HomeMy WebLinkAbout240130a
John F. Barr, President
Jeffrey A. Cline, Vice President
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
January 30, 2024
OPEN SESSION AGENDA
9:00 AM INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CALL TO ORDER, President John F. Barr
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 9, 2024
9:05 AM COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS AND COMMENTS
9:15 AM STAFF COMMENTS
9:20 AM CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
9:30 AM PUBLIC HEARING – APPLICATION FOR ZONING MAP AMENDMENT RZ-23-
006
Travis Allen, Senior Planner, Planning and Zoning
10:00 AM FY25 RURAL LEGACY PROGRAM GRANT – APPROVAL TO SUBMIT
APPLICATION AND ACCEPT AWARDED FUNDS
Chris Boggs, Rural Preservation Administrator, Planning & Zoning
10:10 AM CLIPP RURAL LEGACY PROGRAM (RLP) EASEMENT
Chris Boggs, Rural Preservation Administrator, Planning & Zoning
10:15 AM MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY OFFICE OF STATEWIDE BROADBAND, FY23
CONNECT MARYLAND NETWORK INFRASTRUCTURE GRANT PROGRAM
BY AND BETWEEN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF
WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND AND VERIZON MARYLAND, LLC
Michelle Gordon, County Administrator; Kirk Downey, County Attorney; Tyler Patton,
Verizon Maryland, LLC
10:25 AM FY24 HEALTHY FAMILIES HOME VISITING CONTINUATION GRANT –
APPROVAL TO ACCEPT AWARDED FUNDING
Nicole Phillips, Senior Grant Manager, Grant Management; Richard Lesh, Grant
Manager, Grant Management
Derek Harvey
Wayne K. Keefer
Randall E. Wagner
Page 2 of 3
OPEN Session Agenda
January 30, 2024
Individuals requiring special accommodations are requested to contact the Office of the County Commissioners, 240.313.2200
Voice/TDD, to make arrangements no later than ten (10) working days prior to the meeting.
10:30 AM FY24 SCHOOL BASED HEALTH CENTER SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING –
APPROVAL TO ACCEPT AWARDED FUNDING
Nicole Phillips, Senior Grant Manager, Grant Management; Richard Lesh, Grant
Manager, Grant Management
10:35 AM SOLE SOURCE PROCUREMENT (PUR-1665) SENTINEL ONE EDR SOFTWARE
AND SOC MONITORING AGREEMENT FOR THE INFORMATION SYSTEM
DEPARTMENT
Rick Curry, Director, Purchasing; Josh O’Neal, Chief Technical Officer, Information
Technology
BID AWARD (PUR-1658) FIFTEEN (15) 2023 OR NEWER POLICE
INTERCEPTORS UTILITY AWD VEHICLES FOR THE SHERIFF’S OFFICE
Rick Curry, Director, Purchasing; Alan Matheny, Fleet Logistics and Commercial
Vehicle Enforcement, Sheriff’s Office
10:40 AM QUOTATION AWARD (Q-23-767) – WELL DRILLING SERVICES AT
ELEVATED WATER STORAGE TANK FOR THE TOWN OF SHARPSBURG
Brandi Naugle, Buyer, Purchasing; Joe Moss, Deputy Director, Water Quality –
Engineering Services
CONTRACT RENEWAL (PUR-1596) LABORATORY SERVICES FOR
WATER/WASTEWATER TESTING FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER
QUALITY
Brandi Naugle, Buyer, Purchasing; Davina Yutzy, Deputy Director, Water Quality
10:50 AM BUDGET TRANSFER
Sheriff Brian Albert, Washington County Sheriff’s Office
10:55 AM AGRICULTURE - FACES OF FARMING PRESENTATION
Leslie Hart, Business Development Specialist, Business and Economic Development
11:00 AM 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; To consider the acquisition of real
property for a public purpose and matters directly related thereto; To consider a matter that concerns
the proposal for a business or industrial organization to locate, expand, or remain in the State; To
consult with counsel to obtain legal advice on a legal matter; To consult with staff, consultants, or
other individuals about pending or potential litigation; and To discuss cybersecurity, if the public
body determines that public discussion would constitute a risk to: (i) security assessments or
deployments relating to information resources technology; (ii) network security information; or (iii)
deployments or implementation of security personnel, critical infrastructure, or security devices.)
Page 3 of 3
OPEN Session Agenda
January 30, 2024
Individuals requiring special accommodations are requested to contact the Office of the County Commissioners, 240.313.2200
Voice/TDD, to make arrangements no later than ten (10) working days prior to the meeting.
3:00 PM RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION
3:00 PM RECESS
EVENING MEETING AT MAUGANSVILLE RURITAN CLUB
Location: 17008 Maugans Avenue
Maugansville, Maryland 21767
6:00 PM INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CALL TO ORDER, President John F. Barr
6:05 PM COMMISSIONERS’ REPORTS AND COMMENTS
6:10 PM CITIZENS’ PARTICIPATION
7:05 PM ADJOURNMENT
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING - Application for Zoning Map Amendment RZ-23-006
PRESENTATION DATE: January 30, 2024
PRESENTATION BY: Travis Allen, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Zoning
RECOMMENDED MOTION: The purpose of this public hearing is to take public comment on the
rezoning application. The Commissioners have the option to reach a consensus to either approve or
deny the request after the public hearing closes or deliberate on the issue at a later date.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Application is being made to apply the Rural Business floating zone over a 2-
acre property through a rezoning map amendment.
DISCUSSION: The applicants Ralph and Leah Martin seek a map amendment for a property at 19815
Reidtown Road ¼ mile west of Marsh Pike. The applicant wishes to establish an auto body repair shop
that would not be permitted under its current zoning designation.
The factors to be considered in a request for the creation of a new RB zoning district are listed in Article
5E of the Washington County Zoning Ordinance. RB districts must designate a specific type of land
use they wish to pursue at the location in their application materials and demonstrate that the proposed
use will be compatible with the existing neighborhood which surrounds it. The purpose of the RB
zoning district is to permit the continuation and development of businesses that support the agricultural
industry and farming community, serve the needs of the rural residential population, provide for
recreation and tourism opportunities, and to establish locations for businesses and facilities not
otherwise permitted in the rural areas of the County.
This item was presented to the Washington County Planning Commission at a Public Information
Meeting held during their regular meeting on November 6, 2023. It was then brought back for
recommendation at the December 4, 2023 meeting. At the latter meeting, members unanimously
recommended in favor of the proposed map amendment, with the condition that the property not be
subdivided in the future to separate the business from the associated residential structure.
Thus far, three public comments in opposition of the proposal were received during the Public
Information Meeting. Concerns centered around the potential effects of auto body business on the
surrounding neighborhood.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: Washington County Planning Commission
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Application, staff report, Planning Commission recommendation, approved
Planning Commission minutes and written public comments
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: none
FOR PLANNINIG # A1SSION USE ONLY
Reaching No -
Date Date Filed;
WASHINGTON COUNTYPLANNING CONINUSSION
ZONING ORDINANCE MM AN4ENDN ENT APPLIC04TION
Ralph E_ & Leah A Martin
Applicant
19815 REvdbmm Road
Hagerstown. TAD 21742
Md &,Esll�
mt r--maFA
Sam =9
AProperty Owner oContract Purchaser
uAtt orney aConsutlant
o0ther-.
(240) T12-SIM
Phone Number
noel_manalo§oliifkurman.com
E-mail Address
19815 Re'udtown Road - E of Paradise Church Rd., W of Marsh Pike
Property Location:
flQ1 i tX}20 tIQ:i9 2 �l0- +l-
Tax Grid: Parcel No.: Acreage:
Rural Village RMW
fkn (110)
Current Zoning: Requested Zoning.
Reason for the Request a Change in the character oaf the neighborhood
❑ Mistake in original zoning X floating Zone
PaJ)* 41 • f - /
/ L %i _ .
AppimWsArwture
Subscribed and -;mwrn before me this day of - At
My ��WAftbIk&
•a ti oexpires _. • s # IZOZ6 l'
Alotary Public
FOR PLANNING COMMISSION USE ONLY
❑ Application Form
❑ Fee Worksheet
o Application Fee
a Ownership Veffi cation
u Boundary Plat (Including Metes
& Bounds)
u Names and Addresses of all Adjoining
& GDnkomting Property Owners
a Vicinity Map
c3 Justification Statement
o 30 copies of complete Application
W N
o
N p
od N� N
z
i; � �
a°��0 �E
a 0 m c
W % c O
93 E
E E
EM U
E
o �
U
WA
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
C
I
R
C
U
I
T
C
O
U
R
T
(
L
a
n
d
R
e
c
o
r
d
s
)
D
J
W
5
4
0
0
,
p
.
0
4
2
2
,
M
S
A
_
C
E
1
8
_
5
3
5
2
.
D
a
t
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
1
2
/
2
7
/
2
0
1
6
.
P
r
i
n
t
e
d
0
7
/
1
4
/
2
0
2
3
.
WA
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
C
I
R
C
U
I
T
C
O
U
R
T
(
L
a
n
d
R
e
c
o
r
d
s
)
D
J
W
5
4
0
0
,
p
.
0
4
2
3
,
M
S
A
_
C
E
1
8
_
5
3
5
2
.
D
a
t
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
1
2
/
2
7
/
2
0
1
6
.
P
r
i
n
t
e
d
0
7
/
1
4
/
2
0
2
3
.
WA
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
C
I
R
C
U
I
T
C
O
U
R
T
(
L
a
n
d
R
e
c
o
r
d
s
)
D
J
W
5
4
0
0
,
p
.
0
4
2
4
,
M
S
A
_
C
E
1
8
_
5
3
5
2
.
D
a
t
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
1
2
/
2
7
/
2
0
1
6
.
P
r
i
n
t
e
d
0
7
/
1
4
/
2
0
2
3
.
WA
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
C
I
R
C
U
I
T
C
O
U
R
T
(
L
a
n
d
R
e
c
o
r
d
s
)
D
J
W
5
4
0
0
,
p
.
0
4
2
5
,
M
S
A
_
C
E
1
8
_
5
3
5
2
.
D
a
t
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
1
2
/
2
7
/
2
0
1
6
.
P
r
i
n
t
e
d
0
7
/
1
4
/
2
0
2
3
.
WA
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
C
O
U
N
T
Y
C
I
R
C
U
I
T
C
O
U
R
T
(
L
a
n
d
R
e
c
o
r
d
s
)
D
J
W
5
4
0
0
,
p
.
0
4
2
6
,
M
S
A
_
C
E
1
8
_
5
3
5
2
.
D
a
t
e
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
1
2
/
2
7
/
2
0
1
6
.
P
r
i
n
t
e
d
0
7
/
1
4
/
2
0
2
3
.
U
a
QO
Q�
PENNSYLVANIA `S
MARYLAND
Q�
G9
REIDTOWN ROAD
SIT
C�yMq
ROq
O
Owner:
Leah Martin and Ralph Martin
19815 Reidtown Road
Hagerstown MD 21742
VICINITY MAP
SCALE 1 "=2000'
N/F
Esther Martin and Gary Martin
Liber 755, folio 579
115.63 Ac.t
Zoned RV
U/P G13 `� \
\ \
v�
/ \ o
\\T0
N/Q
N/F UPG1\
Esther Mae Martin and Gary Martin
Liber 1169, folio 70 Q
/ �0�� ' Proposed Sign
O� Eic. Well
4, / \
/ Existing
Concrete
qa
`cp
00 Existing
�Q Qa Garage
\ J
Ex.
Bldg.
/
d rc�iN0
Hof .dory op \ /
0 �i.6 <ed \ ./
Existing 100'
Dwelling
#19815
General Notes
1. Parcels are currently zoned RV - Rural Village
2. Proposed zoning is RB - Rural Business.
3. This Rezoning Exhibit was prepared without the benefit of a title report and therefore may not indicate all
encumbrances on this property.
Proposed Site
Functional Use: Auto Body Repair and Painting
Hours: Monday - Friday 8 AM - 6 PM
Employees: 2
Deliveries: Small Truck/Van twice a day
Estimated Number of Customers: 2/Day
30% of business is Agriculturally related
Land Surveyor's Certification
I hereby certify to the best of my professional knowledge and belief that the plan shown hereon is correct; that it is all
of the lands as conveyed by Grant B. Martin, Personal Representative of the Estate of Anna Mary Martin, to Ralph E.
Martin and Leah A. Martin, by deed dated December 23, 2016, recorded among the Land Records of Washington
County, Maryland in Liber 5400, folio 422; that this document was prepared by myself and that the survey work
reflected hereon is in compliance with the requirements set forth in COMAR 09.13.06.12 in effect at the time this
survey was performed.
1 also certify that I am a duly licensed Professional Land surveyor under the laws of the State of MD. License No.
10731, Expiration on January 16, 2024.
