HomeMy WebLinkAbout171212a
Individuals requiring special accommodations are requested to contact the Office of the County Commissioners, 240.313.2200 Voice/TDD, to make
arrangements.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
December 12, 2017
Agenda
10:00 A.M. INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CALL TO ORDER, President Terry L. Baker
APPROVAL OF MINUTES – DECEMBER 5, 2017
10:05 A.M. COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS AND COMMENTS
10:10 A.M. REPORTS FROM COUNTY STAFF
10:15 A.M. CITIZENS PARTICIPATION
10:30 A.M. WASHINGTON COUNTY’S PARTICIPATION IN 2018 COMMUNITY COALITION
– Paul Frey, Wash Co Chamber of Commerce and Jim Kercheval, Greater Hagerstown
Committee
10:45 A.M. INSURANCE RENEWAL, WASHINGTON COUNTY FIRE & RESCUE
ASSOCIATION, JANUARY 1, 2018 – JANUARY 2, 2019 – Tracy McCammon, Risk
Management Coordinator, Division of Health & Human Services and Patrick Hancock,
Aon Risk Solutions
10:50 A.M. CONTRACT AWARD OF PUR-1367 FOR VEHICLE AND OFF ROAD
INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT – Brandi Naugle, Buyer, Purchasing Department and Ed Plank,
Director, Highway Department
11:00 A.M. PUBLIC HEARING: RZ-17-003 MAP AMENDMENT
11:20 A.M. LETTER TO GOVERNOR HOGAN IN REGARDS TO TRANS CANADA NATURAL
GAS PIPE LINE – Dan Divito, Deputy Director, Department of Water Quality
11:30 A.M. FIRST QUARTER ADJUSTMENTS TO THE WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF
EDUCATION’S FY2018 GENERAL FUND BUDGET – Jeffrey Proulx, Chief
Operating Officer and David Brandenburg, Executive Director of Finance, Washington
County Public Schools
Terry L. Baker,
Jeffrey A. Cline, Vice
President
John F. Barr
Wayne K. Keefer
LeRoy E. Myers, Jr.
WWW.WASHCO-MD.NET
Individuals requiring special accommodations are requested to contact the Office of the County Commissioners, 240.313.2200 Voice/TDD, to make
arrangements.
11:40 P.M. CLOSED SESSION
(To discuss the appointment, employment, assignment, promotion, discipline, demotion, compensation, removal, resignation,
or performance evaluation of appointees, employees, or officials over whom this public body has jurisdiction; or any other
personnel matter that affects one or more specific individuals)
11:55 A.M. Depart for 122 North Potomac Street, Hagerstown, MD, 21740
12:00 P.M. ANNUAL LUNCHEON – Michael Piercy and the Washington County Board of Social
Services
LOCATION: 122 NORTH POTOMAC STREET, HAGERSTOWN
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: The County’s participation in the 2018 Washington County Community Coalition
PRESENTATION DATE: December 12, 2017
PRESENTATION BY: Paul Frey, Washington County Chamber of Commerce; Jim Kercheval,
Greater Hagerstown Committee
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: See cover letter on attached request.
DISCUSSION:
FISCAL IMPACT: $5,000
CONCURRENCES:
ALTERNATIVES:
ATTACHMENTS: See attached.
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: None.
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
• •
tv.City
Washington County Government
• The Greater Hagerstown Committee, Inc.
m i
Cv'c
of Hagerstown
Hagerstown -Washington Co. Chamber of Commerce
•
o a n
Wi
Washington Co. Public Schools
Washington Co. Free Library
Visit Hagerstown (Local Convention & Visitor's Bureau)
• CHIEF (Hagerstown -Washington Co. Industrial Foundation)
•
Town of Williamsport
Washington County Community Coalition Lobbyist:
John Favazza, Esquire Mannis
Canning & Associates 410.263.7882 jfavazza@maniscanning.com
October 18, 2017
Ms. Rob Slocum
County Administrator
Washington County Government
100 West Washington Street, Room 226
Hagerstown, MD 21740
Dear Rob:
As a founding member of The Washington County Community Coalition, it is time once again to invite
Washington County Government to participate in our lobbying efforts in Annapolis. Since 2005, a
number of dedicated community stakeholders have joined together to advance Washington County's
interests at the state level, including the CVB, the Washington County Free Library, Washington County
Government, the City of Hagerstown, the Greater Hagerstown Committee, Washington County Public
Schools, CHIEF, and the Chamber of Commerce.
As our community continues to change and grow, the Coalition partners see the need to supplement
the work of our Delegation and help promote Washington County in Annapolis. Over the last thirteen
years we've seen the value of a concerted effort to speak with one voice and be heard alongside larger,
more urban areas. As a result, the Coalition's efforts have elevated our stature and helped build State
support for the issues you as stakeholders bring to the table.
As in the past, the Coalition will hire a lobbyist to push our state -level agenda during the 2018 General
Assembly session. In addition, we will be organizing our "Day in Annapolis' on Wednesday, January
31, 2018, where members flock to Annapolis to meet with our state decision makers to talk about our
community and issues of concern. The day will conclude with a Washington County: "We Mean
Business" reception, highlighting the strengths of our region and the value we bring to Maryland. The
program will also keep partners posted on issues of concern throughout the year, serving as an "early
warning system" for anything in Annapolis that may affect Hagerstown or Washington County.
The lobbying process starts in the summer when the Coalition partners decide on the list of community
priorities; we appreciated your willingness to join us in crafting that agenda. Again this year, we will ask
the partners to participate financially, and the Chamber will manage the program. The Coalition is
asking Washington County Government to contribute $5,000, as it did last year.
Working together, we leverage our collective voice and strengthen our case with decision makers. We
hope that you will consider our invitation to participate in the Coalition and that you will work with us to
include the County's priorities in the overall legislative agenda. If you have any questions please do not
hesitate to contact me, and please let me know how to move forward from here.
Sincerely, ^,A��
O
Paul Frey, IOM
Managing Partner
Washington County Community Coalition 28 W. Washington St. Hagerstown, MD 21740 301.739.2015
2017 Washington County Community Lobbying Coalition
The Coalition
The Washington County Community Lobbying Coalition has successfully advocated for
issues important to the entire community, many of which directly impacted the City of
Hagerstown.
Past Projects in the County
Edgewood Drive Intersection
Central Booking
Prisoner Release Process
New Downtown Regional Library
Eastern Blvd.
Professional Blvd./Bridge
Funding for Downtown Master Plan
MELP Plant (support through demolition process)
MD Theatre improvements
Protection of USMH Funding (remains on watch list)
Funding for Heart of the Civil War Heritage Area
Liquor Law Changes to support designated downtown festival areas
Legislation to assist with zombie homes getting back on the tax rolls
Funding for the Urban Improvement Project ($7M+)
Funding for I-81 widening and submittal for Federal INFRA grant (formerly
FASTLANE grant)
I-70/MD65 interchange improvements
NPS Office and C&O Canal Visitor’s Center in Williamsport
Funding Partners
Partner 2017
Contribution
2018 Request 2018
Committed
City of Hagerstown 5,000 5,000
Convention & Visitors Bureau 3,000 3,000 3,000
Chamber 2,000 2,000 2,000
CHIEF 3,000 3,000 3,000
Greater Hagerstown Committee In-Kind In-Kind In-Kind
Friends of the Library 5,000 5,000 5,000
Washington Co. Public Schools 5,000 5,000 In-Kind
The Town of Williamsport 1,000 1,000 1,000
County 5,000 5,000
The Process
Like in years past, the process to develop the agenda began with a series of meetings
to which the entire leadership of all Coalition partners was invited. The group began in
the summer with brainstorming sessions designed to identify issues important to our
community. The partners agreed that, as in years past, the agenda should include only
items that have been supported by all partners with a specific State “ask.” We continue
to use input from the members as well as feedback from members of our Delegation
and our lobbyist. The agenda will be finalized in November. However, should the need
arise, the Coalition may modify the agenda and/or watch list as needed.
2
Current Draft 2018 Agenda (still open for discussion)
Urban Improvement Project (County, City, WCPS, MD Theatre, USMH, Private
Business) – Looking for continued funding to complete the project as well as
protecting the funding currently pledged.
City Revitalization Improvement Zone (CRIZ) –Del. Wilson and City staff are
discussing and plan of action and whether to continue pursuit of this initiative in 2018
or to pursue a different plan to achieve the same goa ls. Coalition will await their
advice.
I-81 Widening Improvements (County/City) - The State is currently widening I-81
to 6 lanes from the Potomac River Bridge to Exit #1 in Williamsport (Phase 1). In
addition, the state has allocated $5M for the enginee ring and design of Phases 2
through 4 and applied for a federal INFRA grant to provide a significant portion of the
construction funding for Phase 2. Phase 2 would widen I-81 an additional 3.5 miles
from the end of Phase 1 to I-70. We are asking the State to identify funds to
construct Phase 2 in conjunction with a INFRA grant award, and create a 10-year
plan to finish the widening of I-81 to the Pennsylvania line. Note: SHA’s revised cost
estimate for I-81 Phases 2, 3, and 4 is a total of $291M.
I-70/Rt. 65 Interchange improvements (County/City) – SHA recently announced it
had approved the county’s interchange design as the preferred design option. We
will begin asking the state for design and construction funds to be programmed into
their future state transportation plans for these interchange improvements.
NPS Headquarters/Visitors Center in Williamsport (Williamsport/CVB) The Town
will be asking for funding to assist with the construction costs of project. The funding
to purchase the land has been secured.
Funding for a Mobile Crisis Team and 24/7 Walk-In Mental Health Clinic - Our
Mental Health Authority (MHA) has put in for funding for a mobile crisis team (MCT)
as well as a 24/7 Walk-in clinic for mental health for those having a mental health
crisis. HPD and our Sheriff’s Department get numerous calls that involve people
suffering from a mental health crisis. The police are often challenged with properly
handling calls involving those with mental health need, as well as finding medical
treatment for them outside of our Emergency Room. The MCT would provide a
person(s) to be on call and/or ride with officers when these issues arise to assist with
getting patients immediate care (when appropriate) vs going into the criminal justice
system. In addition, it would take pressure off of Meritus’s ER. The Coalition would
be supporting MHA’s funding request.
Towpath Rehabilitation - C&O Canal NHT is applying for a $6.7M grant over 5
years through the Maryland State Highway Administration’s Transportation
Alternatives Program (TAP) to resurface the entire towpath in multiple counties
(including Washington County in Boonsboro). They have successfully competed for
these funds before, most notably the towpath at Big Slackwater and the Restoration
of the Conococheague Aqueduct in Williamsport. Coalition would support request.
Boonsboro Visitor Center and National Road Museum. – The town may be
pursuing bond bill funding to complete this project
Promotion/Educational Outreach – continue educational efforts to promote
Washington County as an area for economic prosperity and innovation for Maryland
through meetings with legislators and reception.
3
“Watch List”
University System of Maryland at Hagerstown Operational Funding
Protection of County’s Gaming Revenue
Shifting liabilities from state to localities
Highway User Revenue restoration
HCC Operational and Capital Funding
State funding of K-12 education
o Kirwin Commission “Thorton 2” will set education funding formulas for next 20
years – report due out in December 2017
o 21st Century School Construction Commission working on capital funding
Joint Commission Report on Integration of Local Mental Health Authorities – monitor
how recommendations from this report would affect our County’s mental health
system of providers
Lobbying Program
Develop a strategic lobbying program for our agenda
Host a “Day in Annapolis” during session (January 31, 2018)
Evening Legislative Reception/Hagerstown Washington County Trade Show
(January 31, 2018)
Meet/Greet legislators
Year-long advocacy updates
Track local legislation
Advice on issues/special events
On-call “trip-wire” for Watch List
4
2018 Budget
Each of the Coalition partners contribute to the overall effort and the Chamber manages
both the finances and the logistics. The lobbying program’s goal is to maintain a fund
balance equal to approximately one year’s budget for cash flow and planning. The
current fund balance is $27,973, as of August 2017.
REVENUE 2018 Budget 2017
Coalition Dues:
City of Hagerstown 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$
Chief 3,000.00$ 3,000.00$
Hagerstown-Wash Co CVB 3,000.00$ 3,000.00$
Wash Co Free Library 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$
Wash Co Public Schools 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$
Washington County Govt.5,000.00$ 5,000.00$
Chamber of Commerce 2,000.00$ 2,000.00$
Town of Williamsport 1,000.00$ 1,000.00$
SUBTL 29,000.00$ 29,000.00$
Miscellaneous Revenue:
Vendor and Sponsor Revenue 7,500.00$ 8,250.00$
Community Foundation 1,000.00$ 1,000.00$
Lunch Reimbursement 1,125.00$ 1,125.00$
Leadership Wash Co. Reception Fee 900.00$ 900.00$
SUBTL 10,525.00$ 11,275.00$
TOTAL REVENUE 39,525.00$ 40,275.00$
EXPENSES 2018 Budget 2017
Reception Expenses:
Calvert House Reception 9,000.00$ 9,169.54$
Wine 275.00$ 201.05$
Cheeses -$ -$
Symphony Orchestra 350.00$ 320.00$
Gifts for Reception Guests (MD Tumblers)800.00$ 754.81$ Misc Costs: Nametags/Lanyards/Ribbons,Travel, Invitations,
Postage 3,300.00$ 2,249.68$
SUBTL 13,725.00$ 12,695.08$
Miscellaneous Expenses:
Lunch with Delegation - Galway Bay 1,400.00$ 1,350.00$
CoalitionPackets (Prepared by GHC/City and Printed by WCPS)-$ -$
SUBTL 1,400.00$ 1,350.00$
Lobbyist Fee and Liscense Fees 24,400.00$ 24,400.00$
TOTAL EXPENSES 39,525.00$ 38,445.08$
NET PROFIT/LOSS -$ 1,829.92$
Community Coalition Financial Breakdown
The Request
To support its work, the Coalition is requesting $5,000 from Washington County
Government (same level as in recent past years).
5
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Insurance Renewal, Washington County Fire & Rescue Association January 1, 2018 –
January 1, 2019
PRESENTATION DATE: December 12, 2017
PRESENTATION BY: Tracy McCammon, Risk Management Coordinator, Division of Health
and Human Services and Patrick Hancock, Aon Risk Solutions
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to renew the commercial property, auto and casualty
package with VFIS Insurance Company at the quoted premium of $551,423 and workers
compensation insurance with Chesapeake Employers Insurance Company at the quoted premium of
$621,200.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Washington County Volunteer Fire & Rescue Association had its
property and casualty lines of coverage placed with VFIS Insurance on January 1, 2015 and its
workers’ compensation insurance placed with Chesapeake Employers Insurance on the same date.
As such, the County and the Association expressed their intention for coverage to remain with these
incumbent insurers, as they have provided satisfactory coverage and services.
DISCUSSION: The premium paid to VFIS for the 2017 policy year was $545,497. Therefore,
VFIS is requiring an additional premium of $5,926 or 1.09% increase. This increase is due to new
structures being added to the property insurance. Given that the property values increased to
$1,767,017, the small increase in premium is reasonable. Otherwise, low losses within other lines
of coverage have helped to keep rates stable. The workers’ compensation insurance premium for
2017 was $665,275. A reduction of $44,075 is due to a lower number of claims filed in the 2017
policy year.
FISCAL IMPACT: Total premium for both programs is $1,172,623. With a savings in premium
of $38,149 we are well within budget. VFIS requires a down payment of $139,510 due on January
1, 2018. The remaining balance will be paid in ten monthly installments. Chesapeake Employers
Insurance also requires a down payment of $74,556 on January 1, 2018. Again, the remaining
balance will be paid in ten monthly installments.
CONCURRENCES: Stephanie Stone, Director of Health & Human Services Dave
Hays, Director of Emergency Services
ALTERNATIVES: Should you not approve this, a market bid would be required
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Contract Award of (PUR-1367) Bid for Vehicle and Off Road Industrial Equipment.
PRESENTATION DATE: December 12, 2017
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Naugle, Buyer, CPPB – Purchasing Department and Ed Plank,
Director – Highway Department
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the contract for the Vehicle and Off Road Industrial
Equipment as follows: Item No. 1 - One (1) New 2018 or latest production model five-man class 5
cab/chassis crew cab, with high roof service body to Bayshore Ford, of New Castle, DE. for the
lowest bid in the amount of $69,466.00. Item No. 2 - Two (2) New 2018 or latest production model
cab tractors with one 74-inch (1) side mounted flail mower and one (1) 88-inch rear mounted offset
flail mower to Smith’s Implements, Inc. of Hagerstown, MD. for the lowest bid in the amount of
$112,203.27 each. Item No. 3 – Two (2) New 2018 or latest production model 2-1/2 to 3 ton class ride-on
double-drum asphalt compactors with two (2) drum vibratory function to Alban Tractor Co., Inc. of
Baltimore, MD. for the lowest bid in the amount of $34,299.00 each.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: On November 8, 2017, the county received a total of three (3) bids for item
No. 1, two (2) bids for item No. 2; one of which was non-responsive. And two (2) bids for item No.
