HomeMy WebLinkAboutH_2022_Annual ReportAnnual Report Worksheet
Reporting (Calendar) Year 2022
1
Revised 4/3/2023
INSTRUCTIONS
Each Planning Commission/Board must approve an Annual Report for the reporting calendar
year 2022 (January 1, 2022 - December 31,2022), as required under §1-207(b) of the Land Use
Article. In addition, the Annual Report shall be filed with the local legislative body and the
Maryland Department of Planning (MDP), via email to david.dahlstrom@maryland.gov and cc:
to mdp.planreview@maryland.gov.
A jurisdiction may use the attached template form, or any of the previous Annual Report forms.
The requirements have not changed for calendar year 2022, however, an optional survey is
included in Section VII. We encourage all jurisdictions to respond.
Section I- New Residential Permits, and Section II- Amendments and Growth-Related
Changes, are required by all local jurisdictions.
Section III- Development Capacity Analysis, is required every three years.
Section IV- Locally Funded Agriculture Preservation, is required for counties only.
Section V – Measures and Indicators, is required for jurisdictions reporting more than 50 new
residential permits in Section I.
Section VI- Adequate Public Facility Ordinances, is required every two years for jurisdictions
with adopted Adequate Public Facility Ordinances (APFOs).
Section VII – Planning Survey Questions is optional
Annual Report Worksheet
Reporting (Calendar) Year 2022
2
Revised 4/3/2023
Section I: New Residential Permits Issued (Inside and Outside the PFA)
(§1-208(c)(1)(i) and (c)(3)(ii))
(A) In Table 1, New Residential Permits Issued (Inside and Outside the PFA) below, enter the number
of new residential building permits issued in calendar year (2022). Enter 0 if no new residential
building permits were issued in 2022.
Table 1: New Residential Permits Issued
Inside and Outside the Priority Funding Area (PFA)
Residential – Calendar Year 2022 PFA Non - PFA Total
New Residential Permits Issued 188 54 242
Section II: Amendments and Growth Related Changes In Development Patterns
(§1-207(c)(1) through (c)(4))
Note: Growth related changes in development patterns are changes in land use, zoning, transportation capacity improvements, new subdivisions, new schools or school additions, or changes to water and sewer service areas.
(A) Were any new comprehensive plan or plan elements adopted? If yes, briefly summarize what
was adopted. Y N ☒
No new comprehensive plan or plan elements were formally adopted. A draft of the
2040 Washington County Comprehensive Plan is due to be released for public comment in June
2023. All elements of the plan have been presented to the Washington County Planning
Commission to gain their input prior to taking the plan for adoption by the Board of County
Commissioners.
(B) Were there any amendments to zoning regulations or zoning map? If yes, briefly summarize
each amendment, include a map, or GIS shapefile, if available. Y ☒ N
Case
Number Name Loca�on Total
Acres From
Zone To Zone Decision
Date
RZ-21-006 Keedysville Town Boundary (Map Line
Adjustment) 19228 Shepherdstown Pike 6.51 Town P 09/07/2021
RZ-22-001 Washington County Planning
Commission (Text) Sec�ons 21A.1, 21B.1 &
21C.1 (Educa�onal Facili�es) n/a n/a n/a 11/15/2022
RZ-22-002 JTA Investments LLC (MAP) 9170 Stotlemyer Road 5.64 RB (AR) A(R) 08/09/2022
RZ-22-003 Dan & Sharon Blickenstaff (Map) 16363 Mount Tabor Road 2.64 RB (EC) EC 11/15/2022
Annual Report Worksheet
Reporting (Calendar) Year 2022
3
Revised 4/3/2023
RZ-21-006
• Map Line Adjustment – Zoning Map correction to address a Town boundary line issue on the
w/s of the Town of Keedysville, north of Coffman Farms Road. The Planning Director has the
authority to adjust zoning district boundaries per Section 27.8 of the Zoning Ordinance. This
adjustment removes 6.51 acres from the Town of Keedysville boundary, placing it in the
County Preservation Zoning district. This adjustment was mistakenly omitted from the 2021
Annual Report.
RZ-22-001
• Text application - Zoning Ordinance text amendment to Sections 21A1, 21B.1 and 21C.1
pertaining to Educational Facilities in the ORT, ORI and ERT sections of the Zoning Ordinance.
