HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 - February (no staff reports)
Lloyd Yavener, Chair Michael Lushbaugh
Justin Bedard, Vice Chair Tyler Milam
Ann Aldrich Gregory Smith
Brianna Candelaria Randal Leatherman,
BOCC Rep HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
WWW.WASHCO-MD.NET
747 Northern Avenue | Hagerstown, MD 21742 | P: 240.313.2430 | F: 240.313.2431 | TDD: 7-1-1
AGENDA
February 4, 2026
Regular Meeting – 6:00 p.m.
Washington County Administration Complex, 100 West Washington Street, Room 2001,
Hagerstown, MD 21740
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
MINUTES
1. Minutes of the December 3, 2025, meeting *
NEW BUSINESS
1. Residential New Construction Permit (2025-05908), 21245 Mount Lena Road
– (WA-II-166, Mount Lena Rural Village) - (Discussion/Approval) - 2,520 sq. ft.
one story pole building on concrete slab to rear of dwelling to be used as a
garage, (7) overhead doors, metal roof and sides, pre-engineered roof trusses *
2. Non-Residential Addition-Alteration Permit (2025-05780), 8505 Fahrney
Church Road – (WA-II-055, San Mar Orphanage and Mechanical Institute) -
(DEMOLITION PORTION ONLY - Discussion/Support) - Demolition of exterior
balconies and front covered porch, gutting all interior levels of structure to create
individual suites, associated rooms, and community use rooms for the purpose of
young adult housing and staffing, 975 sq. ft. three story addition to be used as a
stairway with elevator and elevator lobby on all floors, 666 sq. ft. ramp, 174 sq. ft.
covered front porch, 22 sq. ft. stoop, Zoning Certification for “San Mar Children’s
Home” to convert space from an orphanage to a young adult housing facility San
Mar family & Community Services, Findley Building *
3. Residential Demolition Permit (2026-00212), 13511 Maugansville Road –
(WA-I-252, Martin Farm) – (Discussion/Support) - Demolition of 3,256 sq. ft.
dwelling and foundation
4. HTC-25-004, 900 The Terrace, Hagerstown (WA-HAG-146, Oak Hill Historic
District) – (Information) – Part 1 and Part 2 application equivalent documentation
for tax credits at the Seifarth House for roof repair *
OTHER BUSINESS
1. Certified Local Government Annual Report Federal Fiscal Year 2025 -
(Discussion/Comment) The completed draft report is attached. *
2. Correspondence
a. Request for Comments - Smithsburg High School Telecommunications
Tower - Proposed Telecommunications Project - Trileaf #766917 *
i. Note: Updated documentation attached for comment
b. Request for Comment – AP2025-034, 20659 National Pike – Special
exception for banquet/reception facility use and variance from the
pavement requirement for off-street parking *
i. Note: Staff submitted comments
c. Invitation to Comment – Proposed Telecommunications Project – Trileaf
#746609 – 5404 Mondell Road, Sharpsburg*
i. Note: staff submitted standard comment/request to consult;
Section 106 still in progress
d. Request for Comment AP2025-031, 5404 Mondell Road - special
exception for communication tower *
i. Note: staff submitted comments and attended meeting – Special
exception was denied
e. Invitation to Comment – Proposed Telecommunications Project – Trileaf
#778831, Mt. Briar, 4220 Chestnut Grove Road *
i. Note: Staff requested standard information 1/13/2026
f. Request for Comment AP2025-030, 4220 Chestnut Grove (no
attachments)
i. Note: Staff did not comment on this tower as part of local appeal
process; Appeal was granted
g. Request for Comment – Telecommunications Tower – 10944 White Hall
Road Smithsburg, MD – Trileaf #770617 *
i. Note: Staff requested standard information 12/22/2025
h. Request for Comment – Proposed Telecommunications Tower –
3417/3413 Rohrersville Rd., Rohrersville, MD - Trileaf #771285 (no
attachments)
i. Note: Staff submitted comments provided by HDC at 12/4/2025
meeting; No Section 106 update after new comments; SP-25-029,
related local site plan, in progress, AP2025-004, Granted
i. Request for Comment- Proposed Telecommunications Tower –
Bakersville, 7116 Houser Road, Trileaf #775393 (no attachments)
i. Note: Staff requested standard information 10/14/2025; consultant
work in progress to compile as of 1/14/2026; No local applications
at this time
j. Section 106 Consultation: I-70 Bridges over Licking Creek – MDOT *
i. Note: no comments submitted by staff
k. Consultation Request – New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility – 16220
Wright Road, Williamsport, MD *
3.Staff Report
a.Staff Reviews *
b.Update on Town adoption of MOU’s for Tax Credit
i.Boonsboro and Sharpsburg completed
ii.Smithsburg finished their process; awaiting copies to take to BOCC
iii.Funkstown is still outstanding
c.Grant Program for Historic Structures – Draft – Status with CA update
d.Reminder to submit Financial Disclosures to staff before April 30, 2026
e.Preservation Month 2026 planned/potential topics/events (discussion)
i.May 30th Campaign for Historic Trades Window Workshop
ii. Emphasize Ordinary Maintenance
iii.Highlight Salvage Positives
1.20313 Locust Grove
iv.Emphasize sustainability of historic Preservation and deconstruction
v.Adaptive Reuse (saving places article from Ann)
vi.Interview Bikles for historic tax credit highlight
ADJOURNMENT
UPCOMING MEETING
1.Wednesday, March 4, 2026 at 6:00 p.m.
*attachments
MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY December 3, 2025
The Washington County Historic District Commission held its regular monthly meeting on Wednesday,
December 3, 2025 at 6:00 p.m. in the Washington County Administrative Complex, 100 W. Washington
Street, Room 2001, Hagerstown, Maryland
CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The Vice-Chairman called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Commission members present were: Justin Bedard, Vice-Chairman, Ann Aldrich, Tyler Milam, Greg Smith,
and Brianna Candelaria. Staff members present were: Washington County Department of Planning &
Zoning: Meghan Jenkins, GIS Coordinator and HDC Staff member.
Also in attendance were Theodore and Sharon Lapkoff (20313 Locust Grove Road).
MINUTES
Motion and Vote: Ms. Aldrich made a motion to approve the minutes of the November 5, 2025 regular
meeting as presented. The motion was seconded by Mr. Milam and unanimously approved.
NEW BUSINESS
Residential Demo Permit (2025-05388) – 20313 Locust Grove Road
Ms. Jenkins presented a demolition permit application for the deconstruction of a 3,900 sq. ft. single-
family dwelling and a detached garage. She noted there are several exterior elements that have
contributed to the deterioration of the structure. The configuration of the structure is generally intact
with a log front and frame structure to the rear. The property owners have tried to rehabilitate the
dwelling over the years. Ms. Jenkins noted that due to topographic constraints on this property such as
the location of the septic system and the forest conservation easement area, the owners would like to
demolish the existing structure and use the same site to construct their new home. Deconstruction of the
existing structure will be performed by Second Chances and the applicants intend to reuse some of the
stone and timbers, if possible.
Ms. Jenkins explained that the applicants intend to keep the bank barn (which has been restored) as well
as the summer kitchen and the well house located on the property.
Staff recommends support of the demolition application in consideration of the alternative analysis
provided by the applicants and details of the staff report and photographs provided.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Smith made a motion to support the demolition permit in accordance with Staff’s
recommendation. The motion was seconded by Ms. Aldrich and unanimously approved.
OLD BUSINESS
Residential Demo Permit (2025-04522) – 11416 Hanging Rock Road, Clear Spring
Ms. Jenkins reminded members that this demolition permit application was tabled at the November 5th
meeting pending staff working with other reviewing agencies to determine if the structure could be
reused. Following the meeting, the applicant withdrew the demolition application because they intend to
save the structure and remove whatever elements are required by the Health Department in order to use
the space either for storage or as a workshop.
OTHER BUSINESS
Correspondence
a.Smithsburg High School Tower Update – Ms. Jenkins provided comments on this project that
included information that the proposed cell tower site is located in a forest conservation area.
The Board of Education intends to replant any trees that are cleared for the project. Members
would like the consultant to provide an archaeological report, a historic structures assessment
of the viewshed area, and visualizations (GIS viewshed and photo simulations) of the
proposed tower,
b.Rohrersville Telecommunications Tower – Mr. Bedard explained that the report covered the
standard level of effort; however, the effects of the historic properties in Rohrersville is
insufficient. The summary provided does not address key elements or issues to determine if
location of this cell tower would have any adverse effects on the historic properties. The
assessment does not address any of the following concerns: a) if the proposed cell tower is
visible from the historic resources; b) the extent or magnitude of the visibility and its effect
on the setting of the resources; or c) an adequate assessment of whether or not the proposed
cell tower will alter the characteristics of these historic properties that qualify them for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The summary does not state under which
criteria the properties are eligible nor does it discuss if the location of the tower would
diminish the integrity of each property’s location, sign, setting, materials, workmanship
feeling or association. Members recommended that Mr. Bedard’s comments be sent directly
to the consultant.
Staff Report
•A written report was provided to members in the agenda packet.
•Legislative Priorities Update – The County Attorney’s Office has reviewed the grant and to their
knowledge the grant program can be enacted without further legislation. The implementation
information has been updated by the County Attorney’s Office and will be brought back to the
Commission for review. We are trying to get the funding source added to the upcoming fiscal
year’s budget.
•Update of Town adoption of MOUs for Tax Credits
o The MOUs for the Towns of Boonsboro and Sharpsburg will be presented to the County
Commissioners on December 9th for their approval and signature.
o Ms. Jenkins will be attending the Funkstown Town Council meeting on December 8th to
make a presentation.
•Discussion of Demolition Resources – Members discussed the visibility of the HDC’s demolition
resources that are currently on the County’s website. Discussions were focused on becoming part
of the Permitting Department’s outreach, including information in the County’s Solid Waste
Management Plan regarding deconstruction and reuse, and discuss ordinary maintenance of
historic resources during Preservation month.
•Discussion of ruins and their rehabilitation/reuse – Ms. Jenkins noted she was having difficulty
finding any information on this subject. Members believe this could be a cultural issue.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Smith made a motion to adjourn to Closed Session. The motion was seconded by
Ms. Aldrich and unanimously approved.
CLOSED SESSION
To discuss the appointment, re-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.
The Vice-Chairman reconvened the meeting in Open Session at 7:15pm.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Motion and Vote: Mr. Smith made a motion to elect Lloyd Yavener as the Chairman for a second term.
The motion was seconded by Ms. Aldrich and unanimously approved.
Motion and Vote: Ms. Candelaria made a motion to elect Justin Bedard as the Vice-Chairman for a second
term. The motion was seconded by Mr. Milam and unanimously approved.
UPCOMING MEETING
The next meeting of the Historic District Commission is scheduled for Wednesday, January 7, 2026 at 6:00
p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
Ms. Aldrich made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:20 pm. The motion was seconded by Mr. Smith,
unanimously approved and so ordered by the Vice-Chairman.
Respectfully submitted,
______________________________________
Justin Bedard, Vice-Chairman
Garage
Shed
Pool
Proposed
36' x 70'
Pole Barn
House
Driveway
Driveway
151'
40'
25'
331'
Lums Lane
Mt. Lena Rd
North
1'' = 50'
Harold & Wanda Dorsey
21245 Mount Lena Rd
Boonsboro Md 21713
Site Plan Proposed Pole Barn
Drawn By RMD
Existing Septic
x 100'
Radius
Well
August 12, 2025
Elizabeth Hughes Director / State Historic Preservation Officer Maryland Historical Trust Maryland Department of Planning 100 Community Place Crownsville, MD 21032
REF: San Mar Children’s Home Findlay Building Rehabilitation Project Assessment of Effects
Dear Ms. Hughes:
San Mar Family and Community Services, Inc. is proposing to renovate and modernize the Findlay
Building at the historic San Mar Children’s Home in Boonsboro, Washington County, Maryland. The proposed undertaking would utilize the existing historic fabric while providing an updated and expanded space that satisfies the required programs for contemporary youth housing. As part of this effort, a three-
story rear addition will be constructed creating an additional stair and elevator core to satisfy code requirements. The historic character and layout of the building will be preserved where possible; however, providing the necessary square footage and amenities for fifteen studio apartment units within the current building footprint will require the reinterpretation of some architectural features.
The Findlay Building, addressed 8505 Fahrney Church Road, sits in the center of a 36-acre property, operated by the San Mar Children’s Home since its facilities opened in 1927. The property, located to the north of Boonsboro’s Main Street within the San Mar community, stretches along the major thoroughfare of Mapleville Road (Maryland Route 66) to the east and is divided into two parcels by Fahrney Church Road, which runs east to west from Mapleville Road. The entire site is rural in nature, and the property is bound by farmland to the north, south, and west. Several accessory buildings surround the Findlay
Building, including a two-story brick farmhouse and stone springhouse to the northeast that date from the mid-nineteenth century when the land was owned and farmed by the Fahrney family.
Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and its implementing regulations (36 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 800) “Protection of Historic Properties” (Section 106), San Mar Family and Community Services, Inc. initiated the Section 106 process and the Maryland Historic Trust
(MHT) Act Section 5A-325 and 5A-326 in March 2025. Since that time, the San Mar organization has defined the undertaking and has assessed potential effects to historic resources by enlisting EHT Traceries, Inc. to complete a DOE Form for the Findlay Building as requested by MHT. This letter is being transmitted to seek concurrence from your office with the findings presented in the DOE Form, which can be found in Attachment A, while the project drawings can be found in Attachment B.