3; one of which was a “no bid”. The bid was published in the local newspaper, listed on the State of
Maryland’s “eMaryland Marketplace” website, and on the County’s website. Twenty-three
persons/companies registered/downloaded the bid document online.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are budgeted in the Highway Department’s Capital Improvement
Plan (CIP) account 600300-30-20010 (EQP042) in the amount of $462,135.00.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: The complete Bid Tabulation may be viewed at:
https://www.washco-md.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/purch-pur-1367-bidtab.pdf
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING – Application for Map Amendment – RZ-17-003
PRESENTATION DATE: December 12, 2017; 11:00 a.m.
PRESENTATION BY: Travis Allen, Comprehensive Planner, Washington County Dept.
of Planning and Zoning
Case Application Applicant/Property
Owner Proposed Amendment
RZ-17-003 Map Applicant:
Christopher R. Smith
Property Owner:
Downsville Pike Land,
LLC
Washington County Zoning Ordinance –
Application for Map Amendment:
▪ Property location: Northwest side of
Downsville Pike, ¼ mile north of I-70
(1.60 acres: P. 210-1.10 ac; P. 408-.50 ac)
▪ Existing Zoning: RS – Residential, Suburban
▪ Requested Zoning:
Attachments:
Ordinance Amendment Application with Justification Statement and rezoning site maps
Staff Report and Analysis dated September 8, 2017
Planning Commission Report and Recommendation dated October 30, 2017
(All attachments are available with the online version of the Agenda Report Form
at https://www.washco-md.net/index.php/county-commissioners/bocc-meeting-archive-2017/
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Y;W;ashington County FOR PLANNING COMMISSION USE ONLY.
Rezoning No. � � ,% ���� V C
Date Filed
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION JUL 12 2017
ZONING ORDINANCE MAP AMENDMENT APPLICATION
W TY
D%JVV"Q lle Pike Land, LLC CANNING DEPARTMENT
Applicant
10306 Remington Drive
Address
Hagerstown, MD 21740
Primary Contact
Christopher R. Smith
Address
Property Location:
@Property Owner ❑Contract Purchaser
❑Attorney ❑Consultant
❑Other:
301-733-4365 EXT 203
Phone Number
crsmith@myactv.net
E-mail Address
10662 Downsville Pike and 10656 Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, MD
Tax Map: 0057 Grid: 0002
Current Zoning:
RS-Residential Suburban
Parcel No.: 210&408Acreage: '
Requested Zoning:
HI -Highway Interchange
Reason for the Request: a Change in the character of the neighborhood
❑ Mistake in original zoning
PLEASE NOTE: A Justification Statement is required for either reason.
Applicant's Signature
Subscribed and sworn before me this day of July , 20 17
My commission expires on fV` Z�. �011I 4n hi Ml IV0, r'
Notary Public
FOR PLANNING COMMISSION USE ONLY
❑ Application Form
❑ Fee Worksheet
❑ Application Fee
❑ Ownership Verification
❑ Boundary Plat (Including Metes
& Bounds)
❑ Names and Addresses of all Adjoining
& Confronting Property Owners
❑ Vicinity Map
❑ Justification Statement
❑ 30 copies of complete Application
Package
FOR PLANNING COMMISSION USE ONLY
Rezoning No.
Date Filed:
JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT
DOWNSVILLE PIKE LAND, LLC, APPLICANT
The Map Amendment sought is based upon the following:
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE.
Downsville Pike Land, LLC (the "Applicant") is the owner of two parcels of land,
located at 10656 and 10662 Downsville Pike, totaling 1.60 acres and situated along the northwest
side of Maryland Route 632 (Downsville Pike), immediately south of its intersection with
Halfway Boulevard (the "Site"). A copy of the rezoning vicinity map is included with this
application as Exhibit A. The Site is located adjacent to the Maryland Rte. 632/I70 Interchange,
and is currently developed with 2 aged single-family residences. Land uses within the Site's 1-
mile zoning neighborhood (the "Rezoning Neighborhood") contain a mix of commercial and
residential developments. Immediately to the south of the Site is one residence and the Marty L.
Snook Regional Park as well as a State Highway Administration Park and Ride. To the north are
primarily residential neighborhoods. To the south are I70 and the interchange (south of I70 is the
Callas Contractors property), and to the east are the site of a coming new Sheetz store, several
other commercial uses including the Health at Work site, and a mix of other commercial and
residential uses. An aerial photograph of the Site showing the Rezoning Neighborhood and the
various residential and commercial developments in the vicinity of the Site is attached as Exhibit
B.
The official zoning classification of the Site, pursuant to the Washington County Zoning
Ordinance (the "Zoning Ordinance"), is Residential, Suburban District (RS)'. (Exhibit A). As
shown on Exhibit A, the Site adjoins the Downsville Pike/I70 interchange, a public park, and the
coming new Sheetz convenience store. Other than the home immediately to the south of the Site,
1 The purpose of the RS zoning district is "to provide appropriate locations in the Urban and Town Growth Areas for
single and two-family residential dwellings on moderately sized lots and limited community service type uses."
1
all other residences nearby are either north of Halfway Boulevard or west of the parks from the
Site. While there are residential neighborhoods nearby, the Site's location at the exit from I70
next to a Park and Ride (which attracts numerous commuters) and across from the proposed
Sheetz store make it singularly inappropriate for continued residential use. The Applicant is
requesting a map amendment to change the zoning classification of the Site from RS to Highway
Interchange (HI) due to its immediate adjacency to the I70/Downsville Pike interchange and the
proliferation of commercial uses along Downsville Pike.
Prior to 2012, the Site was zoned RS, but the interchange land located across Downsville
Pike (hereinafter, the "Interchange Parcel") was zoned RM. As explained in greater detail below,
the Washington County Board of County Commissioners (the "Board") in 2012 rezoned the
Interchange Parcel from its prior RM zoning to the HI classification during the comprehensive
rezoning of the Urban Growth Area that became effective on July 1, 2012 (See Ordinance No.
ORD-2012-08) (the "Comprehensive Rezoning"), but the Site retained its RS zoning. Similarly,
parcels 262 and 464 on Tax Map 56 and parcel 258 on Tax Map 57, south of I70 and within the
rezoning neighborhood, were rezoned to HI in 2012. (see Exhibits C and D to show change in
zoning during the Comprehensive Rezoning)
For the reasons set forth below the Applicant submits that the decision of the Board
during the Comprehensive Rezoning to rezone the Interchange Parcel to the HI district, but NOT
further deciding to rezone the Site to the same HI district, resulted from legal mistake, in that the
Board did not take into account that the HI zoning district was significantly more appropriate for
the Site as well as for the Interchange Parcel.
The Applicant further submits that there has been a substantial change in the character of
the Rezoning Neighborhood sufficient to justify the rezoning request. Based on both mistake in
zoning and change in the character of the neighborhood, the Applicant requests that the Site be
reclassified to the HI zoning district.
THE PURPOSE OF THE HI DISTRICT IS TO "PROVIDE SUITABLE
LOCATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES OR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL LAND USES
2
THAT SERVE HIGHWAY TRAVELERS, PROVIDE GOODS AND SERVICES TO A
REGIONAL POPULATION, OR USES THAT HAVE A NEED TO BE LOCATED NEAR
THE INTERSTATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM TO FACILITATE ACESS BY A LARGE
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES, OR THE RECEIPT OR SHIPMENT OF GOODS BY
HIGHWAY VEHICLES. IN ADDITION TO PROVIDING ACCESSIBLE LOCATIONS,
THE HIGHWAY INTERCHANGE DISTRICT IS INTENDED TO PROTECT THE SAFE
AND EFFICIENT OPERATION OF THE INTERCHANGE AND TO PROMOTE ITS
VISUAL ATTRACTIVENESS. "
2. ZONING HISTORY OF THE SITE
The Site, being located within the Urban Growth Area boundary around the City of
Hagerstown, was among those "17,000 parcels and 38,000 acres of land" rezoned as part of the
Comprehensive Rezoning of the Urban Growth Area in 2012. See Ordinance No. ORD-2012-08,
p. 1. In adopting the Comprehensive Rezoning, the Board's goal was to "promote compatibility
amongst varied uses while providing the range of land uses needed to accommodate the needs of a
growing community." See Ordinance No. ORD-2012-08, p. 6. During the Comprehensive
Rezoning process, the Board eliminated the agriculture zone in the Urban Growth Area which
"resulted in the assignment of different zoning classification to 8,861 acres of land ... [and] all of
the reclassifications result in ... decreases in land area devoted to residential and commercial
uses." See Ordinance No. ORD-2012-08, p. 5 (emphasis added). To that end, the Comprehensive
Rezoning of the Urban Growth Area was aimed to "positively reflect the general planning
principles of providing for increased diversity, density, and intensity of uses as proximity
increases towards the urban core of the County." See Ordinance No. ORD-2012-08, pp. 5-6.
Given the Site's location adjacent to the 170 interchange, near extensive commercial
development existing and occurring to the east and with the less intense single-family residential
development separated from the Site to the west and north, divided by roads (Halfway
Boulevard) and parks, the HI district should have been deemed as appropriate for the Site as it
3
was for the Interchange Parcel, which was comprehensively rezoned to HI zone from its prior
residential RM zoning under the goals of the 2012 comprehensive rezoning.
The Comprehensive Rezoning was guided by the principles and recommendations
contained in the 2002 comprehensive plan for the County (the "Comprehensive Plan") which
identifies, as major goals, the objective of promoting "the retention and expansion of existing
businesses and industry while encouraging the development of new manufacturing and hi -tech
industries to broaden the employment base" and providing "locations for new industry that
encourage the use of existing infrastructure facilities and that take advantage of the interstate
transportation system" See Comprehensive Plan, p. 13.
The Site, being located within the urban core of the County and adjacent to a highway
interchange, is clearly appropriate for the HI zoning district, and designation of the HI zoning
classification is compatible with the adjoining and nearby properties. At the time of the
comprehensive rezoning of the Urban Growth Area was adopted, the Planning Department
advised the Board that "at least 75% of those specific [zoning modification] requests received
from property owners were approved," and that the Board would have opportunities in the future
to address certain areas of the Urban Growth Area if it elected to do so. See Board of County
Commissioners Meeting Minutes from April 17, 2012, p. 3. Therefore, the Applicant submits
that if the Board were today to apply the very same policy criteria that it did during the 2012
Comprehensive Rezoning, it would not designate the Site in the RS district but rather would re-
classify the Site to the HI district.
3. CHANGES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
While the Site has been used for residential purposes long before the enactment of the
Ordinance, changes to the neighborhood have occurred since the original and last Comprehensive
Rezoning. During the Comprehensive Rezoning, several of the parcels within the Rezoning
E
Neighborhood were zoned to more intensive uses. As stated above, the Interchange Parcel was
rezoned HI from RM-Residential Multi -Family, and the above referenced Parcels 262, 464 and 258,
located south of I70 were rezoned from ORT-Office Research and Technology to HI. Similarly, the
Marty Snook Park parcel was also rezoned from A -Agricultural to RS. Finally, the approval of the
new Sheetz convenience store immediately across Downsville Pike from the Site will greatly
influence changes to the Rezoning Neighborhood.
In addition, traffic travelling through the Rezoning Neighborhood has significantly
increased since the Comprehensive Rezoning. As shown on the Maryland Department of
Transportation, State Highway Administration Annual Average Daily Traffic 2009-2015 chart,
(Exhibit E), traffic on that portion of Downsville Pike from Halfway Boulevard to Downsville Pike
increased from 10,960 daily trips in 2012 to 12,361 daily trips in 2015. Notably, average daily trips
have increased each year since 2012.
4. LEGAL ARGUMENT.
A. The Law.
A local legislative body (in Washington County, the Board of County Commissioners)
may approve a piecemeal zoning map amendment, which changes the zoning classification of a
property outside of the comprehensive planning process, upon finding that either there was a
mistake in the existing zoning classification or that there has been a substantial change in the
character of the neighborhood where the property is located. Md. Ann. Code Lane Use, §4-
204(b)(2).
B. Mistake In Zoniny_
Mistake in zoning, as defined by the Maryland Court of Appeals in numerous opinions
related over the years, is proved by introducing evidence that shows either that the approving body
failed to take into account factors at the time of comprehensive zoning which would (or should)
have justified a different zoning classification, or that events have occurred subsequent to the
comprehensive rezoning which show that the approving body's assumptions and premises have
5
since proved to be invalid. Howard County v. DorseX, 292 Md. 351, 438 A.2d 1339 (1982).
Specifically, "when the assumption upon which a particular use is predicated proves, with the
passage of time, to be erroneous, this is sufficient to authorize a rezoning." Mayor of Rockville v.
Stone, 271 Md. 655, 319 A.2d 536 (1974); see also Anne Arundel County v. A-Pac Ltd., 67 Md.
App. 122, 506 S. 2d 671 (1986) (stating, "when subsequent events demonstrate that any significant
assumption made by the Council at the time of the comprehensive rezoning was invalid, the
presumption of validity accorded to the comprehensive rezoning is overcome."). In addition, the
"evidentiary burden [of proving error in existing zoning] can be accomplished ... by producing
evidence that the Council failed to make any provision to accommodate a project, trend or need
which it, itself, recognized as existing at the time of the comprehensive rezoning." Boyce
Sembly, 25 Md. App. 43, 334 A.2d 137 (1975), citing also Jobar Corp. v. Rodgers Forge
Community Ass'n., 236 Md. 106, 202 A.2d 612 (1964) and Rohde v. County Board of Appeals 234
Md. 259,199 A.2d 216 (1964).
In the case at hand, evidence exists and is presented herein which specifically and
unequivocally shows that:
(1) In adopting the Comprehensive Rezoning of the Urban Growth Area, the Board
intended to "positively reflect the general planning principles of providing for
increased diversity, density, and intensity of uses as proximity increases towards
the urban core of the County." See Ordinance No. ORD-2012-08, pp. 5-6. The
Board mistakenly retained the RS zoning on the Site while rezoning the
neighboring Interchange Parcel to the HI district instead of accounting for the
Site's ideal location for HI uses and its unsuitability as an ongoing residential area
due to the 170 interchange substantially similar to the situation facing the
Interchange Parcel;
10
(2) At the time the Board maintained the RS zoning district on the Site, it also
reclassified the adjoining Interchange Parcel from the RM district to the HI district
despite the fact that the Interchange Parcel is undevelopable and the same facts and
circumstances which justified the change in zoning for the Interchange Parcel apply
to the Site. The Board did not account for the fact that designating this Site as HI
would be compatible and consistent with its reclassification for the Interchange
Parcel. The Board made a legal mistake by failing to recognize that the adjoining
Interchange Parcel, like the Site, fronts on Downsville Pike and is significantly
impacted by the traffic leaving I70, such that future development of both
properties should be oriented toward highway uses and not residential uses.
This evidence is sufficient to allow the Board to grant the requested rezoning on the basis of a
mistake in the existing zoning.
C. Change in the Character of the Neighborhood.
In determining if there has been a substantial change in character of the neighborhood , one
must first determine what constitutes the neighborhood. Montgomery v. Board of County
Commissioners for Prince George's County, Maryland, et al. 263 Md. 1, 280 A.2d 901 (1971). The
concept of a neighborhood is a flexible one, and will vary according to the geographical location
involved. Montgomery, at 5. The Applicant asserts that while adjoining properties located along
Halfway Boulevard to the west are similarly zoned RS, the "neighborhood" should more properly
include those commercially zoned and/or utilized properties adjoining the Site along the east side of
Downsville Pike, including the coming Sheetz convenience store immediately across from the Site,
zoned HI and further including the land zoned HI and ORI south of I70. The neighborhood that
faces the same situation as the Site, in reality, is not the nearby residential neighborhoods along
Halfway Boulevard but more appropriately is the commercial corridor along Downsville Pike and
near or adjacent to its interchange with 170. The Downsville Pike commercial corridor is highlighted
in yellow on Exhibit B.
7
While the Site has been used for residential purposes for many years, it is currently
uninhabited and is, frankly, uninhabitable. Changes to the neighborhood have occurred since the
both original comprehensive zoning and the 2012 Comprehensive Rezoning. During the
Comprehensive Rezoning, several parcels within Applicant's defined neighborhood were zoned to
more intensive uses. As stated above, the Interchange Parcel was rezoned HI from RM, and the
above referenced Parcels 262, 464 and 258, located south of 170 were rezoned III from ORT. The
adjacent Marty Snook Park land was also rezoned from A to RS.
In addition, as stated above, traffic within the neighborhood has also increased significantly.