1
A
Date Professional Land Surveyor
\
Loc. of Ex. Septic Tank \ \ \ \ \
U/P G15' \ \ \
\ \
rs
'�ores400 fq/o Lands of
g Ralph E. Martin and Leah A. Martin
22 b/ Parcel No. 2 of Liber 5400, folio 422 N/F
a° o0 1.01 Acres Chris Kennedy
Liber 1703, folio 273
o
�i
Re_
N/F
Don R. Eshleman and
Karlene J. Eshleman
NLiber 1800, folio 980
co
m
d
Z
-6
0
GRAPHIC SCALE
40 0 20 40 80 160
( 1N FEET )
1 inch = 40 ft.
* U.
�3 0
*'�x O'VA L L MI? �
E(n
0 W
��
C6
��2
Z J
I➢.
g � N
p
�o�
m
Z
•
w
=
� o
o a m
m C=i
N I y
4 L O
W
oQ
U Cqi
zo
Z
w�
LU
Q •
a�g
O� y�.
m z
U)
m•
H
�a
UJ W
N
� Z
oz�
' rn
o �
L L Z
S O M
oW
UJ>
o�
�v
_Z
F—
Q
0
O �
W
co Z
cc
LU
0 5.
m
= Q
W
J
O
Cr.
Z Z
U-W
O�
O�0
u-Z
�S
Z
o00
Z
0
<
EL
Z
M ZZ
0
W
C
G
rZ
Q
Q
W Q
Q
�
J
PROJECTNO.
2023-0114
DWN BY DATE
LEJ 6,21,2023
PROJECT MANAGER EJS
EMAIL ESchreiber@fsa-inc.com
ELECTION DISTRICT 27
PROPERTYINFORMATION 11-20-31
ACCOUNTNo. 27-011055
SCALE
1" = 40'
SHEET TITLE
REZONING
EXHIBIT
SHEET 01 OF 01
Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment
19815 Reidtown Road, Hagerstown
Applicant: Ralph E. and Leah A. Martin
Adjoining Property Owners
Tax Account Number: 27-011268
Tax Map 11, Parcel 39
Property Address: 19836 Reidtown Road, Hagerstown
Owner(s): Gary R. and Esther M. Martin
Mailing Address:
19717 Reidtown Road
Hagerstown, MD 21742
Tax Account Number: 27-025927
Tax Map 11, Parcel 30
Property Address: 19823 Reidtown Road, Hagerstown
Owner(s): Chris Kennedy
Mailing Address:
19823 Reidtown Road
Hagerstown, MD 21742
Tax Account Number: 27-004865
Tax Map 11, Parcel 40
Property Address: 19703 Reidtown Road, Hagerstown
Owner(s): Don R. and Karlene J. Eshleman
Mailing Address:
19707 Reidtown Road
Hagerstown, MD 21742
Tax Account Number: 27-011225
Tax Map 11, Parcel 32
Property Address: 19723 Reidtown Road, Hagerstown
Owner(s): Gary and Esther Mae Martin
Mailing Address:
19717 Reidtown Road
Hagerstown, MD 21742
4863-4394-5072, v. 1
Property and Zoning Web Map
Washington County Planning Depatment, WashCo MD, Esri, HERE, Garmin,
INCREMENT P, NGA, USGS
Zoning
Agricultual (Rural)
Rural Village
Zoning Overlay
Rural Business
Parcels
7/14/2023, 11:43:55 AM 0 0.07 0.150.04 mi
0 0.1 0.20.05 km
1:5,760
Washington County, MD GIS
This map is provided for informational purposes ONLY. Data are not guaranteed by Washington County Maryland to be free of errors. Data should be verified through appropriate sources.
Noel S. Manalo, Principal
240.772.5108 Phone
240.772.5135 Facsimile
Noel.Manalo@offitkurman.com
August 18, 2023
VIA HAND-DELIVERY AND EMAIL
Board of County Commissioners
Planning Commission
Washington County, Maryland
100 West Washington Street
Ha erstown, Mar land 21740
Re: Map Amendment Application for 19815 Reidtown Road
Request for Rural Business District (RB) Floating Zone
Honorable County Commissioners and Planning Commission:
On behalf of Ralph E. & Leah A. Martin (collectively “Applicant”), owners of the +/- 2.0
acres located at 19815 Reidtown Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21742, Tax Map 0011, Grid 0020,
Parcel 0031, Tax ID #27-011055 (the “Property”), we offer the following justification statement
in support of our request for application of the Rural Business District (RB) Floating Zone to the
Property.
The Property is currently zoned Rural Village and improved with a residence and
outbuildings. The primary use is currently residential with related agricultural/livestock uses. The
Applicant intends to conduct an automobile body repair service at the Property. Granting of the
RB Floating Zone would permit the repair service use. The Applicant would conduct the business
with no additional employees in the foreseeable future. The number of automobiles the Applicant
would be working on would be limited to no more than 2-3 at any given time.
Granting the request would allow the Applicant to provide a desired and needed service to
neighboring agricultural properties in the proximate Rural Village area. There would be no
discernable impacts related to noise, traffic, dust or fumes that would not otherwise be typical in
the Rural Village zone in this location. As specified in the Purpose Statement of the RB District,
the requested zoning and allowance of the automobile body repair use would “support the
agricultural industry and farming community” and would help establish a location for “businesses
and facilities not otherwise permitted in rural areas of the County.”
Below in bold typeface are the relevant provisions from the Washington County Zoning
Ordinance with responses following each provision:
Page 2
ARTICLE 5E - “RB” RURAL BUSINESS DISTRICT
Section 5E.4 Criteria
(b) The RB Floating Zone District may be newly established at a particular
location if the following criteria are met.
1. The proposed RB District is not within any designated growth area
identified in the Washington County Comprehensive Plan;
RESPONSE: The Property is not within any designated growth area identified in the
Washington County Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed RB District has safe and usable road access on a road
that meets the standards under the “Policy for Determining Adequacy of Existing Roads.”
In addition a traffic study may be required where the proposed business, activity or facility
generates 25 or more peak hour trips or where 40% of the estimated vehicle trips are
anticipated to be commercial truck traffic;
RESPONSE: The Property has safe and usable road access on Reidtown Road. The
Applicant anticipates meeting the standards of the referenced Policy document. The intended use
will not generate more than fifteen (15) peak hour trips.
3. Onsite issues relating to sewage disposal, water supply, stormwater
management, flood plains, etc. can be adequately addressed; and
RESPONSE: The intended use will not create any sewage disposal, water supply,
stormwater or other issues that are not above and beyond impacts already accounted for by the
current residential (and related agricultural and livestock) use onsite.
4. The location of an RB District would not be incompatible with existing
land uses, cultural or historic resources, or agricultural preservation efforts in the vicinity
of the proposed district.
RESPONSE: The intended use would not create any impacts discernable beyond the
current residential (and related agricultural and livestock) use. Vehicle movements would be
consistent with the existing residential and agricultural uses. The auto body repair work would be
conducted completely indoors. Therefore, the intended use would not create any incompatibilities
with any of the above elements that may be in the vicinity.
Page 3
Section 27.3 Factors to be considered in a request for a map amendment.
In order for an amendment, modification, repeal, or reclassification of such district
as herein provided, the local legislative body shall make findings of fact in each specific case
including, but not limited to, the following matters:
(a) The report and recommendation of the Planning Commission.
RESPONSE: Acknowledged.
(b) Population change in the area of the proposed change.
RESPONSE: According to census.gov, April 1, 2010 population for Washington County
was 147,430 and estimate for July 1, 2022 was 155,590.
(c) Availability of public facilities in the area.
RESPONSE: Property is served by County roads and by well and septic.
(d) Present and future transportation patterns in the area.
RESPONSE: Rural Village residents and agricultural operations infrequently use
Reidtown Road presently; given the rural nature of this part of Washington County, this pattern is
not likely to change in the future.
(e) Compatibility with existing and proposed development of the area including
indication of neighboring sites identified by the Washington County Historic Sites Survey
and subsequent revisions or updates.
RESPONSE: The proposed use would be practically indistinguishable from the current
residential and agricultural uses at the Property and therefore maintain compatibility. The Property
is adjacent to/proximate to parcels identified in the “Reid (I) Historic Rural Village/Community.”
(f) The relationship of the proposed change to the Adopted Plan for the County,
Development Analysis Plan Map and Policies.
RESPONSE: The proposed use would be consistent with the Adopted Plan maps and
policies, as the RB Zoning District is specifically meant for rural areas of the County.
(g) Whether there was a substantial change in the character of the neighborhood
where the property is located.
RESPONSE: Not applicable, as the RB Zoning District is a floating zone.
Page 4
(h) Whether there was a mistake in the existing zoning classification.
RESPONSE: Not applicable, as the RB Zoning District is a floating zone.
For the aforegoing reasons, and as supported by the accompanying application materials,
the Applicant submits that the requested zoning meets the necessary requirements, and we
respectfully request your approval of the application. The Applicant will provide additional
information, submissions and testimony as may be required.
Sincerely,
Noel S. Manalo
1Washington County
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING
PLANNING I ZONING I LAND PRESERVATION I FOREST CONSERVATION I GIS
January 2, 2024
Property Owner(s)
Applicant(s)
Location
Election District
Comprehensive Plan
Designation
Zoning Map
Parcel(s)
Acreage
Existing Zoning
Requested Zoning
Date of Meeting:
RECOMMENDATION
RZ-23-006
APPLICATION FOR MAP AMENDMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
Ralph E. and Leah A. Martin
Ralph E. and Leah A. Martin
19815 Reidtown Road
#27 - Fountainhead
Rural Village
11
31
2 acres
RV — Rural Village
RV — Rural Village with RB — Rural Business overlay
November 6, 2023
The Washington County Planning Commission held a rezoning public input meeting on November 6,
2023 for the purpose of considering a map amendment for 2 acres of land located at 19815 Reidtown
Road. The applicant is requesting the application of the Rural Business floating zone on his property to
establish an auto body repair facility.
The Planning Commission considered the application and supporting documents, oral testimony from the
applicant and his legal counsel, public comments from interested parties and the Staff Report and
Analysis. The Planning Commission then took action at its regular meeting held on Monday. December 4,
2023 to recommend, to the Board of County Commissioners, approval of the map amendment (RZ-23-
006) contingent upon the two individual tracts called out in the deed of record to be combined into one
parcel for the purpose of any future development. After further research, it was discovered that the
existing dwelling crosses the boundary between the two tracts called out in the deed. Therefore, the
tracts should be considered as combined according to the Doctrine of Zoning Merger, putting the tracts
together by default.
Copies of the application packet, Staff Report and Analysis, minutes of the November 5, 2023 public
rezoning meeting and the minutes of the December4, 2023 regular meeting are attached.
Respectfully submitted,
a �—
Jill Baker, AICP,
JLB/TMA/dse Director, Washington County Dept. of
Planning & Zoning
Attachments
cc: Kirk Downey
Noel S. Manalo„ Esq.
100 West WasliIngton Street, Suite 2600 1 Hagerstown, MD 21740 1 1': 240.313.2430 111: 240.313.2431 1 TDD: 7-1.1
WWW.WASHCO-MDAET
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING | LAND PRESERVATION | FOREST CONSERVATION | GIS
1
November 6, 2023 Case #: RZ-23-006
Application for Map Amendment
Staff Report and Analysis
Property Owner(s) : Ralph E. and Leah A. Martin
Applicant(s) : Ralph E. and Leah A. Martin
Location : 19815 Reidtown Rd
Election District : #27 – Fountainhead
Comprehensive Plan
Designation : Rural Village
Zoning Map : 11
Parcel(s) : P. 31
Acreage : 2 acres
Existing Zoning : Rural Village (RV)
Requested Zoning : Rural Village (RV) with Rural Business (RB) overlay
Date of Hearing : October 2, 2023
I. Background Information
a. Location and Description of Subject Properties
The subject parcel is located on the south
side of Reidtown Road between the CSX
railroad line and Marsh Pike,
approximately 1 mile east of Hagerstown
Regional Airport in the Rural Village of
Reid. The property subject to this rezoning
encompasses 2 acres of land and is
owned by the applicant. It is improved by
an existing single-family dwelling and
associated accessory structures.
The site lies outside of both the Airport
(AP) and Airport Overlay Zoning Districts
that strictly govern land uses in the vicinity
of the Airport. The land does, however, fall within the Hazardous Wildlife Attractant
Management Overlay District that protects airport operations from wildlife hazards. The
proposed land use (auto body repair) does not seem to pose any threat to airport operations,
however.