Description of Undertaking
San Mar Family and Community Services, Inc. proposes to renovate and modernize the interior and exterior of the Findlay Building and to construct a three-story rear addition that will provide an additional stair and elevator core, satisfying code requirements. The Findlay Building, constructed between 1925 and 1927, is an L-shaped, two-and-a-half-story brick mansion designed in the Colonial Revival style. The Findlay Building originally functioned as the main building of the San Mar Children’s Home, previously
Findlay Building Rehabilitation Page 2 of 6
Assessment of Effects Letter August 12, 2025
the Washington County Home for Orphaned and Friendless Children. The property is included in the Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties as the San Mar Orphanage (WA-II-55). In the late nineteenth
century, the building footprint was expanded by a small, two-story rear addition. The interior has been extensively altered during modernization efforts over the years; however, the historic layout remains intact. The building currently houses offices and conference rooms used by the San Mar organization. The intent of this project is to rehabilitate the exterior of the building in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and completely modernize the interiors. As needed, materials and finishes will be replaced in-kind. Exterior alterations will include the construction of an addition at the west (rear) elevation, removal of the main entrance pavilion, modifications to the door opening of the main entrance, conversion of Juliet balcony doors on the façade into windows, removal of the metal Juliet balconies on the façade, and the replacement of eight roof dormers with four larger roof dormers. In addition, the project will include parking lot upgrades and new landscaping.
The interior of the existing building, which retains little historic fabric, will undergo an extensive renovation to update all utilities and living quarters, mitigate environmental concerns, and provide
programmatic elements that will support community development. Interior alterations will include modifications to floor plans and construction of bathrooms to create fifteen studio units, along with the removal of the main central staircase. An innkeeper’s suite will also be added to the program. Beyond
this, the building’s overall interior configuration will be retained as the original north-south circulation axis will remain, along with the larger gathering spaces and kitchen facilities towards the northwest corner of the first floor. In February of 2024, San Mar hosted Cindy Stone of DHCD and MHT Preservation Officer Elizabeth Hughes to review the proposed project and received positive feedback on the direction of the rehabilitation efforts. Ms. Hughes shared that it was her belief that minor mitigation measures would allow the organization to protect the legacy of the services provided on the campus. As the continuous owner over the past 98 years, San Mar Family and Community Services, Inc. plans to renovate the facilities to offer a related service in housing young adults in transition from foster care. There was not much concern for the loss of the legacy, as the legacy will continue. The San Mar organization has since
assessed potential effects to historic resources by enlisting EHT Traceries, Inc. to complete a DOE Form for the Findlay Building as requested by MHT. The resource is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) based on the findings presented by the DOE Form. The Findlay Building at 8505 Fahrney Church Road in Boonsboro, Maryland demonstrates sufficient historical and architectural significance to support eligibility under National Register Criterion A in the area of Social History and Criterion C in the area of Architecture. The DOE Form recommends a Period of Significance of 1925-1927. This period extends from the start of construction in 1925 to the completion of the building in 1927 when approximately forty children were moved in. Assessment of Effects The facilities, while available for use, are not conducive in their current layout to address housing insecurity as they were designed as an early twentieth century group home. The San Mar organization has no desire or plan to step backwards towards that traditional model; their wish is to revitalize the Findlay Building’s historic use and footprint to create an environment for women aging out of foster care that results in optimism, calmness, and respect, supporting each resident's dignity and sense of self. The design approach for the renovation is rooted in key trauma-informed design principles: Beauty and joy, community and collaboration, safety and trust, and choice and empowerment.
Findlay Building Rehabilitation Page 3 of 6
Assessment of Effects Letter August 12, 2025
As previously described, the masonry circulation tower to be added to the rear elevation is necessary to meet contemporary code requirements for a building with fifteen studio apartment units. A ramp along the
rear elevation will access this addition. The dormer expansion will then create the appropriate amount of viable living space in the new loft apartments, previously used as attic space. San Mar is committed to keeping the dormer component of the roof; however, connecting pairs of dormers in their original locations allows for the most efficient use of space for apartments for vulnerable young women transitioning from foster care to adulthood. The altered dormers will be clad in modern materials to differentiate them and highlight them as altered features. The organization believes that the needs of the residents of the apartments should come before the dormer integrity, and enlarging the dormers will ensure spaces are not cramped with low head heights or barriers to freely moving about the room, in turn providing a sense of empowerment and openness. The redesign of the main entrance access is important for many different reasons. The removal of the
pavilion structure on the façade will increase safety and security between the ground level and second floor. Within its organizational history, San Mar has experienced how this element of the façade could be problematic on some occasions with unauthorized entry and exit from the second-floor window openings.
Removing the pavilion will also allow for more natural light to infiltrate the entry area. This focus on light extends to the restoration of the original wood fanlight in the center of the façade, along with the two wood oculi at the north and south elevations. Natural light is crucial to the building’s functionality as such
architectural elements can significantly heighten or calm a resident's response to stressors, contributing to a sense of calmness and well-being. Please, note, the wood oculi and wood fanlight are called out to be replaced in the drawings found in Attachment B, but they will instead be salvaged, restored and reused. The organization has gone to great lengths to preserve important elements of the historic fabric within the design for the new home; however, they believe that aspects of the building that retain their institutional feel will do a disservice to future residents who may be reminded of former homes where conditions were unsatisfactory. San Mar hopes to design a building that will be a place of healing and support; the invitingness of the main entrance is a critical component to sending the message to residents, day in and day out, that they are in a safe, vibrant, and opportunity-rich environment. San Mar proposes to retain the original rectangular double-leaf door opening of the entry, but recessing the opening to shelter residents
from inclement weather as the pavilion once did. The visual cues and amount of space available to residents are critical components of the trauma informed design process. As the sole organization operating and managing services on the Boonsboro site for nearly a century, San Mar is committed to mitigating historical impact by continuing to lift up not only the history of the organization, but that of the broader area in Boonsboro. San Mar Family & Community
Services, Inc. is undoubtedly a willing and interested partner in preserving this history and supporting MHT’s mission to educate residents of the state about the legacy of Maryland’s past. The organization believes that creating a space for young people on this site that never makes them feel like they are in an undesirable institutional space, which will be produced from the marriage of many unique historical elements with the overall modernization of the facilities, can be achieved while supporting broader preservation goals. Proposed Mitigation Measures: 1. Interpretation. In order to educate visitors, employees, and residents about the history of the Findlay Building and the larger Fahrney/Gray farm site, interpretive signage will be created for
the lobby and/or the main entrance to the building. 2. Digital Capture. Digital capture of photos and client information will be carried out to protect the legacy of services provided on the campus.
Findlay Building Rehabilitation Page 4 of 6
Assessment of Effects Letter August 12, 2025
3.Design Review. As the design is further refined, consultation will continue with the U.S.Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and MHT to meet the expected historic
preservation guidelines.
The interior and exterior renovations will provide long-term preservation of the historic building while making use of the former living quarters existing on the San Mar organization’s property, returning the building to its original use. The rehabilitation of the Findlay Building’s exterior in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and the modernization of the interiors allows for continued and improved use of the historic resource. The proposed undertaking will retain exterior character-defining features of the Colonial Revival style of the building while providing modernized efficient interior floorplans that provide maximum utility for tenants.
Sincerely,
Kim Dailaeder Principal/Director of Technical Preservation EHT Traceries
Included: Attachment A: Determination of Eligibility Attachment B: Project Drawings
Cc: Matthew Bray, matthew.j.bray@hud.gov Becky Roman, becky.roman@maryland.gov Jerica Washington, jwashington@snamarhope.org Keith Fanjoy, kfanjoy@sanmarhope.org
Attachment A: Determination of Eligibility
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR Eligible: yes X DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY FORM no
Property Name: San Mar Orphanage & Mechanical Institute (San Mar) Inventory Number: WA-II-055
Address: 8505 Fahrney Church Road City: Boonsboro, MD Zip Code: 21713
County: Washington County USGS Topographic Map: USGS Funkstown quadrangle
Owner: San Mar Children’s Home Inc. Is the property being evaluated a district? yes
Tax Parcel Number: 0117 Tax Map Number: 0063 Tax Account ID Number: 024963
Project: Agency:
Site visit by MHT Staff: no yes Name: Date:
Is the property located within a historic district? yes x no
If the property is within a district District Inventory Number:
NR-listed district yes Eligible district yes District Name:
Preparer’s Recommendation: Contributing resource yes no Non-contributing but eligible in another context
If the property is not within a district (or the property is a district)
Preparer’s Recommendation: Eligible yes x no
Criteria: x A B x C D Considerations: A B C D E F G x None
Documentation on the property/district is presented in:
Description of Property and Eligibility Determination: (Use continuation sheet if necessary and attach map and photo)
Description
Summary
The Findlay Building, the original main building of the San Mar Children’s Home, is located at 8505 Fahrney Church
Road in Boonsboro, Maryland. The L-shaped, Colonial Revival building consists of a two-and-a-half-story
rectangular main block with a two-and-a-half-story rear wing to the north. The exterior is clad in red brick and features
slightly projecting bays, overlaid hipped roofs, and dormers, in addition to neoclassical-inspired elements such as a
large pediment and fanlight in the center of the façade, decorative molding, and overall symmetry of the elevations.
The building was designed by local Hagerstown architect Amos J. Klinkhart in 1925 and construction was completed
in 1927. The Findlay Building functioned as the living quarters for the children of the San Mar Orphanage, which
opened in 1927 in the community of San Mar following the merger of the Washington County Home for Children
and the Peter Gray Orphans Home and Mechanical Institute, along with the latter’s move from its original facilities
in downtown Hagerstown. The orphanage was built on the acreage of the Gray Farm, which Peter Gray had stipulated
in his will be used for such a purpose after his and his wife’s passing. The home was rededicated in 1981 and the
name changed to that of the San Mar Children’s Home. Shortly after, the main building was given the official name
of the Findlay Building in honor of longstanding board member Anna K. Findlay who laid the cornerstone back in
1925. The building exterior maintains much of its original historic character and fabric. Although the interior has
seen multiple renovations over time, its historic layout, circulation pattern, and program have also remained largely
intact. A two-story addition was added to the west elevation of the rear wing between 1958-1979.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 1 MIHP No: WA-II-055
1
Site
The Findlay Building sits in the center of a thirty-six-acre property operated by the San Mar Children’s Home since
its facilities opened in 1927. The property, located to the north of Boonsboro’s Main Street within the San Mar
community, stretches along the major thoroughfare of Mapleville Road (Maryland Route 66) to the east and is
divided into two parcels by Fahrney Church Road, which runs east to west from Mapleville Road. The entire site is
rural in nature, and the property is bound by farmland to the north, south, and west. The Findlay Building is sited
close to the intersection of Mapleville Road and Fahrney Church Road with an east facing façade. The building is
surrounded by a paved access road and swaths of parking spaces, and a circle with a small garden in the center
creates a drop-off zone in front of the main entrance. These paved elements were installed before 1958. Mature
trees shield the building from the highway and are dotted across the site. Several accessory buildings surround the
Findlay Building, some predating the opening of the orphanage that are associated with the farmhouse. The two-
story brick farmhouse to the northeast of the main building was constructed in the mid-nineteenth century when the
land was owned and farmed by the Fahrney family. The springhouse, located further north along a small stream
running from Little Beaver Creek, is thought to be from the same time period. A brick smokehouse, immediately
north of the main building, is a one-story structure that was built shortly after the opening of the orphanage to
enhance its operations. The farmhouse was also converted into an administration building for the home, along with
the Superintendent’s quarters. The hipped-roof wood pavilion to the west (rear) of the main building was originally
located at the home’s Hagerstown property; however, it was moved along with the children to the new facilities in
1927. A few contemporary sheds can be seen to the northwest. Other noteworthy features of the site include a 1927
barn closer to the west edge of the property, a volleyball court, the tomb of Peter and Annie Gray along Mapleville
Road, and the upping block of a former medical office next to the tomb.
Exterior
The L-shaped building consists of a two-and-a-half-story rectangular main block with a two-and-a-half-story rear
wing to the north. A two-story addition was added to the west elevation of the rear wing between 1958-1979 based
on historic aerials. The exterior is clad in red brick laid in a stretcher bond with projecting quoins and is topped by a
cross-hipped roof, truncated on the main block, covered in asphalt shingles. The roof form is augmented by hipped
dormers above the façade and west (rear) elevation, along with hipped and gable projections across all elevations.
The building rests on a cut stone foundation and features a full partially exposed basement, highlighted on the exterior
by a stone water table wrapping around all elevations. The rear wing is located on the west elevation, extending the
north elevation by a single bay. A large brick chimney pierces the hipped roof of the wing to the northeast. The
addition to the west elevation features a secondary entrance on the south elevation, which is above ground level and
accessed by a large concrete platform. The addition is clad in the same style of brick as the original building, with an
enclosed porch on the second story covered in white vinyl siding. It is topped by a low hipped roof.
East Elevation (Façade)
The façade of the two-and-a-half-story rectangular main block measures eleven bays wide and features four dormer
windows at the truncated hipped roof (Photo 1). The outer bays are slightly extruded and feature wider proportions.