As shown on Exhibit C, traffic on that portion of Downsville Pike from Halfway Boulevard to
Downsville Pike increased from 10,960 daily trips in 2012 to 12,361 daily trips in 2015. Notably,
average daily trips have increased each year since 2012.
When considering the issue of "substantial change in a neighborhood, the County should
consider `all changes and pertinent facts' together in totality." The Bowman Group v. Dawson
Moser, 112 Md.App. 694, 686 A.2d 643 (1996). In Bowman case, the Court upheld the rezoning of
appellant's property by taking into consideration the following factors: 1) previous rezonings; 2)
upgrades made to roads; and 3) new water and sewer lines. Id. Considering that multiple parcels in
the neighborhood have been rezoned to HI, there has been a significant increase in traffic along
Halfway Boulevard and Downsville Pike, improvements made to Halfway Boulevard, and the
recently approved and coming Sheetz convenience store, these facts in totality clearly establish that
there has been a substantial change in the neighborhood sufficient to justify the proposed map
amendment, and that the requested HI zoning for the Site is more appropriate than the existing RS
zoning.
In addition, the County anticipated and provided for the future development of the Site when
including the Properly in the Urban Grown Area. The commercial corridor along Downsville Pike
and rezoning of parcels in the neighborhood have transformed the neighborhood significantly and
will continue to do so in the future. As stated, the Site would be better suited for a commercial use
permitted by the HI District, given its location along Halfway Boulevard, Downsville Pike and the
8
I70 interchange and the impact of the interchange and the adjacent Park and Ride property on the
continuing ability to use the Site for residential purposes, as well as its proximity and access to I70.
In conclusion, the Applicant avers that it is conclusive that a substantial change in the
character of the neighborhood has occurred which legally justifies a decision to approve the
requested rezoning.
5. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES.
a. Public Water and Sewer. Public water and sewer are currently available to
serve the Site.
C. Protective Services. The Site will be served by the Halfway Fire
Company. Police protection will be provided by the
Washington County Sheriff's Department.
6. PRESENT AND FUTURE TRANSPORTATION PATTERNS.
The Site is bounded by Halfway Boulevard and Downsville Pike and could potentially be
serviced by entrances on either or both roads. Highway access to the Site is via the Downsville
Pike/I70 Interchange, making access for both regional and local travelers convenient and safe.
These roads and this interchange are ideal for the requested HI zoning. Both Downsville Pike
and Halfway Boulevard are classified as Arterial Roads.
7. COMPATIBILITY WITH EXISTING AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FOR THE -
AREA.
As stated above, the Site is surrounded by a mix of residential and commercial uses, and
the adjacent properties to the east along Downsville Pike are all is classified in the HI district,
and compatible with the requested zoning classification for the Site. A new Sheetz convenience
store will be located immediately across Downsville Pike from the Site. The Site's proximity to
I
the I70 interchange and the adjacent Park and Ride make continued residential use clearly
unsuitable. The Site is well suited to serving the travelling public, however, due to this
proximity, and thus the requested HI zoning makes much more sense from a land use perspective
than the existing residential zoning.
8. POPULATION CHANGE.
The Site is currently unoccupied and this is unlikely to change in any circumstance.
Rezoning the Site to HI will have no effect on the population of the Rezoning Neighborhood.
The population of the Rezoning Neighborhood is, however, growing.
9. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
The Comprehensive Plan identifies, as major goals, the objective of promoting "the
retention and expansion of existing businesses and industry while encouraging the development of
new manufacturing and hi -tech industries to broaden the employment base" and providing
"locations for new industry that encourage the use of existing infrastructure facilities and that take
advantage of the interstate transportation system" See Comprehensive Plan, p. 13. In addition, the
Comprehensive Plan discusses the need to sustain and expand existing businesses. See
Comprehensive Plan, p. 60. The proposed rezoning of the Site to HI will allow for the
redevelopment of the Site from a decrepit and aging single family residence to a much more
appropriate retail operation serving the neighborhood and the travelling public along Downsville
Pike and I70. Given the Site's location at the intersection of Halfway Boulevard and Downsville
Pike (both Arterial Roads) and being at the end of the off -ramp from I70, such a commercial use
is much more suitable for the Site and in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan. The
Comprehensive Plan also identifies that appropriate commercial site locations should reflect the
need to be located where the market can best be served. See Comprehensive Plan, p. 61, The
Applicant avers that a commercial site located at the intersection of Halfway Boulevard and
10
Downsville Pike and directly across from the I70 off -ramp and adjacent to the Park and Ride is
an ideal location for a commercial use to serve the Halfway and South Hagerstown markets as
well as interstate travelers.
8. CONCLUSION.
The Applicant requests that the Board approve this rezoning application as the request
meets all of the legal requirements for map amendments under the Washington County Zoning
Ordinance and under Maryland law to be approved. The Applicant's requested zoning map
amendment will remedy the Board's failure to designate the Site for HI use. Moreover, the
requested zoning map amendment will correct the Board's failure to take into account various
factors related to the Site at the time of comprehensive rezoning which would have justified the HI
zoning classification, and will properly reflect the substantial changes to the Rezoning
Neighborhood outlined in this statement.
**L&B 6445218vl/13291.0001
11
N
=Z
_Z
EXHIBIT A
Zk Z
o Ow\\
0
8�
�e
e�
a1-h
o� Norma
aoa
c Z
m o
zo oInz
�z n oom
z
$
$
s
REZONING EXHIBIT
DOYNS[IILLE PIKE LAND LLC
FOX do ASSOCIATES, INC.
ENGINEERS •SURVEYORS• PLANNERS
P
7 A
Q
p
=
S S i,
{(S�¢
FS :
4e
�n
eel ur. ,mu xan e82 1-
pfflt ( l o. sna C
rxorr: (wp,.x>-aw enmewce. W. stiol
e
R� O
ly
4 i
i ::?
6 SITUATE NORTf/ OF DOIINS70M P/.itb' C 6C57 OF RALF,7AY BLVD.
RLRCl/ON D/STR/CT 28
)MSH/NOTON COUNTY d/ARYLAND
u (wiHte-isso pxoxc: (,wl)cesweeo
rNu (wprv-Inss ruc lao,)zs3-mm
-
e,�
=
r
EXHIBIT B
J
..��
REZONING EXHIBIT B
DOWNSVILLE PIKE LAND LLC
FOX &ASSOCIATES, INC.
NGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLAN NERS
All
'rM°1, uu cap
u
O
O
�1
EE ¢
�'
w
c�
! F9 i
$�
�I
S/7'UATE NORTH OF LA57' OF //ALN7/AY BLVD.
wnK�Ds
PMAE: (N I)1]J-fl50] iFEDEFkK, uD 11101
or (wiNIK-1zw rronr: (xi)css-oeea
az
L
�m
Q
Lj
ELECT/ON DISTRICT 26
ELECTION C
rfx: (Jol)1JJ-lest f�: (wl)zv-cxs
�
WASH/NGTON COUNTY, MARY/AND
Parcel and Zoning Locator
0
F .q
L—ff_.i
R�i
s Mg.
EXHIBIT C Page 1 of 1
F'w r10662 downsville pike X Q
Ow search results for 106.6
Ry
!r,qrssckmN4E
Pac a A.
Zo 12- ZON iN i,
Ippft-77.750 39.611 Degrees
http://washcomd.maps.aregis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=6485fb39d72544d29... 7/11/2Q 17
Parcel and Zoning Locator EXHIBIT D Page 1 of 1
X-,
n
r,
10662 downsville pike X Q
El wS
ZNrimeNAN4E AAOrjr,.
Libor 2eN,fj4
00ft-77.750 39.611 Degrees
http://washcomd.maps.arcgis.com/appslwebappviewer/index.html?id=6485fb39d72544d29... 7/11 /2017
EXHIBIT E
w CD � y
�, o a
cn
o
c�
v
Q -�
CD70
Z7
n
v
�.
_ CD
n
O
O
_0O C
G O
N W cn�
o S
.(D ,.�
(D
. CD
CD W
O
3 En
CD =
O- S Q
--� Q
C@ °. (D
n
O
O
Q CD C
Q
-�
.� O S CD
O (D CD �
C
(n
a
r
fD
Q cn 0
O0
:
fl7CD
CD
v
�, rn
CD
D o m
-�
O CO (D n
¢) =
- O O O
O v
'O
S
Vl
° o w o
+-
a �
r Q � �
—
CD
o 0 0-o
CD
5
�
`C �. n
cD
n
cD
cn CD
Q
CD 0
=rn cn
���,v
c W
� @
CD CD r} (n
O
cn O
v -t,
�G
:3
0-
CD w
3
m
�'
�� (o Cn
D
CD N CD
3 rn
o
�
(D
C:) CD
-o
v Q
v-,
CD
_Q
N
O
O
O
O
O cn
(D
c�
� •6
Co
Q r, 1+
= —
CD O 0O 0
cn C
0
(D
(D
CD
�(
0
Q
(Du)
(D
SU
(D
.
OO O a'
�
O
`G
CD
(n w
CO O w
CD -- Q
-1
CD
(D �
o-
CDX
��
Co
'
cn
Z) -�
C-)5 o
��
�
(n
c _+
CD
N C
S
C
W'
D
-CD
%
= (D
oQ
m CD
(
n
"n
oC
oo
v—I
CL) Q
O
o-a
CD
Q =O
W
cn
(D
CD
o
v 0:
0-�,
Q
v
� CD
.�
a
n
(D
CD(CD
`C
w
W
C-) C)
cn
n
O'
,N
-O
Q
O
O
=
-f
O
.
O
O
D
C:w
(nQ
--
CD
(D
�
CD
L0
o�
N 0
0-
C CDQ
CD
(D
(D
G
CD
_Q Q
0-fn
(D -'
-`
C
fl]
coO
t� _''
Q
C)
W
O `C
6
O --n
= O
n
ct -c:
(On S
C— p
O O
O
O
cn
CD
� CD
0-O
(D
cn - CD
�
fn
n a O�
`�
O
O O-
`Z
3
O
3
N
(D CD
m
QO
v ¢F1
Cr+
-1
"
C
O
N
C (D CD
C
O
G R
CD
Q Q
w
Q
Q- N
CD
CD
C
Q
cn
CDC+
3
3
-
O ,�� �
X cn CD
v
<
O N 0
O n
(�
3CD
CD
S 00
0
Q w
O
CD
CD
(D
�'
O
Q CD
v
-0
n _
(D
T1 CD (D
Q p
O
�, cc
C
N C �-r
n
N 0- n
n+
O
O
O
O
v
o
a cn
W rCr (n
O
In
'n
v
0
m
D
ch
>-sr-
O
--I
Dr>D
D
�
mzcn
mo
CZ=-mo
m�=M
z
CJ)
ch>
-j
O
z��rn
�1
D..q
=
mm90
m
M?"n
m
D
znFn
�
°�
z
�
C)
mezzo
N
N
zm
-
o
m
o
U„
;o
z
C)
C)
O
L
v
m
z
z
D
z
D
m
m
N
O
N
O
W
N
m
J
(D
O
m
m
Z
z
co
z
D
m
m
IN
A
En
N
C)
O
m
O
c
z
z
X
v
0 00� 0 0 0
w (n N N N
D
rn ov0
z D Z
c
z
n c < <
z —I
m m m
m m m
Nm
Nm
Am A m
O
O
N O O
O
UI m 0
AO
w
O
O
p N O
to
0
m
N � o
yo
s
0
v
v v
mx
D Z
A
mm Corm
O
j O O
z
0
0
< D
�
v m
W
O
0
j
�
Ov m
r
O
� O
_>
O
r
r
m
D
r
m
N (n
N
Oo
bO
m
m O
(n
O
O
N cn
N
m
W
N N
N
O Cn
N
N
N
O W
w
O Cn
N
A
m cn
ipn
w
W
A
A
O 01
N
A
m Cn
A
?
N cn
cm
r
`Jol
A
O O
A
Cn
Cn
O O
O
N Ln
N
W
xn
m
z
D
X
0
C)
m
Am
A
O
0
0 0
Ut Cn
ul
0 0
0 0
M
�
;o0 x
0
m
x
0
N �
0 0
u
N w
O
W
W
W
m O
O
o S-
m X
In
< p
r
m C)
0 0
o m
v m zz
z
m
<
0 m
v,
m
m
N
v �
N m
OID
W
N Co
O ?
0 W
N cn
V co
M
Cm"
j ?
P Ln
co a) m
O O O
m o
m O O
CD m O
0 A O
m m O
C- O A
a) m
v
(„ z
J
Z
CD
W -0, r
;u m D
z
D
cocn
O m r-
00 O
rn 0
w p
Cn
W N
CAn 0) O
W N
A m J
co N N N
Li J N
til CT CT
O O CO
W N
in m
m m (O
W � N
En m
N N N
W � N
J -4w
W w W
13 , N
Tv m J
p A
0 00
z z
0 0
0 0
m ID
w 10
w w
w w
m O
A O
O O
P A
J O
m w
-n
v
m o m
A
m -f
O
N m
C7 m
O 0
i� z
O O
o C)
Cn O
o r
1 N
Lo w
_1 N_
A A
N 1
N CA
N N
� O
0 0
mm m
G) G)
0 0
v_ v_
m
m mw
LO
LDD (0
v Lnn
N O
J 0
P- N
m J
N J
v v
d O
O O
-0K:
M p
z m
Z p
-O<
<
D
Z
D
W
fT A
m O
O O
Ln A
W (OO
N A
m O
N N
N d
C. O
N w
cn A
m 0
0 0
A A
Cn A
M O
O O
Ln U.
a A
4
J O
000
P A A
w CD 5s
D
m m
z z
mm
W m m
W Co
CO cD w
w w
W N
W N O
m J O
J J O
Uf W N
m J
J J
� r
v Op
(mO m
A M (n
O x 0
O
J p 2
o po
Om
C. (n
W 0)A m
O
r
O
0
m
m
v
m A
N O w
O j J
N
m A
N N (ma
m A
O w
W W A
M A
O w
A A (J71
C. w
O (WO CD
Cn Cn O
01 N
V COT m
O O
N
CO co
w � N
K
A0
sn
S
v
s
z
c�
0
z
cn
A
000
ti ti
O O 0
m m m
0 0 0
m W Co
CO w CO
LD
w To
N O O
[n O
J O
N s J
v
r p o
m
-n A
O
y m O
rr- 0 -n
cn
-m< C)
M r
O �r m
o 0
-n D
z
M
m D
0 �
o v
C, A
W Co
M N
W W A
A W
W W A
W AD IQ
N N N
j W A
W W W
W W A
N Cmmn W
A A A
E 9 9 K E K E
0 0 0 0 0 0 Q 0
m m m m m m m m
m m m m m m m m
ra Dr n n c�
p r r r
'O -0 _0 .D Z art �n
a n D D 0 A
z z z z n cn cn cn
0 (n cn co O v v v
;D X w x 0 X X
v v v v x z z z
TC)0G)
0 w m m
m 0 0 0
cn
W m mw m m co
w (m W
w0 (D (O CO (D (D O
J J m m m m M N
O w J m m A N
W (J O m J W N O
C.
wm (NO N O
m (7 W O m J W N
Cn (n W N N w �1
O m m m w N A
m c C) E c
D p p m CD m p Cn
m cn N -1 8 M o
m O p � oO p
v y v m c0i m o
Om (mn > m
m v
A —
o O o
v c O M
M
0
N N N N N N N N
O O O O O 4 O O
1 N A w W-
N N
UI 07 w W A O In
1 N A O W A N N
N N N N N N N N
N N A
cn
O w W O O O O W
N N A O W A 1 N
01 m w O O 0
A t j W
A A A
j N A 1 Wv A j N l
m ACD
Ln N N N cnN VI [n N
00I
p
EO
m m
7
ao
0
0
0 0
x x
"
O
a
< <
z
m m
ry
0 0
m m
r
C
ra
Ln N
m
O O
I C7
n
Z
Y
r.� cn
I7Iz
Z
0
D Y
D G ^y
r y r
Z o
CO)
D
(npo co
nnc��
-vi
O
o
o
D
0
P
0 0
y
Cl
r
0
N?
D
z
z
CD
y
0
^
n z y
v
>
r]
Viz° y
O
.. z
N A
A CD
o
I�
a
N N
H A
+
T.