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-23-006 – Ralph E. and Leah A. Martin
2
b. Rural Business Floating Zone Purpose and Criteria
The Rural Business Zoning District (RB) is established to permit the continuation and
development of businesses that support the agricultural industry and farming community, serve
the needs of the rural residential population, provide for recreation and tourism opportunities,
and to establish locations for businesses and facilities not otherwise permitted in the rural areas
of the County. It is established as a “floating zone” which may be located on any parcel in an
Agricultural, Environmental Conservation, Preservation or Rural Village Zoning District. A
floating zone is a zoning district that delineates conditions which must be met before that zoning
district can be approved for an existing piece of land.
Section 5E.4 of the Rural Business Zoning District describes the criteria that must be met for the
establishment of a new Rural Business Zoning District. These criteria include:
1. The proposed RB District is not within any designated growth area identified
in the Washington County Comprehensive Plan;
2. The proposed RB District has safe and usable road access on a road that
meets the standards under the “Policy of Determining Adequacy of Existing
Roads.” In addition, a traffic study may be required where the proposed
business, activity or facility generates 25 or more peak hour trips or where
40% of the estimated vehicle trips are anticipated to be commercial truck
traffic;
3. Onsite issues relating to sewage disposal, water supply, stormwater
management, floodplains, etc. can be adequately addressed; and
4. The location of an RB District would not be incompatible with existing land
uses, cultural or historic resources, or agricultural preservation efforts in the
vicinity of the proposed district.
Section 5E.6c further expands upon the above noted criteria in describing the basis for which
the Planning Commission should base its recommendation to the Board of County
Commissioners upon after the Public Information Meeting including:
1. The proposed district will accomplish the purpose of the RB District;
2. The proposed site development meets criteria identified in Section 5E.4 of
this Article;
3. The roads providing access to the site are appropriate for serving the
business-related traffic generated by the proposed RB land use;
4. Adequate sight distance along roads can be provided at proposed points of
access;
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-23-006 – Ralph E. and Leah A. Martin
3
5. The proposed landscaped areas can provide adequate buffering of the
proposed RB land use from existing land uses in the vicinity;
6. The proposed land use is not of a scale, intensity or character that would be
incompatible with adjacent land uses or structures.
To be established, RB districts must also meet bulk requirements outlined in Article 5E.5. A
preliminary site plan which addresses the elements noted above and other criteria in 5E.6.a(3)
in greater detail is also a required part of the application process. Finally, approval of the
application to create an RB District shall only be for the use identified on the application and
preliminary site plan. An approved RB District covers only the portion of the parcel or lot
identified in the application. Changes to the use, intensity or area covered by an approved RB
District shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission. A new public hearing may be required
to approve the changed use.
II. Staff Analysis
The staff analysis of the proposed rezoning will utilize the criteria outlined in the previous
section of this report to determine the suitability of applying a newly created RB floating zone in
the designated location.
1. The proposed district will accomplish the purpose of the RB District;
As defined above, one purpose of the floating zone is to “establish locations for
businesses and facilities not otherwise permitted in the rural areas of the County.” The
proposed auto body service facility is not a permitted land use in the underlying Rural Village
Zoning District. Services are presently limited in the immediate vicinity of this property, given its
location in a rural area of the County. Therefore, it would have the potential to “serve the needs
of the rural residential population.”
2. The proposed RB District is not within any designated growth area identified in
the Washington County Comprehensive Plan;
The proposed site of this rezoning is located outside of the County’s current Urban Growth Area
boundary. This status is not proposed to change in the forthcoming Comprehensive Plan
update.
3. Road and Traffic Considerations
a. Traffic Generation
Traffic generation from the proposed land use is estimated by the Applicant in their
justification statement (Exhibit F) to be less than 15 trips per day. This trip generation estimate
falls below the requirements of the RB District which necessitate a traffic study when the
proposed business, activity or facility generates “25 or more peak hour trips or where 40% of the
estimated vehicle trips are anticipated to be commercial truck traffic.”
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-23-006 – Ralph E. and Leah A. Martin
4
Traffic counts on County and State roads in the vicinity of the rezoning site provide
limited information traffic flow or congestion that might be impacted an expanded business at
this location. Single day traffic counts were collected for one 24-hour period in 2022 at three
locations in the vicinity of the subject site, near its intersection with Marsh Pike. The counts for
these three locations are noted below:
Reidtown Rd, west of Marsh Pike (.15 miles away): 355 vehicles
Lehman’s Mill Rd, east of Marsh Pike (.20 miles away): 297 vehicles
Lehman’s Mill Historic District (.33 miles away): 287 vehicles
SHA does not maintain a permanent traffic counter in the immediate vicinity of the site.
b. Road and Site Circulation Improvements
The proposed business is located on Reidtown Rd, which is classified as a local road in
the Transportation Element of the County’s 2002 Comprehensive Plan. Local roads serve a
mean ADT of less than 1,000 vehicles in rural areas such as this. Parking is planned on the east
side of the building that would be constructed to conduct the auto body repair service.
A review of the County’s 10-Year CIP and the State Highway Administration’s
Consolidated Transportation Plan did not note any road improvements in the vicinity of this
proposed rezoning that would affect road capacity or traffic flow. The Highway Plan in the 2002
Comprehensive Plan and HEPMPO’s LRTP also did not indicate any immediate road
improvements in the vicinity.
The Applicant’s preliminary site plan (Exhibit C) anticipates a second entrance onto
Reidtown Road from the proposed use, separate from the current driveway that leads to the
house. This Exhibit appears to indicate an intent to subdivide the property in the event of
zoning approval, separating the residential and commercial uses.
The application was sent to the Washington County Department of Engineering for their
review and comment. They offered the following comments:
We have evaluated the proposal and Reidtown Road appears inadequate for
commercial traffic in accordance with the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance and
Policy to Determine the Adequacy of Existing Highways, dated May 2005. Per available
records Reidtown Road has varying widths from 14.0 feet to 21.0 feet with an average
width of +/‐ 15.3 feet. In accordance with Section III.F.1 and the exemption provided
under Section V.D.2 of the aforementioned policy, the minimum required pavement
width is eighteen (18) feet along the proposed lot frontage and out to the nearest road
deemed adequate, in this case Marsh Pike. Should the project move forward, the
applicant shall be required to have a Road Condition Survey and road widening plans
prepared by a licensed professional to accompany the Site Plan submission.
Adequate intersection sight distance will be required for any access that serves the
commercial use in accordance County Policy and AASHTO standards. The access will
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-23-006 – Ralph E. and Leah A. Martin
5
require a Washington County Entrance Permit and must be upgraded/installed to
commercial standards.
4. Site Planning Considerations
a. Water
The proposed rezoning site is designated as W-7 in the 2009 Water and Sewer Plan
with no planned connection to public water. An existing well connected to the residential use is
depicted on Applicant’s Exhibit C. No additional information about water usage is provided on
the preliminary site plan aside from a declaration within their justification statement:
“The intended use will not create any sewage disposal, water supply, stormwater or
other issues that are above and beyond impacts already accounted for by the current residential
and agricultural use onsite.”
Well locations are approved by the Washington County Health Department. The Health
Department is also responsible for monitoring wells for water quality issues.
b. Sewer
The proposed rezoning site is designated as S-7 in the 2009 Water and Sewer Plan with
no planned connection to public sewer. An approximate location of the existing septic system is
depicted on Applicant’s Exhibit C. No additional information on sewage disposal was provided
beyond the declaration noted above.
The Washington County Health Department is responsible for approving the location and
method of sewage disposal on individual properties in the County. A copy of this rezoning
application was routed for the Health Department for their review. No comments were received.
c. Stormwater Management
A stormwater management pond is proposed in the northwest corner of the property on the
preliminary site plan to capture stormwater from the storage facility.
The application was sent to the Washington County Department of Engineering for their review
and comment. They offered the following comments:
The property is located within the Hazardous Wildlife Attractant Management District and
may need to be reviewed by the appropriate airport authorities. This will also be of
consideration in review of any required stormwater management facilities for the project.
The State of Maryland classifies “Vehicle Service and Maintenance Facilities” as
“Stormwater Hotspots”. Any required stormwater management for the project would
need to comply with “hotspot” requirements as specified in the Maryland Stormwater
Design Manual.
A portion of the property is located within the Maryland Sensitive Species Project Review
Area and may need to be reviewed by the Maryland Department of the Environment.
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-23-006 – Ralph E. and Leah A. Martin
6
d. Floodplain
The proposed rezoning site does not contain floodplain.
e. Bulk Regulations
The applicant’s Justification Statement does not specifically address bulk requirements such as
setbacks or lot coverage aside from a generalized parking area east of the proposed building.
The apparent intent to subdivide the parcel if zoning approval was granted, as potentially
indicated on Exhibit C, does raise some question about the ability of the project to meet side
yard setback requirements for the existing dwelling and its accessory structures.
5. Compatibility with Adjacent Land Uses
a. Land Use in the Vicinity
As seen at left, the parcel is part of a
block of properties zoned RV, some of
which fall within the Rural Village of
Reid. There is one other existing RB
Zoning District in the vicinity, at the
Lehman’s Mill Historic District to the
east. All the surrounding lands are
zoned Agricultural Rural A(R).
Land use conforms to the zoning, with
small residential lots found within the
RV District and along Marsh Pike.
These lots give way to larger agricultural
parcels on all sides in the immediate
vicinity.
Given the prohibition on most commercial uses in rural areas of the County outside of an
established RB Zoning District, services are limited in the vicinity. There is an antique shop
within the RB District at Lehman’s Mill Historic District. An engraving shop is located just south
of the Reidtown Road/Marsh Pike intersection. There is one other auto body shop in the vicinity
of the rezoning site, on Marsh Haven Lane along the Pennsylvania border, located
approximately one mile from subject property.
b. Historic Resources
There are 6 existing historic sites within ½ mile or less of this proposed rezoning that
should be considered in evaluating its compatibility. Two are located on immediately adjacent
properties. Two other sites are found within the larger Lehman’s Mill National Register Historic
District. The others are within ¼ mile of the site, just west of the CSX railroad line. Three
others are located approximately ½ mile south of the site across U.S. 40 near I-70 West. Four
of the six sites were documented on the Maryland Historic Sites Inventory by the Maryland
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-23-006 – Ralph E. and Leah A. Martin
7
Historical Trust (MHT) but were not listed as National Historic Register Properties. These six
historic sites are described in the inventory as follows:
Within Reid Historic Rural Village/Community
Individual structures noted below within Reid were surveyed by MHT, but the larger community
does not have a fully completed and adopted historic survey.
• WA-I-220: “Reid School” (adjoining property)
Early 20th century 1 ½ story brick rural educational facility.
• WA-I-215: “Eshelman-Martin Farm” (adjacent property)
19th century farm complex offering an example of a large early plantation in Washington County
owned by members of the prominent local family. Includes 2-story multi-sectioned brick
farmhouse and several outbuildings.
• WA-I-223: “Reid Elevator” (.10 miles away)
Early 20th century frame grain storage facility, feed mill and general store built to accommodate
the needs of the surrounding agrarian community. The mill is still actively used.
Lehman's Mill National Register Historic District (WA-I-523) – .33 miles away
The Lehman's Mill Historic District located near Marsh Run, is significant for its association with
the county's agricultural and economic history. It is the oldest continuously operating mill in
Washington County and is the most intact mill complex remaining in the County as well. The
Historic District includes the mill, mill farm, miller's house, assorted domestic agricultural and
mill-related outbuildings, and vestiges of the mill race and dam. Individual structures that were
surveyed by MHT survey and are among those listed on the National Register are noted below.
• WA-I-209: “Lehman's Mill (Marsh Mills)”
Mid-to-late 19th century 2 ½ story brick grist mill. The mill has been in continuous operation
since at least 1869 provides an excellent example of an early rural industrial structure.
• WA-I-211: “Lehman's Mill House”
Early-to-Mid-19th century 2-story roughcast limestone farmhouse associated with larger mill
complex.
Other Historic Structures
• WA-I-224: “Eshelman Farm” (.20 miles away)
Mid-19th century farmstead including 2 ½ story brick dwelling and frame bank barn.
c. Agricultural Land Preservation
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-23-006 – Ralph E. and Leah A. Martin
8
The proposed rezoning site is located outside of the County’s designated Priority Preservation
Area (PPA). The PPA boundary terminates just east of the RV District shown previously. There
would be no impact on County agricultural land preservation efforts as a result of this rezoning
request.
6. Additional Considerations
a. Emergency Services
The Hagerstown Regional Airport’s Fire Department (Station 35) is the nearest emergency
services provider to this site, located approximately 3 miles west at the Airport.
b. Comprehensive Plan Designation
The 2002 Comprehensive Plan designated this site as falling within the Rural Village Policy
Area in its Land Use Plan. This Policy Area, found throughout the County, is associated with
small communities in rural areas of the County, often settled historically, at junctions in roads or
along railroads or waterways. Typically, they include a small residential core with associated
institutional and/or commercial services (i.e. – post office, church, school or retail
establishment). Due to constraints on infrastructural capacity, Rural Villages are intended to
absorb limited growth and development, typically through infill or redevelopment within the
communities existing footprint. Permitted development should be of a similar density, scale and
use type/mixture as that which already exists in the village.
c. Hours of Operation, Employees
The anticipated hours of operation for the proposed auto body repair shop are Monday through
Friday, 8 am to 8 pm with two onsite employees. Their preliminary site plan estimates that the
business would receive two daily customers and the same number of deliveries by small truck
or van each day.
