HomeMy WebLinkAboutPreliminary Consultation Minutes June 2021County
JUL 2 02021
DIVISION OF ash
PLAN REVIEW & PERMITTING 9tof Pngton County
Dept. . Planning & Zoning
PRELIMINARY CONSULTATION DISTRIBUTION
TO: Washington County Health Dept.
Washington County Plan Review Engineering
Washington County Dept. of Business Development
Washington County Forest Conservation
Washington County Environmental Management
Washington County Historic District Commission
Maryland Dept. of Transportation State Highway Adm.
Washington County Soil Conservation District
Washington County Emergency Services
Washington County Addressing
Washington County Sheriff's Dept.
City of Hagerstown Utilities
City of Hagerstown Planning and Zoning Dept.
Williamsport Fire Department
Potomac Edison
FROM: Ashley Holloway
DATE: June 3, 2021
RE: Preliminary Consultation
PC -21-001 — Northpoint Dickinson
Please find attached the Preliminary Consultation for the above referenced
project.
ARH/msg
Attachments
Cc: Ashley Holloway, Director, Plan Review & Permitting
Frederick, Seibert & Associates, Inc.
Dickinson Family Ltd Partnership, Owner
Northpoint Development, Developer
80 West Baltimore Street I Hagerstown, MD 21740-6003 1 P: 240,313.2460 1 TDD: 711
WWWWASHCO-MD.NET
PRELIMINARY CONSULTATION
PC -21-001 Northpoint Dickinson
A preliminary consultation was held on Thursday, June 3, 2021, at 1:30 p.m. via teleconference,
in the offices of the Washington County Division of Plan Review & Permitting, 80 West
Baltimore Street, Hagerstown, Maryland. A concept plan was presented for Northpoint
Dickinson. The developer is proposing two warehouses with offices. The project is located at
16822 National Pike and is zoned PI (Planned Industrial District).
Present and participating in the consultation were: Ashley Holloway Director, Division of Plan
Review & Pennitting/Zoning Administrator; Rebecca Calimer, Chief of Plan Review, Division of
Plan Review & Permitting; Misti Grimmer, Sr. Office Associate, Division of Plan Review &
Permitting; Mark Bradshaw, Washington County Environmental Management, Water Quality;
Jonathan Horowitz, Washington County Department of Business Development; Meghan Jenkins,
Washington County Department of Planning & Zoning; Tim Lung, Washington County Health
Department; Mark McKenzie, Maryland State Highway Administration; Steve Bocicmiller, City
of Hagerstown Planning & Zoning; Kellen Douglas, City of Hagerstown Utilities; David Salinas,
Northpoint Development; Trevor Frederick, Frederick, Seibert & Associates, Inc., Consultant.
WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Jonathan Horowitz was present and provided the following comments.
Mr. Horowitz stated that the Department of Business Development is in full support of this
project and will be available to facilitate its successful completion.
MARYLAND STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)
Mr. Mark McKenzie was present and provided the following comments.
Mr. McKenzie stated that a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) is required, and the TIS must be approved
prior to site plan review and approval by MSHA. He went on to say that the two proposed
entrances are acceptable. However, if a traffic signal is proposed in the future, one entrance will
be required. He added that a consultation with the Maryland Historic Trust will be required prior
to the approval of a demolition permit.
WASHINGTON COUNTY DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT -
WATER OUALITY
Mr. Mark Bradshaw was present and provided the following comments.
Mr. Bradshaw stated that there is three thousand feet of offsite sewer construction required to
reach this property and he will need to review this grading plan. The developer will be
responsible for obtaining all easements and permits related to construction. The sewer for this
development will be directed to Cedar Springs pump station. A special exception exists of $1,000
per acre or $1000 per EDU (Equivalent Dwelling Unit), whichever is greater. This fee is due at
the time of permit application.
CITY OF HAGERSTOWN UTILITIES
Mr. Kellen Douglas was present and provided the following comments.