These bays are further delineated by brick quoins and decorative flashing creating a triangular shape at the roofline.
A thick band of molding comprised of a cornice and frieze sits just below the roofline and spans the entire width of
the façade and all other elevations. The main entrance is located in the center bay, which is also slightly extruded
with brick quoins. A projecting pediment emphasizes the bay at the roofline. The double-leaf door opening of the
main entrance is located beneath a rectangular pavilion and holds two single-light metal doors. The pavilion consists
of a low hipped roof supported by six fluted columns, all connected by railings and posts, and a cornice. The pavilion
and door opening are raised above ground level on a stone platform and can be accessed by several concrete steps.
Above the main entrance, there is a single window opening at the second story which holds paired six-over-one,
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 2 MIHP No: WA-II-055
2
double-hung, vinyl windows. The opening is lined with a stone sill and decorated lintel. There is an additional half
round opening at the attic level, within the pediment, that holds an original wood fanlight. The opening is lined with
stone blocks and has a keystone detail.
The four bays on both the north and south side of the center bay feature single window openings at the first and
second stories; these openings all hold six-over-one, double-hung, vinyl windows. The first-story openings feature
stone sills and lintels, while the second-story openings only have stone sills; the top of each opening meets the cornice
and frieze. Each bay also features single window openings at the basement level, highlighted by a stone water table.
These openings hold three-over-three, double-hung, vinyl windows. The outer bays feature two window openings at
this level. The outer bays are symmetrical; there is a large rectangular opening at the first and second stories on both
sides. The first-story opening in each bay holds tripartite ten-light fixed windows. An inoperable screen door shields
the center window. Three, four-light transoms sit above the windows. The opening is lined with a stone sill and lintel
and also features a decorative iron balcony. The second-story opening in each bay holds tripartite six-over-one,
double-hung, vinyl windows and is lined with a stone sill. Four hipped dormers protrude from the roof; each features
two openings that hold three-over-one, double-hung vinyl windows. All windows on this elevation, except for the
half round window at the attic level, are contemporary double-hung, vinyl windows. Some window openings contain
air conditioning units.
South Elevation
The south elevation of the two-and-a-half-story rectangular main block measures five bays wide (Photo 2). The center
bay projects outwards and rises above the roofline. A gable roof supports the tower part of the bay. The top of the
tower features a gable-shaped parapet with stone coping and shoulders. A secondary entrance is located at the first
story in the center bay and consists of a double-leaf door opening which holds two single-light metal doors. The brick
shoulders are slightly wider than the tower’s face and are accented with corbeling. Above the secondary entrance, A
large opening holds paired six-over-one, double-hung, vinyl windows. The opening is lined with a stone sill and
lintel. An original eight-light oculus with four stone keystones is located on the tower’s face at the roofline. The two
bays opposite the projection feature the same fenestration pattern and elements as the façade.
The south elevations of the two-and-a-half-story rear wing and two-story addition are also visible to the west (Photo
3). The rear wing measures one bay wide and features single window openings at the first and second stories. These
openings hold paired six-over-one, double-hung, vinyl windows. The south elevation of the two-story addition to the
west of the rear wing features a stone water table and brick cladding that matches the original exterior finishes (Photo
4). The second story is wrapped in white vinyl siding, highlighting the enclosed porch at this level. A single window
opening which holds the standard six-over-one, double-hung, vinyl window is inset into the siding at the second story.
A secondary entrance is located at the first story above ground level and consists of a single-leaf door opening with
a storm door. The opening is shielded by a flat, projecting, aluminum-covered wood roof. The entrance can be
accessed by a stepped concrete block platform with wood steps built from the ground plane up to the first tier of the
platform, and two free-standing wood steps from the second tier of the platform up to the door opening. Metal railings
line the steps at the ground level and the upper tier of the platform by the entrance.
West Elevation
The west elevation consists of the two-and-a-half-story rectangular main block and the two-story addition off of the
rear wing (Photo 5). The west elevation of the main block features a center projecting bay with an overlaid hipped
roof. A secondary entrance is centered on the projection at the basement level and consists of a single-leaf opening
holding a single-light metal door and a three-light transom. The opening is topped with a stone lintel and has been
partially filled in with vinyl siding, indicating that it may have originally accommodated a larger door. Single window
openings at the first story flank the entrance and hold the standard six-over-one, double-hung, vinyl windows. The
same sill and lintel patterns are also replicated across the elevation. At the second story, an opening holding paired
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 3 MIHP No: WA-II-055
3
six-over-one, double-hung, vinyl windows is centered over the entrance. The portion of the main block to the south
of the projection is three bays wide and features an irregular fenestration pattern, including an array of openings
holding single, paired, and tripartite vinyl windows. The window openings at the basement level have been covered
or infilled with glass blocks and a single light. Immediately adjacent to the projection is a second-story porch with a
low hipped roof. This porch is accessed by a single-leaf door opening which holds a four-light wood door, a two-
light storm door, and a three-light transom. Below the porch, a small contemporary gable-roof shed has been added,
enclosing a single-leaf door opening with basement access; it has an asphalt shingle roof and is clad in vinyl siding
(Photos 6 and 7).
The portion of the main block to the north is two bays wide and also features irregular fenestration, including openings
holding paired and tripartite windows of various sizes. There is a single basement-level opening in the bay adjacent
to the projection which holds paired single-light, vinyl windows. The rest of the basement level is covered by a raised
concrete platform that accesses the addition to the north. The platform is lined with metal railings. The west elevation
of the 1958-1979 addition projects outwards on the north side of the main block and is two bays wide. There is a
single window opening in both bays at the first and second stories. The openings at the second story are inset into
white vinyl siding, highlighting an enclosed porch. Access to a crawl space can be seen in the south bay at the ground
level; a small square door opening is framed with vinyl siding. All windows on this elevation at the first and second
stories have been replaced with contemporary six-over-one, double-hung, aluminum windows. Some openings
contain air conditioning units. Four hipped dormers protrude from the roof on the main block; each features two
openings that hold three-over-one, double-hung vinyl windows.
North Elevation
The north elevation consists of the two-and-a-half-story rectangular main block and the two-story-and-a-half-story
rear wing with the two-story addition (Photo 8). The north elevation of the two-and-a-half-story rectangular main
block mirrors that of the south elevation (Photo 9). The north elevation of the rear wing extends that of the main
block. It measures one bay wide and is visually separated from the main block by a line of projecting brick quoins. It
features single openings at the first and second stories which hold paired six-over-one, double-hung, vinyl windows.
A single opening can be seen at the basement level holding a three-over-three, double-hung, vinyl window, similar
to the bays on the main block. A large brick chimney is pushed to the east, piercing the hipped roof. The north
elevation of the two-story addition to the west of the rear wing is unfenestrated; it features a stone water table and
brick cladding that matches the original exterior finishes and vinyl siding at the second story.
Interior
The main entrance opens onto a small entry vestibule (Photo 10). The vestibule accesses a double-loaded central
corridor that organizes all of the rooms in the main block. The spaces that comprise the rear wing in the northwest
corner of the first floor, creating the buildings L-shaped footprint, can be accessed directly from the perpendicular
corridor. The corridor runs through the foyer, which is delineated by contemporary moulded openings with wide
transoms (Photo 11). Stairwells accessing all levels including the basement, first floor, second floor, and attic, are
located at the north and south ends of the corridor in the main block (Photo 12). The secondary entrances on the north
and south elevations access these stairwells and provide means of egress. The grand central stair is located on the
west side of the corridor, aligned with the entry vestibule in the center of the main block (Photo 13). It is comprised
of a wide stair-run that reaches a small mezzanine level before branching into two sets of steps up to the second floor.
The mezzanine is occupied by an office that is accessed by two contemporary single-leaf door openings with large
three-light transoms that align with the mirrored steps to the second floor (Photos 14 and 15). The metal stair-runs,
posts, and wood railings of the grand stair are original; the treads have been covered with carpet. The grand stair
accesses the basement as well through an enclosed stair-run beneath the open stair-run to the mezzanine. Adjacent to
the entrance to the stair down to the basement is a small set of steps to the exterior door at ground level in the center
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 4 MIHP No: WA-II-055
4
of the west (rear) elevation. The opening to the vestibule accessing this exterior door is original and features a four-
light transom (Photo 16). The large living spaces that flank the grand stair to the west on the first floor can be accessed
from a short service corridor between the basement and rear stairs.
The spaces that line the central corridor on the first floor vary in size, with those on the east side featuring smaller
footprints and generally functioning as offices and storage spaces. Restrooms are located to the north and south on
the west side, adjacent to the stairwells. Some of the original panelled doors and transoms have been preserved;
otherwise, little historic fabric remains due to several late twentieth century renovations, the most extensive occurring
in 1987. The rear wing in the northeast corner of the building can be accessed through door openings on the north
edge of the rooms abutting the corridor in the main block. These rooms originally functioned as large living spaces
but were renovated to expand the kitchen and dining room footprints over time. The rear wing is still occupied by the
kitchen as it was originally designed; however, most of the historic finishes have been lost. The kitchen was first
expanded when the two-story addition was built on the west elevation between 1958 and 1979. This addition enlarged
the space’s footprint and provided exterior access to the south (Photo 17).
The second-floor spaces of the main block are organized around the central corridor in the same manner as those on
the first floor; however, additional hallways and vestibules branch off to access clusters of smaller rooms than those
seen on the first floor. The majority of the rooms on the second floor function as offices. The restrooms on this floor
are larger and more centrally located, opposite the grand stair. No historic fabric remains as the restrooms were
completely gutted and updated during the 1987 renovation. The rear wing holds additional office space and is
accessed by a narrow hallway connected to the west side of the central corridor (Photo 18). The 1958-1979 addition
added an enclosed porch to the second floor beyond the rear wing, the original wood flooring of which has been
preserved (Photo 19). Similar to the first floor, the original paneled doors and transoms have been preserved, stripped
of paint and resealed in 1987, but little historic fabric remains throughout the rest of the floor due to the late twentieth
century renovations. Evidence of historic finishes and character can be seen at the half-story attic level, accessed by
both the north and south stairwells. Inside these stairwells, which occupy the interiors of the projecting bays on the
side elevations, the original metal stair runs remain along with their metal posts and wood railings (Photo 20). The
treads have been covered with contemporary vinyl flooring. The historic moulded surrounds of the double-leaf doors
accessing the stairwells at each level remain, although it appears that some of their lights have been infilled. The
fixed eight-light wood oculi adorning the tops of both stairwells are original (Photos 21 and 22). The attic features
an exposed wood structure and concrete floor, both of which are original (Photo 23). Although all of the dormer
windows have been replaced, the original fixed wood fanlight in the center of the façade remains (Photo 24).
Little historic fabric remains at the basement level which features dropped ceilings, drywall partitions, and a
combination of carpeted and vinyl tile floors. The central corridor has been carried down to this level as well, and the
arrangement of spaces more closely mirrors the first floor with larger rooms appearing to the west and smaller rooms
to the east (Photo 25). The 1958-1979 addition did not expand the basement’s footprint.
Historic Context
Boonsboro, Maryland
The town of Boonsboro was founded in 1792 at the foot of South Mountain between Hagerstown and Fredrick in
Washington County by brothers George and William Boone. The Boones laid out forty-four half-acre lots total,
twenty-two on either side of a secondary wagon road that would become the town’s Main Street. Boonsboro’s growth
accelerated at the beginning of the nineteenth century due to the construction of the Bank Road, a turnpike connecting
Baltimore to the west, later known as the National Road. In 1823, a new process called “macadam” was used to finish
an unpaved section of the turnpike from Boonsboro to Hagerstown. This was the first time the road building process
was used in the United States. The town was incorporated in 1831, and its first election was held. During the Civil
War, the town’s churches and public buildings were used as makeshift hospitals due to the town’s proximity to the
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 5 MIHP No: WA-II-055
5
battles at South Mountain and Antietam. The parcels surrounding Main Street were farmed, and in the twentieth
century, agricultural products and fruit were the principal source of income for the rural area around Boonsboro. One
of the major communities that made up this rural bubble was San Mar which is located south of U.S. Route 40 at the
western edge of Greenbrier State Park. The facilities for the Washington County Home For Orphans and Friendless
Children were constructed from 1925-1927 on the west side of the community along Mapleville Road (Maryland
Route 66). The orphanage was built on a portion of the approximately sixty-acre Gray Farm, owned by Peter Gray
and his wife in the early twentieth century. The land had been farmed by the Fahrney family since the mid-nineteenth
century prior to Gray’s ownership.1
Washington County Home for Orphans and Friendless Children
The origins of children’s homes in the U.S. can be traced back to the Civil War, when many children were orphaned
as a result of the conflict. Before the creation of the children’s home, orphaned children either became indentured
servants, were taken in by relatives, or were sent to live at Alms Houses, which were county-funded homes for the
elderly, homeless, sick, and mentally ill. These homes were notorious for their improper living conditions and were
widely considered to be unsuitable places for young children to inhabit. One of the first children’s homes, “The
Sheltering Arms,” was established in New York City in 1876, following the state’s passing of a law to remove
children from Alms Houses. The state of Maryland, however, was slow to adopt this type of law, resulting in an
alarming number of children still occupying Alms Houses in the following decade.2 The Children of Washington
County were sent to what was known as the “County Home” in downtown Hagerstown, which was first constructed
in 1799 before being replaced by larger facilities a bit further from downtown in 1880.3
As early as 1880, a movement had begun amongst citizens of Hagerstown and the surrounding areas to fund a proper
children’s home in Washington County. The Orphan’s Home of Washington County was successfully incorporated
in 1883, with the majority of the endowment for the home being donated by Benjamin F. Newcomer. In 1885, the
organization officially changed its name to the Washington County Home For Orphans and Friendless Children, as
the operators responded to the demand to house all kinds of children who required aid, not just orphans. W. Walter
Esmer, Superintendent of the home from 1915-1952, noted in his 1918 report to the Board of Managers that the home
was “the first successful attempt in the state of Maryland of the people of a county, without outside financial
assistance, to care for their county’s dependent children.”4 The first children were admitted from the Alms House to
the home’s new facilities at 355 South Potomac Street in Hagerstown on November 8, 1883. The home operated from
this building until the organization’s move to San Mar in 1927. The first superintendent of the home was David
Emmert, a professor who had helped to establish Juniata College in Huntington, Pennsylvania, just a few years prior.