III. Recommendation
Based on the analysis provided above and offered by the applicant in their justification
statement, Staff believes that there is sufficient evidence that the criteria outlined in Article 5E of
the Zoning Ordinance has been met for the application of a Rural Business floating zone to the
subject area.
Considerations that the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners may wish to
investigate further during public meetings include the following:
The issues raised about road adequacy for commercial vehicle traffic on Reidtown Road,
which may necessitate road widening from the subject site to Marsh Pike.
Staff Report and Analysis
RZ-23-006 – Ralph E. and Leah A. Martin
9
Whether the applicant has considered the architectural designs for the proposed
structure that would be compatible with the historic architectural context of the
surrounding Rural Village.
o Since Reid does not have a fully completed and adopted historic survey, and
there are no currently documented historic resources on the subject property,
there would not be an architectural review by the Historic District Commission
during site planning. Therefore, this is more a general question as to whether the
proposed structure housing the auto body repair facility would be compatible in
terms of scale, intensity or character with adjacent structures and land uses.
The ability of the proposed use to meet setback requirements in the event of a
subdivision, if that is indeed the intent of the applicant.
It is likely that the above questions can be addressed during development review of an eventual
site plan, if the zoning was first to be approved for this parcel. The criteria for establishing a
new RB Zoning District do allow for considerations such as these to be investigated during the
rezoning process, however, if the Commission or Board chooses to do so.
Respectfully submitted,
Travis Allen
Senior Planner
Eckard, Debra S.
From: Bernard White <bhwhiteiv@hotmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 5, 2023 9:46 AM
To: Planning Email
Subject: Proposed Zoning Change for Ralph and Leah Martin (Map 11/Grid 20/Parcel 31)
You don't often get email from bhwhiteiv@hotmail.com. Learn why this is important
Good morning,
I am writing to voice my concern about the proposed zoning change as shown in the attached photo for Ralph
and Leah Martin at Map 11, Grid 20, Parcel 31, from a Rural Village to a Rural Village with a Rural Business
overlay. My wife and I bought our property because it is located in a rural village and want the surrounding
area to stay that way. We live on Lehmans Mill Rd which has one lane bridges in a couple of spots, one of
which is adjacent to my house. Reidtown Road is not large enough to handle any more traffic than it already
does. Lehmans Mill and Reidtown Road are both used by traffic going from 181 towards Leitersburg. Drivers
already drive to fast on both Marsh Pike and Lehman's Mill road. It is not uncommon for someone to pass me
on Marsh Pike doing 50+ mph.
The property size for the business only 1.01 acre which is zoned rural village. Along with a business comes
parking lot(s), and has the potential for storing a number of cars on a fairly small property while they are
waiting to be repaired or stored to be used for parts for future repairs. This would make the area look like an
eyesore. In looking at the proposed zoning application, it states that it is for an "automobile body repair service"
which to me is one to fix cars that were in accidents. There is a sign out front that seems to indicate it will be
for both a body repair shop and an auto repair shop.
Adding this along with water facilities (drinking water and bathrooms) will tax an already low water table. The
creek next to my house has run dry the past few years as there has not been sufficient water to feed it. We
also have a low -flow well, which only produces 1/8 gallon a minute. We all take water from the same source,
taxing it will affect all the residential uses in the area, not just mine.
Another of my concerns is that the Martins are already erecting a building, which seems to indicate that they
believe the zoning approval is guaranteed. I heard that the Martins do not have a building permit, therefore, I
looked at all the building permits issued in 2023 that were listed on the Washington County website. I may
have missed it, but I did not see one for his proposed building. My concern is that if he doesn't follow the laws
for erecting the building, there are no assurances he will follow Washington County, the State of Maryland, or
the EPA regulations if the rezoning is permitted. The proposed business could pollute both the air I breath and
the drinking water that feeds the well for my house. I work for the Federal Government as a regulator and I
completely understand the inability of a government to inspect with a proper frequency the large number of
entities that it regulates.
According to the Washington County Zoning ordinance, Section 5D.0 ,"Purpose," states
"The Rural Village designation is provided to preserve the unique historic or rural character of existing
villages by encouraging compatible development within a defined village boundary. It also identifies
clusters of existing development in the rural areas that may be candidates for public facilities in the
future. The zone intends for permitted development to be generally of a similar density, scale and use
type and mixture as that which exists in the village. The zone is also designed to prevent large amounts
or inappropriately scaled development or uses that would detract from the existing rural or historic
character of the village. It is expected that development will be residential and a limited amount of
mixed rural services. More than one use may be permitted on one parcel in accordance with specific
guidelines. Public water and sewer may be available for the purpose of resolving or preventing health
issues. Use of public utilities to permit greater density than the density specified in this section is not
permitted."
In the above paragraph it states "zone intends for permitted development to be generally of a similar density,
scale and use type and mixture as that which exists in the village," which means that business in it should be
like what is in the village. There are no autobody shops within a couple of miles of this area, only agriculture
uses. The closest one is 2.1 miles away on Leitersburg Pike, which has a significant number of businesses on
it. If Planning and Zoning allows this one, there is precedent for the second, and third, and fourth business, not
to mention future business, eventually leading to have our rural village look like Route 11, just down the
road. There are plenty of unused buildings and property that already have the proper zoning that are nearby. I
do not believe allowing this one to pass would be in anyone's best interest, except for the Martin's who are
seeking the zoning change.
In addition, Section 5E.0, "Purpose," states:
"The "RB" Rural Business District is established to permit the continuation and development of
businesses that support the agricultural industry and farming community, serve the needs of the rural
residential population, provide for recreation and tourism opportunities, and to as establish locations for
businesses and facilities not otherwise permitted in the rural areas of the County. The Rural Business
District is established as a "floating zone" which may be located on any parcel in an Agricultural,
Environmental Conservation, Preservation or Rural Village Zoning District."
It states that the Rural business district is "..to permit the continuation and development of businesses that
support the agricultural industry and farming community..." An autobody shop in no way shape or form
supports the agricultural industry and farming community. In addition, according to Google Maps, there at least
30 autobody shops within a 10-mile radius of my house. That is more than sufficient number, that one could
argue that the proposed upzoning does not "serve the needs of the rural residential population."
The property next door, across the railroad tracks, appears to be used as a feed mill, which supports the
farming industry, and therefore, I do not have any issues with that. However, the building us rundown and
looks like it is going to fall apart any minute. That I do have an issue with. In addition, the property behind it,
which I believe is owned by Gary Martin, a relative, looks like he is storing rusted items and do nothing but
spoil the groundwater. I am concerned that his business would eventually look like those around it owned by a
relative.
I am not in favor of this change.
Keep this area RV and run the car repair business in a proper place.
Thanks
Bernie White
Senior Project Manager
19919 Lehmans Mill Rd
Hagerstown MD 21742
Get Outlook for iOS
Eckard, Debra S.
From: Cynthia Brezler <lehmansmill@comcast.net>
Sent: Sunday, November S, 2023 12:03 PM
To: Planning Email
Subject: Proposed Zoning Change for Ralph and Leah Martin (Map11/Grid20/Parcel3l)
You don't often get email from lehmansmill@comcast.net. Learn why this is important
To all that this Concerns:
We are writing to have our concerns heard about the proposed zoning change that we were made
aware of my mail.
We have owned and lived on Lehmans Mill road for over 40 years and also restore both the house
and the mill which is now on the
Historical Registry. We take great pride in our property and work very hard to keep it looking nice and
tidy. Lehmans Mill Road
and Reidtown Road are used more heavily. More than you can imagine by not only the residents but
all the heavy farm machinery all year long.
No to mention the usage to get to 181. Drivers already drive too fast in these narrow county roads
and it is not unusual for us to hear them hit the brake going over the small corner hill in front of our
property. Several very bad accidents have occurred on both Reidtown & Lehmans Mill one taking a
life. I vote for speed bumps....
However the issue at hand is the rezoning. My husband and I had to so a lot of work and put a lot of
money to get the permit and setbacks
for Lehmans Mill 25 plus years ago. We saved a historical building... This rezoning has no building
and is asking to erect one which by the way
they have already started to do that without a permit and then to even put a sign in the yard. If I
recall... we had to have a business license and all that in place which costs us money to do. We
couldn't Start anything without that. Why are they being allowed to do this?? With no permit!
If this couple thinks that is ok to do that they need to be informed it is not. It has has caused concern
for several of the residents that if they
get this zoning change what is to prevent them for doing other things —used car lot ... as was there this
summer..lt already appears that they don't think they need to comply with the rules. Doesn't appear
that they care. Best thing they could do is put this business where it is already zoned.
We do not need another Auto Repair /Body Shop in this area.
The other thing that concerns me is the EPA for paint fumes... wrecked cars sitting around -not the
mention the environment. This could pollute our air we breathe and water we drink,,, someone needs
to care about this.
Is there even enough room on this property for this?? probably not... But I could see it flow over to the
neighbors and having seen what we have seen in the 40 years living here they would probably rent it
to them... Maybe...
WE as a community DO NOT WANT this.... if anything that area of The Historical Village of Reid
needs to be cleaned up... The old feed mill building beside the railroad tracts is falling down and no
one cares. Junk laying around all the time.
An Autobody shop does not support the farming community or adhere to the agricultural industry.
If you would like to speak to us we can contacted at 301-991-6522
We have had plans made for Nov 6th that can not be changed or we would definitely be at the
meeting.
This is our voices for this.
Please know some will not speak up but there is great concern in our area about this
WE VOTE NO CHANGE
Thank you for your time
Ronald & Cynthia J. erezler
lehmansmill@comcast.net
301-992-6522
lehmansmill@comcast.net
Eckard, Debra S.
From: li3mow@comcast.net
Sent: Friday, November 3, 2023 4:02 PM
To: Planning Email
Subject: Rezoning Case No RZ-23-006
You don't often get email from li3mow@comcast.net. Learn why this is important
Good afternoon. We are submitting this regarding rezoning case no. RZ-23-006 at 19815 Reidtown
Road. We are unable to attend the meeting Monday evening but do have several concerns we would
like to have addressed. We have spoken with Ralph Martin, the applicant, and very much appreciate
his desire to work with his neighbors to try to ensure this project does not cause issues. However, we
have the following concerns:
1. Paint smell - We understand an autobody shop is the goal of the rezoning and that there will be
filters on the paint booth. Although he says the filters will remove up to 99%, we don't know what is
being removed. Is it smell? We do not want to sit out on our patio in a rural village zoned area and
smell paint.
2. Lighting - We want to be sure the property does not install bright lighting that would shine through
the trees and be noticeable at night in the neighborhood. It is our hope that the lighting would be
more like normal lighting you might see outside of a house, facing downward and not projecting up
like a business.
3. General appearance/landscaping- Because this is a rural village area, we would like to see the look
of the property maintain its "farm" appearance and not have buildings, pavement, etc. that does not
match the area but appears to be more commercial. We would also prefer to see any signage be
very low profile to fit in with the nature of the area.
4. Number of vehicles - We are hoping there would not be a large amount of cars on the property at
any given time. Again, we don't want this property to look like a car lot vs. a home in the
neighborhood.
5. Autobody work only - We were told by Ralph Martin this would be a business that provides body
work only, not any mechanical work. It is our hope that this remains true.
We would like to see this business blend in with the countryside so that it does not disrupt the farm
appearance of this area. We chose this area for our home because it was rural and did not have a
commercial/business smell or appearance.
Thank you for your consideration of our concerns.
Mike and Lisa Mowen
14420 Marsh Pike
Hagerstown, MD 21742
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
PUBLIC INPUT MEETING AND REGULAR MEETING
November 6, 2023
The Washington County Planning Commission held a public input meeting and its regular monthly meeting
on Monday, November 6, 2023 at 7:00 p.m. at the Washington County Administrative Complex, 100 W.
Washington Street, Room 2000, Hagerstown, MD.
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
In the absence of the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman, the meeting was called to order by Mr. Goetz at
7:00 pm.