Mr. Douglas stated that the requirement for a Pre -Annexation Agreement is acknowledged on the
concept plan cover sheet. However, a water line extension will be required for water connection.
research, the applicant is welcomed to use the city's codified requirements for this in
Article 5 of the City's Land Management Code. However, to be clear, the City
understands that this property is not under city jurisdiction, and this is offered as
a recommendation only."
Mr. Frederick inquired as to whether the sidewalk comment was a recommendation or a
requirement. Mr. Bockmiller responded that it is a strong request due to the likelihood of a future
annexation, that would necessitate completion at taxpayer's expense. However, the site is not
located within the City of I-Iagerstown's jurisdiction, so they cannot require it to be completed at
this time. He recommended that sidewalks should at least be considered as a part of the grading
plan. Mr. Frederick responded that they would discuss options with the Maryland State Highway
Administration, since they hold the right of way in this location, prior to site plan submittal.
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING
Ms. Meghan Jenkins was present and provided the following comments.
Ms. Jenkins stated that she is representing staff for the HDC (Historic District Commission) who
is making recommendations. She requested that the Developer note on the site plan that this is a
historic site, it is listed as WAI004 on the Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties. She also
recommended that the list of demolition alternatives be reviewed and considered. Ms. Jenkins
explained that the HDC prefers to be provided with information as to why those alternatives were
not feasible, when reviewing permits or site plans for approval. She stated that documentation of
the property prior to demolition is recommended, and that information and resources are available
on the HDC's website to assist with this process. It appears that the spring house may be
amenable to retention, so if the HDC can be of assistance in this process please contact them with
any questions. Mr. Frederick requested that Ms. Jenkins forward him the information on WAI004
and the other documents to which she referred in her comments.
WASHINGTON CO. PLAN REVIEW DEPT. — ENGINEERING REVIEW
Ms. Rebecca Calimer was present and provided the following comments. Written comments were
also provided, a copy of which is attached to this summary. Ms. Calhner wrote,
"Please see the following comments on the conceptual site and stormwater management layout
for incorporation at the design phase.
1. To promote connectivity and access in the PI district the eastern entrance and associated
drive should be designed to allow for a possible future conversion to a public roadway.
Further consideration and discussion will be necessary to determine how best to approach
the design at this phase. The entrance appears to be in the vicinity of future planned
connection of Newgate Boulevard with US 40, which is the prefers ed location.
2. A Traffic Impact Study (TIS) is required for this project. ATIS scope was issued by the
County April 29 of this year. We are continuing coordination with the traffic consultant
regarding COVID related trip adjustments.
3. This project outfalls to the Maryland State Highway (MSHA) drainage system and will
require approval from MSHA Hydraulics Division.
4. This project proposes two entrances on US 40 and will require approval from MSHA for
WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING -FOREST
CONSERVATION
Mr. Allen provided the following written comments.
Mr. Allen wrote, "The proposed development will almost certainly necessitate the removal of
many specimen trees. This will require the approval of a variance by the Washington County
Planning Commission at their regular monthly meeting. Every effort should be made to preserve
as many of these trees as possible in the design of the development. Specimen Trees #11 and 12,
in particular, should be retained and protected in the design and construction of the SWM facility
shown on sheet 3. It is unclear if its current location will impact those specimen trees."
WASHINGTON COUNTY DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING — ADDRESSING
Mr. John Baker provided the following written comments.
"Addresses are tentative, will be formally assigned at time of permitting."
WASHINGTON COUNTY SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Ms. Dee Price provided the following written comments
"l. Provide a Topography Map with the drainage areas delineated for all stream segments on -site
As presented, a soils map was provided with a portion of the stream segments addressed; a
Topography Map is required. Further, there are 5 stream segments to be addressed; only 3 have
been partially addressed. If any of the streams require buffers, based upon soil type and/or
drainage area, etc., show and address within the design accordingly. Additionally, the Stream
Buffer Criteria applies to any stream associated with wetlands and their associated State
mandated buffers.