Emmert came to Hagerstown in 1883 and immediately began working with the incorporators to found the children’s
home after witnessing the poor conditions at the Alms House. Emmert presided over the home for its first ten years.5
San Mar Children’s Home Construction
On August 15, 1910, the will of Peter Gray was admitted to probate, revealing a legacy of $50,000 for the
establishment of an orphanage on his farm at San Mar.6 On July 13, 1911, the Peter Gray Orphans Home and
1 “History of Boonsboro,” Boonsboro Historical Society, accessed August 2025, https://boonsborohistoricalsociety.org/history/. 2 J. R. Stauffer, “History of San Mar,” January 1988, 1-2; R. Brenner, ed., Children and Youth in America (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1971).
3 J. R. Stauffer, “History of San Mar,” January 1988, 4. 4 J. R. Stauffer, “History of San Mar,” January 1988, 3-7; W. Walter Esmer, Annual Report to Board of Managers, 1918, 73.
5 J. R. Stauffer, “History of San Mar,” January 1988, 3-7; “Orphans’ Home Has Open House on Anniversary,” Herald Mail, September 19, 1929, 2. 6 “Do You Remember?” Herald Mail, August 15, 1975, 4.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 6 MIHP No: WA-II-055
6
Mechanical Institute was incorporated.7 A mutually beneficial partnership between the Gray estate trustees and the
Washington County Home For Orphans and Friendless Children was formed in the following years when the
Washington County Home began looking to relocate after W. Walter Esmer became Superintendent. Esmer was
interested in moving the home because the facilities at 355 South Potomac Street were in constant need of repair and
had become inadequate for their operations. An agreement between the boards of both organizations was signed in
1925 that would result in the pooling of their funding to construct a state-of-the-art facility to be managed by the
Washington County Home that would honor Peter Gray’s vision for his property.8
On July 11, 1925, specifications for the building plans for the joining of the Washington County Home For Orphans
and Friendless Children and the Peter Gray Orphans Home and Mechanical Institute were approved by the directors
of both.9 The plans were designed by architect Amos J. Klinkhart, who had a well-established practice in neighboring
Hagerstown. Klinkhart also agreed to supervise construction for a two percent fee. The contract for construction was
awarded to local contractor William L. Middlekauff, who was also a member of the Gray Board.10 Several months
later, the cornerstone for the new building in San Mar, that was to replace the facilities in Hagerstown, was laid during
a small ceremony on November 11, 1925. Members of the Washington County Home Board and the Gray Board
were in attendance, and C. Harry Keller, the president of the Washington County Home, presided over the
ceremonies.11 The cornerstone was laid by Anna K. Findlay, the longest serving board member, whom the building
was later named after.12 Both boards expressed the goal of having the building ready for occupancy by the summer
of the following year.13
Construction ended up taking an additional year, lasting from late 1925 to June 1927. Klinkhart’s plans called for a
two-and-a-half-story brick building set on a cut stone foundation with neoclassical elements. The building was topped
by a hipped slate roof, its form augmented by dormers and a projecting pediment above a central entrance pavilion.
The program included fourteen bedrooms total which would allow for the accommodation of about sixty children.
On the first floor there was a center hall, six large bedrooms, and two baths in the front of the house, and a kitchen,
dining rooms, and living rooms towards the rear. The building also featured a full basement and concrete-floored
attic; two bathrooms were located in the basement.14 Gray had specified in his will that one room in the main building
7 The Peter Gray Orphans Home and Mechanical Institute was incorporated by J. Frank Beck, C. Harry Keller, William H. Bowers, H. A. McComas, Albert Danzer, Francis H. Miller, J. G. Bower, William L. Middlekauff, and Joseph C. Roulette. “Do You Remember?” Herald Mail, July 13, 1961, 8. 8 J. R. Stauffer, “San Mar Property – The Buildings,” November 1987, 3. 9 The Washington County Home for Orphans and Friendless Children will be shortened to the Washington County Home, and the Peter Gray Orphans Home will be shortened to the Gray Home, for the sake of brevity. Their respective boards will be referred to as the Washington County Home Board and the Gray Board. The San Mar facilities continued to be known as the Washington County Home for Orphans and Friendless Children until its name was changed to the San Mar Children’s Home in 1981. “20 Years Ago Today,” Daily Mail, July 11, 1945, 4. 10 The building committee representing the Washington County Home included Charles A. Weagley (chairman), Mrs. William H. Howard, Mrs. George M. Bushey, Albert Danzer, and Walter Esmer. Albert Danzer later replaced Weagley as the chairman. The building committee representing the Gray Home included John Hollyday (chairman), William L. Middlekauff, and J. Frank S. Beck. “Lay Cornerstone For New Home of Washington County Orphans,” Herald Mail, November 12, 1925, 3; J. R. Stauffer, “San Mar Property – The Buildings,” November 1987, 4. 11 Members of the Washington County Home Board included C. Harry Keller, Mrs. James Findlay, Clarence M. Stickell, Franklin M. Thomas, George T. Prather, Mrs. Wolfgang M. Newcomer, Mrs. R. D. McKee, and Miss Mary A. Harter. “Lay Cornerstone For New Home of Washington County Orphans,” Herald Mail, November 12, 1925, 3.
12 Anna K. Findlay was elected to the Washington County Home Board in 1884. She passed in 1941. J. R. Stauffer, “San Mar Property – The Buildings,” November 1987, 4.
13 “Work on Second Story,” Herald Mail, December 19, 1925, 11. 14 It is unknown how the remaining eight bedrooms were divided among the second floor, attic, and basement as the original 1925 drawings could not be located. “Work on Second Story,” Herald Mail, December 19, 1925, 11.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 7 MIHP No: WA-II-055
7
be set aside as the Peter Gray Room to display furnishings from his home on N Jonathan Street, specifically his inlaid
tool chest as an example of workmanship.15
In May 1926, plans for the remodeling and modernizing of the farmhouse were approved and work was to be started
immediately.16 Towards the end of the month, construction was impacted by a severe hail storm, which resulted in
twenty windows being broken out of the nearly finished main building, along with many others in the accessory
buildings. All gardens and shrubbery were destroyed.17 On September 13, 1926, the new building was declared
finished with the exception of the installation of three metal stairways, delivery of which had been much delayed.
The Superintendent’s residence was also nearly complete at this time; however, site work including grading, road
building, plumbing, and removal of an old barn structure still needed to be done so the home would not be relocated
for several more months.18
On July 1, 1927, the home was officially opened and approximately forty children were moved in. A newspaper
article from that date notes that the new home was “without question one of the finest in Maryland.”19 The first few
decades of the home’s operation at San Mar saw a steady increase in the number of children being boarded, with an
all-time high of seventy children recorded in 1935 at the height of the Great Depression. The increase in legislation
promoting social welfare and government regulation towards the mid-century aided the home in acquiring additional
funding for its expanding operations; growth that would not begin to slow down until the 1960s when the home began
to specialize in the needs of children aged six to twelve, a fraction of the population it originally served.20
The Findlay Building had experienced minor updates since its completion in 1927, including the construction of the
two-story addition on the west elevation between 1958-1979; however, many of the facilities and finishes on the
interior had become outdated by the 1980s. A sum of $100,000 was authorized by the Board in November 1986 for
the most extensive remodel to date. The second floor saw the most updating, as the large communal bathrooms were
completely demolished and reinstalled and the lockers lining the central corridor were removed. The majority of the
original floors and ceilings throughout the building were replaced. New interior finishes consisted of dropped ceilings,
carpeting, and vinyl flooring. All new lighting was installed throughout and the kitchen was expanded, receiving new
appliances and tile flooring. All of the asbestos in the building was also removed during this campaign.21
Since the turn of the century, the facilities have housed a variety of programs committed to serving children and
youth, including The Edward and Pauline Anderson Home, The Jack E. Barr Home, The Henry and Florence Graff
Shelter for Girls, The Allegany Girls’ Therapeutic Group Home, The Jone Bowman Home, Treatment Foster Care,
and Regular Foster Care. This mission remains in effect today under the continued ownership of the San Mar
Children’s Home.
Architect
Amos John (A. J.) Klinkhart (1875-1954) was born in Canajoharie, New York and was a graduate of Cornell
University. He initially worked for the federal government before moving between a number of private architectural
firms in New York, Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Klinkhart established a practice in Hagerstown in
1907, and over the course of his career designed many of the largest buildings in the city and vicinity such as the City
Hall, the Washington County Hospital, and the State Reformatory for Males.22
15 Gray was a skilled carpenter. J. R. Stauffer, “San Mar Property – The Buildings,” November 1987, 6. 16 “Orphans’ Home Board Hears the Report of the San Mar Project,” Daily Mail, May 11, 1926, 5. 17 “Heavy Damage By Hail Storm,” Daily Mail, May 20, 1926, 5.
18 “San Mar Home For Orphans is Completed,” Daily Mail, September 13, 1926, 11. 19 “Orphans’ Home to Move Today,” Daily Mail, July 1, 1927, 18.
20 J. R. Stauffer, “History of San Mar,” January 1988, 18-21. 21 J. R. Stauffer, “San Mar Property – The Buildings,” November 1987, 5. 22 “A. J. Klinkhart Dies Friday,” Daily Mail, October 30, 1954, 20.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 8 MIHP No: WA-II-055
8
Klinkhart designed numerous public schools in Washington County in addition to the Washington Street School and
also prepared the plans for several school additions. Klinkhart designed schools at Halfway (1919), Highfield (1924),
Indian Spring (1928), Huyett (1930), and Sharpsburg (1936). He designed additions to schools at Mt. Lena and Sandy
Hook in 1936.23 In 1930, he prepared plans for the North End Junior High School at Woodland and Hillcrest Avenues
(today Harvest Baptist Church). He designed an addition to South Potomac High School in 1938, and one for the
North Street Colored School between 1945 and 1947.24
A. J. Klinkhart undertook a number of municipal and civic projects in the Hagerstown area. He prepared plans for
two additions to the Washington County Courthouse in 1933 and again in 1936.25 In 1934, he designed a new
Washington County Hospital in association with Buckler & Fenhagen.26 In 1939, Klinkhart collaborated with
Baltimore architects Taylor & Fisher on the design of the Hagerstown City Hall (WA-HAG-004) at 1 E. Franklin
Street.27 The Colonial Revival-Style building is a contributing resource in the Hagerstown and Hagerstown
Commercial Core Historic Districts. In 1937, Klinkhart oversaw the restoration of the Old Dunkard Church at
Antietam Battlefield. The Washington County Historical Society sponsored the restoration, and labor was provided
by the Works Progress Administration.28 In 1938, Klinkhart designed a new wing at The Pines, an institute for the
treatment of paralyzed children in Berkeley Springs.29
Klinkhart designed a number of residences for wealthy clients in the Hagerstown area. In 1930, he designed a Colonial
Revival-Style dwelling at 1121 Oak Hill Avenue for F. Merrill Hayes. The Morning Herald described it as “one of
the most attractive residences being erected in Hagerstown this year.”30 He designed a house of “early American
style” for Francis Moore of Funkstown in 1932.31 Klinkhart was on the board of directors of the Washington County
Building and Loan Association. In 1937, he designed a model home at 1409 Hamilton Boulevard, promoted by the
Lions Club as the “Modern All Gas Home.” The club organized tours of the home, with the proceeds from the ticket
sales donated to the Babies Milk Fund.32 In 1940, Klinkhart won first prize in an architectural competition for low-
cost house designs that was sponsored by the Maryland Society of Architects.33
A. J. Klinkhart was member of the American Institute of Architects from 1939 until his death in 1954.34 He was also
an active member of the Maryland Society of Architects, and he sat on the Maryland State Registration Board for
Architects between 1935 and 1943.35
Integrity
The Findlay Building of the San Mar Children’s Home retains sufficient integrity to convey its historical and
architectural significance. The building maintains its historic location on the west side of Mapleville Road (Maryland
Route 66) in the community of San Mar, north of Boonsboro’s Main Street (Alt. Route 40) and south of the larger
city of Hagerstown. Design integrity is relatively strong, and the building still exhibits most of its historic Colonial
23 “Plans for School Mapped by Board,” Morning Herald, May 14, 1936, 1. 24 “Board Opens School Bids,” Daily Mail, April 1, 1938, 2; “School Board Seeks Bids on New School,” Morning Herald, April 18, 1947, 1. 25 “Civil Works Projects,” Daily Mail, November 24, 1933, 14.