O O
IC
O
d
Y
m
o
I�
v
i
Ui
W O
(`
N N
w N
O O
N Y
w
A
j
la
(n A
,,
o
to w
N N
ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER LIST
TAX MAP 0057 PARCEL 0495
TAX MAP 0057 PARCEL 0565
TAX ID#26-038308
TAX ID#10-031478
Washington Co. Commissioners
632 Joint Venture LLP
Court House
P.O. Box 889
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Hagerstown, Maryland 21741-0889
TAX MAP 0057 PARCEL 0208
TAX MAP 0057 PARCEL 0375
TAX ID#26-023017
TAX ID#10-014263
Karen J. Funk
Washington Co. Commissioners
Eric F. Funk
Court House Annex
17906 Halfway Boulevard
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740-1332
TAX MAP 0057 PARCEL 0432
TAX MAP 0057 PARCEL 0329
TAX ID#26-006821
TAX ID#26-018862
William Lee Divelbliss
John D. Wastler
17910 Halfway Boulevard
10650 Downsville Pike
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740-1734
TAX MAP 0057 PARCEL 0311
INTERSTATE 70 (I-70) Highway
TAX ID#26-022134
Dennis L. Price
State Highway Administration
Diane C. Price
Box 717
10702 Downsville Pike
Baltimore, Maryland 21203
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740-1774
TAX MAP 0049 PARCEL 0270
TAX ID#26-033306
Glenn S. Rea, Jr.
10801 Oak Valley Drive
Hagerstown, Maryland 21740-7868
**L&B 6436201v1/13291.0001
SDAT: Real Property Search
Page 1 of 1
Real Property Data Search w3
Sr- �h Result for WASHINGTON COUNTY
View Map View GroundRent Redemption
Account Identifier: District - 26 Account Number - 023114
View GroundRent Registration
Owner Information
Owner Name:
DOWNSVILLE PIKE LAND LLC
Use: RESIDENTIAL
Principal Residence: NO
Mailing Address:
10306 REMINGTON DR 2ND FLR
Deed Reference: /05486/ 00190
HAGERSTOWN MD 21740-0000
Location & Structure Information
Premises Address:
10656 DOWNSVILLE PIKE
Legal Description: 0.50 ACRES
HAGERSTOWN 21740-0000
10656 DOWNSVILLE PIKE
Map: Grid: Parcel:
Sub District: Subdivision: Section:
Block: Lot: Assessment Year: Plat No:
0057 0002 0408
0000
2017 Plat Ref:
Special Tax Areas:
Town:
NONE
Ad Valorem:
Tax Class:
Primary Structure Built
Above Grade Living Area Finished Basement Area Property Land Area County Use
1928
900 SF
21,780 SF
Stories Basement
Type Exterior Full/Half Bath Garage Last Major Renovation
2 YES
STANDARD UNIT FRAME 1 full
Value Information
Base Value Value
Phase -in Assessments
As of
As of As of
01 /01 /2017
07/01 /2016 07/01/2017
Land:
8,700 8,700
Improvements
10,200 10,200
Total:
18,900 18,900
18,900 18,900
preferential Land:
0
0
Transfer Information
Seller: CARBAUGH BONNIE L ET AL
Type: ARMS LENGTH IMPROVED
Seller: RICE ANITA V
Type: NON -ARMS LENGTH OTHER
Seller:
Type:
Date: 04/24/2017
Price: $50,000
Deed1: /05486/ 00190
Deed2:
Date: 12/07/2015
Price: $0
Deed1: /05119/ 00426
Deed2:
Date:
Price:
Deed1:
Deed2:
Exemption Information
Partial Exempt Assessments: Class 07/01/2016 07/01/2017
County: 000 0.00
State: 000 0.00
Municipal: 000 0.0010.00 0.0010.00
Tax Exempt: Special Tax Recapture:
Exempt Class: NONE
Homestead Application Information
Homestead Application Status: No Application
Hlorneowners' Tax Credit Application Information
Homeowners' Tax Credit Application Status: No Application Date:
http://sdat.dat.maryland.gov/RealProperty/Pages/default.aspx 7/11 /2017
BOOK:5486 PAGE: 190
2,4 Z
Tri-State Signature Settlements, LLC
File No. TE-10107M
Tax ID # 26-023114
lub[z ? Beeb, made this 21st day of April, 2017, by and between Connie Proctor, Bonnie L.
Carbaugh, Ronald G. Rice and Donald W. Rice, GRANTORS, and Downsville Pike Land. LLC,
a Maryland Limited Liability Company, GRANTEE,
- IVitne2'9;etb -
Tbat for anb in eono'iberation of the sum of Fifty Thousand And 00/100 Dollars
($50,000.00), which includes the amount of any outstanding Mortgage or Deed of Trust, if any, the
receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the said Grantors do grant and convey to the said
Downsville Pike Land, LLC, in fee simple, all that lot of ground situate in the County of Washington,
State of Maryland and described as follows, that is to say:
r-:
All the following described lot of land, together with any improvements thereon
situate in Washington County, Maryland, on the Northwest side of the Downsville
Hagerstown Turnpike, about two miles South of Hagerstown, and being more
particularly described as follows:
Beginning at a stone standing near the west or northwest side of the Hagerstown and
Downsville Turnpike and at the end of the 17'h or South 79 '/a degrees East 89 '/2
N perch line of a deed from Edward A. Shaffer, Executor, to John H. Eldridge, dated
N July 13, 1892, and running thence reversing said 17"' line North 79 '/2 degrees West
c 181 feet, then leaving the outlines of the aforesaid deed 2 degrees East 185 feet,
passing a stone on the North side of the aforesaid turnpike to the middle of said
turnpike, then with the turnpike North 63 degrees East 252 feet to the place of
al beginning; containing approximately 0.50 acres of land, more or less.
U
c. Subject to and together with the covenants, restrictions, rights of way and easements
Go
of record applicable thereto.
�n
M Being the same property described and conveyed in the deed from Bonnie L.
U Carbaugh, Personal Representative of the Estate of Arthur T. Samuels unto Bonnie L.
Q' Carbaugh, Ronald G. Rice, Connie Proctor and Donald W. Rice dated July 17, 2015,
t° and recorded December 7, 2015 in Liber 5119 at folio 0426 among the Land records
C; of Washington County, Maryland.
C,
tp
D7
Ln
0
U;
ti
U
19090ber with the buildings and improvements thereon erected, made or being; and all and
Cr
v every, the rights, alleys, ways, waters, privileges, appurtenances and advantages thereto belonging, or
in anywise appertaining.
c
To babe aub To �00Cb the said tract of ground and premises above described and
ca mentioned, and hereby intended to be conveyed, together with the rights, privileges, appurtenances
F and advantages thereto belonging or appertaining unto and to the proper use and benefit of the said
Downsville Pike Land, LLC, in fee simple.
U
w
Z(Iib the Grantors hereby covenant that they have not done or suffered to be done any act, matter or
J 0 thing whatsoever, to encumber the property hereby conveyed; that they will warrant specially the
U property hereby granted; and that they will execute such further assurances of the same as may be
z
O requisite.
c�
z
776
BOOK: 5486 PAGE: 191
OW NMITC00 the hands and seals of said Grantors, the day and year first above written.
WITNESS:
C — —- (Seal)
Connie Proctor
�5eal)
nnie L. arbaugh
KA0 Ili —(Seal)
Ronald G. Rice
(Seal)
Donald W. kice
r STATE OF MARYLAND ss
N COUNTY OF WASHINGTON
I hereby certify that on this 21st day of April, 2017, before me, the subscriber, a Notary
Public of the State and County aforesaid, personally appeared Connie Proctor, Bonnie L. Carbaugh,
Ronald G. Rice and Donald W. Rice, the Grantors herein, known to me (or satisfactorily proven) to
a be the persons whose names are subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged the same for
the purposes therein contained, and further acknowledged the foregoing Deed to be their act, and in
N my presence signed and sealed the same, giving oath under penalties of perjury that the consideration
N recited herein is correct.
n * By Connie J. Proctor, His Attorney In Fact
�o
AND IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and official al.
tp •f...
a LESA N. DAVIS ary ublic
Notary Publio My commission expires
+ Washlnpton County
a' Commission IIme Aprll 2, 201e
w
THIS 1S TO CERTIFY that the within Deed was prepared by, or under the supervision of the
undersigned, an Attorney duly admitted to practice before the Court of Appeals of Maryland.
AFTER RECORDING, PLEASE RETURN TO:
Tri-State Signature Settlements, LLC
1185 Mount Aetna Road
Hagerstown, MD 21740
I' rri A n Lo ery, E uir
TL. I I D Y, TREASUREA
TAXES PAID
BOOK: 5486 PAGE: 192
N
U7
Q
C6
co
It
LO
c�
U
Q)
rY
-CJ
03
J
F--
C)
t....
C)
0-1
I)
z
U
U
VA
MARYLAND Certification of Exemption from Withholding Upon 2017
FORM Disposition of Maryland Real Estate Affidavit of
wH-AR Residence or Principal Residence
Based on the certification below, Transferor claims exemption in ownership of real property is presented for recordation. The
from the tax withholding requirements of §10-912 of the Tax- requirements of §10-912 do not apply when a transferor provides
General Article, Annotated Code of Maryland. Section 10-912 a certification of Maryland residence or certification that the
provides that certain tax payments must be withheld and transferred property is the transferor's principal residence.
paid when a deed or other instrument that effects a change
1. Transferor Information
Name of Transferor Bonnie L. Carbaugh
2. Reasons for Exemption
Resident Status I, Transferor, am a resident of the State of Maryland.
Transferor is a resident entity as defined in Code of Maryland Regulations
(COMAR)03.04.12.026(11), I am an agent of Transferor, and I have authority to sign this
document on Transferor's behalf.
Principal Residence ❑ Although I am no longer a resident of the State of Maryland, the Property is my principal
residence as defined In IRC 121 (principal residence for 2 (two) of the last 5 (five) years) and is
currently recorded as such with the State Department of Assessments and Taxation.
Under penalty of perjury, I certify that I have examined this declaration and that, to the best of my
knowledge, it is true, correct, and complete.
3a. Individual Transferors
Witness
3b. Entity Transferors
WltnessJAttest
File No. TE-10107M Re: 10656 Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Bonnie L. Carbaugh
Name
- �:? e
Signature
Name or Entity
By
Name
Title
17-49
BOOK: 5486 PAGE: 193
MARYLAND Certification of Exemption from Withholding Upon 2017
FORM Disposition of Maryland Real Estate Affidavit of
WH-AR Residence or Principal Residence
Based on the certification below, Transferor claims exemption in ownership of real property is presented for recordation. The
from the tax withholding requirements of §10-912 of the Tax- requirements of §10-912 do not apply when a transferor provides
General Article, Annotated Code of Maryland. Section 10-912 a certification of Maryland residence or certification that the
provides that certain tax payments must be withheld and transferred property is the transferor's principal residence,
paid when a deed or other instrument that effects a change
1. Transferor Information
Name of Transferor Ronald G. Rice
2. Reasons for Exemption
Resident Status I JAI I, Transferor, am a resident of the State of Maryland.
Y❑� Transferor is a resident entity as defined in Code of Maryland Regulations
(COMAR)03.04.12.02B(11), I am an agent of Transferor, and I have authority to sign this
document on Transferor's behalf.
Principal Residence Although I am no longer a resident of the State of Maryland, the Property Is my principal
residence as defined in IRC 121 (principal residence for 2 (two) of the last 5 (five) years) and is
currently recorded as such with the State Department of Assessments and Taxation.
Under penalty of perjury, I certify that I have examined this declaration and that, to the best of my
knowledge, it is true, correct, and complete.
3a. Individual Transferors
Witness
3b. Entity Transferors
Witness/Attest
File No. TE-10107M Re: 10656 Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Ronald G. Rice
N e
Signature
Name or Entlty
By
Name
Title
17-49
BOOK: 5486 PAGE: 194
MARYLAND Certification of Exemption from Withholding Upon
FORM Disposition of Maryland Real Estate Affidavit of
WH-AR Residence or Principal Residence
Based on the certification below, Transferor claims exemption
from the tax withholding requirements of §10-912 of the Tax -
General Article, Annotated Code of Maryland. Section 10-912
provides that certain tax payments must be withheld and
paid when a deed or other instrument that effects a change
1. Transferor Information
Name of Transferor Connie P
2017
in ownership of real property Is presented for recordation. The
requirements of §10-912 do not apply when a transferor provides
a certification of Maryland residence or certification that the
transferred property Is the transferor's principal residence,
2. Reasons for Exemption
Resident Status � I, Transferor, am a resident of the State of Maryland.
Transferor is a resident entity as defined in Code of Maryland Regulations
(COMAR)03,04.12.02B(11), I am an agent of Transferor, and I have authority to sign this
document on Transferor's behalf.
Principal Residence a Although I am no longer a resident of the State of Maryland, the Property is my principal
residence as defined in IRC 121 (principal residence for 2 (two) of the last 5 (five) years) and is
currently recorded as such with the State Department of Assessments and Taxation.
Under penalty of perjury, I certify that I have examined this declaration and that, to the best of my
knowledge, it is true, correct, and complete.
3a. Individual Transferors
Witness
3b. Entity Transferors
Witness/Attest
File No. TE-10107M Re: 10656 Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Connie Proctor
Name
Signature
Name of Entity
By
Name
Title
17-49
BOOK: 5486 PAGE: 195
MARYLAND Certification of Exemption from Withholding Upon
FORM Disposition of Maryland Real Estate Affidavit of
WH-AR Residence or Principal Residence
Based on the Certification below, Transferor claims exemption
from the tax withholding requirements of §10-912 of the Tax -
General Article, Annotated Code of Maryland. Section 10-912
provides that certain tax payments must be withheld and
paid when a deed or other instrument that effects a change
1. Transferor Information
Name of Transferor Donald W. Rice
2017
in ownership of real property is presented for recordation. The
requirements of §10-912 do not apply when a transferor provides
a certification of Maryland residence or certification that the
transferred property is the transferor's principal residence,
2. Reasons for Exemption
Resident Status ® I, Transferor, am a resident of the State of Maryland.
❑Transferor is a resident entity as defined in Code of Maryland Regulations
(COMAR)03.04.12.02B(11), I am an agent of Transferor, and I have authority to sign this
document on Transferor's behalf.
Principal Residence ❑ Although I am no longer a resident of the State of Maryland, the Property Is my principal
residence as defined in IRC 121 (principal residence for 2 (two) of the last 5 (flve) years) and is
currently recorded as such with the State Department of Assessments and Taxation,
Under penalty of perjury, I certify that I have examined this declaration and that, to the best of my
knowledge, it is true, correct, and complete.
3a. Individual Transferors
Witness
Donald W. Rice
Name
Signature
"y,���
3b. Entity Transferors
Witness/Attest
File No. TE-10107M Re: 10656 Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Name of Entity
By
Name
Title
17-49
BOOK: 5486 PAGE: 196
cCi
o�
e--
a
ra
m
a-
Ln
n'
0
c.�
w
U
11'
U
z
O
v
I�
U)
d
This page not to be counted in calculating Recording Fee
Clerk of Circuit Court
Washington County, Maryland
Dennis J. Weaver, Clerk
24 Summit Avenue
Hagerstown, MD 21740
301-790-7991
For Clerks Use Only
Improvement Fee 40.00
Recording Fee 20.00
County Transfer Tax
Recordation Tax _
State Transfer Tax —OLS
Non -Resident Tax �--�
TOTALy 4�
LR - Deed (w Taxes j
Recording Fee - ALL
Name: Rice
Ref:
LR - County Transfer -
Tax - linked 0.00
LR - Surcharoe - linked
4@-@@
LR - Recordation Tax -
linked 380.0@
LR - State Transfer, Tax.
- linked 2S@.00
LR - NR Tax - lkd @.@@
=-==--------------•-----
Total: 710-00
014,124,12017 W1f :iu�
CC21-P.'Z
#8241708 CC@403 -
WashinQton
County/ CC@4.03.@3 -
Register- 03
I ti
(n
State of Maryland BOOK: 5486 PAGE: 197
❑ Baltimoi-e City ® COUllty: WasliinOlon1--,�_ — 1
Information provider' 4 jor the rise oj0re Clerk's Office, slate Departarent t f
Assessments and T avatiom, and Coanly Finance Office Only. �g
(Type or Print in Black Ink Only —All Copies Must Be Legible)
1 Type(s) (n Check Box if addendum Intake Pone is Attached)
of Instruments X Dacd Mortgage Other Olirer s
Deed of Tnist Lease tla
2 Conveyance Type X Improved Salo_j Unimproved Sale Multiple Accounts Nol nil A ms-
CheckBox Arms-Lengih(/J Arrlud.englhOJ Amu-Lendllr[3] LengthSnlc(9) P
3 Tax Exemptions Recunintiou
(If applicable) Slnte Transfer
Clie or Explain Authority
County Transfer-
4 1
Considerrnllon Amouml
f Worce Olnce Use Oidy
Transfer mud Reconlnllun Tnx Consideration
Purchase Rice/Consideration
$ 50,000 00
Any New Mortgage
AnyCO
$
Transfer Tax Consideration $
TaxlOn
Tax
Balance ofExisling Mortgage
$
X ( ) % = $
and
end
CBIOUIntIDne
Other:
$
Len Exenrpban Ammons - $
Total Trenefer Tex S
Other:
$
Recordeliom Tax ConsiderationS
X rSIW S
Pull Cash Value:
$
TOTAL DUE $
5
Amount of Pees
Doc.I
Doc.2 Agent'
Recording Charge
$ 2000
$
Surcharge
$ 40.00
S Tax Bill.