Planning Commission members present were: BJ Goetz, Denny Reeder, Terrie Shank, Jeff Semler and Ex-
officio County Commissioner Randy Wagner. Staff members present were: Washington County
Department of Planning & Zoning: Jennifer Kinzer, Deputy Director; Travis Allen, Senior Planner; Scott
Stotelmyer, Planner; and Debra Eckard, Administrative Assistant; and Washington County Division of
Engineering: Heather Williams, Senior Plan Reviewer;
PUBLIC INPUT MEETING
Ralph and Leah Martin [RZ-23-006]
Staff Presentation
Mr. Allen presented a rezoning application for two acres of land located at 19815 Reidtown Road. The
applicant is requesting the RB (Rural Business) overlay on the existing RV (Rural Village) designation. The
purpose of the RB overlay is to permit the continuation and development of businesses that support the
ag industry and farming community, serve the needs of the rural resident population, provide for
recreation and tourism, and establish locations for businesses and facilities not otherwise permitted in
the rural areas of the County. Specific conditions, found in Section 5.E of the Zoning Ordinance, must be
met before the overlay can be applied to a piece of land. Mr. Allen briefly reviewed the criteria that the
Planning Commission should consider when making its recommendation to the Board of County
Commissioners. He noted that the approval of an RB district is only permitted for the use identified on the
application; any changes in use or intensity would need to come back before the Planning Commission. If
the zoning is approved, a site plan would be required for the property which would also need to be
reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission.
Mr. Allen stated that the application was routed to several outside agencies for review and comment. The
Washington County Engineering Department provided the following comments: Reidtown Road is
inadequate for commercial traffic; a minimum pavement width of 18-feet along the proposed yard
frontage and to the nearest road which is deemed adequate (in this case Marsh Pike) is required. A road
condition survey and road widening plans would be required as part of the site plan process. A Washington
County entrance permit would be required and sight distance requirements would need to be met in
compliance with commercial standards as part of the site plan process.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider the compatibility of the proposed use with the
historic character of the neighborhood. There are several historic structures in close proximity to the
proposed site. Three written public comments were received prior to the public input meeting; all three
were opposed to the application based on the following: inadequacy of the road for a commercial use,
potential effects on the neighborhood from an auto body repair shop (i.e. fumes, number of vehicles on
the site, spillover of lighting, etc.), appearance of the structure to be compatible with the rural area, and
impacts on groundwater resources.
Applicant’s Presentation
Mr. Neil Manalo of Offit Kurman, Buckeystown Pike, Frederick, MD, represented the applicant during the
meeting. Also present was the applicant, Mr. Ralph Martin, 19815 Reidtown Road, Hagerstown. Mr.
Manalo stated the applicant has read the staff report and agrees with staff’s comments; all road adequacy
issues will be addressed during the site plan process, if the zoning is approved. Public comments were
addressed as follows: there would be no more than two or three vehicles on the proposed site at any
time; the amount of traffic will be negligible; and the proposed structure would be compatible with the
character of the neighborhood.
Mr. Martin stated that the vehicles that would be at the property he would be working on within two
weeks. He will be using a spill collection system to contain any impacts to groundwater resources.
Approved but not signed
Discussion and Comments: Mr. Reeder asked if the proposed structure would be a pole barn and how
large it would be in size. Mr. Martin stated it would be a pole barn and would be approximately 3,600
square feet. Mr. Goetz asked if the parcel would be subdivided. Mr. Martin stated it is already two lots
of record. Ms. Shank asked if the business is already operating or will be operating in one of the existing
buildings. Mr. Martin stated the business is not currently in operation and will be housed in a new building.
Ms. Shank asked what type of equipment Mr. Martin will be working on. Mr. Martin stated it will be cars
and pick-up trucks. Ms. Shank asked what the hours of operation will be for the business. Mr. Martin
stated it will be Monday thru Friday, 9 am to 6 pm.
Public Comment
•Norman Martin, 19836 Reidtown Road – Mr. Martin stated he lives across the road from this
property, which has been in the family for 75 years. He respects the concerns raised by the
neighbors; however, he believes Mr. Martin will maintain the appearance of the property and
will have no adverse impact on the neighborhood. Mr. Martin agrees that Reidtown Road is
narrow; however, with only two or three cars at the auto repair shop at a time, he does not
believe this would affect the roadway.
Mr. Goetz closed the public input meeting at 7:20 p.m.
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
Motion and Vote: Mr. Semler made a motion to approve the minutes of the October 2, 2023 meeting as
presented. The motion was seconded by Ms. Shank and unanimously approved.
NEW BUSINESS
ORDINANCE MODIFICATION
Michael and Gail Taylor – Lots 1 and 2 [OM-23-011]
Mr. Stotelmyer presented for review and approval an ordinance modification from Section 5A.7.6 of the
Washington County Zoning Ordinance. The subject property is located at 11835 St. Paul Road and is
currently zoned A(R) – Agricultural Rural. The applicant is requesting a reduction of the left side yard 50-
foot ag buffer to 15-feet in order to combine 11835 and 11831 St. Paul Road for the construction of a
house and detached garage. The owner is aware of the neighboring ag operation. All agency approvals
have been received.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Reeder made a motion to approve the ordinance modification as presented. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Semler and unanimously approved.
PRELIMINARY SITE PLANS
Metzger Mini-Storage [PSP-22-002]
Ms. Williams presented for review and approval a preliminary plat and site plan for a proposed mini-
storage facility to be located at 12019 Itnyre Road. The property is currently zoned BL (Business Local).
The entrance to the site is between two residences at 12019 and 12025 Itnyre Road. A portion of the site
abuts Jefferson Boulevard; however, no ingress or egress is proposed on Jefferson Boulevard. The
applicant is proposing the conveyance of land to two neighboring residential property owners. The hours
of operation will be 7 am to 7 pm daily. No water or sewer services are proposed for the site. The proposed
lighting is in compliance with the County’s Zoning Ordinance. Forest Conservation requirements will be
met through the payment in lieu of planting in the amount of $12,545.28. Ms. Williams distributed
comments received prior to the meeting from the Soil Conservation District.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Reeder made a motion to approve the preliminary plat and site plan as presented
contingent upon approval of the Forest Conservation Ordinance requirements and completion of the Soil
Conservation District’s requests. The motion was seconded by Mr. Semler and unanimously approved.
FOREST CONSERVATION
Metzger Mini-Storage [PSP-22-002]
Mr. Allen presented for review and approval two requests to meet Forest Conservation requirements for
property located at 12019 Itnyre Road. The applicant is requesting the utilization of the payment-in-lieu
of planting option to satisfy the .80-acre planting requirements for commercial development on the site
and removal of specimen trees from the site. Mr. Allen stated there are no areas of qualified forest on the
site; the proposed development takes up the majority of the site, thereby leaving no ideal place for
planting. Justification for the removal of two specimen trees includes: limitations due to grading,
proposed circulation routes, and requirements for storm water management makes retention of these
trees difficult. The effects on water quality of the site would be mitigated by the storm water management
facilities.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Reeder made a motion to approve the use of the payment-in-lieu of planting option
and the removal of two specimen trees as requested. The motion was seconded by Mr. Semler and
unanimously approved.
OTHER BUSINESS
Update of Projects Initialized
Ms. Kinzer provided a written report for the land development plan review projects (50 total) initialized
during the month of September including 6 site plans and 5 preliminary-final plats.
Comprehensive Plan Update
Ms. Kinzer reported that the public input meetings around the County are completed. The public
comment period ended on October 31st. All written public comments will be included in the Commission’s
agenda packets in the near future, hopefully in December. Staff is currently working through all the
comments and will make revisions before bringing the Plan back to the Commission in early 2024.
UPCOMING MEETINGS
1.Washington County Planning Commission regular meeting, December 4, 2023 at 7:00 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Reeder made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:50 p.m. The motion was seconded by Mr. Semler
and so ordered by Mr. Goetz.
Respectfully submitted,
_______________________________________
Robert Goetz, Jr.
Approved but not signed
WASHINGTON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
PUBLIC INPUT MEETING AND REGULAR MEETING
December 4, 2023
The Washington County Planning Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Monday, December 4,
2023 at 7:00 p.m. at the Washington County Administrative Complex, 100 W. Washington Street, Room
2000, Hagerstown, MD.
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
Planning Commission members present were: Clint Wiley, Chairman, BJ Goetz, Denny Reeder, Terrie
Shank, Jeff Semler and Ex-officio County Commissioner Randy Wagner. Staff members present were:
Washington County Department of Planning & Zoning: Jennifer Kinzer, Deputy Director; Travis Allen,
Senior Planner; Misty Wagner-Grillo, Planner; Scott Stotelmyer, Planner; and Debra Eckard,
Administrative Assistant.
OLD BUSINESS
Ralph and Leah Martin [RZ-23-006]
Mr. Allen reminded Commission members that a public input meeting was held on November 6th for this
2-acre parcel of land located at 19815 Reidtown Road. The property owners are requesting the application
of the RB (Rural Business) floating zone on the parcel that is currently zoned RV (Rural Village). The
applicant is proposing an auto body repair facility. Three public comments have been received in
opposition of the proposal. The site is currently two lots of record subdivided from the parent lot parcel
prior to zoning and the Subdivision Ordinance.
Discussion and Comments: Mr. Semler asked if the two lots could be joined to make one parcel. Ms.
Kinzer stated that the two lots currently can be sold separately, but could be combined. The stipulation
to combine the parcels could be made part of the recommendation. Mr. Semler questioned the setbacks
for the proposed business and the existing house if the lots are not combined. As it is currently shown on
the plat, the existing house and garage would not meet the setback requirements. Ms. Kinzer stated this
issue would be need to be resolved during the site plan process.
Mr. Reeder expressed his concern that the lots are currently separate so the business could be sold in the
future and setbacks for the house and business would not be met. He also expressed concern with regard
to the number of vehicles that would be on the property at one time. Mr. Reeder believes that a
stipulation should be put on the property requiring the two parcels to be combined and no further
subdivision could occur in the future.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Semler made a motion to recommend approval of the request to the Board of
County Commissioners to apply the RB overlay to the property contingent upon the two parcels being
combined to make one parcel. The motion was seconded by Mr. Reeder and unanimously approved with
Commissioner Wagner and Mr. Wiley abstaining from the vote.
Cascade Town Centre Lot 2 [OM-23-006]
Ms. Kinzer noted that an ordinance modification request was presented in July to allow 22 lots to be
created without public road frontage along Cushman Avenue in Cascade. The property is currently zoned
SED (Special Economic Development). An ordinance modification was previously approved to create Lot
2 without public road frontage. The developer is requesting the modification in order to subdivide each
of the duplex lots for individual sale. Both the Washington County Engineering Department and Planning
staff have expressed concerns about creating this many lots without public road frontage. During the July
meeting, the Commission tabled the request until the developer could provide a copy of the contract that
would be presented to home buyers regarding the maintenance of the roads. A copy of the contract was
forwarded to Commission members prior to this evening’s meeting.
Discussion and Comments: Mr. Goetz asked if it is the intent of the developer to sell the lots. Mr. Lee of
JGBLI (the developer) stated it will be a combination of selling and leasing the lots. There was a discussion
regarding the maintenance of the road. It is the intent of the developer to organize a homeowner’s
association (HOA) that would be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of the roads until such time
the roads are turned over to the County. Commissioner Wagner expressed his concern that there is no
guarantee that a HOA would always be present or a guarantee that the County would take over the roads
in the future. Ms. Kinzer noted the roads must be upgraded to County standards before the County would
consider taking over the roads. The contract agreement would be attached to the deed and would follow
the deed until such time the roads are turned over to the County. Commission members discussed the
idea of the developer posting a bond for the road upgrades prior to subdivision approval.
Approved but not signed
Motion and Vote: Mr. Goetz made a motion to approve the ordinance modification to allow these 22 lots
without public road frontage contingent upon the County Attorney’s review and approval of the
Declaration of Easement and Maintenance Agreement and that the subdivision approval will be
accompanied with a bond to cover the cost of the improvements of the private road to County standards.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Semler and unanimously approved.
NEW BUSINESS
MINUTES
Motion and Vote: Mr. Semler made a motion to approve the minutes of the November 6, 2023 meeting
as presented. The motion was seconded by Ms. Shank and unanimously approved.
NEW BUSINESS
ORDINANCE MODIFICATION
Josh and Laura Smith [OM-23-014]
Ms. Wagner-Grillo presented for review and approval an ordinance modification request for property
located on Lot 455, Section 3-B of the Westfields subdivision. The applicant is requesting a modification
of the rear yard setback from 40-feet to 30-feet to construct a 20 x 20-foot deck and patio.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Semler made a motion to approve the modification request as presented. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Reeder and unanimously approved.
SITE PLANS
Patton Warehousing and Logistics [SP-23-010]
Mr. Stotlemyer presented for review and approval a site plan for a proposed trailer drop lot on an
undeveloped parcel located at 18525 Breeze Hill Drive. There will be one access point on Breeze Hill Drive.
No water or sewer will be provided. Pole mounted lights and ground mounted signs will be provided.