The amendment is to provide consistency in addressing accessory uses associated with
educational facility campuses.
RZ-22-002
• Piecemeal application – Zoning Ordinance map amendment to remove a Rural Business
floating zone over 5.64 acres, located at 9170 Stottlemyer Road. The underlying zoning of
Agriculture-Rural will be re-activated on the property as the property owners are no longer
interested in pursuing commercial activities on the site.
RZ-22-003
• Piecemeal application – Zoning Ordinance map amendment to remove a Rural Business
floating zone over 2.64 acres, located at 16333 Mount Tabor Road. The underlying zoning of
Environmental Conservation will be re-activated on the property as the property owners are
no longer interested in pursuing commercial activities on the site.
(C) Were there growth-related changes, including land use, annexations, zoning ordinance changes,
new schools, changes in water or sewer service areas, municipal annexations that changed
municipal or unincorporated area boundaries? If yes, describe or attach a map of the changes,
and describe how they are consistent with internal, state, or adjoining jurisdiction plans.
Y ☒ N
WS-22-001 ▪ Washington County received a request to expand the priority sewerage service area
boundary for the Town of Keedysville to include a property located at 39 Mt. Hebron Road with
a designation change from S-7 (no planned service) to S-3 (programmed service). A portion of
the property is located within the municipal boundary while the remainder is an active farm
that has been permanently preserved through the Rural Legacy program. The reason for the
request is due to the property’s location within the Boonsboro wellhead protection area, where
the Boonsboro/Keedysville Regional Water System obtains its water supply from two springs.
The property owners are seeking to construct the one accessory residence allowed per their
Rural Legacy contract and no other development rights remain.
Annual Report Worksheet
Reporting (Calendar) Year 2022
4
Revised 4/3/2023
Hagerstown Annexation: A-2002-001
• The Unger Annexation is located along the s/s of Virginia Avenue, north of West Oak Ridge
Drive, consisting of 115.84 acres, and was effective on 9/9/2022. County Zoning was
Residential Urban, proposed City zoning is Residential - Moderate Density.
Funkstown Annexation: RS-2021-1
• The Crampton Annexation is located along the w/s of South Edgewood Drive, north of Poplar
Street, consisting of 4.79 acres, and was effective on 2/24/2022. County Zoning was
Residential Suburban, proposed Town zoning is Suburban Residential.
Keedysville De-Annexation: R-2022-1
• The Milburn De-Annexation is located along the w/s of Shepherdstown Pike, n/e of Coffman
Farms Road, consisting of 30.04 acres, and was effective on 2/24/2022. Proposed County
Zoning is Preservation, Town zoning was Suburban Residential.
(D) If yes to municipal annexations, have copies of each adopted resolution been submitted to:
Georgeanne Carter, Legislative Counsel Municipal Resolution Reposition Department of
Legislative Services, 90 State Circle, Annapolis MD, 21401-1991? Y☒ N
(E) Did your jurisdiction recommend improvements to the local planning and development process?
If yes, please describe. Y N☒
Section III: Development Capacity Analysis (DCA)(§1-208(c)(1)(iii))
Note: MDP provides technical assistance to local governments in completing development capacity analyses. Please contact your MDP regional planner for more information.
(A) Has an updated DCA been submitted with your annual report or to MDP within
the last three years? Y N ☒
1. If no, explain why not, such as, no
substantial growth changes.
An updated development capacity analysis is being completed as part of our 2040
Comprehensive Plan update due to be released for public review and comment in June
2023.
2. If yes, when was the last DCA submitted? Identify month and year:
Note: A DCA is not due if a comprehensive plan was updated in the past three
years (2020-2022). MDP recommends that jurisdictions share DCAs with local
school boards.
Was the DCA shared with the local school board facilities planner? Y N
Annual Report Worksheet
Reporting (Calendar) Year 2022
5
Revised 4/3/2023
(B) Using the most current DCA available, provide the following data on capacity inside and outside
the PFA in Table 2, Residential Development Capacity (Inside and Outside the PFA):
Table 2: Residential Development Capacity (Inside and Outside the PFA)
Parcels & Lots w/ Residential Capacity PFA Non – PFA Total
Residentially Zoned Acres w/ Capacity
Residential Parcel & Lots w/Capacity
Residential Capacity (Units)
Annual Report Worksheet
Reporting (Calendar) Year 2022
6
Revised 4/3/2023
Section IV: (Locally) Funded Agricultural Land Preservation & Local Land Use
Goal (Counties Only) (§1-208(C)(1)(iv and v)
(A) How many acres were preserved using local agricultural land preservation funding? Enter 0 if
no land was preserved using local funds. Enter the value of local program funds, if available.