2. I assume the proposed grading impact to qualified forest will be addressed; please clarify.
3. Be sure to address Steep Slope designations with the Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan
design.
4. Be sure to address sinkhole remediation as a first order of business within the Soil Erosion and
Sediment Control Plan, as well as consider in the design of stormwater conveyances and
structures.
5. Steep Slope and Forested designations will require valid justification to allow for the proposed
disturbances; potential mitigation may be an option.
6. With cuts proposed at 30-40 feet, please evaluate all soils for elevated ground water levels, etc,
and address accordingly within the forthcoming design.
7. Include Rock Encountered Notes based upon depths determined during the borings.
8. The Geotechnical Report recommends a more detailed exploration be undertaken in
conjunction with the forthcoming design; please provide the report accordingly.
9. We strongly recommend addressing stormwater structure hazard class designations early in the
design process.
Respectfully submitted,
Ashley Holloway,
Director, Plan Review & Permitting,
Zoning Administrator
ARHlmsg
Attachments
AGENCY COMMENTS
PC -21-001 - NORTHPOINT DICKINSON
Comprehensive Planning — Forest Conservation
The proposed development will almost certainly necessitate the removal of many specimen trees. This
will require the approval of a variance by the Washington County Planning Commission at their regular
monthly meeting. Every effort should be made to preserve as many of these trees as possible in the
design of the development. Specimen Trees #11 and 12, in particular, should be retained and protected
in the design and construction of the SWM facility shown on sheet 3. It's unclear if its current location
will impact those specimen trees.
Comprehensive Planning — Address Review
Addresses are tentative, will be formally assigned at time of permitting.
Land Development — Plan Review
-All variances and special exceptions must be granted prior to site plan submission.
-Screening must be done around neighboring residential properties.
-Design standards in section 18.9 must be followed.
Soil Conservation District
1. Provide a Topography Map with the drainage areas delineated for all stream segments on -site. As
presented, a soils map was provided with a portion of the stream segments addressed; a Topography
Map is required. Further, there are 5 stream segments to be addressed; only 3 have been partially
addressed. If any of the streams require buffers, based upon soil type and/or drainage area, etc., show
and address within the design accordingly. Additionally, the Stream Buffer Criteria applies to any stream
associated with wetlands and their associated State mandated buffers.
2. I assume the proposed grading impact to qualified forest will be addressed; please clarify.
3. Be sure to address Steep Slope designations with the Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Plan design.
4. Be sure to address sinkhole remediation as a first order of business within the Soil Erosion and
Sediment Control Plan, as well as consider in the design of stormwater conveyances and structures.
5. Steep Slope and Forested designations will require valid justification to allow for the proposed
disturbances; potential mitigation may be an option.
County
DIVISION OF
PLAN REVIEW & PERMITTING
June 3, 2021
Trevor Frederick, PE
Frederick Seibert and Associates
128 South Potomac Street
Hagerstown, MD 21740
Re: Northpoint Dickenson (PC -21-001)
Mr. Frederick,
Please see the following comments on the conceptual site and stormwater management layout for
incorporation at the design phase.
1. To promote connectivity and access in the PI district the eastern entrance and associated drive
should be designed to allow for a possible future conversion to a public roadway. Further
consideration and discussion will be necessary to determine how best to approach the design at
this phase. The entrance appears to be in the vicinity of future planned connection of Newgate
Boulevard with US 40, which is the preferred location.
2. A Traffic Impact Study (TIS) is required for this project. A TIS scope was issued by the County
April 29 of this year. We are continuing coordination with the traffic consultant regarding
COVID related trip adjustments.
3. This project outfalls to the Maryland State Highway (MSHA) drainage system and will require
approval from MSHA Hydraulics Division.