Fees
Slate Recordation Tax
$ 380.00
$
State Transfer Tax
$ 250.00
$ C.D. Cmedil:
Comity T'musfer Tax
$
S
Other
$
S pg. Tax/Odmr:
Ol m
$
S
6
District
Property Tax 1D No. (1)
Ci nnfor Libel/folio
Mup
Pared No.
Vnr. LOG
Description of
26-023114
5119/426
1_1(
Property
Subdivlslou Name
T Lot (3n)
Black (3b)
Secl/Alt (3c)
flat Ilef. Sglrl/Acn•en
ge (4)
SDAT requires
submission of all
Location/Address of Property Being Couveyed (2)
applicable information.
40
10656 Downsville Pike, Hagerstown. MD 21740
A maximum of
be
Other Property Idendflems (If applicable)
Water Meter Accewrt No.
characters will
indexed in accordance
with the priority cited In
Real Property Article
Section 3-104(g)(3)(i).
Resldenllnl[X]or Nau-ltesldcullnll,I Rea Sinn lelk) or Crorm 1 ltent1 Amount: N/A
Pail hd Cmnvoyauct7 0 Vt. (�]No I Description/And. of Sq FVAcienge Tinnsferiecl: N/A
If Pailial Conveyance, List improvements Conveyed: N/A
7
Doc. I - Grsnm(olls) Nne1t(s)
Doc. 2 - G rortor js) Nmmc(s)
Connie Proctor. Bonnie L. Carbaugh
Transferred
From
Ronald G. Rice. Donald W Rice
Doc. 1- Onvner(s) of Record, If Different tr out Crnrdor(s)
Doc. 2 - Owner(s) of Reconi, If Dl Rerent Rnnn Crnuloils)
B
Doc. I - Crnnlec(s) Nmue(s)
Doe. 2-Crnulm(s) Name(s)
Downsville Pike Land, LLC
Transferred
To
New Owner's (Gm anlce) Mulling Address
10306 Remington Drive 2nd FI. Ha erslown MD 21740
9
Doc. ] - Additional Names to be Indexed (Opllounl)
Doc. 2- Additiounl Names to he Indexed (Opllonni)
Other Names
to Be Indexed
10 Contact/Mail
Information
Instillment Submitted By or Contact Pei son
® 11613m lu Cuntect Person
❑ Hold I'or Pickup
❑ Retum Address Provided
Name: David Hess
Finn Tri-State Signature Settlements, LLC
Address: 1185 Mount Aetna Road
Hagerstown, MD 21740 Phone: (301) 797-0600
11 IMPORTANT! BOTHTHE ORIGINAL DEED AND A PROTC'OPY MUSTACCOMPANY EACH TRANSFER
'
Assessment
Information
Yes X No Will the pmopeAy being conveyed be the grantee's principal residence? '
yes X I No Does transfer include personal property? If yes, identify:
Yes X No Was pmapody surveyed? If yes, atinch copy of survey (ir recordod, no copy required).
Assessment Use Only - 00 Not Write Below This Line
0
Terminal Verlflcallon Agricultural VeriBcallon Whole Part Tren. Process Verification
—
Transfer Number Date Received Deed Reference:
Assigned Property No.:
Year 1
20
20
Geo.
Ma
Sub
Black
c�
Land
Zonln
Gfld
Plat
Lot
Bulldmn a
Use
Pattxl
Section
Occ. Cd.
Total I
Town Cd-
I Ex. Sir I
Ex Cd
v
w
t
REMARKS:
a
m
>Y
rn
OlslNbelba: O Clerk's Oalce O SDAT AOCGCC VD(S40o7)
o Orll—f Ftaaace 0 FV.P.rer T E -10107 M
SDAT: Real Property Search
Page 1 of 1
Real Property Data Search w3
Sc,---h Result for WASHINGTON COUNTY
View Map
View GroundRent Redemption
View GroundRent Registration
Account Identifier:
District - 26 Account Number - 023173
Owner Information
Owner Name:
DOWNSVILLE PIKE LAND LLC Use:
RESIDENTIAL
Principal Residence:
NO
Mailing Address:
10306 REMINGTON DR 2ND FLR Deed Reference:
/05488/ 00165
HAGERSTOWN MD 21740-0000
Location & StaXture Information
Premises Address:
10662 DOWNSVILLE PIKE Legal Description:
1.10 ACRES
HAGERSTOWN 21740-0000
10662 DOWNSVILLE PIKE
Map: Grid: Parcel:
Sub District: Subdivision: Section: Block: Lot:
Assessment Year: Plat No:
0057 0002 0210
0000
2017 Plat Ref:
Special Tax Areas:
Town:
NONE
Ad Valorem:
Tax Class:
Primary Structure Built
Above Grade Living Area Finished Basement Area
Property Land Area County Use
1950
1.196 SF
1.1000 AC
Stories Basement
Type Exterior Full/Half Bath Garage
Last Major Renovation
1 1/2 YES
STANDARD UNIT BRICK 1 full
Value Information
Base Value
Value
Phase -in Assessments
As of
As of As of
01/01/2017
07/01/2016 07/01/2017
Land:
61,000
61,000
Improvements
65,600
65,600
Total:
126,600
126,600
126,600 126,600
nreferential Land:
0
0
Transfer Information
Seller: RICE ANITA VIRGINIA
Date: 04/26/2017
Price: $175,000
Type: NON -ARMS LENGTH OTHER
Deed1: /05488/ 00165
Deed2:
Seller:
Date:
Price: $0
Type:
Deedl: /01770/ 00701
Deed2:
Seller:
Date:
Price:
Type:
Deed1:
Deed2:
Exemption Information
Partial Exempt Assessments:
Class
07/01/2016
07/01/2017
County:
000
0.00
State:
000
0.00
Municipal:
000
0.0010.00
0.0010.00
Tax Exempt:
Special Tax Recapture:
Exempt Class:
NONE
Homestead Application Information
Homestead Application Status: No Application
Homeowners' Tax Credit Application Information
Homeowners' Tax Credit Application Status: No Application Date:
http://sdat.dat.maryland.gov/RealProperty/Pages/default.aspx 7/ 11 /2017
RnnW. GdRR PAf_F• 165
J
Tri-State Signature Settlements, LLC
File No. TE-10106M
Tax ID# 26023173
zbtz ;MCO, made this 21st day of April, 2017, by and between The Estate of
Anita Virginia Rice, Estate No. 69124, Grantor; and Downsville Pike Land, LLC, a
Maryland Limited Liability Company, party of the second part, GRANTEE.
Voermis, on February 12, 2014, the Orphans' Court of Washington County, State of
Maryland (the "Court") granted administration of the Estate of the Decedent to Connie J.
Proctor as Personal Representative of the Estate of the Decedent in Estate No. 69124.
Vbereao, Grantor in the capacity as Personal Representative in the Estate of the
Decedent has complete and full power and authority by law, to grant and convey the
entire fee simple interest in the hereinafter described property; and
VbereaSS, as part of the administration of the Estate of the Decedent, Grantor desires
to convey the entire fee simple estate in the hereinafter described property to the
Grantee.
Tbat in conoiberation of the sum of One Hundred Seventy -Five Thousand
And 00/100 Dollars ($175,000.00), which includes the amount of any outstanding
Mortgage or Deed of Trust, if any, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, the said
GRANTOR as Personal Representative as the Estate of the Decedent, does hereby
grant and convey to Downsville Pike Land, LLC, in fee simple, all that lot of ground
situate in the County of Washington, State of Maryland and described as follows, that is
to say:
All that lot or parcel of land situate along the Northwest side of the Hagerstown
Downsville Road approximately one and six tenths (1.6) miles from the Corporate Limits
of the City of Hagerstown, in District No. 26, Washington County, Maryland and being
more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at a stone planted at the end of the South 78 degrees 30 minutes west 89
and 5/10 perch line of the deed from Mary E. Stockslager, widow, to Albert L.
Stockslager and wife, dated August 6, 1927, and recorded in Liber No. 178, folio 94,
one of the land records of Washington County, Maryland, said stone being in or near
the Northwest margin of the aforesaid Hagerstown-Downsville Road and at the North
east corner of the parcel of land conveyed by the Downsville and Hagerstown Turnpike
Company of Washington County to Arthur T. Samuels and Edna M. Samuels, his wife,
by deed dated May 3, 1919 and recorded in Liber No. 155, folio 185, another of the
Land Records of Washington County and running thence with the closing line of the first
mentioned deed North 62 degrees 45 minutes East 133 feet to a point in said Road,
thence crossing a portion of the Road North 27 degrees 15 minutes West 24 feet to an
iron pipe in the Northwest margin thereof, thence leaving the Road and running North
59 degrees 50 minutes West 337 feet to an iron pipe, thence South 22 degrees 36
minutes West 212 feet to an iron pipe in the boundary of the entire tract conveyed to
Stockslager as aforesaid, thence with said boundary line South 78 degrees 15 minutes
East 88 feet, more or less, to the Northwest corner of the aforesaid parcel of land
conveyed to Arthur T. Samuels and wife, thence binding on said parcel South 78
degrees 15 minutes East 181 feet, more or less, to the place of beginning, containing
one and one tenth acres of land, more or less.
SAVING AND EXCEPTING all that property located along the northwest side of the
Downsville Pike in the Twenty Sixth Election District of Washington County, Maryland,
as shown on State Highway Administration Plat No. 54605 (Rev. 7/15/97); together with
any and all right of vehicular ingress and egress across those portions of the right of
870
BOOK: 5488 PAGE: 166
way lines which are marked "Throughout This Portion of the Right of Way Line All
Vehicular Access is Denied", as set forth in the Inquisition filed as Case No. 21-C-98-
3906 LA in the Circuit Court for Washington County, Maryland, State Roads
Commission of the State Highway Administration vs. Anita V. Rice, et. al., dated
February 12, 2002, and recorded among the Land Records of Washington County,
Maryland in Liber 1756 at folio 1094.
Subject to and together with all covenants, restrictions, rights of way and easements of
record applicable thereto.
BEING A PART OF the property described and conveyed in the Deed from Albert L. Stockslager and
Nellie A. Stockslager unto William D. Rice and Anita V. Rice, dated November 20, 1945 and recorded
November 23, 1945, in Liber 232 at folio 183 among the Land Records of Washington County,
Maryland. The said William D. Rice departed this life on or about March 11, 1986 thereby vesting title
in Anita V. Rice, as Surviving Tenant by the Entirety. The said Anita V. Rice having departed this life on
or about December 14, 2013.
TOgetber bJitb the buildings and improvements thereon erected, made or being;
and all and every, the rights, alleys, ways, waters, privileges, appurtenances and
advantages thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining.
190 J�Qbe anb TO 3�90Cb the said tract of ground and premises above described
and mentioned, and hereby intended to be conveyed, together with the rights,
privileges, appurtenances and advantages thereto belonging or appertaining unto and
to the proper use and benefit of the said Downsville Pike Land, LLC, in fee simple.
Zlnb Grantor does hereby covenant to execute such further assurances of the same as
may be requisite.
N91[ttieM6 the hand and seal of Grantor the day and year first above written.
By: Connie . Proctor, Personal
Representative of The Estate of Anita
Virginia Rice, Estate No. 69124
STATE OF MARYLAND
COUNTY OF WASHIGTON, to wit:
I hereby certify that on this 21st day of April, 2017 before me, the undersigned
officer, a Notary Public in and for the State aforesaid, personally appeared Connie J.
Proctor, known to me or satisfactorily proven to be the person whose name is
subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged herself or himself to be the
Personal Representative of the Estate of The Estate of Anita Virginia Rice, Estate No.
69124 and who, in my presence, signed and sealed the foregoing Deed and
acknowledged it to be his/her act and deed as Personal Representative of the foregoing
Estate, giving oath under penalties of perjury that the consideration recited herein is
correct.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I hereunto set my hand and :r,
LESA 0. ,. ;J13 No ary Public
Notary F`ublic y commission xpires: "f Z
Washington County
Maryland
My Commission Expires April 2, 2018
TODD L. HER
TAXES PAID,
RnnTK SdRR PAGE- 167
THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the within Deed was prepared by, or under the
supervision of the undersigned, an Attorney duly admitted to practice before the Court
of Appeals of Maryland.
4erAnn L*CEire 0
AFTER RECORDING, PLEASE RETURN TO:
Tri-State Signature Settlements, LLC
1185 Mount Aetna Road
Hagerstown, MD 21740
j
0
N
1 r
f;
Co
m
c
0
N
00
N
V
U
� N
m
:C13
M
w
m
t7
0
I
_m
LI.I
U
I
Q
U)
Z
r-
0
d
W
eD
V
S
0
-o
' o
U
N
0f
C
(d
J
f—
rr
O
U
I—
U
p,.
U
F-
7
O
U
7_
O
I—
U
T
U)
Q
BOOK: 5488 PAGE: 168
'MARYLAND Certification of Exemption from Withholding Upon
FORM Disposition of Maryland Real Estate Affidavit of
WH-AR Residence or Principal Residence
Based on the certification below, Transferor claims exemption
from the tax withholding requirements of §10-912 of the Tax -
General Article, Annotated Code of Maryland. Section 10-912
provides that certain tax payments must be withheld and
paid when a deed or other instrument that effects a change
1. Transferor Information
2017
in ownership of real property is presented for recordation. The
requirements of §10-912 do not apply when a transferor provides
a certification of Maryland residence or certification that the
transferred property is the transferor's principal residence.
Name of Transferor The Estate of Anita Virginia Rice, Estate No. 69124
2. Reasons for Exemption
Resident Status I, Transferor, am a resident of the State of Maryland.
Transferor is a resident entity as defined in Code of Maryland Regulations
u j (CO MAR) 03.04.12.02B(11), I am an agent of Transferor, and I have authority to sign this
document on Transferor's behalf.
Principal Residence ❑ Although I am no longer a resident of the State of Maryland, the Property is my principal
residence as defined in IRC 121 (principal residence for 2 (two) of the last 5 (five) years) and is
currently recorded as such with the State Department of Assessments and Taxation.
Under penalty of perjury, I certify that I have examined this declaration and that, to the best of my
knowledge, it is true, correct, and complete.
3a. Individual Transferors
Witness
3b. Entity Transferors
Witness/Attest
File No. TE-10106M Re: 10662 Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Name
Signature
THE ESTATE OF ANITA VIRGINIA RICE, ESTATE NO.
69124
Name of Entity
By
Connie J. Proctor.,
Name
Personal Representative
Title
Z
17-49
BOOK: 5488 PAGE: 169
1
00
This page not to be counted in calculating Recording Fee
For Clerks Use Only
Improvement Fee 40.00
Recording Fee 20.00
County Transfer Tax
Recordation Tax �%b, jo
State Transfer Tax%S •�
Non -Resident Tax
TOTAL
Clerk of Circuit Court
Washington County, Maryland
Dennis J. Weaver, Clerk
24 Summit Avenue
Hagerstown, MD 21740
301-790-7991
LR - Deed (w Taxes)
Recordino Fee - ALL
20.00
Name: downsville pike
Ref:
LR - County Transfer
Tax. - linked 625.2Z
LR - Surcharoe -
linked 40.00
LR - Recordation Tax -
linked 1,330.00
LR - State Transfer
Tax - linked 875.00
LR - NR Tax - lkd 0.00
----------------------
SubTotal: 2,890.90
----------------------
----------------------
Total: '3,423.00
04/26/2017 20:52
CC21-TR
#8254008 CC0403 -
Washin®ton
County/CC04.03.04 -
Reoister 04
State of Maryland - 1JvuA: n4)1)1 rAUM 1 /o
❑ Baltimore City ® County: Washington
I7ifon7ratioe propided is for the nse i7frlle Clerk's Office, State Department tf
Assessments and Taeatiom, and County Finance Office Only,
(Type or Print In Black Lilt Only —All Copies Must Be Legible)
25
t
_b
d
_Lj Type(s)
of Instruments
(E] Check Box if addendum Intake Fomi is Altnched.)
1
2
Deed
Deed of Tnis(
Mortgage
Lease
011ler
Other
2 Convoyanee Type
Check Box
X
hnproved Snle
Amlr-Leutglh[/
Unimproved Snle
Arra-Unigdt[21
Muhiple Accounts
Amur-Length[JJ
Not nn A ms•
Length Sale [91
3 1 Tax Exemptions
(if applicable)
Cite or Explain Authority
Recantation
S(nte Trnnsrev .