Table 3: Locally Funded Agricultural Land Preservation
Local Preservation Program Type Acres Value ($)
CREP Easements (1) 307.67 $932,559.86
MALPF Easements (2) 293.29 $1,448,326.40
Rural Legacy Easements (3) 369.49 $1,199,826.95
MARBIDCO (2) 252.35 $901,690.00
Total 1222.80 $4,482,403.21
*State funded agricultural land preservation acres and values are not required to be reported as state funding is documented.
(B) What is the county’s established local land use percentage goal? This percentage should include
land uses within PFAs, not including PFA comment areas %
Washington County does not have a percentage goal for land preservation efforts. We have
had a long-established acreage goal of 50,000 acres.
(C) What is the timeframe for achieving the local land use percentage goal? 20-30 Years.
(D) Has there been any progress in achieving the local land use percentage goal?
Yes, more than 38,000 acres of land has been permanently preserved across all programs since
the start of the County’s participation in agricultural land preservation 40 years ago.
(E) What are the resources necessary (e.g. legislative actions (programs incentives), functional
planning, and capital funding) for infrastructure inside the PFAs?
Additional funding and streamlining regulations that have similar goals but require dedicated
infrastructure to accomplish required mandates (i.e., programs that address water quality).
(F) What are the resources necessary (e.g. legislative actions (program incentives and zoning
changes), preservation planning, and easement funding) for land preservation outside the PFAs?
a. Promote the Agricultural Preservation program(s) as a method to incentivize farmers to
preserve their land until funds become available for permanent easements.
b. Seek out permanent funding sources that can sustain agricultural easements and
development rights acquisition.
Annual Report Worksheet
Reporting (Calendar) Year 2022
7
Revised 4/3/2023
c. Place an emphasis on preserving large contiguous blocks of permanent farmland in
excess of 1,000 acres by factoring this variable more heavily in the priority ranking
system.
d. Implement strategies that deter land uses that would remove large blocks of prime
agricultural land from active farm production.
e. Promote start up assistance and provide educational awareness to inspire a new
generation of young farmers.
f. Provide and highlight additional agritourism opportunities for farmers to expand
operations with value added products and agricultural industry type uses.
Annual Report Worksheet
Reporting (Calendar) Year 2022
8
Revised 4/3/2023
Section V: Measures and Indicators (§1-208(c)(1))
Note: Measures and Indicators, Section VII, is only required for jurisdictions issuing more than 50 new residential
building permits in the reporting year, as reported in Table 1.
Table 4A: Amount of Residential Growth (Inside and Outside the PFA) Residential – Calendar Year 2022 PFA Non - PFA Total
Total Minor Subdivisions Approved 9 11 20
Total Minor Subdivision Lots Approved 10 14 24
Total Residential Units Approved in Minor
Subdivisions*
10 14 24
Gross Acres of All Approved Minor Subdivisions 63.71 79.50 143.21
Net Lot Area** in Acres of All Approved Minor
Subdivisions
63.01 78.64 141.65
Total Major Subdivisions Approved 5 0 5
Total Major Subdivision Lots Approved 122 0 122
Total Residential Units Approved in Major Subdivisions 122 0 122
Gross Acres of All Approved Major Subdivisions 58.70 0 58.70
Net Lot Area** in Acres of All Approved Major
Subdivisions
49.08 0 49.08
Total Residential Units Constructed 188 54 242
Total Residential Units Demolished*** 16 3 19
Total Residential Units Reconstructed/Replaced*** 3 7 10
* Residential units may be greater than lots if they include duplexes, triplexes. or multifamily