Parking spaces required is 2 spaces; 10 spaces will be provided as well as 93 trailer spaces. Hours of
operation will be 7 am to 7 pm, Monday thru Friday. Forest Conservation requirements were previously
addressed. All agency approvals have been received.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Reeder made a motion to approve the site plan as presented. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Goetz and unanimously approved.
Wantz Distributors [SP-23-014]
Mr. Stotlemyer presented for review and approval a site plan for a proposed 34,500 square foot building
addition on an existing building at 11743 Hopewell Road. The property is currently zoned IG (Industrial
General). The company will continue to use the one entrance on Hopewell Road. Parking spaces required
is 89 spaces; 95 spaces will be provided. Public water and sewer will serve the site. Hours of operation will
be 4 am to 5 pm, Monday thru Friday. Additional building and pole mounted lights will be provided; no
additional signage is proposed. There will be 2.97 acres of forest conservation on-site. All agency approvals
have been received.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Semler made a motion to approve the site plan as presented contingent upon
approval of the Forest Conservation request to remove specimen trees. The motion was seconded by Ms.
Shank and unanimously approved.
FOREST CONSERVATION
Wantz Distributors [SP-23-014]
Mr. Allen presented for review and approval a request to remove three specimen trees on property
located at 11743 Hopewell Road (Wantz Distributors). The lot and Forest Conservation easement were
created in 2003 when the original subdivision occurred. The building expansion would reconfigure and
slightly enlarge the existing forest easement. The specimen trees are located in the area where the
expansion would occur. All mitigation will be retained on-site.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Reeder made a motion to approve the request as presented. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Semler and unanimously approved.
Approved but not signed
Bowman 2000 LLC Lots 4-9 [S-23-052]
Mr. Allen presented for review and approval a request to use off-site mitigation to meet Forest
Conservation requirements for a six-lot subdivision located between 7780 and 7816 Fairplay Road totaling
8.26 acres. The developer is proposing to satisfy the majority of their forest mitigation off-site to meet
the 3.17 acres of planting requirement. Mr. Allen explained that the Forest Stand Delineation (FSD) is the
first step in any type of development that is required to comply with the Forest Conservation Ordinance.
The FSD identifies sensitive areas, including any forest cover, on the property that should be avoided
during development. The FSD for this property revealed one forest stand totaling 2.2 acres that included
steep slopes which sits among 34 acres of agricultural land. Mr. Allen stated that according to the Forest
Conservation Plan (FCP), three of the six lots are proposed to be located in the only forest stand on the
property. He noted that by shifting the lots slightly and using the frontage on both Spielman and Fairplay
Roads, all mitigation could be accomplished on-site. The proposed forest easement of .52 acres, as shown
on the FCP, sits just above a septic reserve area. Staff voiced concerns that if the remaining lands are sold
in the future and further developed, there is the potential for the forest easement to be removed and
thereby eliminating all qualified forest cover from the property.
Mr. Fred Frederick of Frederick, Seibert & Associates, the consultant, explained that the developer wishes
to keep all the residential development clustered together and use the remaining lands for agricultural
purposes. The lots would be marketed as wooded lots and forest clearing would be kept to a minimum
during development. He noted that off-site mitigation is at a 2:1 ratio thereby providing more forest in an
area where forest is already existing and needs protected.
Discussion and Comments: Mr. Goetz asked if the development is being clustered next to the existing
residences. Mr. Frederick explained there will be a gap between the existing residences and the new
development in order to retain a small forested area that will provide a buffer between the two
developments. Mr. Goetz expressed his opinion that if the remaining lands (35 acres) are sold later,
development would not affect the forest easement, which is staff’s concern.
Mr.Reeder asked if the remaining lands would have access from both Spielman Road and Fairplay Road.
Mr.Frederick stated that is correct and the developer will be required to widen Fairplay Road as part of
the development. Mr. Reeder asked if perc tests have been completed on all the proposed lots. Mr.
Frederick stated they have all been tested and passed. Wells will be drilled as the lots are developed.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Reeder made a motion to approve the off-site mitigation request as proposed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Goetz and unanimously approved.
OTHER BUSINESS
19112 Keep Tryst Road
Mr. Allen presented a request to add an additional land use to an existing Rural Business (RB) zoning
district. He explained that Rural Business zoning districts are established as a floating zone which permits
only the specific land use that is established at the time of the rezoning map amendment. The current use
of this property was established as a restaurant. The applicant is proposing to construct an 800 square
foot retail building with a parking lot and a drive-thru. Mr. Allen explained that the Planning Commission
is charged with determining if the change in use would be a significant change in the use and intensity of
the property from the existing land use previously authorized.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Reeder made a motion to approve the proposed change as a minor change to the
existing Rural Business zoning district. The motion was seconded by Mr. Semler and unanimously
approved with Commissioner Wagner abstaining from the vote.
Larry Miller – Lot 1 [S-23-061]
Mr. Allen presented a preliminary request to establish an off-site easement to meet Forest Conservation
requirements on a two-lot subdivision. The subject parcel is located at 2919 Reno Monument Road. Mr.
Allen noted that the subdivision plat has not been submitted; therefore, this request is for informational
purposes only.
Mr. Frederick explained the property is a 15.16 acre parcel that was subdivided from a family farm. There
is currently .96 acres of forest on the property. The owner is proposing to build a house on a portion of
the property and to use the remaining lands for agricultural purposes. He does not want to plant
additional forest on the property. Mr. Frederick stated that the owner is proposing to establish a forest
easement on a 900+ acre parcel owned by a hunting club in Blair’s Valley. A forest conservation easement
containing 484 acres has already been established by the State of Maryland on the subject site. The
proposed easement would be located along a stream and next to the protected lands owned by the State.
Approved but not signed
No formal action was taken; however, members did not have any concerns with the proposal.
Update of Projects Initialized
Ms. Kinzer provided a written report for the land development plan review projects (38 total) initialized
during the month of October including 3 site plans and 3 simplified plats.
Comprehensive Plan Update
Ms. Kinzer reported that the public comment period ended on October 31st. Over 100 comments were
received both from agencies and individual homeowners. Staff is prioritizing all comments and have begun
review of same.
Change of meeting time
Consensus: Members have requested to move the meeting start time to 6 p.m.
UPCOMING MEETINGS
1. Washington County Planning Commission regular meeting, January 8, 2024
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Semler made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:25 p.m. The motion was seconded by Mr. Goetz
and so ordered by the Chairman.
Respectfully submitted,
_______________________________________
Clint Wiley
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: FY25 Rural Legacy Program Grant – Approval to Submit Application and Accept
Awarded Funds
PRESENTATION DATE: January 30, 2024
PRESENTATION BY: Chris Boggs, Rural Preservation Administrator, Dept. of Planning &
Zoning
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the submission of the grant application for
the fiscal year 2025 Rural Legacy Program, in the amount of $7,623,600.00 and to accept
awarded funding.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Each year the Department of Planning & Zoning submits a funding
request to the Maryland Department of Natural Resources for the purchase of easements in the
County’s Rural Legacy Area. Rural Legacy properties are lands of significant agricultural,
historic, environmental, public and cultural value inside of the designated Rural Legacy Area,
which is concentrated around the Antietam Battlefield. Past Rural Legacy grants have
significantly contributed to the progress Washington County has made toward the stated goal of
50,000 permanently preserved acres of land. To date, the County has preserved over 8,700 acres
of land through the Rural Legacy Program.
DISCUSSION: The Office of Community Grant Management has reviewed the grant application
and funding guidelines. There are no unusual conditions or requirements attached to the acceptance
of the grant.
FISCAL IMPACT: There are recurring department operating expenses for the inspections of
the easement properties by staff. Time required for inspections are 8 hours per year or $320.00
per year and the cost is covered by the Department of Planning and Zoning’s Land Preservation
Budget.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: Deny approval for the submission of this request
ATTACHMENTS: Rural Legacy Area Map
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
44
Rural Legacy Area Boundary
Rural Legacy Properties
Other Preserved Lands
County Boundary
Town Boundaries
Mhel
Battlel
' �.NIIIIIIIII&
I
mMiles
W—ING1 Th. 11—d note I -1 .1 1—. 1-1.1 1 — 11,... — 1— huse restrimons and elssiaimen.
—
__d B, 6epan
Z.n,hg GIST
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Clipp Rural Legacy Program (RLP) Easement
PRESENTATION DATE: January 30, 2024
PRESENTATION BY: Chris Boggs, Rural Preservation Administrator, Dept. of Planning & Zoning
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the Brent L. Clipp RLP Easement project, in the amount of
$291,676.00 for 67.29 easement acres, paid for 100% by the Board of County Commissioners of Washington
County, Maryland, and to adopt an ordinance approving the easement purchase and to authorize the execution
of the necessary documentation to finalize the easement purchase.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Clipp property is located at 4329 Trego Rd., Keedysville, and the easement will
serve to permanently preserve a valuable agricultural, scenic, environmental and historic property in the County.
The parcel contains both ag and woodland areas. It lies in a part of Washington County that was heavily
trafficked during the Civil War and the Battle of Antietam and borders the Weverton-Roxbury Rail Trail which
is on the Maryland Inventory of Historic Places. The property is also within close proximity to several sites on
the Maryland Inventory of Historic Places. Additionally, the parcel contains roughly 1,400 feet of a tributary to
Little Antietam Creek.
The parcel adds on to a block of hundreds of acres of contiguous preserved farmland around Antietam Battlefield.
Nine (9) development rights will be extinguished with this easement.
DISCUSSION: Since 1998, Washington County has been awarded more than $31 million to purchase Rural
Legacy easements on more than 8,700 acres near Antietam Battlefield in the Rural Legacy Area. RLP is a sister
program to the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Program (MALPP) and includes the protection of
environmental and historic features in addition to agricultural parameters. RLP uses an easement valuation
system (points) to establish easement value rather than appraisals used by MALPP. For FY 2024, Washington
County was awarded RLP grants totaling $3,127,000. The Clipp RLP Easement will use part of those funds.
Easement applicants were previously ranked based on four main categories: the number of development rights
available, the quality of the land/land management (agricultural component), natural resources (environmental),
and the historic value.
FISCAL IMPACT: RLP funds are 100% State dollars, mainly from DNR Open Space funds. In addition to
the easement funds, we receive up to 3% of the easement value for administrative costs, a mandatory 1.5% for
compliance/monitoring costs, and funds to cover all of our legal/settlement costs.
CONCURRENCES: Both the State RLP Board and the State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) staff
have approved and support our program.
ALTERNATIVES: If Washington County rejects State funds for RLP, the funds will be allocated to other
counties in Maryland.
ATTACHMENTS: Aerial Map, Location Map, Ordinance
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Clipp - Detail Map
to
W4RNING�. TTu map wu—d for rposes onV Ir slwold net De scaled er coplad. Source el spa den mn —d M11l
non art foam varqus pubs[aWlll whlh may have use ni11pdpns— dlxlaimen.
Creantl 9Y- Gepartmenx of PUnninb and 2omn6 GIS
5'.
Clipp - Location Map
Rohrersuille
y
OG\.
\ Mount Briar
a
V
Clipp - 67.29 +/-
4329 Trego Road
Keedysville, MD 21756
Roads
_ Clipp Property
Preserved Lands or Districts
Q Rural Villages
/Z� Agricultural Districts
- Forest Easements
- CREP Easements
- Ag Pres
_ Parks
_ Preserved Lands
0 Municipal Boundaries
Q County Boundary
W4RNING�: Thn map wu enaNd br bluRratgn purppfu only IIfMWd notbe foaled or tpW.Sport.of[bt tlua mnYa—Xenon art",—w p-, IWO, wbcb may Mn uu ro WIM arb dliclaimen.
Creaotl By. GepartS eni of P4nninp and Fonmp GIS
ORDINANCE NO. ORD‐2024‐___
AN ORDINANCE TO APPROVE THE PURCHASE OF A CONSERVATION
EASEMENT UNDER THE MARYLAND RURAL LEGACY PROGRAM
(Re: Clipp RLP Conservation Easement)
RECITALS
1. The Maryland Rural Legacy Program (ʺRLPʺ) provides the funding necessary to
protect large, contiguous tracts of land and other strategic areas from sprawl development and
to enhance natural resource, agricultural, forestry, and environmental protection through
cooperative efforts among State and local governments.
2. Protection is provided through the acquisition of easements and fee estates from
willing landowners and the supporting activities of Rural Legacy Sponsors and local
governments.
3. For FY 2024, Washington County (the ʺCountyʺ) was awarded a RLP grant totaling
$3,127,000.00 (the ʺRLP Fundsʺ).
4. Brent L. Clipp (the “Property Owner”) is the fee simple owner of real property
consisting of 67.29 acres, more or less (the ʺPropertyʺ), in Washington County, Maryland. The
Property is more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto.
5. The Property Owner has agreed to donate to the County a Deed of Conservation
Easement on the Property (the “Clipp RLP Conservation Easement”).