Comely Tinnsfep
4
Consideration Amount
Ronne Omce Use Only
Ti ausfer and Recunhdlurt Tax Consldendlun
Purchase Pi ice/Consideration
$ 175,000.00
Niy New Mortgage
$ 230 000,00
nsfer Tax Consideration
F
$
Consideration
Tax
Balance of Existing Mortgage
$
) %
S
and
Calculations
Other;
$
Exo ion Amount -
$
nl'f�amforTex
$
Other:
$
itccordmion Tex Cormiderelion-
S
X r $500
S
Full Cash Value:
$
TOTAL DUE
$
5
Amount of Rees
Dac. 1
Dec. 2
Agent:
Recording Chni go
$ 2000.
$ 75.00
Fees
Surcharge
$ 40.00
$ 40.00
Tax Bill -
Slate Recordation Tax
$ 1.748.00
$
Slate Transfer Tax
$ 875.00
C.B. Credit:
Counly Transfer Tax
$ 625.00
$
Other
S
$
Ag Tox/Odier:
Outer
$
$
6
Descrlptlon of
Property
SDAT requires
Dlslricl
1'ropertyTnx ID Nv.(1)
GreulurLlber/Fullu
Map
Parcel No.
V., LOG
26023173 1
P/0 232/183
)_1 5)
subdivision Nnine
Lul (7n)
Illock (3b)
Sect/All (7c)
NO Ref.
StIFI/Acrenge (4)
submission of all
iniormation-
Locnlion/Address of Property Being Conveyed (2)
applicable
A maximum of 40
will be
10062 Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, MD 21740
Olber Prppeiiy ldcnaners (Ir nppllcnble)
\9nler Mcicv Account No.
characters
indexed In accordance
with the priority cited In
I(WdtoUal[Xiei' non-Rcsldenfl.10 I Rae Simple X( or ground lit.00 Amount: I NIA
Real Property Article
Section 3-104(g)(3)(1).
l'nriln] Coovc miceT Ves Oft I Description/AniL of SgPVAcreage Trnasfened: NIA
If Parlial Conveyance, List hopiovenients Conveyed: NIA
7
Doc I - Gmuloi(s) Nnnue(s)
- Doc. 2- Ginnlor(s) Nmne(s)
The Estate of Anita Virginia Rice, Estate No. 69124
Downsville Pike Land, LLC
Transferred
From
Dac. 1 - Owncijs) ar Record, it Dllyerent. hrouu Crnnwr(s)
Doc 2-Otvner(s) or Reconl, Ir DIITereul. from Crnutm (s)
B
Transferred
To
Doe. 1-crivalee(a) Nmue(s)
Doc 2- Grnu(ee(s) Nnnre(s)
Downsville Pike Land LLC
Equity Trust Company Custodian FBO David A. Trader IRA
New Owner's (Grantee) Malting Addivas
10306 Remington Drives, 2nd FI Hagerstown, MD 21740
g
Doc. 1 - Addlltnnnl Nunes to be Indexed (Optional)
Doc. 2 - Additional Names to be Indexed (Optional)
Other Names
to Be Indexed
10 Contact/Mail
Information
lost ru lent Submll(cd By or Contact Person
® Rewm lu Cun(ect Pelson
❑ Bold for Pickup
❑ Relum Address Provided
Name: David Hess
Final Tri-State Signature Settlements, LLC
Address: 1185 Mount Aetna Road
Hagerstown, MD 21740 Phone: (301) 797-0600
11 IMPORTANT:
Assessment
Information
BOTH THE ORIGINAL DEED AND A PHOTCOPY MUST ACCOMPANY EACH TRANSFER
Yes X No Will the properly being conveyed be the grnntee's priucipnl residence?
Yes X No Does transfer include personal property? If yea, identify:
Yes 1 X No Was property swveyed7 If yea, nllnah copy of survey (d recorded, no copy required)
Assessment Use Only - Do Not Write Below This Line
0
Terminal Verification Agricultural Verlhcatlon Whole Part Iran. Process Verification
?
Transfer Number
Dale
Received.
Deed Reference'
Assi ned Pra rt
No.:
Year
20
1 20
1 Geo.
Ma
Sub
Block
E
Land
Zonln
Grld
Plal
.,of
Buildings
I
I Use
Parcel
Secllon
Oee. Cd.
Total
III
Town Co.
I Fx. SI I
Ex, Cd.
REMARKS:
Z
�r
w
W
V)
S
Dum6vten. D clorh's oak. O SaaT AOGCCJW (W"7)
0 Calre./fin.nce O Rep.rsr TE-10106M
CiuQ
ae
�4{j1/ xJ � 1`i. 1• J
. I
1a
d
a�Eryo@. a
oc �
e
i3
III ,III I
Washington County
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING I LAND PRESERVATION I FOREST CONSERVATION I GIS
September 8, 2017
Application for Map Amendment
Staff Report and Analysis
Case #: RZ-17-003
Property Owner(s)
Downsville Pike Land, LLC
Applicant(s)
Christopher R. Smith
Location
NW side of Downsville Pike, % mile North of 1-70
Election District :
#26 — Halfway
Comprehensive Plan
Designation
Low Density Residential
Zoning Map
57
Parcel(s)
P. 210 & P. 408
Acreage
1.60 acres (P. 210: 1.10 ac; P. 408:.50 ac)
Existing Zoning
RS — Residential, Suburban
Requested Zoning
HI — Highway Interchange
Date of Hearing:
September 25, 2017
I. Background and Findings Analysis:
I. Site Description
The subject parcels are located along the northwest side of Downsville Pike, approximately .25 miles
north of Interstate 70. The total acreage of the two parcels that are the subject of this rezoning case is
1.60 acres. Each is described below:
Subiect Parcel #1: Tax Map 57; Grid 002; Parcel 210 — The parcel has a regular
rectangular shape consisting of 1.10 acres. A single family detached residence and a
dilapidated accessory structure sit currently on the parcel, accessed from Halfway
Boulevard. The property sits atop a small hill which slopes moderately to the southwest
towards Marty Snook Park. Mature trees and brush cover much of the parcel. There are
no environmentally sensitive areas on the property.
Subiect Parcel #2: Tax Map 57; Grid 002; Parcel
408 — The triangular shaped parcel comprises
.50 acres. The Anita Rice House (historic site
WA-1-692) is located on the parcel, and is
currently in poor condition. Mature trees and
brush surround the house, which sits mid -slope
between Parcel 210 and Parcel 329. There are
no environ-mentally sensitive areas on the
property.
100 West Washington Street, Suite 2600 Hagerstown, MD 21740 1 P: 240.313.2430 y d,. 240.313.24311 'rDD! 7-1-1
VVWW.WASHCO-MD.NET
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
Both properties are located within the Urban Growth Area that surrounds the City of Hagerstown and
the Towns of Williamsport and Funkstown. An intermittent stream, Saint James Run, separates adjacent
parcel 329 from the Park at the base of the hill, just offsite.
2. Population Analysis
To evaluate the change in population, information was compiled from the US Census Bureau over a
thirty-year time frame. A thirty year horizon was chosen to show long term population trends both in the
election district of the proposed rezoning, as well as the overall trends of the County.
The two parcels subject to this rezoning are located within the Halfway Election District (#26). As
shown in the table below, the population in this district has grown more slowly than the County has over
the thirty year time frame between 1980 and 2010. District 26 has grown 13.54% over the thirty year
period (.45%) per year while the County as a whole has increased in population by 30.36% (1.01% per
year) during the same period. Both jurisdictions experienced their greatest population increase between
2000 and 2010, within the time period in question.
Table 1: Halfway Election District Population Trends
Population
Trends 1980 - 2010
Year
Area
Population
o change trom
previous
decade
1980
District
9489
County
113086
1990
District
9418
-0.7%
County
121393
7.3%
2000
District
9854
4.6%
County
131932
8.7%
2010
District
107741
9.3%
County
1474301
11.7%
Source: US Census Bureau
3. Availability of Public Facilities
A. Water and Sewerage
The adopted Water and Sewerage Plan for the County establishes the policies and
recommendations for public water and sewer infrastructure to help guide development in a manner that
helps promote healthy and adequate service to citizens. By its own decree, the purpose of the
Washington County Water and Sewerage Plan is "...to provide for the continued health and well-being of
Washington Countians and our downstream neighbors..."' This is achieved through implementing
recommendations within the County Comprehensive Plan and the Water and Sewerage Plan to provide
for services in a timely and efficient manner and by establishing an inventory of existing and programmed
services.
Water:
WI -Existing Service (County Line — City Treatment)
1 Washington County, Maryland Water and Sewerage Plan 2009 Update, Page I-2
2
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
Both parcels are served by existing (W-1) public water facilities as they are located within the
Urban Growth Area. Water distribution lines in this area are owned by the County while treatment is
provided by the City of Hagerstown. Areas immediately adjacent to the subject properties, along
Downsville Pike are designated as W-3, programmed service (City), in the County's 2009 Water and
Sewerage Plan. The City of Hagerstown Water Division offered no comment on the proposed develop-
ment when sent the application for review.
Wastewater:
WI -Existing Service (County)
The subject parcels are served by existing (W-1) public sewerage facilities within the Urban
Growth Area. The County provides wastewater service for this area at the Conococheague Wastewater
Treatment Plant. Adjacent areas along Downsville Pike are also programmed for service (W-3) by the
County within its Water and Sewerage Plan.
The Department of Water Quality is the wastewater provider for this area and, therefore, the
application was sent to the Department of Water Quality for review and comment. The Department had
no comments for this application.
B. Emergency Services
Fire and Emergency Services:
Volunteer Fire Company of Halfway (1114 Lincoln Avenue) — 1 mile away
Parcels 210 and 408 are located within the service area of the Volunteer Fire Company of
Halfway. This same entity also provides the nearest emergency rescue services. Their station is located
approximately 1 mile away from the properties subject to the rezoning.
A copy of this application was sent to the Halfway Fire Company as well as to the Washington
County Division of Emergency Services. No comments were received.
Schools
The subject site is within the districts of Lincolnshire Elementary, Springfield Middle and Williamsport
High schools. The requested zoning classification, Highway Interchange (HI), does not allow for
residential development. Therefore, there would be no school capacity mitigation requirements for
pupil generation under the County's Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance.
4. Present and Future Transportation Patterns
Highways — Access and Traffic Volume
Halfway Boulevard (which borders parcel 210 to the north) and MD 632iDownsville Pike (borders
both subject parcels to the east) are both classified as minor arterial in the Transportation Element of the
County's 2002 Comprehensive Plan. This classification accounts for mobility and access characteristics
of the roadway in its categorization. Minor Arterial roads are designed to carry between 5,000 — 25,000
Average Daily Traffic in urban areas. The County's road classification system is based upon the Federal
Highway Functional Classification System, but modified to reflect local road conditions.
Parcel 210 has approximately 300 feet of road frontage on Halfway Boulevard, extending from
the intersection of Halfway Boulevard and Downsville Pike to the northwest. The two parcels combined
have approximately 500 feet of road frontage on Downsville Pike, extending south from this same
intersection.
3
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
The southbound and northbound travel lanes on Downsville Pike are divided by a median. This
median extends north of the Halfway Boulevard intersection for approximately 500 feet until ending near
Ventura Drive. It runs south of this intersection for approximately % mile until ending at the 1-70E off -
ramp. The median then extends briefly again for approximately another 600 feet as Downsville Pike turns
southwest.
At present, no new major roadway projects affecting capacity or traffic flow realignment are
currently slated to occur in the immediate vicinity of the subject parcels on County, State or Federal
roads, according to a review of short and long term transportation planning documents.
Of roads in the vicinity of this rezoning application, the Hagerstown/Eastern Panhandle MPO's
current Long Range Transportation Plan (Direction 2040) proposes the widening of 1-70 to six lanes
throughout the County, including the segment that runs just south of the subject parcels. These proposed
improvements have not yet obtained funding or approval at this time. The County's 2002 Comprehensive
Plan also calls for widening of 1-70 between the Frederick County Line and the MD 63 interchange within
its Transportation Element.
In addition to evaluating public access of a parcel for rezoning purposes, it is also important to
evaluate traffic generation and existing traffic volumes. This is commonly accomplished through analysis
of historic and existing traffic counts as well as any existing traffic impact studies. The intersection of
Halfway Boulevard and Downsville Pike, located immediately adjacent to the two parcels to the northeast,
offers a proximate location which has had recorded traffic counts from the Maryland State Highway
Administration (SHA) throughout the time period shown below. The traffic volume data shown in the chart
is expressed in annual average daily traffic volumes.
Table 2: Traffic Volumes 1980-2015
Year
Downsville Pike
Halfway Blvd
2015
12,361
2010
12,152
2005
13,175
2000
6,900
1995
6,250
1990
14,600
1985
11,000
Source: Maryland State Highway Administration
As shown in the table above, traffic volumes have remained relatively consistent during the last
ten years. Traffic volumes have grown 1.7% between 2010 and 2015. The significant dip in traffic
volumes at this location between 1995 and 2000 is likely explained by 1-70 interchange construction
during that same period, causing traffic to divert onto other roads. Accordingly, the sharp increase in
traffic volume in 2005 at this location coincides with the project's completion.
The State Highway Administration had no comment after receiving a copy of the rezoning application.
The zoning application was also sent to the Division of Plan Review and Permitting and they have
supplied the following comment regarding traffic impacts:
1. Engineering Plan Review: `Any development of the area to be rezoned that generates a large
amount of traffic may require a new access location onto Halfway Boulevard. Any access
location onto Halfway Boulevard will necessarily be in close proximity to the intersection with MD
632, which may result in traffic flow issues. A traffic study may be required to determine, among
other things, the impact on MD 632/Halfway Blvd intersection. In addition, Halfway Boulevard is
classified as a minor arterial which requires a minimum 500 feet spacing requirement between
access locations, Any new access onto Halfway Blvd would have to meet that requirement."
0
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
2. 'Any proposed development will require a site plan prepared in accordance with Zoning
Ordinance Article 4, Section 4.11 to be submitted, reviewed, and approved by the Washington
County Plan Review Department."
3. "New development will have to meet the requirements of the Highway Interchange District found
in Article 19 of the Washington County Zoning Ordinance. In particular, additional buffer yards
with solid fencing and vegetative screening will be required between the HI zoned property and
the adjacent Residential Suburban zoned properties."
Public Transaortation
This area is not served by public transportation. Routes 111 and 112 (Valley Mall Via
Rosehill/Summit) of the Washington County Commuter both travel south along Downsville Pike to its
intersection with Oak Ridge Drive, roughly %2 mile north of the subject parcels, but the routes then
continue to the northwest along Oak Ridge Drive.
5. Compatibility with Existing and Proposed Development in the Area:
Both of the subject parcels are currently zoned Residential Suburban (RS) and both are requesting a
change to Highway Interchange (HI). The purpose of the HI zoning district is:
"...to provide suitable locations for commercial activities or light industrial land uses that serve
highway travelers, provide goods and services to a regional population, or uses that have a
need to be located near the interstate highway system to facilitate access by a large number of
employees, or the receipt or shipment of goods by highway vehicles... "2.
Select principal permitted uses within this zoning district include retail trades, businesses and
services, including but not limited to the following and any use permitted in the BL District, drive-in
restaurants, hotels, animal hospitals, auto sales and service establishments and more. New
development in a BG zoning district must be served by public water and sewer facilities.
There is a mix of zoning classes in the immediate vicinity of the two parcels (red box) in question,
as shown in Map 1 on the next page. Residential Suburban surrounds the properties to the north and
west above Interstate 70. The RS block gives way to Residential Urban just beyond that, in those same
directions. To the northeast is a Residential Multifamily (RM) district, while Highway Interchange (HI) lies
due east across Downsville Pike above 1-70. Below 1-70, one finds HI to the southwest; Office, Research
and Industry (ORI) to the south and Residential Transition (RT) to the southeast.
In terms of land use in the area surrounding the rezoning, residential and parkland dominate
north of 1-70. Marty Snook Memorial Park borders the subject parcels to the west. A park and ride lot is
immediately south of adjacent parcel 329, Health at Work, a health care facility in the Meritus system, is
just northeast of Halfway Boulevard. Callas Contractors, a construction firm, is found just after the 1-70
underpass on Downsville Pike to the south. A small cluster of mostly retail businesses is found at the
intersection of Downsville Pike and Oak Ridge Drive roughly'/ mile northeast.
2 Washington County Zoning Ordinance, Section 19.1, Purpose
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
Map 1: Surrounding Zoning Classifications
A. Historic Sites
Another important component of compatibility is the location of historic structures on and around
the parcels being proposed for rezoning. According to the Washington County Historic Sites Survey there
are approximately 6 historic sites located within a 0.5 mile radius of the proposed rezoning areas. One of
the six historic sites, the Anita Rice House, is located within the boundary of parcel 408, which is subject
to this rezoning. Below is a listing of existing historic resources left within a 0.5 mile radius of the subject
parcels.