26 “Board Asking for Bids on Hospital,” Daily Mail, July 19, 1934, 3. 27 Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties, City Hall, Hagerstown, Washington County, MIHP #WA-HAG-004.
28 “Restoring of Old Church Wins Praise,” Daily Mail, April 2, 1937, 7. 29 “The Pines at Berkeley Springs May Soon Be Noted as Warm Springs,” Daily Mail, December 16, 1938, 2. 30 “Attractive Home is Being Erected,” Morning Herald, October 2, 1930, 8. 31 “Erecting Houses,” Daily Mail, August 18, 1932, 2.
32 “Lions Club Sponsors Modern All Gas Home for Babies Milk Fund,” Daily Mail, July 20, 1937, 2. 33 “A. J. Klinkhart Dies Friday,” Daily Mail, October 30, 1954, 20.
34 American Institute of Architects, AIA Historical Directory, “Amos John Klinkhart,” https://aiahistoricaldirectory.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AHDAA/pages/36944357/ahd1024294. 35 “A. J. Klinkhart Dies Friday,” Daily Mail, October 30, 1954, 20.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 9 MIHP No: WA-II-055
9
Revival elements, such as its symmetry, projecting pediment, decorative molding, and overlaid hipped roofs. All of
the window openings on the main block are original, although the majority of the original windows have been
replaced. The fanlight within the pediment on the façade and the two oculi in the stairwells are original; all are fixed
wood windows. While interior spaces have been renovated and altered over the years, some historic finishes and
features remain in the corridors and stairwells. Nearly all original structural elements remain, reinforcing the historic
layout and program on all levels. The building’s setting on the Gray Farm, approximately thirty acres of which
remain, still includes many accessory buildings that allowed the home to function when it was opened in the early
twentieth century, along with the original two-story farmhouse and springhouse, built in the mid nineteenth century
when the Fahrney family owned the land. Integrity of materials and workmanship remain strong with the retention
of the historic windowsills, lintels, quoins, and the stone water table. Several historic materials and details have
survived on the interior as well, such as the wood paneled doors, transoms, sills and surrounds, and the metal stair
treads, risers, posts, and wood railings. Collectively, retention of these aspects of integrity allows the building to
evoke the feeling of an early-twentieth-century institutional building and its association with the expansion of social
welfare resources that occurred in the mid-century as a result of the Great Depression.
Statement of Significance
The Findlay Building at 8505 Fahrney Church Road in Boonsboro, Maryland demonstrates sufficient historical
significance to support eligibility under National Register Criterion A in the area of Social History. The Findlay
Building has housed the San Mar Children’s Home and its predecessors since its completion in 1927 and remains in
operation today, continuing to fulfill the same socially conscious mission. The origins of children’s homes in the U.S.
can be traced back to the Civil War when the orphan population dramatically increased, resulting in a critical need
for safe housing for dependent children. States slowly began introducing legislation to improve the living conditions
these children were subject to in the late 1870s, specifically mandating their removal from Alms Houses. Although
the state of Maryland lagged behind other states like New York, where the first children’s home opened in 1876, in
adopting such policies, the citizens of Hagerstown and its outlying areas were early to push for funding for a proper
children’s home for Washington County. In 1883, the Orphan’s Home of Washington County, which would
eventually become the San Mar Children’s Home, was incorporated. This organization was the first of its kind in the
state that was funded entirely by charitable donation, demonstrating county residents’ commitment to caring for the
dependent children of their community.
The Findlay Building also demonstrates significance under Criterion C in the area of Architecture. Executed in the
Colonial Revival style by local architect Amos J. Klinkhart, the children’s home was reported to be one of the finest
buildings in Maryland upon its completion in 1927. The two-and-a-half-story brick building was constructed from
1925-1927 to house the county’s dependent children following the merging of the Washington County Home For
Orphans and Friendless Children, which had operated out of Hagerstown since 1883, and the Peter Gray Orphans
Home and Mechanical Institute, established in 1911 after the passing of Peter Gray. The alliance between these two
organizations enabled them to combine their resources in order to upgrade the Washington County Home’s facilities
and board additional children in need. With a long resume that included many of the county’s public buildings and
schools, Klinkhart’s design for the home satisfied the institutional typology required by the program while bringing
additional sophistication and abundance to enrich the lives of its young inhabitants. The building’s red brick exterior
is simply adorned and yet offers visual interest through the push and pull of its projecting bays, all while
demonstrating the symmetry characteristic of the Colonial Revival style. Overlaid hipped roofs augmented with wide
eaves and dormers shield the exterior, and additional neoclassical-inspired elements such as the large pediment and
fanlight in the center of the façade, the cornice and frieze carried across the roofline, and regular fenestration both
comfort and instill a sense of pride amidst the vast rural landscape.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 10 MIHP No: WA-II-055
10
Period of Significance
The Period of Significance corresponds to the length of time when a property made a significant historical
contribution or attained the architectural character for which it is noteworthy. Under Criterion A, the period is defined
as that during which the property contributed significantly to the broad patterns of American history, within its
respective historic context. Under Criterion C, the period typically corresponds to the date of construction. For the
Findlay Building, the Period of Significance is 1925-1927. This period extends from the start of construction in 1925
to the completion of the building in 1927 and approximately forty children were moved in.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 11 MIHP No: WA-II-055
11
Bibliography
“A. J. Klinkhart Dies Friday.” Daily Mail, October 30, 1954, 20.
American Institute of Architects. “Amos John Klinkhart.” AIA Historical Directory. Accessed August 2025,
https://aiahistoricaldirectory.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/AHDAA/pages/36944357/ahd1024294.
“Attractive Home is Being Erected.” Morning Herald, October 2, 1930, 8.
“Board Asking for Bids on Hospital.” Daily Mail, July 19, 1934, 3.
“Board Opens School Bids.” Daily Mail, April 1, 1938, 2.
Brenner, R. ed. Children and Youth in America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1971.
“Civil Works Projects.” Daily Mail, November 24, 1933, 14.
“Do You Remember?” Herald Mail, July 13, 1961, 8.
“Do You Remember?” Herald Mail, August 15, 1975, 4.
“Erecting Houses.” Daily Mail, August 18, 1932, 2.
Esmer, W. Walter. Annual Report to Board of Managers. 1918.
“Heavy Damage By Hail Storm.” Daily Mail, May 20, 1926, 5.
“History of Boonsboro.” Boonsboro Historical Society. Accessed August 2025,
https://boonsborohistoricalsociety.org/history/.
“Lay Cornerstone For New Home of Washington County Orphans.” Herald Mail, November 12, 1925, 3.
“Lions Club Sponsors Modern All Gas Home for Babies Milk Fund.” Daily Mail, July 20, 1937, 2.
Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties. City Hall. Hagerstown, Washington County. MIHP #WA-HAG-004.
“Orphans’ Home Board Hears the Report of the San Mar Project.” Daily Mail, May 11, 1926, 5.
“Orphans’ Home Has Open House on Anniversary.” Herald Mail, September 19, 1929, 2.
“Orphans’ Home to Move Today.” Daily Mail, July 1, 1927, 18.
“Plans for School Mapped by Board.” Morning Herald, May 14, 1936, 1.
“Restoring of Old Church Wins Praise.” Daily Mail, April 2, 1937, 7.
“San Mar Home For Orphans is Completed.” Daily Mail, September 13, 1926, 11.
“School Board Seeks Bids on New School.” Morning Herald, April 18, 1947, 1.
Stauffer, J. R. “History of San Mar.” January 1988. Provided by San Mar Children’s Home.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 12 MIHP No: WA-II-055
12
Stauffer, J. R. “San Mar Property – The Buildings.” November 1987. Provided by San Mar Children’s Home.
“The Pines at Berkeley Springs May Soon Be Noted as Warm Springs.” Daily Mail, December 16, 1938, 2.
“Work on Second Story.” Herald Mail, December 19, 1925, 11.
“20 Years Ago Today.” Daily Mail, July 11, 1945, 4.
Repositories Consulted
Boonsboro Historical Society
Digital Maryland, Enoch Pratt Free Library
Maryland Center for History and Culture
Maryland State Archives
Washington County Historical Society
Washington County Planning and Zoning
Western Maryland Room, Washington County Free Library
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 13 MIHP No: WA-II-055
13
Photos and Maps
Figure 1: Detail from USGS Funkstown quadrangle, showing the location of the San Mar Children’s Home.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 14 MIHP No: WA-II-055
14
Figure 2: Detail from USGS Funkstown quadrangle, showing the location of the San Mar Children’s Home.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 15 MIHP No: WA-II-055
15
Figure 3: Tax Map (north pointing up). Maryland Department of Natural Resources.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 16 MIHP No: WA-II-055
16
Figure 4: Aerial view of San Mar Children’s Home (north pointing up), 2025. Google Maps.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 17 MIHP No: WA-II-055
17
Figure 5: Findlay Building of San Mar Children’s Home, October 18, 1929. Herald Mail.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 18 MIHP No: WA-II-055
18
Figure 6: Façade (east) and south elevation of Findlay Building, undated. San Mar Children’s Home.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 19 MIHP No: WA-II-055
19
Figure 7: View of Findlay Building from Mapleville Road, undated. San Mar Children’s Home.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 20 MIHP No: WA-II-055
20
Figure 8: Aerial photo, 1958. Historic Aerials.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 21 MIHP No: WA-II-055
21
Figure 9: East elevation (façade) of Findlay Building, c. 1966. Washington County Historical Society.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 22 MIHP No: WA-II-055
22
Figure 10: Aerial photo, 1979. Vintage Aerial.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 23 MIHP No: WA-II-055
23
Figure 11: Aerial photo, 1979. Vintage Aerial.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 24 MIHP No: WA-II-055
24
Figure 12: Aerial photo, 1988. Vintage Aerial.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 25 MIHP No: WA-II-055
25
Figure 13: East and south elevations, September 23, 1992. Daily Mail article via Washington County Historical Society.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 26 MIHP No: WA-II-055
26
Figure 14: Aerial photo, 1994. Vintage Aerial.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 27 MIHP No: WA-II-055
27
Photo 1: East elevation (façade), looking west. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 28 MIHP No: WA-II-055
28
Photo 2: South elevation, looking north. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 29 MIHP No: WA-II-055
29
Photo 3: South and west elevations, looking northeast. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 30 MIHP No: WA-II-055
30
Photo 4: South elevation of rear wing and 1958-1979 addition, looking north. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 31 MIHP No: WA-II-055
31
Photo 5: West (rear) elevation, looking east. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 32 MIHP No: WA-II-055
32
Photo 6: West (rear) elevation, looking northeast. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 33 MIHP No: WA-II-055
33
Photo 7: Secondary entrances on west elevation, looking east. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 34 MIHP No: WA-II-055
34
Photo 8: North elevation, looking south. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 35 MIHP No: WA-II-055
35
Photo 9: Detail of projecting bay on north elevation, looking south. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 36 MIHP No: WA-II-055
36
Photo 10: Main entrance on façade, looking west. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 37 MIHP No: WA-II-055
37
Photo 11: Central corridor and foyer, first floor. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 38 MIHP No: WA-II-055
38
Photo 12: Doors accessing south stairwell from central corridor, first floor. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 39 MIHP No: WA-II-055
39
Photo 13: Grand central stair opposite foyer and entry vestibule, first floor. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 40 MIHP No: WA-II-055
40
Photo 14: Mezzanine level from grand stair. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 41 MIHP No: WA-II-055
41
Photo 15: Second floor access from grand stair. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 42 MIHP No: WA-II-055
42
Photo 16: Service corridor and exterior access, first floor. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 43 MIHP No: WA-II-055
43
Photo 17: Kitchen in rear wing, expanded by 1958-1979 addition. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 44 MIHP No: WA-II-055
44
Photo 18: Rear wing and addition, second floor. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 45 MIHP No: WA-II-055
45
Photo 19: Detail of wood floor in 1958-1979 addition, second floor. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 46 MIHP No: WA-II-055
46
Photo 20: South stairwell, attic level. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 47 MIHP No: WA-II-055
47
Photo 21: Detail of original wood oculus window. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 48 MIHP No: WA-II-055
48
Photo 22: Access to attic from south stairwell and deterioration at ceiling. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 49 MIHP No: WA-II-055
49
Photo 23: Attic level with exposed wood structure and dormer windows. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 50 MIHP No: WA-II-055
50
Photo 24: Detail of original wood fanlight. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 51 MIHP No: WA-II-055
51
Photo 25: Central corridor, basement level. EHT Traceries.
