisdiction, they will use them asa base. The County is trying to retain as much ofi its authority as possible. Mr. Kane asked about setbacks in otherjurisdictions. Mr. Heyn explained Frederick County requires 50 feet from all property lines and 100 feet from residential structures, Baltimore County requires 50 feet, Harford County requires 150 feet, Caroline County requires 200 feet, Wicomico County requires 75 feet, and Talbot County requires 150 feet. Mr. Robertson asked ift the proposed setbacks are for the Agricultural zone? Mr. Heyn explained the setbacks would be for all zoning districts. Mr. Soisson asked ifMr. Heyn thought the State would recommend reducing the 400-foot setback. Mr. Heyn confirmed the State likely would recommend reduce the 400 feet. Mr. Soisson suggested recommending reasonable setbacks to make it harder for the State to reject Mr. Kane asked how the decision made about setbacks get made. For instance, would the State tell the Mr. Heyn explained next legislative session, the State likely will define these requirements. The Commissioner Gordon asked Mr. Heyn ift there was an Industrial zone solar field out by the airport in the last six months. Mr. Smith said he remembered the public stating they did not want to see a giant solar farm instead ofrolling land by Atlantic Tractor. The public was not against the solar farm, they Mr. Robertson asked if, with that property being zoned Industrial, it subject to Water Resource Mr. Heyn explained he was unaware of the specifics, but the Water Resource codes, and other codes Mr. Soisson recommended putting the setbacks at 200 feet and the emphasis on the landscaping Mr. Heyn confirmed that the suggestion is to change the setback to 200 feet from residential uses and 100 feet for non-residential uses. He also confirmed that the Commission wanted to eliminate the them. County to revise its setbacks, or would the State specify the setback distance itself? requirements will apply Statewide. just did not want to seei it. Management requirements. would apply regardless ofthe zoning district. requirements. provision allowing the Commission to reduce setbacks by 50%. 7 Planning and Zoning Commission Official Minutes September 4, 2024 Mr. Lester asked whether the other counties break setbacks down by residential and non-residential. Mr. Heyn said he does not believe other counties breakdown the setbacks. Mr. Heyn asked the Commission if they would like to simplify it further by setting the setbacks at 200 feet in all cases. Madam Chair Kirkner asked if20 feet above grade is the standard height limit. Mr. Heyn explained this is another number that was different between jurisdictions. The industry standard is around 12 feet. Among the other jurisdictions, Frederick County requires 30 feet, Baltimore County requires 20 feet, Caroline County requires 15 feet, and Talbot requires 16 feet. The work group recommended 20 feet. Some solar panels tilt and move to follow the sun to optimize solar capture. Those would be higher to capture the movement oft the panels. Mr. Soisson asked about short trees for landscaping. Mr. Heyn explained the section related tol landscaping is for groundcover around the facility. Mr. Robertson asked what department would inspect the property ift the vegetation gets out of control. Mr. Heyn explained it would be the same department that inspects Johnson grass. The inspection and maintenance for the County's 's stormwater facilities are dictated by the NPDES permit. The State requires the County toi inspect those stormwater facilities every three years. Mr. Robertson asked how the vegetation is handled at Hampstead Water Treatment Plant. The Water Treatment Plant has a steep hillside. He asked ift they are they mowing the hill. Mr. Heyn explained he is unaware how they maintain the Water Treatment Plant vegetation. Would it be the same department that inspects Johnson grass? Mr. Robertson asked who determines the value of the Surety Agreement? Mr. Heyn explained it would the County working with the developer. The developer would producea a Mr. Lester asked ift three rows of trees would be installed according to the proposed amendments. Mr. Heyn confirmed there would be three rows of plant material. Among the otherj jurisdictions, Harford County has a 20-foot-wide buffer, Wicomico County has a 30-foot-wide buffer. cost estimate for installation ofmaterial, then the County would bond that amount. Mr. Soisson asked why the County is concerned about lighting. Mr. Heyn explained other counties had lighting in their code. panels, they would need light for them to work on the equipment. Ms. Dinne explained ifthere is a building with equipment associated with the operation ofthe solar 8 Planning and Zoning Commission Official Minutes September 4, 2024 Mr. Kane asked how the decommissioning cost is determined. Mr. Heyn explained the developer would provide this information and then the County would review Mr. Robertson asked whether the County would allow subdivision oft the land ifBG&E wanted to the cost sheet. purchase the land and the solar facility. Mr. Heyn confirmed the County would allow the subdivision to occur. Mr. Robertson asked ift the zoning would change from Agricultural when a solar project is constructed. Mr. Heyn explained the zoning would not change. A non-residential subdivision is allowed in the Agricultural district. IfBG&E purchases the solar field and they decommissioned the project, BG&E could develop the land according to the use table for the Agricultural district. Mr. Soisson asked about the life expectancy of the solar panels. Mr. Heyn explained the life expectancy is around 20 -3 30 years. Mr. Smith asked what recourse the County would have ift the decommissioning price increased, and Mr. Heyn explained that the County Attorney's Office would help to resolve that issue. Mr. Kane asked whether a battery storage facility is allowed to be located on a solar farm. Mr. Heyn explained that any proposed battery facilities would be reviewed during the site plan Ms. Daly confirmed that the following were changes the Commission would like to see: the surety could not provide another bond. review process for the solar field. under F, to change the setback from 400 to 200 feet from the boundary lines of all Under K, take out the sentence "A reduced width of no less than 12. feet may be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission where pull-offs and adequate adjoining properties take out #2 in Setbacks turnarounds are provided. - On motion of Mr. Soisson, second by Mr. Smith and carried, the Commission approved the draft with the three changes noted and recommended it be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners. Public Comment for Item #8: There was none. 9 Planning and Zoning Commission Official Minutes GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT Discussion: There was none. ADJOURNMENT 8:11PM. September 4, 2024 On ai motion of Mr. Kane, seconded by Mr. Robertson and carried, the Commission adjourned at 12/25 SaukKaka72 Secretary Approved 1C