4. This project proposes two entrances on US 40 and will require approval from MSHA for access.
5. This preliminary consultation review satisfies the stormwater concept plan requirement in
accordance with the Washington County Storrawater Management, Grading, Soil Erosion and
Sediment Control Ordinance Section 3.7.2.A. The remaining comments are specific to that
review.
6. The conceptual S WM plan includes surface sand filters, bioretention and grass swales. Generally
filtering practices should be kept "offline" with a flow regulator or splitter diverting the water
quality/ESD volumes to the practice.
7. Chapter 3 filtering practices require pretreatment equivalent to at least 25% of the computed WQ�,
prior to the filter media.
8. Downstream drainage will need to be evaluated and discussed in detail in the SWM report.
9. The Geotech report supplied with this concept level submission was preliminary in nature. A
final Geotech report will be necessary at the next stage to provide recommendations based on the
final design and in accordance with the Design Manual Appendix Dl and D2 and MD378, as
applicable. This report should include recommendation on SWM facility liner specification and
installation.
10. Discharges from the SWM facilities or from impervious surfaces should be directed away from
any existing sinkholes.
80 West Baltimore Street I Hagerstown, MD 21740-6003 1 P: 240,313.2460 1 -ID!): 711
WWWWASHCO-MD.NET
1PCAD
Planning 6 Code .bp
Administration '-T
City of Hagerstown, Maryland
Committed to Safety
Dedicated to Partnership and Progress
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ashley R. Holloway
4 Director of Plan Review & Permitting and Zoning Administrator
Washington County Government
FROM: Stephen R. Bockmiller, AICP
Development Review Planner/Zoning Administrator
Planning and Code Administration Department, City of Hagerstown
SUBJECT: North Point Davidson Consultation - US 40 West
DATE: June3,2021
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this development proposal. The City's Planning and Code Administration Department
offers the following comments on this consultation plan:
Pre -annexation agreement will be required for city utility.
2. Since there are few tracts between this and current city boundaries and we are receiving development inquiries on some of them
that could trigger annexation of the subject property sooner or not so much later, the potential of annexation of this site sometime
in the foreseeable (but not immediate) future is a real possibility. Therefore, the city requests that the developer construct a
public sidewalk along the front of the site (US 40) and on the Burkholder Lane frontage that would be available to connect with
sidewalks on future developments. The City's design standards require public sidewalks where they do not currently exist along public
streets in the development process. Since the potential for annexation of this site may become " real" the taxpayer should not be
burdened with the cost of installing sidewalks later, after an annexation. Also, grading for sidewalks is best handled with the mass
grading plan for the initial development of the site.
3. The city recommends generous use of street trees and landscaping trees in the front of the site to buffer the large buildings from
the road.
4. The city assumes that upon annexation at some point in the future, it will assume responsibility for enforcing the County
-approved forest conservation plan for the site, including being the enforcing party of any protected areas that are created as a
result. The City protects forest conservation areas through the recordation of protective easements on plats or deed exhibits. If
the County expects the City to enforce the agreements at a later date, easements illustrated on plats or deed exhibits should be
recorded in the land records.
5. Although not required by county ordinance (that we know of), the City recommends to the developer that they conduct field
reconnaissance and deed research to ensure there are no farm cemeteries on the property, so if there are, that they be appropriately
treated in the development review process. The City has a codified requirement for this and it was employed in th e recent
development of the Wesel Boulevard corridor for NO Ith Po int. If looking for a model to use for this research, the applicant is
welcomed to use the city's codified requirements for this in Article 5 of the City's Land Management Code. However, to be clear,
the City understands that this property is not under city jurisdiction, and this is offered as a recommendation only.
Copy: S. Nicewarner, City Administrator
K. Maher, AICP, Director, PCAD
J. Thompson, Director, DCED
D. Reaser, Business Development Specialist, DCED
M. Flick, Planner, PCAD
Trevor Frederick, FS&A, Design Consultant
One East Franklin Street Suite 300 I Hagerstown Maryland 21740 1301 .739.8577, ext. 138 I planning@hagerstownmd.org