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST NR-ELIBILITY REVIEW FORM
Continuation Sheet No. 52 MIHP No: WA-II-055
52
Prepared by:
Nicole Starego, Architectural Historian EHT Traceries Date Prepared: August 2025
MARYLAND HISTORICAL TRUST REVIEW Eligibility recommended Eligibility not recommended ______
Criteria: A B C D Considerations: A B C D E F G None
Comments:
Reviewer, Office of Preservation Services Date
Reviewer, NR Program Date
Attachment B: Project Drawings
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
T-001
TITLE SHEET
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
DRAWING LIST
SHEETNUMBER SHEET NAME
CURRENTREVISION DESCRIPTION
T-001 TITLE SHEET 3 65% PROGRESS SET
C-1 Unnamed
A-001 ABBREVIATIONS / SYMBOLS / UNIT MATRIX 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-002 ACCESSIBILITY DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-010 CODE ANALYSIS / LIFE SAFETY PLANS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-011 CODE ANALYSIS / LIFE SAFETY PLANS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-020 ASSEMBLY DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-021 FIRESTOP DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-051 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN & DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-052 SITE DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-090 BASEMENT FLOOR - EXISTING & DEMO 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-091 FIRST FLOOR - EXISTING & DEMO 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-092 SECOND FLOOR - EXISTING & DEMO 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-093 THIRD FLOOR - EXISTING & DEMO 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-094 ROOF PLAN - EXISTING & DEMO 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-100 BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN - NEW 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-101 FIRST FLOOR PLAN - NEW 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-102 SECOND FLOOR PLAN - NEW 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-103 THIRD FLOOR PLAN - NEW 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-150 RCP - BASEMENT FLOOR RCP 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-151 RCP - FIRST FLOOR RCP 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-152 RCP - SECOND FLOOR RCP 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-153 THIRD FLOOR RCP 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-190 ROOF PLAN - NEW 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-191 ROOF DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-200 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - EXISTING & DEMO 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-201 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - NEW CONSTRUCTION 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-350 WALL SECTIONS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-390 VERTICAL CIRCULATION 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-391 VERTICAL CIRCULATION DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-400 ENLARGED PLAN INFORMATION 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-401 ENLARGED PLANS - SUITES 1-9 2 35% PROGRESS SET
A-402 ENLARGED PLANS - SUITES 10-15 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-403 ENLARGED PLANS - COMMON AREAS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-450 TYPICAL MILLWORK DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-451 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-452 INTERIOR ELEVATIONS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-600 FINISH SCHEDULE 3 65% PROGRESS SET
A-650 DOOR SCHEDULE & DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-001 STRUCTURAL NOTES 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-002 STRUCTURAL NOTES 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-003 STRUCTURAL NOTES 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-004 STRUCTURAL NOTES 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-091 BASEMENT PLAN DEMO 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-092 1ST FLOOR FRAMING PLAN DEMO 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-093 2ND FLOOR FRAMING PLAN DEMO 3 65% PROGRESS SET
SAN MAR
FINDLAY BUILDING
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH ROAD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR OWNER
8504 MAPLEVILLE RD, BOONSBORO, MD 21713, TELE: (301) 733-9067
ZA+D ARCHITECT
21 BYTE COURT SUITE I, FREDERICK, MD 21702, TELE: (301) 698-0020
ADTEK ENGINEERS, INC.STRUCTURAL
150 EAST STREET, SUITE 201, FREDERICK, MD 21701, TELE: (301) 662-4408
BOWMAN M/P/E
300 E JOPPA RD, SUITE 501, TOWSON, MARYLAND, 21286, TELE: (410) 494-1111
TRIAD ENGINEERING CIVIL
1075 D SHERMAN AVE, HAGERSTOWN, MARYLAND, 21740, TELE: (301) 797-6400
TRUE
NORTH
ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE+DESIGN, LLC
NO T F O R C ON ST RUCT
I O N
PROJECT LOCATIONPROJECT VICINITY
DRAWING LIST
SHEETNUMBER SHEET NAME
CURRENTREVISION DESCRIPTION
S-094 ATTIC FLOOR FRAMING PLAN DEMO 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-095 ROOF FRAMING PLAN DEMO 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-101 BASEMENT FOUNDATION PLAN 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-102 1ST FLOOR FRAMING PLAN 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-103 2ND FLOOR FRAMING PLAN 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-104 ATTIC FLOOR FRAMING PLAN 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-105 ROOF FRAMING PLAN 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-201 WALL SECTIONS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-202 SECTIONS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-301 FOUNDATION DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-302 FOUNDATION DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-303 FOUNDATION DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-304 SLAB ON GRADE DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-311 FOUNDATION SECTIONS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-401 MASONRY WALL DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-402 MASONRY WALL DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-403 MASONRY WALL DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-501 WOOD FRAMING DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
S-502 WOOD FRAMING DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-001 MECHANICAL COVER SHEET 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-002 MECHANICAL COVER SHEET 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-101 BASEMENT - DEMOLITION HVAC 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-102 FIRST FLOOR - DEMOLITION HVAC 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-103 SECOND FLOOR - DEMOLITION HVAC 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-104 THIRD FLOOR - DEMOLITION HVAC 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-105 ROOF - DEMOLITION HVAC 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-201 BASEMENT FLOOR - NEW WORK HVAC 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-202 FIRST FLOOR - NEW WORK HVAC 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-203 SECOND FLOOR - NEW WORK HVAC 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-204 THIRD FLOOR - NEW WORK HVAC 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-301 BASEMENT - NEW WORK - PIPING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-302 FIRST FLOOR - NEW WORK - PIPING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-303 SECOND FLOOR - NEW WORK - PIPING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-304 THIRD FLOOR - NEW WORK - PIPING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-701 DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-702 DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-703 DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-801 SCHEDULES 3 65% PROGRESS SET
M-802 SCHEDULES 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-001 PLUMBING COVER SHEET 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-002 FIRE PROTECTION - PLUMBING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-101 BASEMENT - DEMOLITION - PLUMBING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-102 FIRST FLOOR - DEMOLITION - PLUMBING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-103 SECOND FLOOR - DEMOLITION - PLUMBING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-201 SUB SLAB - NEW WORK - PLUMBING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-202 BASEMENT - NEW WORK - PLUMBING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-203 FIRST FLOOR - NEW WORK - PLUMBING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-204 SECOND FLOOR - NEW WORK - PLUMBING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-205 THIRD FLOOR - NEW WORK - PLUMBING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-206 ROOF - NEW WORK - PLUMBING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-601 RISER - DOMESTIC WATER 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-701 DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-702 DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-703 DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-704 DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-705 DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-706 DETAILS 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-801 SCHEDULES 3 65% PROGRESS SET
P-802 SCHEDULES 3 65% PROGRESS SET
E-002 ELECTRICAL GENERAL NOTES 3 65% PROGRESS SET
E-101 BASEMENT - DEMOLITION ELECTRICAL 3 65% PROGRESS SET
E-102 FIRST FLOOR - DEMOLITION ELECTRICAL 3 65% PROGRESS SET
E-201 BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN - NEW WORK - POWER 3 65% PROGRESS SET
E-202 BASEMENT - NEW WORK - LIGHTING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
E-203 FIRST FLOOR - NEW WORK - POWER 3 65% PROGRESS SET
E-204 FIRST FLOOR - NEW WORK - LIGHTING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
E-205 SECOND FLOOR - NEW WORK - POWER 3 65% PROGRESS SET
E-206 SECOND FLOOR - NEW WORK - LIGHTING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
E-207 THIRD FLOOR - NEW WORK - POWER 3 65% PROGRESS SET
E-208 THIRD FLOOR - NEW WORK - LIGHTING 3 65% PROGRESS SET
E-209 ROOF - NEW WORK - POWER 3 65% PROGRESS SET
E-210 ELECTRICAL SCHEDULES 3 65% PROGRESS SET
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
1 PROGRESS SET 01/17/25
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
A-1
A101
1 SIM
A-1
ALUMINUM
STEEL
WOOD-ROUGH
(CONTINUOUS)
WOOD-ROUGH
(NON-CONTINUOUS)
PLYWOOD
WOOD FINISH
EARTH
C.M.U. (SOLID)
C.M.U.
BRICK
MASONRY
WALL PARTITION
SEALANT
BATT INSULATION
RIGID INSULATION
GYPSUM BOARD
ACOUSTICAL TILE
CONCRETE
GRANULAR FILL
EXISTING WALL & DOOR
TO REMAIN
NEW WALL & DOOR
EXISTING CONSTRUCTION
TO BE REMOVED
ELEVATION
KEYED NOTE
DOOR NUMBER
WINDOW TYPE
TOILET/KITCHEN
ACCESSORIES
ROOM NUMBER
ROOM NAME
INDICATES DIRECTION OF
ELEVATION / SECTION
DETAIL NUMBER
SHEET WHERE DRAWN
SIMILAR/OPPOSITE OF
INDICATED DETAIL
PARTITION TYPE
DESIGNATION
DETAIL NUMBER
SHEET WHERE DRAWN
SIMILAR/OPPOSITE OF
INDICATED DETAIL
DETAIL NUMBER
SHEET WHERE DRAWN
INDICATES REFERENCE OF
INTERIOR ELEVATION
D
A101 A
A101
1
DETAIL CALLOUT
LEVEL LINE
1
2
AREA OF REVISION
REVISION SEQUENCE TAG
101
A101
1 SIM
Room
name
101
150 SF
(M)MODIFIED EQUIPMENT
(N)NEW CONSTRUCTION OR EQUIPMENT
(E)EXISTING CONSTRUCTION OR EQUIPMENT
(S)SURPLUS EQUIPMENT
(R)RELOCATED EQUIPMENT