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of Washington
County, Maryland, that the acceptance of a donated conservation easement on the Property be
approved and that the President of the Board and the County Attorney be and are hereby
authorized and directed to execute and attest, respectively, all such documents for and on behalf
of the County relating to the acquisition of the Clipp RLP Conservation Easement.
ADOPTED this 30th day of January, 2024.
ATTEST: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
_______________________________ BY:
Dawn L. Marcus, County Clerk John F. Barr, President
Approved as to legal sufficiency: Mail to:
Office of the County Attorney
_____________________________ 100 W. Washington Street, Suite 1101
Zachary J. Kieffer Hagerstown, MD 21740
Deputy County Attorney
EXHIBIT A – DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
ALL that farm, tract, or parcel of land, and all the rights, ways, privileges and
appurtenances thereunto belonging or in anywise appertaining, situate in Election District No. 8,
Washington County, Maryland, being the property identified by the State Department of
Assessments and Taxation as tax account no. 08‐001383, and being more particularly described
in accordance with the description contained in the Deed recorded in Liber 4021, Folio 1 among
the Land Records of Washington County, Maryland, as follows:
SITUATE and lying near Rohrersville Station and the Washington County branch of the
Baltimore and Ohio Railroad in Washington County, Maryland, and more particularly described
as follows: BEING part of a tract called “Showman’s Forest” lying and being in Washington
County, and BEGINNING at a planted stone standing on the East margin of the Washington
County branch of the B&O R.R. and on the North margin of the lane leading to the dwelling house
on said land, and running thence along the North margin of said Lane North 83 ¾ degrees East
11.1 perches to a stone in the edge of the branch; thence North 12 ½ degrees East 5.8 perches to a
stone; thence North 7 ¼ degrees West 8.48 perches to a stone; thence North 3 ½ degrees West 30
½ perches to a stone; thence North 7 ¼ degrees West 4.32 perches to a post; thence North 77
degrees East 14.56 perches to a stone; thence South 67 ¾ degrees East 38.68 perches to a stone;
thence North 71 ¼ degrees East 49 perches to a stone; thence North 64 ¼ degrees East 26 perches
to the land of [now or formerly] Mrs. Sophia Rorher; thence bounding on said land South 44 ¼
degrees East 10 perches; thence South 47 ¼ degrees East 47 ¼ perches to a post; thence South 19
¾ degrees West 41.2 perches to the north margin of a lane; thence along the North margin of said
land South 71 degrees East 42 perches to the public road leading from Rohrersville to Trego;
thence with said road South 4 degrees West 0.8 perches; thence leaving the road North 71 degrees
West 42 perches; thence South 19 ¾ degrees West 37.9 perches to [now or formerly] John Smith’s
land; thence with the said land of John Smith, thence bounding on said land North 84 degrees
West 131 ½ perches to a stone; thence leaving Smith’s land North 8 ¼ degrees West 27.2 perches
to a stone; thence South 77 degrees West 10 perches to a stone on the East margin of the aforesaid
railroad; thence along the East margin of said railroad North 12 ¼ degrees West 10 perches to the
point of beginning; containing 84 ½ acres 19 perches of land, more or less.
SAVING AND EXCEPTING therefrom those tracts or parcels of land conveyed by Deeds
dated and recorded among the Land Records of Washington County, Maryland, as follows:
That tract, lot or parcel of land containing about 6.28 acres conveyed by Clemmie I.
Mullendore and Noah O. Mullendore, her husband, to George B. Mullendore and Wife, by Deed
dated December 10, 1930, and recorded in Liber 188, Folio 16;
All that lot or parcel of land containing 0.918 acre of land, more or less, conveyed by Merl
L. Clipp and Ivy M. Clipp, husband and wife, to Joseph Egar Clipp and Vivian M. Clipp, husband
and wife, by Deed dated October 19, 1961, and recorded in Liber 373, Folio 321;
All that lot or parcel of land containing 3.00 acres of land, more or less, conveyed by Merl
L. Clipp and Ivy M. Clipp, husband and wife, to Jospeh Lyndell Clipp and Fonda Kay Clipp,
husband and wife, by Deed dated August 2, 1985, and recorded in Liber 790, Folio 477;
All that lot or parcel of land containing 7.0 acres, conveyed by Joseph Edgar Clipp and
Vivian E. Clipp to Paul C. Umberger, Jr. and Julia E. Umberger, his wife, by Deed dated March 6,
2003, and recorded in Liber 1958, Folio 414.
THE street address of the herein described property is currently known and designated
as 4329 Trego Road, Keedysville, Maryland.
BEING all of the same property which was conveyed from Joseph L. Clipp and Vivian E.
Clipp, his wife, to Joseph L. Clipp, Galen L. Clipp, and Brent L. Clipp, as joint tenants with the
right of survivorship, by Deed dated December 27, 2010, and recorded in Liber 4016, Folio 38
among the Land Records of Washington County, Maryland. Joseph L. Clipp and Galen L. Clipp
conveyed their right, title, and interest in and to said property to Brent L. Clipp by Deed dated
December 30, 2010, and recorded in Liber 4021, Folio 1 among the aforesaid Land Records. Title
thereafter vested in Brent L. Clipp, sole owner.
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Memorandum of Understanding for The Department of Housing and Community Office of
Statewide Broadband, FY23 Connect Maryland Network Infrastructure Grant Program by and between the
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland and Verizon Maryland, LLC
PRESENTATION DATE: January 9, 2024
PRESENTATION BY: Michelle Gordon, County Administrator; Kirk Downey, County Attorney; and
Tyler Patton, Verizon Maryland, LLC
RECOMMENDATION: Move to approve and authorize the execution of the Memorandum of
Understanding for The Department of Housing and Community Office of Statewide Broadband, FY23
Connect Maryland Network Infrastructure Grant Program by and between the Board of County
Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland and Verizon Maryland, LLC. as to be finalized by the
parties with the approval of the County Attorney's Office.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Discussion regarding the approval of an MOU for The Department of Housing
and Community Office of Statewide Broadband, FY23 Connect Maryland Network Infrastructure
Grant Program by and between the Board of County Commissioners of Washington County,
Maryland and Verizon Maryland, LLC.
DISCUSSION: Verizon Maryland, LLC was awarded a broadband grant of $1.0M from the DHCD,
Statewide Broadband, FY23 Connect Maryland Network Infrastructure Grant Program (ARPA Funds) for
the Hancock area. Verizon will invest $1.1M to make the total project cost $2.1M. Verizon will install
approximately 44 miles of fiber for this “last mile” project to approximately 481 unserved or
underserved premises, both residential and commercial. Most of the fiber will likely be above ground
(80/20) due to the topography; and the project is estimated to take 12-18 months to complete. Verizon
is not asking for funding. The MOU indicates the County is committed to ensuring that the process
runs as smoothly as possible.
FISCAL IMPACT: No funding is requested.
CONCURRENCES: Greg Cartrette, Director of Permits & Inspections, Scott Hobbs, Director of
Engineering
ALTERNATIVES: None
ATTACHMENTS: None
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: None
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: FY24 Healthy Families Home Visiting Continuation Grant – Approval to Accept
Awarded Funding
PRESENTATION DATE: January 30, 2024
PRESENTATION BY: Nicole Phillips, Senior Grant Manager, Office of Grant Management
and Richard Lesh, Grant Manager, Office of Grant Management
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the acceptance of funding awarded under the
FY24 Healthy Families Home Visiting Continuation Grant Program from the Maryland State
Department of Education in the amount of $138,996.50.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Washington County Office of Grant Management on behalf of and
at the direction of the Local Management Board is seeking approval to accept awarded funding
from the Maryland State Department of Education for the FY24 Healthy Families Home Visiting
Continuation Grant Program.
DISCUSSION: The Healthy Families Home Visiting Program is a comprehensive program
modeled after a nationally renowned initiative Healthy Families America. The goals of the
program are to prevent child maltreatment through early intervention, promote healthy growth,
development, and strengthening of the parent-child relationship. This funding is valid from
January 1, 2024 until June 30, 2024. Funding in the amount of $3,302 is included in the award
for County administrative support. No County funds are involved in this award.
FISCAL IMPACT: Provides $3,302 for County administrative expenses.
CONCURRENCES: Local Management Board and Rachel Souders, Director, Office of Grant
Management.
ALTERNATIVES: Deny acceptance of awarded funds.
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: FY24 School Based Health Center Supplemental Funding – Approval to Accept
Awarded Funding
PRESENTATION DATE: January 30, 2024
PRESENTATION BY: Nicole Phillips, Senior Grant Manager, Office of Grant Management
and Richard Lesh, Grant Manager, Office of Grant Management
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve the acceptance of the FY24 School Based
Health Center Supplemental Funding in the amount of $35,000.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: The Washington County Office of Grant Management, on behalf of and
at the direction of the Local Management Board is seeking approval to accept awarded
supplemental funding from the Maryland State Department of Health for the School Based
Health Centers in Washington County.
DISCUSSION: The Washington County School Based Health Center was awarded $35,000 in
supplemental funding from the Maryland State Department of Health. The supplemental funding
will be used to purchase a freezer and refrigerator to house vaccines and generator upgrades at
Western Heights Middle School. This funding will be expended by June 30, 2024. Meritus
Health is the clinical provider contracted to provide these services.
FISCAL IMPACT: No County funds involved.
CONCURRENCES: Local Management Board and Rachel Souders, Director of Grant
Management.
ALTERNATIVES: Deny acceptance of awarded funds.
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Sole Source Procurement (PUR-1665) Sentinel One EDR Software and SOC
Monitoring Agreement for the Information System Department
PRESENTATION DATE: January 30, 2024
PRESENTATION BY: Rick F. Curry, CPPO, Purchasing Director; Josh O’Neal, Chief Technical
Officer
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize a Sole Source procurement for Sentinel One
EDR software and SOC Monitoring for the Information Systems Department in the amount of
$285,379.20 over a 3-year period from Arete Advisors of Boca Raton, FL based on its proposal.
Total Cost at Minimum Number of Agents: $285,379.20
Annual Cost at Minimum Number of Agents: $95,126.40
Monthly Cost at Minimum Number of Agents: $7,927.20
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Arete managed detection and response includes the licensing and
management of the Sentinel One EDR software suite, as well as 24/7 management and monitoring
of this suite, including security responses and notification of key personnel.
Information Systems wishes to apply Sections 1-106.2(a)(1) & (2) of the Code of Local Public
Laws of Washington County, Maryland, to the procurement requested. These sections state that a
sole source procurement is authorized and permissible when (1) Only one source exists that meets
the County’s requirements and (2) The compatibility of equipment, accessories, or replacement
parts is the paramount consideration. Information Systems is requesting permission to enter into
an Agreement for licensing and 24/7 monitoring of the Sentinel One security suite.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $95,126.40 are available in the department’s account
515180-10-11000 and are budgeted annually.
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Arete’s Renewal Quote
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Arete At! wr,oi ,, 4800 T-Rex Avenue, Suite 350
t wl,e^r!frKrrnurre•rs. R0r0 Raton, FI. 3]431
QUQTE
Washington County MD Prepared for: O'Neal Joshua
Customer:
100 W Washington Street Suite 1201, Phone: (240) 313-2265
Hagerstown, MD 217401 Email: ioneal@washco-md.net
Date: Dec 12,2023
Quote Expires: Jan 11,2024
Quote ID 20231212-174452A
Prepared by:
Matthew Unrau
Phone:
(561)448-7902
Email:
munrau@areteiccom
Quote Renewal Term:
36 Months
Start Date:
Jan 10,2024
End Date:
Jan 09,2027
Arete Managed Detection and Response (MDR) Service includes Arete continuous (24hr by 7day by 365 days) monitoring and response.
Total Cost at Minimum Number of Agents: $ 285,379.20
Annual Cost at Minimum Number of Agents: $ 95,126.40
Monthly Cost at Minimum Number of Agents: $ 7,927.20
PRICE QUOTATION
This is a Price Quotation, not a Service Agreement. To order an Arete MDR service, simply sign and date this Price Quotation and return it to
your Arete Representative. Your Arete Representative will then prepare a Service Agreement and make it available to you for signature.
Arete MDR service is priced and invoiced per SentinelOne Agent, per month, based on the actual number of SentinelOne agents that you
have deployed in your infrastructure and monitored by Arete in any given month, down to the Minimum number of SentinelOne Agents
("Min Agents") shown above. Every month, Arete will measure the number of SentinelOne Agents in your infrastructure, calculate your
monthly Service Fee by multiplying the "Per Agent per Month Price" shown above by the actual number of SentinelOne Agents in your
infrastructure (down to the Minimum number of SentinelOne Agents), and invoice you for that amount.