**Net lot area is the sum of all developed lots, minus open spaces and right-of-way, other publicly dedicated land.
***Not required. Table 4B: Net Density of Residential Growth (Inside and Outside PFAs)
Residential – Calendar Year 2022 PFA Non – PFA Total
Total Residential Units Approved (Major + Minor
Subdivisions)
132 14 146
Total Approved Net Lot Area
(Major + Minor Subdivisions)
112.09 78.64 190.73
Table 4C: Share of Residential Growth (Inside and Outside the PFA)
Residential – Calendar Year 2022 PFA Non – PFA Total
Total Units Approved (Major + Minor Subdivisions) 132 14 146
% of Total Units
(Approved Residential Units)
90.4% 9.6 100%
Annual Report Worksheet
Reporting (Calendar) Year 2022
9
Revised 4/3/2023
Table 4D: Amount of Commercial Growth (Inside and Outside the PFA)
Commercial – Calendar Year 2022 PFA Non - PFA Total
Site Plans
Total # of Commercial Site Plans Approved 24 7 31
Gross Acres of All Approved Commercial Site Plans 660.38 42.23 702.61
Gross Building Area Approved in Square Feet for
Commercial Site Plans
6,248,956 14,410 6,263,366
Building Permits
Total Commercial Building Permits Issued 28 8 36
Gross Building Area Constructed in Square Feet for
issued Building Permits
5,577,359 12,188 5,589,547
Annual Report Worksheet
Reporting (Calendar) Year 2022
10
Revised 4/3/2023
Section VI: Adequate Public Facility Ordinance (APFO) Restrictions (§7-104)
(Section VI is only required by jurisdictions with adopted APFOs)
Note: Jurisdictions with adopted APFOs must submit a biennial APFO report. The APFO report is due by July 1 of
each even year and covers the reporting period for the previous two calendar years. APFO reports for 2020 and
2021 are due July 1, 2022. However, jurisdictions are encouraged to submit an APFO report on an annual basis.
*The Washington County APFO has not restricted development during the 2022
reporting period. Therefore, no biennial APFO report is required.
(A) What type of infrastructure is monitored and may trigger development approval restrictions or
require a developer to address deficiencies? (List each for schools, roads, water, sewer,
stormwater, health care, fire, police or solid waste.)
The Washington County Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance applies to infrastructure including:
Roads, Schools, Sewage Disposal Systems, Water Supply and Distribution Systems and Fire
Protection.
(B) Has APFO impacted development approvals? Y/N No, not during the 2022 reporting period.
(C) If APFO has delayed, limited, or denied development, defined here as a “restriction”:
a. Are there infrastructure or service facility deficiencies that have triggered denials of
development requests, or held up development approvals? Y/N n/a
Note: This does not include APFO required developer-funded projects, , or phased
development approvals due to APFO limitations, or APFO required study areas for
approval.
b. Can the impact area of facility deficiencies/ development restrictions, which temporarily
delay development approvals, be mapped? Y/N n/a
(D) If yes for (C)(b), where is each restriction located? (Identify on a map, including PFA
boundary.) n/a
(E) Describe what is causing each restriction. The following restrictions, due to the County’s APFO,
could be identified in the future.
• Schools: Some of the County’s school districts are over the designated school capacity due
to population growth and there are limited funds for new school construction.
• Roads: The majority of restrictions are in the rural areas where some roads are not
considered adequate by today’s standards.
• Sewer: Collection systems are aging, and need upgraded. Availability of treatment capacity
is limited by water quality regulations.
• Water: Distribution systems are aging, and need upgraded. Availability of water is limited by
permitting and water quality regulations.
• Fire: There are no restrictions at this time.
Annual Report Worksheet
Reporting (Calendar) Year 2022
11
Revised 4/3/2023
(F) If applicable, what is the proposed resolution of each restriction? The following are proposed
resolutions to future restrictions:
• Schools: The County has adopted an Alternative Mitigation Contribution option for
developers who will voluntarily pay a fee to help mitigate the impact of new
development on school districts. Funds collected go towards expanding capacity in the
educational system.
• Roads: Restrictions are mitigated on a case-by-case basis.
• Sewer: Developers are required to install and/or upgrade infrastructure to service their
development. There is no local control that can resolve the issue of diminishing
availability due to State and Federal water quality regulations.
• Water: Same as Sewer
• Fire: No restrictions at this time.
(G) If applicable, what is the estimated date to resolve each restriction?