Existing historic sites onsite:
• WA-1-692: "Anita Rice House" ca. 1900-1910, vernacular, 2-story wood frame dwelling located
within Parcel 408.
Existing historic sites within % mile: (Marsh Head land grant)
• WA-1-691: "Eldridge Tenant House," ca. 1900 vernacular , 2-story wood frame dwelling
constructed as employee housing for adjoining Shafer Farm (.25 miles away).
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
• WA-1-264: "Shafer Farm," mid-19"' agricultural complex encompassing five buildings including a
2-story brick farmhouse, two barns, smokehouse and stone springhouse associated with
prominent early residents of Washington County (1/3 mile away).
• WA-1-388: "David's Friendship," 18t" century, 2-story stone farmhouse associated with prominent
early residents of Washington County (1/2 mile away).
• WA-1-389: "Thomas -Adams House," late 19th century 2-story brick farmhouse and wash house
outbuilding associated with prominent early residents of Hagerstown (1/2 mile).
• WA-1-376: "Stockslager Farm," mid-191" century 2-story brick cased log house now converted to
commercial through property adaptive reuse (1/2 mile).
6. Relationship of the Proposed Change to the Adopted Plan for the County:
The purpose of a Comprehensive Plan is to evaluate the needs of the community and balance the
different types of growth to create a harmony between different land uses. In general, this is
accomplished through evaluation of existing conditions, projections of future conditions, and creation of a
generalized land use plan that promotes compatibility while maintaining the health, safety, and welfare of
the general public.
Each of the properties is located in the sub -policy area Low Density Residential. The Comprehensive
Plan offers the following definition for this policy area:
"This policy area designation would be primarily associated with single-family and to a
lesser degree two-family or duplex development. It is the largest policy area proposed for
the Urban Growth Area and becomes the main transitional classification from the urban
to rural areas. a
7. "Change or Mistake" Rule
When rezonings are not part of a comprehensive rezoning by the governing body, individual map
amendments (also known as piecemeal rezonings) are under an obligation to meet the test of the
"Change or Mistake" Rule. The "Change or Mistake" Rule requires proof by the applicant that there has
been either: a substantial change in the character in of the neighborhood since the last comprehensive
zoning plan, or a mistake in designating the existing zoning classification.
As part of the evaluation to determine whether the applicant has proven whether there has been
either a change or mistake in the zoning of a parcel, the Maryland Annotated Code Land Use Article and
the Washington County Zoning Ordinance state that the local legislative body is required to make findings
of fact on at least six different criteria in order to ensure that a consistent evaluation of each case is
provided. Those criteria include: 1) population change; 2) the availability of public facilities; 3) present
and future transportation patterns; 4) compatibility with existing and proposed development for the area;
5) the recommendation of the planning commission; and 6) the relationship of the proposed amendment
to the local jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan.
Even when change or mistake has been sufficiently sustained, it merely allows the local
governing body the authority to change the zoning; it does not require the change. When conditions are
right for a change the new zone must be shown to be appropriate and logical for the location and
consistent with the County's Comprehensive Plan.
II. Staff Analysis:
The analysis of a rezoning request begins with a strong presumption that the current zoning is
correct. It is assumed that the governing body performed sufficient analysis, exercised care, and gave
3 2002 Washington County, Maryland Comprehensive Plan, Page 243
7
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
adequate consideration to all known concerns when zoning was applied to a parcel of land. However,
there are instances by which a case can be established to show that the governing body either erred in
establishment of the proper zoning of a property or that enough change has occurred within the
neighborhood surrounding the property since the governing body's last assessment to require a new
evaluation of the established zoning designation.
The applicant of this case has indicated in their justification statement that they believe that there
has been both a mistake in the current zoning and a substantial change in the character of the
neighborhood since the last comprehensive rezoning in 2012. As noted in the prior section describing
the "Change or Mistake" Rule, the Washington County's Zoning Ordinance requires data to be presented
to the local legislative body on factors such as population change, present and future traffic patterns, the
availability of public facilities, the relationship of the proposed change to the Comprehensive Plan and its
compatibility with existing and proposed development in order to determine how the area subject to
rezoning has evolved over time.
A. Evidence for Mistake in the Current Zoning
In order to demonstrate that a mistake was made by the regulatory body in applying the existing
zoning classification to the parcel, the applicant must establish error occurred as a result of factors such
as:
1. A failure to take into account projects or trends probable of fruition;
2. Decisions based on erroneous information;
3. Facts that later prove to be incorrect;
4. Events that have occurred since the current zoning; or
S. Ignoring facts in evidence at the time of zoning application.
The last Comprehensive Rezoning in Washington County was completed in 2012, affecting the Urban
Growth Area that surrounds the City of Hagerstown and the towns of Williamsport and Funkstown. The
Rezoning affected approximately 17,000 parcels and 38,000 acres of land.° Information such as
population projections, growth trends, transportation and infrastructure data, and the recommendations of
the Comprehensive Plan were considered as a part of this effort. The input of property owners, local
officials, County staff and the general public was also solicited and considered in the assignment of each
parcel affected by the Comprehensive Rezoning_
The applicant's primary assertion in offering proof that a mistake was made in the designation of the
current zoning classification is to question whether the location and characteristics of parcels 210 and 408
make them more representative of adjacent residential or commercially zoned areas. The applicant
contends that the Board of County Commissioner's erred in their decision during the 2012 UGA
Comprehensive Rezoning to rezone the land radiating northeast and southwest from the 1-70 interchange
to HI, but not the adjacent parcels which are the focus of this rezoning.
The applicant claims that factors such as the following were not fully considered by the Board in their
decision:
• The separation of parcels 210 and 408 from adjacent residential areas to the north and west
by Halfway Blvd and Marty Snook Park;
• The proximity of other commercial development to the east, and
• The proximity of the 1-70 interchange (both for its development potential and traffic impacts
on a residential use)
4 Washington County Ordinance No. ORD-2012-08
8
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
For these reasons, the applicant feels that the subject parcels should have been considered similarly
situated to those located adjacent to the 1-70 interchange which were rezoned to HI in 2012 by the Board.
Given the Board's decision in 2012 was to retain the RS zoning classification for these parcels, we
can only conclude that the governing body judged that the site more closely fit the character of the nearby
residential neighborhoods than it did adjacent areas that either had or were given a commercial zoning
class.
We can surmise that there are good reasons for such a conclusion. As noted by the applicant on
multiple occasions within his justification statement, the parcel has a long history of residential usage.
Residential use on parcel 408 goes back more than 100 years, for example.
In addition to the established residential history of these properties, there are also challenges with
the existing transportation patterns. The location of the two parcels at the intersection of Halfway Blvd
and MD 632 presents a challenge in terms of access, as noted by SHA in their comments on page 5 of
this report. There is a concrete median running north and south along MD 632 from approximately 500
feet south of the intersection with 1-70 eastbound off ramp north to Venture Drive, with the only interrupted
area being at Halfway Blvd in the vicinity of the site.
It is evident from this configuration that the State Highway Administration is attempting to limit the
number of left hand turn movements in this vicinity due to its proximity with Interstate off ramps and high
volumes of traffic. While the developer may not be asking for an additional break in the median, creating
a retail destination area on these properties could increase the amount of U-turn traffic at the intersection
with Halfway Boulevard and create additional traffic issues at this intersection. Furthermore, there is very
limited road access to Halfway Boulevard. Almost the entire road frontage along Halfway Boulevard has
dual left turn lanes meaning that traffic entering the site will need to cross two lanes of on -coming traffic.
The alternative to access on the subject parcel would be to divert access to the entrance of Marty Snook
Regional Park. This presents a safer access point but then has an impact on the traffic related to the
park.
For these reasons, it is reasonable to assume that the local legislative body took in the relevant
factors and concluded that the continuation of the RS zoning class was a good fit at this particular
location.
B. Evidence for Substantial Change in the Character of the Neighborhood
In addition to the claim that the Board made a mistake in the application of the current zoning, the
applicant also argues that there has been a substantial change in the character of the neighborhood
since the time of the last comprehensive zoning plan. In order to demonstrate that a substantial change
has occurred in the character of the neighborhood since the passage of the last Comprehensive Zoning
Plan, the applicant must establish:
1. What area reasonably constitutes the `neighborhood" of the subject property,,
2. The changes that have occurred in the neighborhood since the comprehensive rezoning;
3. Proof that these changes resulted in a change in the character of the neighborhood.
Maryland case law has consistently established that these factors must be considered cumulatively,
not individually, if the applicant is to demonstrate proof that a substantial change in the character of the
neighborhood has occurred. Correspondingly, a substantial change in any one individual factor doesn't
necessarily illustrate that substantial change has occurred in the neighborhood overall.
0
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
C. Neighborhood Definition
In determining what reasonably constitutes the neighborhood surrounding parcels 210 and 408, we
again confront the challenge of answering the question presented within the prior "mistake" section: is this
site more similarly situated to nearby residential or commercial areas? The Applicant's Exhibit B presents
their interpretation of the boundaries of the neighborhood_ While this Exhibit displays an aerial photo
utilizing a 1 mile radius around the site to encompass the "neighborhood," the applicant narrows down its
borders considerably by saying:
"The neighborhood that faces the same situation as the Site, in reality, is not the nearby
residential neighborhoods along Halfway Boulevard but more appropriately the
commercial corridor along Downsville Pike and near or adjacent to its interchange with P
70. "s
While the concept of a neighborhood is flexible according to its geographical context, as the applicant
notes citing Montgomery v. Board of County Commissioners for Prince George's County (1971),
subsequent Maryland case law demonstrates that the neighborhood must be reasonable, not "unduly
restrictive" and include the "immediate environs of the subject property. ,6
The neighborhood defined by the applicant in the aerial photograph meets this test, appropriately
encompassing the influence of the commercial and residential areas that are immediately adjacent. The
applicant's above written statement however fails the "immediate environs" and "unduly restrictive" tests
that would render their interpretation of the neighborhood's boundaries fairly debatable by marginalizing
all of the surrounding property zoned for residential uses (zoning classes RS and RM) in the immediate
vicinity of the property to the west, north and northeast as being immaterial to the site. By extension,
Marty Snook Park, which is also zoned RS, and directly abuts the property on two sides, would also be
excluded by this narrow neighborhood definition. The applicant reinforced this narrowed interpretation by
highlighting the Downsville Pike commercial corridor in the application package provided to the planner.
D. Changes that have occurred in the Neighborhood
The applicant contends in their Justification Statement that a substantial change has occurred in the
character of the neighborhood since the 2012 Comprehensive Rezoning of the UGA. As evidence they
offer:
1. The rezoning of several adjacent parcels as a part of the 2012 Urban Growth Area Rezoning to
all for more intensive uses
2. An increase in annual average daily traffic at the intersection of Halfway Boulevard and
Downsville Pike from 2012 to 2015
3. The approval of a new Sheetz across Downsville Pike from the site
Zoning Changes in the Vicinity
Typically, piecemeal rezoning cases seeking to establish a claim that there has been a change in the
character of the neighborhood should use the last comprehensive rezoning of the area as their starting
point to illustrate substantial change. "Changes contemplated prior to the last comprehensive are
usually not relevant in determining whether a substantial change has occurred to support
rezoning of the property"'.
5 Applicant's Justification Statement, P.7
6 Sedney v. Lloyd, 44 Md. App. 633, 410 A.2d 616 (1980)
Guide to Maryland Zoning Decisions, Yh Edition, Stanley Abrams referencing Maryland Court of Appeals Case
Buckel v. Board of County Commissioners of Frederick County, 80 Md. App. 305, 562 A.2d 1297 (1989)
10
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
Though not typical, there have been cases whereby the Maryland Court system has provided leeway
for applicants to use zoning and other changes that occurred prior to the last comprehensive rezoning to
be used as evidence of a substantial change; however, they must be coupled with evidence showing
substantial change after the fact.
"Changes which may have occurred prior to the last comprehensive rezoning need not be
wholly disregarded when a change from that zoning is under consideration. It may be, as
was the case here, that it was a rather close question in the minds of the officials
concerned whether a change in the zoning of the land involved should not have been
made at the time of the last comprehensive zoning, and additional changes thereafter
may bring the zoning status of the land as to which action is sought over the line dividing
different zones. "a
In this case the applicant does not call out specific rezoning cases that occurred previous to the last
comprehensive rezoning adopted in 2012. Rather the applicant simply states that the comprehensive
rezoning in and of itself constitutes a substantial change. This argument has repeatedly been struck
down in the court system due to the fact that the point of a comprehensive rezoning is to analyze historic
changes and future growth projections to establish the appropriate zoning on parcels in their jurisdiction.
If the property owner felt aggrieved by the decision they had the option to appeal the rezoning of the
property at that time.
For the sake of argument, Staff has reviewed the zoning of the area prior to the 2012 Urban Area
Comprehensive Rezoning. Map 2 shows the zoning in the vicinity just before the Comprehensive
Rezoning of the UGA. This image provides a baseline image from which to detect how the area's zoning
has changed in the time since 2012.
In Map 2 we can see that both before and after the adoption of the Comprehensive UGA Rezoning in
2012, the subject parcels were zoned Residential Suburban (RS). At that time, the properties were
bounded on the north and northwest by IRS zoning; Agricultural (A) zoning to the south and west;
Highway Interchange (HI-1) to the east, and Residential Multi -family to the south, east and northeast.
South of Interstate 70 Office, Research and Technology (ORT), Agricultural and Highway Interchange
(HI-2) zoning could be found within the immediate vicinity of the site.
The HI-2 zoning district, which was a predominantly high density residential zoning district that also
allowed some light industrial uses, was located roughly '/Z mile southeast of the subject parcels. These
prior zoning classifications can be seen in Map 2 below, which approximates the site location in a red
box.
s Town of Somerset v. County, 229 Md. 42 (1962) & Runyon v. Glackin, 45 Md. App. 457,413 A.2d 291 (1980)
11
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
The current zoning, shown below, demonstrates the effects of Urban Area Comprehensive
Rezoning. The old Agricultural zoning classification that applied to several adjacent parcels in the vicinity
was eliminated, necessitating their reassignment to new zoning classes. By and large, most of these
parcels were assigned to varying residential classes that are fitting of the gradually decreasing density
that signals the transition from the core to the fringes inside of the Urban Growth Area. Notably, Marty
Snook Park was assigned to the RS zoning class as it was determined that this designation most closely
fit its most immediate neighborhood, in addition to allowing the park as a principal permitted use. The HI-
2 district has also been replaced by the similar Residential Urban (RU) zoning class with the repeal of the
HI-2 classification in 2012.
The RM zoning district adjacent to the parcels subject to this rezoning also was changed to HI
during the 2012 UGA Comprehensive Rezoning. It's important to understand that the RM zoning for this
parcel was in place prior to the completion of the 1-70 interchange that significantly transformed
immediate portions of the neighborhood following its completion in 1999. Thus, in 2012 when the UGA
Comprehensive Rezoning occurred, the rezoning of the Interchange Parcel reflected administrative
recognition that the site conditions on the parcel had been transformed by the construction and reflected
that in the zoning. The same could not be said of parcels 210 and 408, where the onsite and surrounding
neighborhood conditions remained largely the same as they were in the past. Accordingly, the site
conditions of the Interchange Parcel (which encompasses the recently approved Sheetz) were
qualitatively different than those found on parcel's 210 and 408, to significant degree, when the decision
was made by the Board to rezone the former to HI, but keep the latter parcels as IRS.
12
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
Map 3: Current Zoning
Aside from the interchange parcel, additional expanded areas of Highway Interchange (HI) also
appear on Map 3. These new areas demonstrate administrative recognition with stakeholder input,
during the Comprehensive Urban Growth Area Rezoning, of the land use changes that had occurred in
the area as a result of the completion of the 1-70 interchange at Downsville Pike in 1999. The HI wedges
shown below radiate outward from the boundaries of this interchange, replacing notable portions of the
former ORT immediately south of 1-70. ORT became ORI (Office, Research and Industry) in the
remaining portion, which allowed for a greater range of uses within a similar zoning class.
These comprehensive rezoning changes encompass parcels 258, 262, and 264, which are
specifically noted by the applicant in their Justification Statement as being indicative of substantial
neighborhood change. As stated above in discussing the interchange parcel, these properties are
qualitatively different sites than parcels 210 and 408. They are located distant to any dense residential
neighborhoods and have long been planned for either commercial industrial use. Their location directly
on 1-70 makes their use unsuitable for anything but these types of uses, in contrast to the subject parcels,
which clearly are influenced by the adjacent park and residential neighborhoods. It is debatable whether
these particular parcels should be considered part of the "neighborhood" given these characteristics, and
their distant location to the parcels in question.
The rezoning of the block of parcels to the east of the subject site from HI-1 to HI represents
administrative recognition that existing uses on those properties, such as Premium Outlets on parcel 176,
serve a regional population in keeping with the definition of the present HI zoning district. Given the
location of the subject site; bordered by a park and substantial residential neighborhoods, a zoning
classification that serves primarily a local, not regional population, would seem more logical for the site.