@AT
CENTERLINE
O DIAMETER OR ROUND
A, AMP AMPERE
A.B.ANCHOR BOLT
ABV ABOVE
A/C AIR CONDITIONING
A.C.B.M. ASBESTOS CONTAINING BUILDING MATERIAL
ACC ACCESSIBLE
ACP ACOUSTICAL CEILING PANEL
ADA AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
ADAAG ADA ACCESSIBILITY GUIDELINES
ADJ. ADJUSTABLE
A.F.F. ABOVE FINISH FLOOR
A.F.G. ABOVE FINISH GRADE
ALUM ALUMINUM
ALT ALTERNATIVE
APPROX APPROXIMATE
ARCH ARCHITECTURAL
ATT. ATTACHED
AUTO AUTOMATIC
BD BOARD
BLDG BUILDING
BLK BLOCK
BLKG BLOCKING
BM BEAM
BOT BOTTOM
BRG BEARING
BSMT BASEMENT
BTWN BETWEEN
B.U.BUILT-UP
CAB CABINET
CEM CEMENT
CH. BD. CHALKBOARD
C.I.P. CAST IN PLACE
C.JT. CONTROL JOINT
CLG CEILING
CLKG CAULKING
CLO CLOSET
CLR CLEAR
C.M.U. CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT
C.O. CLEAN-OUT
COL COLUMN
CONC CONCRETE
CONT CONTINUOUS
CORR CORRIDOR
C.T.CERAMIC TILE
D DEEP
DBL DOUBLE
DEPT DEPARTMENT
DET DETAIL
D.F.DRINKING FOUNTAIN
DIA DIAMETER
DIM DIMENSION
DN DOWN
DR DOOR
D.S.DOWNSPOUT
DW DISHWASHER
DWG DRAWING
EA EACH
E.B.EXPANSION BOLT
EF EXHAUST FAN
E.I.F.S. EXTERIOR INSULATION FINISH SYSTEM
EXP.JT. EXPANSION JOINT
EL ELEVATION
ELEC ELECTRIC
ELEV ELEVATOR
EM ELECTRIC METER
ENCL ENCLOSURE
ENG ENGINEER
EST ESTIMATE
ETR EXISTING TO REMAIN
EQ EQUAL
EQP EQUIPMENT
E.W.EACH WAY
E.W.C. ELECTRIC WATER COOLER
EXH EXHAUST
EXP EXPANSION
EXT EXTERIOR
F.A.FIRE ALARM
F.B.FLAT BAR
F.B.O. FURNISHED BY OTHERS
F.D.FLOOR DRAIN
FDN FOUNDATION
F.E.FIRE EXTINGUISHER
F.E.C. FIRE EXTINGUISHER CABINET
F.G.FINISH GRADE
F.H.FIRE HYDRANT
F.H.C. FIRE HOSE CABINET
F.H.M.S. FLAT HEAD METAL SCREW
F.H.W.S. FLAT HEAD WOOD SCREW
FIN FINISH(ED)
F.O.FACE OF
F.O.F. FACE OF FINISH
F.O.M. FACE OF MASONRY
FRP FIBER REINFORCED PANEL
FRTW. FIRE-RETARDANT TREATED WOOD
FT.FOOT OR FEET
FURR FURRING
G.NATURAL GAS
GA GAUGE
GAL GALLON
GALV GALVANIZED
G.B. GRAB BAR
G.C. GENERAL CONTRACTOR
G.D. GARBAGE DISPOSAL
G.F.I. GROUND FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER
GL GLASS
G.M. GAS METER
GND GROUND
G.S.F. GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE
GYP. BD. GYPSUM BOARD
HHIGH
H.B.HOSE BIBB
H.D.HIGH DENSITY
HDR HEADER
H.M.HOLLOW METAL
HORIZ HORIZONTAL
HR HOUR
HT HEIGHT
HVAC HEATING VENTILATION & AIR CONDITIONING
I.C.F. INSULATED CONCRETE FORMS
I.D. INSIDE DIAMETER
IN INCH
INSUL INSULATION
INT INTERIOR, INTERCOM
INV INVERT
JJUNCTION BOX
JT JOINT
KIT KITCHEN
K.O. KNOCKOUT
L LENGTH, LONG
LAB LABORATORY
LAM LAMINATE
LAV LAVATORY
LBS POUNDS
L.C. LOAD CENTER
L.F. LINEAR FEET
L.P. LOW POINT
MAX MAXIMUM
M.C. MEDICINE CABINET
MECH MECHANICAL
MTL METAL
MFR MANUFACTURER
M.H. MANHOLE
MIN MINIMUM
MIR MIRROR
MISC MISCELLANEOUS
M.O. MASONRY OPENING
MTD MOUNTED
MTL MATERIAL(S)
MICRO MICROWAVE OVEN
MWK MILLWORK
N. NORTH
NE. NORTHEAST
N.I.C. NOT IN CONTRACT
NO. OR # NUMBER
NOM. NOMINAL
N.T.S. NOT TO SCALE
NW. NORTHWEST
O.C. ON CENTER(S)
O.D. OUTSIDE DIAMETER
O/H OVERHEAD
OPG OPENING
OPP OPPOSITE
OPT OPTIONAL
O.S.A. OUTSIDE AIR
O.S.B. ORIENTED STRAND BOARD
PH PHASE
P/L PROPERTY LINE
PL PLATE
P.LAM. PLASTIC LAMINATE
PLUMB PLUMBING
PLYWD PLYWOOD
PNL PANEL
PR PAIR
PROP PROPOSED
P.S.F. POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT
P.S.I. POUNDS PER SQUARE INCH
PTD PAINTED
P.T. PRESSURE TREATED
PVC POLYVINYL CHLORIDE
PVMT PAVEMENT
Q.T. QUARRY TILE
RRADIUS
R.A. RETURN AIR
RCP REFLECTED CEILING PLAN
R.D. ROOF DRAIN
RE: REFERENCE
REF REFRIGERATOR
REFR REFRIGERATION
REINF REINFORCEMENT
REQ'D REQUIRED
R.O.W. RIGHT OF WAY
RM. ROOM
R.O. ROUGH OPENING
REV REVERSED
SSOUTH AND SLOPE
S.A. SUPPLY AIR
S.B. SPLASH BLOCK
S.C. SOLID CORE
SCHED SCHEDULE
S.D. SMOKE DETECTOR, SOAP DISPENSER,
STORM DRAIN
SEAL SEALANT
SECT SECTION
S.F. SQUARE FOOT/FEET
SE SOUTHEAST
SHWR SHOWER
SHT SHEET
SHEATH SHEATHING
SIM SIMILAR
SPECS SPECIFICATIONS
SQ SQUARE
SS STAINLESS STEEL, SANITARY SEWER
ST STREET
STA STATION
STB SETBACK
STD STANDARD
STL STEEL
STOR STORAGE
STRUCT STRUCTURAL
SUSP SUSPENDED
SW SOUTHWEST
SYM SYMMETRICAL
T. THERMOSTAT
T.B. TOWEL BAR
T&B TOP AND BOTTOM
T&G TONGUE & GROOVE
T.D. TOP OF DRAIN
TEL TELEPHONE
TEMP TEMPERED, TEMPORARY
THK THICK
THRESH THRESHOLD
T.O. TOP OF
T.O.D. TOP OF DECK
T.O.F. TOP OF FRAMING
T.O.J. TOP OF JOIST
T.O.M. TOP OF MASONRY
T.O.S. TOP OF SLAB
T.O.W. TOP OF WALL
T.P.D. TOILET PAPER DISPENSER
T.S. TUBE STEEL, TEMPERATURE SENSOR
TYP TYPICAL
A
L
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
UG UNDERGROUND
U.N.O. UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE
VVOLTS
VENT VENTILATION
VERT VERTICAL
VEST VESTIBULE
VHI VISUAL AND HEARING IMPAIRED
V.I.F. VERIFY IN FIELD
V.C.T. VINYL COMPOSITION TILE
V.R.VENT RISER
V.T.R. VENT THRU ROOF
V.W.C. VINYL WALL COVERING
W.WEST, WATER, WIDTH, WIDE
W/WITH
W.C.WATER CLOSET
W/O WITHOUT
WD WOOD
WIN WINDOW
WG WIRE GLASS
WH WATER HEATER
WP WATERPROOF
WT WEIGHT
W.V. WATER VALVE
W.W.F. WELDED WIRE FABRIC
W.W.M. WELDED WIRE MESH
YD YARD
Y.D.YARD DRAIN
U
K
J
I
V
W
Y
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I
AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-001
ABBREVIATIONS /
SYMBOLS / UNIT MATRIX
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
GENERAL SYMBOLS LEGEND ABBREVIATIONS
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
MAPLEVILLE ROAD
FAHRN
EY CHURC
H ROA
D
1
A-350
3
A-051
4
A-051
43
A-350
2
Level 1
0' -0"
4
A-051
Level 1
0' -0"
RAMP RAMP
5'-0" MIN
FLUSH CURB
12:1 MAX.
SLOPED CURB
12:1 MAX.
SLOPED CURB
12
:
1
M
A
X
.
DETECTALE WARNING
AREA (TYP.)
COMBINATION
CURB
& GUTTER
2" SMOOTH
TOWLED EDGE TYP.
2'
-
0
"
EXPANSION
JOINT (TYP.)
TYP. SIDEWALK, WALKING SURFACES
SHALL NOT BE STEEPER THAN 1:20. CROSS SLOPE OF WALKING
SURFACES SHALL NOT BE STEEPER THAN 1:48
NOTE:
1/2" EXPANSION (MAX HEIGHT W/ BEVEL NOT
EXCEEDING 1:2, UNBEVELED LEVEL CHANGES
DO NOT EXCEED 1/4" IN HEIGHT) JOINT
MATERIAL AT 20'-0" TO 30'-0"- VERIFY JOINT
LOCATIONS WITH ARCHITECT
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I
AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-051
ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN
& DETAILS
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
SCALE:1" = 30'-0"A-051
1 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"A-051
2 NEW FRONT STOOP ENLARGED PLAN
SCALE:3/4" = 1'-0"A-051
3 FRONT STOOP SECTION 1
SCALE:3/4" = 1'-0"A-051
4 FRONT STOOP SECTION 2N
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"A-051
5 TYP. SIDEWALK DETAIL
UP
DN
2
A-052
5
A-052
Level 1
0' -0"
APPROX EXT GRADE
-4' -8"
6'
-
0
"
5'-0" GATE5"x5" PVC POSTS, TYP.
PROVIDE EVERY 6' OR PER
MANUF. INSTRUCTIONS
12"X 30" CONCRETE
FOOTING, TYP
PVC PRIVACY FENCE
REFER TO PLAN
PRE-FINISHED STEEL
HANDLE, LATCH & LOCK
PRE-FINISHED HEAVY
DUTY STEEL HINGES
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I
AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-052
SITE DETAILS
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"A-052
4 NEW ACCESSIBLE RAMP & PATIO
SCALE:3/4" = 1'-0"A-052
2 TYP. PATIO/RAMP SECTION
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"A-052
3 NEW FIRE PUMP ROOM ENTRY
SCALE:3/4" = 1'-0"A-052
5 SECTION @ FIRE PUMP ENTRY
SCALE:3/4" = 1'-0"A-052
1 TYP. MECHANICAL SCREEN ELEVATION
A-2002
A-200 4
A-200
1
A-200
3
3'
-
4
"
6'
-
1
0
"
D-14
D-3
D-13
DEMO
4' - 4"
D-4
D-4
1' - 0"
1' - 0"
D-5
D-3
D-3
D-4
D-4
D-1
D-2
D-19
D-18
D-16
D-16
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-17
D-15
D-13
D-13
D-13
D-13
D-13
D-13
D-14
D-14
D-3 3' - 6"3' - 5"
3' - 4"
3' - 5"3' - 4"
6'
-
6
"
5'
-
2
"
1'
-
0
"
1'
-
0
"
D-5
1'
-
0
"
1'
-
0
"
D-5
3'
-
4
"
2'
-
1
0
"
6' - 1 1/2"D-14
D-4
D-4
D-4D-3
D-3
D-4
D-4
D-4
D-10
D-1
D-2
D-6
D-6
D-7
D-7
D-8
D-8
D-9D-9
D-11
D-11
D-12
D-16
D-16
D-16D-42
D-43
D-3
D-13
DEMO
6'
-
6
"
1'
-
4
"
D-14
D-15
3' - 4"
D-13
D-3
D-41
D-45
1. GC SHALL NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT OF ANY CONCEALED CONDITIONS UNCOVERED DURING DEMOLITION THAT
IMPEDES THE EXECUTION OF THE DESIGN AS INDICATED ON THE DOCUMENTS OR POSES ANY HEALTH AND/OR
LIFE-SAFETY HAZARDS.
2. GC SHALL MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO FINISHES ADJACENT TO DEMOLITION AREAS, GC SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
RESTORING ALL FINISHES AFFECTED BY THEIR WORK.
3. REFER TO MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND PLUMBING COMPONENTS FOR DEMOLITION OF SUCH MATERIALS,
EQUIPMENT & SYSTEMS.
4. DIMENSIONS ARE BASED ON FIELD SURVEYS BY ARCHITECT. ANY DISCREPANCIES IN DIMENSIONS THAT CONFLICT
WITH DESIGN AS DRAWN MUST BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY.
5. NOTIFY LANDLORD/OWNER IN WRITING 72 HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK ON ANY PROJECT PHASE OR
PERFORMING ANY WORK THAT WILL IN ANY WAY IMPACT THE LANDLORD/OWNER (SUCH AS CONSTRUCTION OF
TEMPORARY BARRICADES, TEMPORARY UTILITY SHUT DOWNS). DO NOT PROCEED WITH SUCH WORK IF THE
LANDLORD/OWNER DOES NOT GRANT PERMISSION.
6. PERFORM ALL WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND PERMITS, NOT LIMITED TO THOSE
REFERENCED HEREIN.
7. PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH DEMOLITION GC TO REVIEW HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TESTING REPORT. GC MUST
NOTIFY LANDLORD/OWNER AND ARCHITECT WHEN HAZARDOUS MATERIALS NOT INCLUDED IN THE REPORT ARE
DISCOVERED PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH REMOVAL ACCORDING TO FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAWS.
8. VERIFY EXTENT OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION IN FIELD, IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES.
9. GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTION OF THE EXPOSED BUILDING, INTERIOR MATERIALS AND FINISHES SUBJECT
TO WEATHER; WATER AND MOISTURE, EXTREME TEMPERATURES DURING THE TERM OF THE CONSTRUCTION
PERIOD. REFER TO SPECIFICATION SECTION 015000 TEMPORARY FACILITIES AND CONTROLS FOR SPECIFICS.
GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MEANS OF A PROTECTION PLAN.
10. PRIOR TO STRUCTURAL MODIFICATIONS INDICATED HEREIN OR OTHERWISE, GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING
ENGINEERED MEANS FOR TEMPORARY SHORING.
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I
AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-090
BASEMENT FLOOR -
EXISTING & DEMO
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-090
1 BASEMENT LEVEL - EXISTING & DEMO
GENERAL NOTES: DEMOLITION
KEYED NOTES
D-1 REMOVE EXISTING PLUMBING FIXTURES, CAP PLUMBING PER PLUMBING DRAWINGS AND CODE
D-2 REMOVE EXISTING TOILET PARTITIONS
D-3 REMOVE EXISTING DOOR AND FRAME AS SHOWN
D-4 REMOVE WALL TO THE EXTENT SHOWN
D-5 REMOVE PORTION OF EXISTING CONCRETE SLAB AS SHOWN FOR NEW PERIMETER SUB-SLAB
(PASSIVE) RADON PIPE SYSTEM
D-6 REMOVE ALL EXISTING CEILING TILE, LIGHTS, DUCTWORK, BULKHEADS, PIPES AND CONDUIT
STEMMING FROM EXISTING HEATING SYSTEM - REFER TO MEP - TYPICAL
D-7 REMOVE EXISTING FLOOR FINISH, ADHESIVE AND WALL BASE, TYPICAL
D-8 REMOVE EXISTING VINYL STAIR TREADS
D-9 REMOVE EXISTING CASED OPENING TRIM
D-10 REMOVE EXISTING STAIR AND RAILING
D-11 REMOVE EXISTING FURNACE, WATER HEATERS AND ASSOCIATED PIPES AND DUCTWORK PER
MEP (CAP PER CODE)
D-12 REMOVE EXISTING LAUNDRY SINK. RETAIN EXISTING LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT FOR FUTURE USE
D-13 NEW DOOR TO BE INSTALLED IN EXISTING DOOR OPENING, ENLARGE OPENING PER DOOR
SCHEDULE TO ACCOMMODATE NEW OPENING SIZE
D-14 REMOVE PORTION OF EXISTING WALL FOR NEW CASED OPENING OR DOOR, REFER TO
DIMENSION ON PLAN - NEW HEAD HEIGHT, REFER TO "NEW" DRAWINGS (REFER TO STRUCTURAL
FOR NEW HEADER)
D-15 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A NEW WINDOW - TYPICAL, U.N.O. RETAIN
EXISTING INTERIOR WINDOW TRIM.