All categories are mitigated on a case-by-case basis and have no established timeline for
resolution.
(H) If a development restriction has been addressed, what was the resolution that lifted each
restriction? n/a
(I) If a development restriction has been addressed, when was each restriction lifted? n/a
Annual Report Worksheet
Reporting (Calendar) Year 2022
12
Revised 4/3/2023
Section VII: Planning Survey Questions (Optional)
This information can help MDP and MDOT staff to identify potential pedestrian/bicycle projects
and their funding.
(A) Does your jurisdiction have a bicycle and pedestrian plan? Y N
1. Plan name
2. Date Completed (MM/DD/YR)
3. Has the plan been adopted? Y N
4. Is the plan available online? Y N
5. How often do you intend to update it? (Every ____ years)
6. Are existing and planned bicycle and pedestrian facilities mapped? Y N
(B) Does your jurisdiction have a transportation functional plan in addition to a
comprehensive plan? Y N
1. Plan name
2. Date completed (MM/DD/YY)
3. Has plan been adopted? Y N
4. Is the plan available online? Y N
5. How often do you intend to update it? (Every ____ years)
(C) Has your jurisdiction completed and submitted a five year mid-cycle comprehensive plan
implementation review report this year?
Y N
Note: To find out if your jurisdiction is scheduled to submit this report,
consult the Transition Schedule (Counties) section located at:
https://planning.maryland.gov/pages/OurWork/compPlans/ten-
year.aspx
If yes, please include the 5-Year Report as an attachment.
END
Annual Report Worksheet
Reporting (Calendar) Year 2022
13
Revised 4/3/2023
Submitting Annual Reports and Technical Assistance
(A) Annual Reports may be submitted via email (preferred) to david.dahlstrom@maryland.gov with
a cc: to mdp.planreview@maryland.gov, or if emailing is not possible one copy may be mailed
to:
Office of the Secretary
Maryland Department of Planning
301 W. Preston Street, Suite 1101
Baltimore, Maryland 21201-2305
Attn: David Dahlstrom, AICP
(B) Annual reports should include a cover letter indicating that it has been approved by the planning
commission and that a copy has been filed with the local legislative body. The cover letter should
also indicate a point of contact(s) should MDP have questions about the report.
(C) If you need assistance to prepare or submit reports, MDP regional planners are available to assist.
Contact information is found at: Planning.Maryland.gov/OurWork/local-planning-staff.shtml
(D) You may wish to send additional copies directly to your MDP regional planner or school board
facilities planner.
(E) Copies of this annual report worksheet, and links to legislation about annual report
requirements can be found on the Maryland Department of Planning website:
Planning.Maryland.gov/YourPart/SGGAnnualReport.shtml
(F) If you have any suggestions to improve this worksheet or any of the annual report materials,
please list or contact David Dahlstrom at david.dahlstrom@maryland.gov.
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(!(
!(
HancockHancock Clear SpringClear Spring
WilliamsportWilliamsport
HagerstownHagerstown
FunkstownFunkstown
SmithsburgSmithsburg
BoonsboroBoonsboro
KeedysvilleKeedysville
SharpsburgSharpsburg1
2
3
4
5 6
7
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Miles
¹
LegendLegend
!(Rezonings
Roads
Priority Funding Areas
Municipal Boundaries
Growth Areas
County Boundary
Document Path: U:\Views\MRH\Annual Reports\2022\Rezoning.mxd
Created by theWashington County
Planning DepartmentGISMay 2023
Pennsylvania
Allegany
County, MD
Frederick County, MD
West Virginia
WestVirginia
Virginia
W a s h i n g t o n C o u n t yWashington C o u n t yMarylandMaryland20222022
O r d i n a n c e M a p C h a n g e sOrdinance M a p C h a n g e s
Map Key Case Change Acres1RZ-21-006 Keedysville Town Boundary (Map Line Adjustment)6.512RZ-22-002 JTA Investments LLC 5.643RZ-22-003 Dan & Sharon Blickenstaff 2.644WS-22-001 39 Mt Hebron Road, Keedysville 109.805A-2002-001 Unger Annexation (Hagerstown)115.846RS-2021-1 Crampton Annexation (Funkstown)4.797R-2022-1 Milburn De-Annexation (Keedysville)30.04