Signature:
Name and Title:
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Bid Award (PUR-1658) Fifteen (15) 2023 or Newer Police Interceptors Utility AWD
Vehicles for the Sheriff’s Office
PRESENTATION DATE: January 30, 2023
PRESENTATION BY: Rick F. Curry, CPPO, Purchasing Director; Alan Matheny, Deputy
Sheriff Sergeant
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the procurement of Fifteen (15) 2023 or Newer
Police Interceptors Utility AWD vehicles for the Sheriff’s Office to the lowest responsive,
responsible bidder, New Holland Auto Group of New Holland, PA in the amount of $44,956 each,
for the total sum of 668,940.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: On January 10, 2023, the County received three (3) bids for the fifteen police
interceptors. The Invitation to Bid notice was published in the local newspaper, listed on the State
of Maryland’s “eMaryland Marketplace Advantage”, and on the County’s website. Eighteen (18)
persons/companies registered/downloaded the bid document on-line. The new vehicles will replace
units that meet the County’s replacement criteria; the units will be advertised on GovDeals.com for
auctioning or they will be given to an outside agency. Additional information: The County initiated
the Vehicle and Equipment Types and Usage Guidelines in 2001. The County’s replacement
guidelines for vehicles less than 19,500 lbs. GVWR is recommended for a ten (10) year economic
life cycle.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $1,681,772 are budgeted in CIP line account 30-
11310VEH006.
CONCURRENCES: Sheriff
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Bid Tabulation Matrix
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
PUR-1658
Fifteen (15) 2023 or Newer Police Interceptor Utility AWD
Description Unit Price Unit Price Unit Price
Fifteen (15) 2023 or Newer Police Interceptor Utility
AWD $51,000.00 $51,000.00 $52,690.00 $52,690.00 $44,596.00 $668,940.00
Delivery Date
Warranty
*Corrected Calculations based on Unit Pricing
Remarks/Exceptions:
New Holland Auto Group
New Holland, PA
Total Price
of January, 2024
Full Manufacturers Warranty
Applies
Germantown, MD
Total Price
4/11/24
Germantown, MD
Total Price
4/11/24
1 Bids Opened: January 10, 2024
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Quotation Award (Q-23-767) – Well Drilling Services at Elevated Water Storage
Tank for the Town of Sharpsburg
PRESENTATION DATE: January 30, 2024
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Naugle, CPPO, Buyer, Purchasing Department; Joe Moss, P.E.,
Department of Water Quality, Deputy Director, Engineering Services
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the well drilling services contract to the
responsive, responsible low quoter, Negley’s Well Drilling Inc., of Newburg, PA for the Total
Base Bid in the amount of $97,424 (items 1, 2, 3, and 4); plus Contingent Bid Items in the amount
of $25,450 (items 1 and 2) for the total sum of $122,874.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Notice of Request for Quote (RFQ) was listed on the State of Maryland’s
“eMaryland MarketplaceAdvantage” website, and the County’s website. Quotes were received on
December 20, 2023. Ten (10) persons/companies registered/downloaded the quote document on-
line. One (1) quote was submitted as indicated on the attached quote tabulation matrix.
The contract services require the Contractor to furnish all materials, labor, equipment, power,
maintenance, etc., to drill a new drinking water well at the Town of Sharpsburg Elevated Water
Storage Tank. The proposed well will be used as a supplemental water supply for the Town of
Sharpsburg area. The well is desired to supply a minimum of 100 gal/min to be used as a drinking
water source.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funds in the amount of $330,000 are available in the department's Capital
Improvement Plan account (38-41010-LIN047); the Town of Sharpsburg will pay 50% of the cost
of these services.
CONCURRENCES: D ivision Director of Environmental Management
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: Quote Matrix Tabulation.
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
Q-23-767
WELL DRILLING SERVICES AT ELEVATED WATER STORAGE TANK FOR THE TOWN OF SHARPSBURG,
WASHINGTON COUTNY, MARYLAND
Item
No.Item Description Qty.Unit Price Extended Price
1 Mobilization and Demobilization LS 1 $30,218.00 $30,218.00
2 VF 200 $36.93 $7,386.00
3 depth of water bearing zone identified in VF 170 $209.50 $35,615.00
4 Complete 72-hour yield test LS 1 $24,205.00 $24,205.00
Item Description Qty.Unit Price Extended Price
1 Additional 6" well bore beyond 200 VF VF 100 $45.00 $4,500.00
2 VF 100 $209.50 $20,950.00
bore. Pricing includes up to 20 ft of temporary 12" steel casing in finished bore. Pricing is for conventional
air percussion drilling only. Pricing does not include abandonment costs in the case of an unsuccessful pilot
CONTINGENT BID ITEMS:
Remarks / Exceptions:
Negley's Well Drilling, Inc.
Newburg, PA
$97,424.00Total Base Bid for Items 1 through 4
Total Base Bid for Contingent Items 1 through 2 $25,450.00
Total Bid Price (Base Bid Items 1 through 4, Plus Contingent
Items 1 and 2)$122,874.00
Quotes Opened: December 20, 2023
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Contract Renewal (PUR-1596) Laboratory Services for Water/Wastewater Testing
for the Department of Water Quality
PRESENTATION DATE: January 30, 2024
PRESENTATION BY: Brandi Naugle, CPPB, Buyer - Purchasing Department, Davina Yutzy,
Deputy Director of Water Quality Operations
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to renew the contract for the Laboratory Services for
Water/Wastewater Testing for the Department of Water Quality with ALS Group USA, dba ALS
Environmental, of Middletown, PA, per the rate included in its letter dated January 8, 2024. ALS
is requesting a Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase of 3% to the current pricing structure for
this renewal time period.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: On March 28, 2023, the Board of County Commissioners of Washington
County originally awarded a contract for the subject services to ALS, based on a total bid sum of
$82,142 for items 1 through 59. This contract was for a period of one (1) year, with an option by
the County to renew for up to two (2) additional consecutive one (1) year periods , which began
May 1, 202 3. This is the first of two additional one-year renewal periods. The quantities stated in
the bid document are estimated annual quantities. This is a requirements contract, utilized on an
as-needed basis with no guarantee of minimum or maximum number of units of services.
The scope of services to be provided by the contractor includes pick-up, preserve and transport
of samples (which could be water, wastewater and/or solids) from the Department of Water
Quality’s Laboratory twice per week. All analyses are to be completed and reported within
fourteen (14) consecutive calendar days after the contractor receives the sample.
DISCUSSION: N/A
FISCAL IMPACT: Funding for these services is available in the Department of Water
Quality’s operating budget 515000-40-40030 .
CONCURRENCES: Division Director of Environmental Management
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: ALS Group USA , Corp., letter dated January 8, 2024
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: N/A
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form
January 8, 2024
Washington County Purchasing Department
Washington County Administration Building
100 West Washington Street, Suite 320
Hagerstown, MD 21740-4748
ATTENTION: Brandi J. Naugle
ALS Group USA, Corp.
301 Fulling Mill Road
Middletown, PA 17057
T +1 717 944 5541 F +1 717 944 1430
RE: Letter of Intent for PUR 1596
Dear Brandi,
ALS Environmental would like to renew the Contract PUR-1596 - Laboratory Services for
Water/Wastewater Testing for the second consecutive one year period beginning May 1, 2024
through April 30, 2025. ALS is also requesting a CPI increase of 3% to the current price
structure in place for this time period.
If you have any questions or need additional information, you may contact me at 717-577-3515
or Shiloh.Summy@alsglobal.com.
Yours sincerely,
Mr. Shiloh Summy
Laboratory Director
Right Solutions • Right Partner www.alsglobal.com
I Washington County M A R Y L A N D
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland Agenda Report Form SUBJECT: Budget Transfer
PRESENTATION DATE: January 30, 2024
PRESENTATION BY: Sheriff Brian Albert
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Transfer of Funds
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: Transfer of Funds from Account 498800 in the amount of $101347.00 to
Account number 599999 Detention Center Systemic projects. transfer of $6800. From Account
498800 to Account 599999 Vehicle and Equipment. Transfer of funds from 515350 in the amount
of $28018.00 to Account 490010 Accident repairs.
DISCUSSION: First budget adjustment form in the amount of $108147.00 is from Insurance
Claim for damages for record at IKO way. Damage occurred during the roof replacement.
Second budget adjustment form in the amount of $28018.00 was from an insurance claim for a totaled
police interceptor vehicle.
FISCAL IMP ACT: None
CONCURRENCES:
ATTACHMENTS: Budget Transfer Form
Commissioners Approval
https://lf-forms.washeo-md. net/Forms/form/aysubmission?RemoveHea...
Washington County, Maryland
0 Budget Adjustment Form
(�) BudgetAmendment
Budget Transfer
Department Head Authorization
Division Director / Elected Official Authorization
Budget & Finance Director Approval
County Administrator Approval
County Commissioners Approval
BOCC Approval Date (if known)
Deputy Director - Finance
Preparer, if applicable
Sign
I(rX�br.�y x. f�rr�
Sign
Sign
a� e�pa t trr7`
ThAq llMaMh,
signed by Rose, Chip on:
1/312024, 8:18:27 AM
signed by on:
1/4/2024, 8:15:52 AM
Explain Budget Insurance reimbursement for claims 3333269 (ck 2000215635 - $36,211.16) and 3336955 (ck 2000215634 - $71,936.05)
Adjustment
signed by Garrett, Zane M. on:
1/312024, 2:26:41 PM
signed by McCammon, Tracy L.
on:
1/212024, 2:44:11 PM
Expenditure /
Department
Account Number
Fund Number
Number
Project Number Grant Number Activity Code
Department and Amount Description Increase
(Decrease) +/-
498800
30
11320
BLD089
Other - CIP Revenue
101,347.00
599999
30
11320
BLD089
Detention Center Sytemics
101,347.00
498800
30
11310
VEH006
Other- CIP Revenue
6,800.00
599999
30
11310
VEH006
Police Vehclie and Equipment
6,800.00
Attach Additional Items
Upload
Detention - roof claim —Bonded Applicators 03...
390.11 KB
Approve
Reject
Comments
2000 characters left
I of 1 1 /4/2024, 8:23 AM
> m
x
>
m x
C),
m
cc "=o
=
c
CL
C)
cn
CY'l
CL
z
(a
0
C
o
—
C c
cr
0
m
-n
a
CL
CD
m
ca
CL
mrz
m
>
CD
3
cr
m
0
C)
CD
:3
CD
CL
>
>
m
rL
-
0
—
Z CD
'a
0
0
:r
0
a)
m
3
::t
k
CD
-n
cr
CD
>
w
0
0
N
f
@
3
N)
00
o
E
M
CD
CL
CD
CD
0
N
z
so
0
cr
CD
m
0
0
<
0
CD
Z
>
cr
0
71)
cr
0
(D
pr
.CD.
CD
0
«
:1
0
0
0
CL
(D
2)
clE
m
fu
G)
a)
f
0
>
CL
0
cn
0
0
>
cn
C)-
(D
3
0
Cx Cl) CD
0
:3
CT
o
co 0
o
k
k
SD
>
CO)
0
o
At:r
N)
rl)
CR
CD
OD
oo
C)
o C)
6.1
PD
m
m
0
C)
3
� }
03
90
n
0
0
9
Open Session Item
SUBJECT: Agriculture – Faces of Farming Presentation
PRESENTATION DATE: Tuesday, January 30, 2024
PRESENTATION BY: Leslie Hart, Business Development Specialist, Department of Business and
Economic Development
RECOMMENDED MOTION: N/A
REPORT-IN-BRIEF: “Faces of Farming” is an agricultural-focused video marketing campaign that
will showcase two local Washington County farms every month, for one year. The “Faces of Farming”
marketing videos will be showcased on the County’s website, as well as Facebook and other social
media platforms, and will target a new industry and highlight a local farmer from that specific
agricultural industry. Additionally, the Faces of Farming marketing campaign will be utilized in
Washington County Public Schools as an agricultural education element focused on kindergarten to
Fifth grade students to connect Washington County youth directly with local farms.
DISCUSSION: Washington County’s agricultural business represents the backbone of the County’s
landscape. With over 900 operating family farms and $153,725,000 in market value of products sold,
agriculture is the largest economic driver in Washington County. The “Faces of Farming” marketing
campaign will aim to educate residents in Washington County, along with the surrounding States and
Counties, about the economic impact of the Ag industry. Additionally, these videos will be used for
agricultural education to numerous streams around Washington County, such as, 4-H and FFA (Future
Farmers of America) meetings, Ag Expo and Fair, and they will be available on the Washington County
Ag App and website.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
CONCURRENCES: N/A
ALTERNATIVES: N/A
ATTACHMENTS: N/A
AUDIO/VISUAL NEEDS: Yes - Faces of Farming Videos: Antietam Creek Vineyard of Sharpsburg
Maryland and Vixen Hollow Equestrian Center of Smithsburg Maryland
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
Agenda Report Form