The last approved piecemeal rezoning in the immediate vicinity of the site occurred in 2000 (RZ-
00-002), lending further credence to the stable character of the neighborhood.
13
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
Summarily, from a zoning standpoint, the changes which occurred in the neighborhood resulting
from the construction of the 1-70 interchange at Downsville Pike were considered and responded to by the
implementation of the Comprehensive Rezoning of UGA the 2012. Since that time, there hasn't been
significant activity that suggests substantial change has occurred in the neighborhood, as evidenced by
the lack of requests for piecemeal rezoning.
Note: Applicant's Exhibit D is labeled "2012 Zoning" but actually shows the Current Zoning just after the
UGA Rezoning took place in that year.
ii. Changes in Average Annual Daily Traffic
While the applicant presents accurate data on the on Annual Average Daily Traffic from the State
Highway Administration between 2012 and 2015, it is important to understand the caveats to the
Applicant's conclusion that traffic is increasing to a considerable degree in the neighborhood.
First, traffic count data was considered by the Board as a part the Urban Area Comprehensive
Rezoning in 2012, and was factored into the ultimate decisions about the appropriate zoning classification
for the subject parcels, and the surrounding area. Second, traffic data can vary considerably from year to
year at any given location, due to factors that may not necessarily be locally derived. If, for example,
construction work on a nearby arterial road necessitates closure or diversion of traffic to alternate routes,
neighboring roads can see short-term upticks in traffic that may not necessarily be indicative of long-term
traffic increases.
Long-term traffic data tells a different story about area traffic volume than the short term data
presented by the Applicant at the Halfway Boulevard/Downsville Pike intersection. The applicant's Exhibit
E makes this clear, as does Table 2 of this report on page 2.
Exhibit E shows that traffic did increase from 2012 to 2015 (10,871 to 12,361 ADT) as the Applicant
contends. This trend obscures the fact that the 2012 traffic count also represented a slight decrease in
traffic volume from 2011 (10,960 in 2011 to 10,871 ADT in 2012).
• Traffic also decreased in the three years prior to 2012 (12,152 in 2010 to 10,871 in
2012).
• Further, the 2015 traffic count represents a 15.33% decrease from the peak traffic
count at this location, which occurred in 1990, as shown in Table 2 (14,600 in 1990 to
12,361 in 2015 ADT).
In effect, the traffic at this intersection has yet to regain the volume that it reached prior to the
construction of the interchange at 1-70 and Downsville Pike. Thus, while traffic has marginally increased
in the last few years at this intersection, the increase has not increased traffic volume to past its historic
levels.
A traffic impact analysis was also conducted in February 2017 as a part of the development
review process for the Sheetz gas station and convenience store recently approved by the Planning
Commission and noted by the applicant for this proposed rezoning. The study concluded that traffic
volume has remained largely flat at the Downsville Pike/Halfway Blvd intersection in the time since the
interchange was constructed in 1999.9
iii. Relationship to 2002 Washington County Comprehensive Plan
In 2002 the Washington County Comprehensive Plan was updated. As part of that update an
evaluation of existing and projected land uses were evaluated to develop a guide for future land use
9 Traffic Impact Analysis (TIS-17-001) conducted February 13, 2017 by Street Traffic Studies, Ltd.
14
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
decisions in the County; the Land Use Map. This map provides a generalized analysis and projection of
land uses in various regions of the County. The Land Use Map was heavily consulted as part of the
Urban Growth Area Rezoning.
As shown in the map below, cropped from the adopted Land Use Map in Chapter 12 of that Plan,
the County projected that land within and surrounding the subject parcels to develop in the manner
eventually realized in the 2012 Comprehensive Rezoning: Industrial Flex (IF) south of 1-70 and east of
Downsville Pike; Low and High Density Residential (LD, HD) to the north, Commercial (CM) surrounding
the northern Interchange Parcel and Open Space (OS) for Marty Snook Park. By and large, what was
projected in this map has been borne out on the ground over the last 14 years. Thus, projected changes
in the neighborhood were largely accounted for in prior long range planning and comprehensive rezoning
efforts by the County. The 2002 Comprehensive Land Use Map can be seen below.
Map 4: 2002 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
15
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
iv. Recommendation:
The applicant claims that both a mistake in the designation of the existing zoning and a
substantial change in the character of the neighborhood have or did occur since the time of the last
comprehensive rezoning, thereby warranting their petition to rezone the property from RS to HI.
The burden of the applicant in a "Mistake" case is to provide evidence that the Board:
1. Failed to take into account projects or trends probable of fuition,
2. Made decisions based on erroneous information,
3. Used facts that later prove to be incorrect,
4. Couldn't have foreseen events that have occurred since the current zoning,
5. Ignored facts in evidence at the time of zoning application.
The burden of the applicant in a "Change" case is to illustrate three points:
1. Defining the boundaries of the neighborhood,
2. Demonstrating that substantial changes have occurred since the last Comprehensive
Rezoning Plan, and
3. Showing that those changes resulted in the altered character of the neighborhood.
Regarding the charge of mistake, this analysis has revealed that the Board very likely did
consider the facts presented by the applicant during the UGA Comprehensive Rezoning (such as the
challenges and unique characteristics of the site's location noted on page 9), and concluded in 2012 that
the site more closely fit with the residential neighborhoods to the north and west, than it did the
commercial neighborhoods located to the east and south for reasons such as those provided on that
same page.
The analysis has also revealed that the applicant has not met the burdens in proving that a
substantial change has occurred in the neighborhood since the 2012 UGA Rezoning. First, the applicant
fails to reasonably define the neighborhood boundaries by marginalizing the adjacent residential
neighborhoods and parkland that that immediately abut the property to the north and west in favor of
those parcels in the vicinity that are zoned commercial. Second, the changes cited by the applicant which
have occurred in the neighborhood; in terms of zoning changes in the vicinity, traffic counts, and road
improvements, were all considered and accounted for in full during the Comprehensive Rezoning of the
Urban Growth Area in 2012. Accordingly, the building of a new Sheetz store nearby should be
recognized as an example of planned growth, not as evidence of neighborhood change.
Finally, as stated on page 10, "Changes contemplated prior to the last comprehensive are
usually not relevant in determining whether a substantial change has occurred to support
rezoning of the property. "i0 Insufficient evidence beyond the intentional changes resulting from the
UGA Rezoning itself have been offered by the applicant demonstrating recent substantial change in the
character of the neighborhood since 2012.
When paired with the background information cited at the beginning of this Staff Report, such as
the Halfway District population growing more slowly than the County as a whole and modest growth in
traffic volume, a picture emerges that substantial change in the character of the neighborhood has not
occurred in the past five years.
10 Guide to Maryland Zoning Decisions, 5 h Edition, Stanley Abrams referencing Maryland Court of Appeals Case
Buckel v. Board of County Commissioners of Frederick County, 80 Md. App. 305, 562 A.2d 1297 (1989)
16
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-17-003 Downsville Pike Land LLC
Consequently, the staff analysis has concluded that convincing proof has not been offered by the
applicant demonstrating either a mistake in the current zoning, or a substantial change in the character of
the neighborhood since the 2012 UGA Rezoning in their petition to rezone the property from RS to HI.
Respectfully Submitted,
Travis Allen
Comprehensive Planner
17
Washington County
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING 0 LAND PRESERVATION P FOREST CONSERVATION f GIS
October 30, 2017
APPLICATION FOR MAP AMENDMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Property owner(s):
Applicant(s):
Location:
Election District:
Comprehensive Plan Designation
Zoning Map:
Parcel(s):
Acreage:
Existing Zoning:
Requested Zoning:
Date of Public Meeting:
RECOMMENDATION
RZ-17-003
Downsville Pike Land, LLC
Christopher R. Smith
Northwest side of Downsville Pike, % mile north of 1-70
#26 - Halfway
Low Density Residential
57
Parcel 210 and Parcel 408
1.60 acres (P. 210 —1.10 ac.; P. 408 - .50 ac.)
RS — Residential Suburban
HI — Highway Interchange
September 25, 2017
The Washington County Planning Commission took action at its regular meeting held on Monday, October 2,
2017 to recommend approval of Map Amendment RZ-17-003 to the Board of County Commissioners. The
Commission considered the applicant's claim that there was a mistake in the zoning of the property during
the 2012 Comprehensive Urban Growth Area Rezoning and that there has been a change in the character of
the neighborhood since the 2012 Comprehensive UGA rezoning. The Commission evaluated the supporting
documentation submitted with the application and the applicant's presentation during the public rezoning
information meeting. The Commission also considered the Staff Report and Analysis, verbal comments of
interested parties provided during the public rezoning information meeting and written comments received
by the Department of Planning & Zoning.
The Commission evaluated supporting documents submitted with the application that cited the location near
the interchange, other Highway Interchange rezonings, traffic impacts, and the recent abandonment of the
parcels for residential purposes as support for the mistake claim. Further, the Planning Commission
considered the applicant's proposition that other zoning changes have occurred in the neighborhood along
the Downsville Pike and continued commercial development along with traffic impacts have caused change
in the character of the neighborhood. The Planning Commission recognized that continued residential use
may be difficult in light of intersection expansions that will further complicate residential access and, that in
the future, commercial uses may be more suitable and able to accommodate access restrictions.
120 West Washington Street, 2°d Floor I Hagerstown, MD 217401 P: 240.313.24301 F: 240.313.24311 TDD: 7-1-1
WWW.WASHCO-MRNET
Copies of the application, Staff Report and Analysis, written comments, minutes of the September 18, 2017
public rezoning information meeting, and the unapproved minutes of the October 2, 2017 regular meeting
are attached.
TA/STG/dse
Attachments
cc: Bruce Dean, Linowes & Blocher
file
Respectfully submitted,
Stephen T. Goodrich, Director
Washington County Department of
Planning & Zoning
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Letter to the Governor in regard to Trans Canada Natural Gas Pipe line
PRESENTATION DATE: December 12, 2017
PRESENTATION BY: Daniel DiVito, Deputy Director, Department of Water Quality
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to send letter to Governor Hogan encouraging all appropriate
approving agencies carefully consider the 401 certification.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: TransCanada is planning to construct a natural gas pipe line crossing
Washington County west of Hagerstown near Hancock crossing the Potomac River there. The
company plans to utilize a method of Hydraulic Directional Drilling called “Blowout” to cross rivers
and waterways in Washington County. The Hagerstown R C Wilson Water Plant and our Sharpsburg
plant use the Potomac River as source water and are directly downstream from the proposed crossing
site. Obviously both plants would be directly affected by any accidental spill in the river. Our
Sharpsburg plant serves 594 customers. The City of Hagerstown on the other hand not only provides
water for those in the city limits but also in adjacent areas including the towns of Smithsburg,
Williamsport, and Funkstown. They also have major industrial customers like Mack Truck, MCI,
Citicorp, and Meritus Hospital. Their estimated service population is around 90,000. In addition,
everything east of here all the way to the bay has the potential to also be affected. Another relevant
point is the Karst geology that makes up most of Washington County. This kind of geological
makeup is a conduit directly from the surface to the many aquafers utilized to produce water for most
of our systems.
In order for this project to move forward approval from EPA, Army Corp of Engineers and MDE is
necessary. MDE must within one year approve or deny a Clean Water Act Certification.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES:
ALTERNATIVES:
ATTACHMENTS: Draft Letter
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS:
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Individuals requiring special accommodations are requested to contact the Office of the County Commissioners, 240.313.2200 Voice/TDD, to make
arrangements.
DATE
Office of Governor Larry Hogan
100 State Circle
Annapolis, MD 21401-1925
Dear Governor Hogan,
TransCanada has proposed to build a new, eight-inch diameter pipeline for fracking gas that would
cut across the Potomac River in Washington County. The Potomac River Basin is one of the most
prized and valuable environmental assets in our region, if not our nation. It also serves as a clean
and stable source of drinking water for some Marylanders. Our interest in writing this letter is to
protect the Potomac River and those who enjoy it. Please consider once again standing with our
County to protect our drinking water and our natural resources.
TransCanada’s proposed Eastern Panhandle Expansion Pipeline in western Maryland would carry
fracked gas from Pennsylvania through Maryland and into West Virginia. The pipeline would
connect with another gas pipeline proposed by Mountaineer Gas, a West Virginia company. The
County has been advised that both pipelines would cross dozens of rivers and streams that flow into
the Potomac River. Although Maryland’s authority is centered on the TransCanada portion of this
pipeline, both pipelines pose a potential risk.
Our constituents are concerned over the inherent risks with the construction of pipelines and the
methods used to route them across rivers and waterways, from stormwater pollution to spills during
the Hydraulic Directional Drilling method called a “blowout”. A blowout spill at the Potomac River
crossing on the TransCanada pipeline would most likely threaten the some Washington County
public water systems. Similarly, the Mountaineer Gas portion of the pipeline, poses public and
private water system concerns.
The route proposed for both pipelines would also cross sensitive limestone geology called karst.
Karst geology allows pollution to quickly flow through the ground and into aquifers that supply
drinking water to private and public water systems. Karst geology can increase the risks of a
blowout spill during hydraulic directional drilling and pose a long term risk to drinking water from
pipeline leaks or breaks after construction. The karst geology in Western Maryland continues to be
of concern, when considering pipelines and fracking.
For approval, TransCanada must obtain a permit under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act from
your administration. This water quality certification process is meant to ensure that the proposed
pipeline will not threaten or degrade Maryland’s water quality. This process provides the Maryland
Department of the Environment (MDE) a critical opportunity to assess the potential impacts of a
federal project on the state’s water resources.
President
Jeffrey A. Cline, Vice President
John F. Barr
Wayne K. Keefer
LeRoy E. Myers, Jr.
WWW.WASHCO-MD.NET
Individuals requiring special accommodations are requested to contact the Office of the County Commissioners, 240.313.2200 Voice/TDD, to make
arrangements.
MDE has one year from the time TransCanada submitted its application to decide whether to
approve or deny the Clean Water Act certification. Thus, MDE’s deadline to act is March 15, 2018.
MDE must fully understand the scope of the impacts the pipeline will have on Maryland’s water
quality before making a decision on the pipeline.
For these reasons, please encourage MDE and all appropriates agencies in your administration to
carefully consider the 401 certification. Please postpone any approval until Maryland has all the
information necessary to fully understand the impacts of Eastern Panhandle Expansion natural gas
pipeline.
Thank you,
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: First Quarter Adjustments to the Washington County Board of Education’s
FY2018 General Fund Budget
PRESENTATION DATE: December 12, 2017
PRESENTATION BY: Jeffrey Proulx, Chief Operating Officer, Washington County Public
Schools and David Brandenburg, Executive Director of Finance, Washington County Public
Schools
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the requested first quarter adjustments to the
Board of Education’s FY2018 General Fund Budget.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Annotated Code of Maryland requires local school systems to
periodically re-forecast their financial needs and make necessary changes to their budgets. To that
end, the Washington County Board of Education approved the attached list of changes to its
FY2018 General Fund Budget at its November 21, 2017 meeting.
DISCUSSION: Several of the changes that the Board of Education approved on November 21,
2017 cross major categories. Therefore, these requested adjustments must also be approved by
the Board of County Commissioners. The Board of Education has asked its Finance staff to
review the requested budget changes with the Commissioners and answer any questions that they
may have.
FISCAL IMPACT: None. These proposed modifications merely adjust the budget to allow for
proper categorization of revenues and expenses.
CONCURRENCES: The Board of Education’s Finance Committee reviewed the proposed
adjustments at their meeting on November 14, 2017 and recommended them for approval by the
full Board. The Board of Education approved these changes at their November 21, 2017 meeting.
ALTERNATIVES: None
ATTACHMENTS: Proposed first quarter budget adjustments for the Washington County Board
of Education’s FY2018 General Fund Operating Budget.
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: None
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Washington County Public Schools
Requested First Quarter FY2018 Budget Adjustments
Category
Increase/
Decrease
The primary reason for requested change is:
Instructional Salaries
1,024,361
Negotiated salary adjustments, offset partially by increased
turnover credit and position reduction - paraprofessional
Special Education
215,156
Negotiated Wary adjustments
Other Instructional Costs
200,000
Non -renewal of contracted services
Administration
42,000
Position reduction - Print shop technician
Student Transportation Services
64,000
Position reduction - Garage staff
Operation of Plant
(83,184)
Position reduction - Custodial consolidation
Fixed Charges
(850,333)
Pension and Social Security adjustments to experience and
for tax savings, as well as above position reductions
Net Effect on Fund Balance
$ 0
Note: An increase in the revenue budget has the same effect as a decrease in the expense budget. (They are both positive.) Therefore, when
adding the column, one must reverse the sign on the requested change in revenue.