D-16 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW OR OPENING FOR THE INSTALLATION OF WALL IN-FILL IN LIKE KIND,
PER DETAILS
D-17 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW FOR THE INSTALLATION OF NEW MECHANICAL LOUVER, REFER TO
MECHANICAL DRAWINGS
D-18 REMOVE EXISTING DOOR FOR THE INSTALLATION OF NEW WINDOW, PER DETAILS
D-19 REMOVE EXISTING BASEMENT LEVEL EXIT ENCLOSURE
D-41 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY IN ITS ENTIRETY, TO BELOW FINISHED FLOOR IN BASEMENT. INFILL
WITH NEW CONCRETE PER DETAIL 2/A-100
D-42 REMOVE EXISTING ACCESS DOOR IN ITS ENTIRETY
D-43 REMOVE ALL EXISTING ELECTRICAL PANELS AND CONDUIT, REFER TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS
D-45 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW, WINDOW TO BE INFILLED PER DETAIL AND TO ACCOMODATE NEW
DRYER VENTS
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
1 PROGRESS SET 01/17/25
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
A-2002
A-200 4
A-200
1
A-200
3
D-20
D-19
4' - 10 1/2"5' - 7"D-14
D-16
D-16
D-10
D-4
D-3
D-4 3'
-
5
"
3' - 5"
3' - 5"3' - 5"
3' - 5"
3' - 5"
3' - 5"3' - 5"3' - 5"
3' - 4"
D-13
D-13
D-13
D-13
D-13
D-13 D-13
D-13
3' - 5"
D-14
D-14
D-24
D-24
D-25D-25
D-18 D-18
D-3
D-3
D-3 D-3
D-3
D-4
D-4
D-4
D-3
D-4
D-4
D-3
D-1
D-22
D-3
D-4
D-3
D-4
D-3
D-3
D-3
D-4
D-4
D-22
D-23
D-4
D-41
D-21D-21
D-27
1' - 3"
4' - 0"
D-28
D-4D-3 D-3
D-3
D-4
D-3
D-1
D-8
D-8
D-16
D-16
D-15
D-15
D-29
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-15 D-15
D-6
D-7
D-26
D-6
D-26
D-7
D-3
D-40
D-16
D-3
1. GC SHALL NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT OF ANY CONCEALED CONDITIONS UNCOVERED DURING DEMOLITION THAT
IMPEDES THE EXECUTION OF THE DESIGN AS INDICATED ON THE DOCUMENTS OR POSES ANY HEALTH AND/OR
LIFE-SAFETY HAZARDS.
2. GC SHALL MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO FINISHES ADJACENT TO DEMOLITION AREAS, GC SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
RESTORING ALL FINISHES AFFECTED BY THEIR WORK.
3. REFER TO MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND PLUMBING COMPONENTS FOR DEMOLITION OF SUCH MATERIALS,
EQUIPMENT & SYSTEMS.
4. DIMENSIONS ARE BASED ON FIELD SURVEYS BY ARCHITECT. ANY DISCREPANCIES IN DIMENSIONS THAT CONFLICT
WITH DESIGN AS DRAWN MUST BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY.
5. NOTIFY LANDLORD/OWNER IN WRITING 72 HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK ON ANY PROJECT PHASE OR
PERFORMING ANY WORK THAT WILL IN ANY WAY IMPACT THE LANDLORD/OWNER (SUCH AS CONSTRUCTION OF
TEMPORARY BARRICADES, TEMPORARY UTILITY SHUT DOWNS). DO NOT PROCEED WITH SUCH WORK IF THE
LANDLORD/OWNER DOES NOT GRANT PERMISSION.
6. PERFORM ALL WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND PERMITS, NOT LIMITED TO THOSE
REFERENCED HEREIN.
7. PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH DEMOLITION GC TO REVIEW HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TESTING REPORT. GC MUST
NOTIFY LANDLORD/OWNER AND ARCHITECT WHEN HAZARDOUS MATERIALS NOT INCLUDED IN THE REPORT ARE
DISCOVERED PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH REMOVAL ACCORDING TO FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAWS.
8. VERIFY EXTENT OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION IN FIELD, IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES.
9. GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTION OF THE EXPOSED BUILDING, INTERIOR MATERIALS AND FINISHES SUBJECT
TO WEATHER; WATER AND MOISTURE, EXTREME TEMPERATURES DURING THE TERM OF THE CONSTRUCTION
PERIOD. REFER TO SPECIFICATION SECTION 015000 TEMPORARY FACILITIES AND CONTROLS FOR SPECIFICS.
GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MEANS OF A PROTECTION PLAN.
10. PRIOR TO STRUCTURAL MODIFICATIONS INDICATED HEREIN OR OTHERWISE, GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING
ENGINEERED MEANS FOR TEMPORARY SHORING.
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-091
FIRST FLOOR - EXISTING &
DEMO
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-091
1 FRIST LEVEL - EXISTING & DEMO
GENERAL NOTES: DEMOLITION
KEYED NOTES
D-1 REMOVE EXISTING PLUMBING FIXTURES, CAP PLUMBING PER PLUMBING DRAWINGS AND CODE
D-3 REMOVE EXISTING DOOR AND FRAME AS SHOWN
D-4 REMOVE WALL TO THE EXTENT SHOWN
D-6 REMOVE ALL EXISTING CEILING TILE, LIGHTS, DUCTWORK, BULKHEADS, PIPES AND CONDUIT STEMMING
FROM EXISTING HEATING SYSTEM - REFER TO MEP - TYPICAL
D-7 REMOVE EXISTING FLOOR FINISH, ADHESIVE AND WALL BASE, TYPICAL
D-8 REMOVE EXISTING VINYL STAIR TREADS
D-10 REMOVE EXISTING STAIR AND RAILING
D-13 NEW DOOR TO BE INSTALLED IN EXISTING DOOR OPENING, ENLARGE OPENING PER DOOR SCHEDULE TO
ACCOMMODATE NEW OPENING SIZE
D-14 REMOVE PORTION OF EXISTING WALL FOR NEW CASED OPENING OR DOOR, REFER TO DIMENSION ON
PLAN - NEW HEAD HEIGHT, REFER TO "NEW" DRAWINGS (REFER TO STRUCTURAL FOR NEW HEADER)
D-15 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A NEW WINDOW - TYPICAL, U.N.O. RETAIN EXISTING
INTERIOR WINDOW TRIM.
D-16 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW OR OPENING FOR THE INSTALLATION OF WALL IN-FILL IN LIKE KIND, PER
DETAILS
D-18 REMOVE EXISTING DOOR FOR THE INSTALLATION OF NEW WINDOW, PER DETAILS
D-19 REMOVE EXISTING BASEMENT LEVEL EXIT ENCLOSURE
D-20 REMOVE EXISTING ACCORDION PARTITION
D-21 REMOVE EXISTING KITCHEN EQUIPMENT IN ITS ENTIRETY
D-22 REMOVE EXISTING CASEWORK IN ITS ENTIRETY
D-23 REMOVE EXISTING WALK-IN COOLER/FREEZER
D-24 REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE STOOP/STEPS AND ASSOCIATED RAILING
D-25 REMOVE EXISTING STEEL BALCONY
D-26 REMOVE EXISTING CAST IRON RADIATOR HEATING SYSTEM IN ITS ENTIRETY AND ASSOCIATED PIPING PER
MEP DRAWINGS, TYPICAL. PATCH AND REPAIR EXISTING STRUCTURE
D-27 REMOVE EXISTING DOOR FOR THE INSTALLATION OF NEW DOOR PER DOOR SCHEDULE
D-28 REMOVE EXISTING PORTION OF EXISTING WALL FOR THE INSTALLATION OF NEW INTERIOR WINDOW
D-29 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A NEW DOOR PER DOOR SCHEDULE
D-40 REMOVE EXISTING THRU-WALL KITCHEN EQUIPMENT
D-41 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY IN ITS ENTIRETY, TO BELOW FINISHED FLOOR IN BASEMENT. INFILL WITH NEW
CONCRETE PER DETAIL 2/A-100
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
1 PROGRESS SET 01/17/25
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
A-2002
A-200 4
A-200
1
A-200
3
D-4
D-4
D-3
D-1
D-3
D-4
D-10
D-4
D-4
D-146' - 1"D-3
D-4
D-3
D-1
D-4
D-3
D-4
D-4
D-3
D-3
D-4
D-4
D-3
D-30
D-32 D-32
D-33
D-34
D-31
D-3
D-4
D-4D-4
D-3
D-4
D-3
D-4
D-4D-3
D-4
D-1 D-3
D-3D-3
D-3
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-15 D-15
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-6
D-6
D-26 D-7
D-7
D-26
D-8
D-8
D-13
D-13
D-13
D-13D-13
3' - 5"3' - 5"3' - 5"
3' - 5"3' - 5"
3' - 4"
D-13
D-4
D-41
1. GC SHALL NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT OF ANY CONCEALED CONDITIONS UNCOVERED DURING DEMOLITION THAT
IMPEDES THE EXECUTION OF THE DESIGN AS INDICATED ON THE DOCUMENTS OR POSES ANY HEALTH AND/OR
LIFE-SAFETY HAZARDS.
2. GC SHALL MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO FINISHES ADJACENT TO DEMOLITION AREAS, GC SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
RESTORING ALL FINISHES AFFECTED BY THEIR WORK.
3. REFER TO MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND PLUMBING COMPONENTS FOR DEMOLITION OF SUCH MATERIALS,
EQUIPMENT & SYSTEMS.
4. DIMENSIONS ARE BASED ON FIELD SURVEYS BY ARCHITECT. ANY DISCREPANCIES IN DIMENSIONS THAT CONFLICT
WITH DESIGN AS DRAWN MUST BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY.
5. NOTIFY LANDLORD/OWNER IN WRITING 72 HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK ON ANY PROJECT PHASE OR
PERFORMING ANY WORK THAT WILL IN ANY WAY IMPACT THE LANDLORD/OWNER (SUCH AS CONSTRUCTION OF
TEMPORARY BARRICADES, TEMPORARY UTILITY SHUT DOWNS). DO NOT PROCEED WITH SUCH WORK IF THE
LANDLORD/OWNER DOES NOT GRANT PERMISSION.
6. PERFORM ALL WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND PERMITS, NOT LIMITED TO THOSE
REFERENCED HEREIN.
7. PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH DEMOLITION GC TO REVIEW HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TESTING REPORT. GC MUST
NOTIFY LANDLORD/OWNER AND ARCHITECT WHEN HAZARDOUS MATERIALS NOT INCLUDED IN THE REPORT ARE
DISCOVERED PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH REMOVAL ACCORDING TO FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAWS.
8. VERIFY EXTENT OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION IN FIELD, IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES.
9. GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTION OF THE EXPOSED BUILDING, INTERIOR MATERIALS AND FINISHES SUBJECT
TO WEATHER; WATER AND MOISTURE, EXTREME TEMPERATURES DURING THE TERM OF THE CONSTRUCTION
PERIOD. REFER TO SPECIFICATION SECTION 015000 TEMPORARY FACILITIES AND CONTROLS FOR SPECIFICS.
GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MEANS OF A PROTECTION PLAN.
10. PRIOR TO STRUCTURAL MODIFICATIONS INDICATED HEREIN OR OTHERWISE, GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING
ENGINEERED MEANS FOR TEMPORARY SHORING.
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-092
SECOND FLOOR -
EXISTING & DEMO
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-092
1 SECOND LEVEL - EXISTING & DEMO
GENERAL NOTES: DEMOLITION
KEYED NOTES
D-1 REMOVE EXISTING PLUMBING FIXTURES, CAP PLUMBING PER PLUMBING
DRAWINGS AND CODE
D-3 REMOVE EXISTING DOOR AND FRAME AS SHOWN
D-4 REMOVE WALL TO THE EXTENT SHOWN
D-6 REMOVE ALL EXISTING CEILING TILE, LIGHTS, DUCTWORK, BULKHEADS,
PIPES AND CONDUIT STEMMING FROM EXISTING HEATING SYSTEM -
REFER TO MEP - TYPICAL
D-7 REMOVE EXISTING FLOOR FINISH, ADHESIVE AND WALL BASE, TYPICAL
D-8 REMOVE EXISTING VINYL STAIR TREADS
D-10 REMOVE EXISTING STAIR AND RAILING
D-13 NEW DOOR TO BE INSTALLED IN EXISTING DOOR OPENING, ENLARGE
OPENING PER DOOR SCHEDULE TO ACCOMMODATE NEW OPENING SIZE
D-14 REMOVE PORTION OF EXISTING WALL FOR NEW CASED OPENING OR
DOOR, REFER TO DIMENSION ON PLAN - NEW HEAD HEIGHT, REFER TO
"NEW" DRAWINGS (REFER TO STRUCTURAL FOR NEW HEADER)
D-15 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A NEW WINDOW -
TYPICAL, U.N.O. RETAIN EXISTING INTERIOR WINDOW TRIM.
D-26 REMOVE EXISTING CAST IRON RADIATOR HEATING SYSTEM IN ITS
ENTIRETY AND ASSOCIATED PIPING PER MEP DRAWINGS, TYPICAL.
PATCH AND REPAIR EXISTING STRUCTURE
D-30 REMOVE EXISTING BALCONY IN ITS ENTIRETY
D-31 REMOVE EXISTING COVERED PORCH IN ITS ENTIRETY
D-32 REMOVE EXISTING SIDING AS NOTED, FOR THE RECEIPT OF NEW FIBER
CEMENT SIDING PER EXTERIOR MATERIALS LEGEND
D-33 REMOVE EXISTING DOOR FOR THE INSTALLATION OF WALL IN-FILL IN
LIKE KIND, PER DETAILS
D-34 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOWS FOR THE INSTALLATION OF NEW CASED
OPENING, SIZE PER PLANS
D-41 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY IN ITS ENTIRETY, TO BELOW FINISHED FLOOR
IN BASEMENT. INFILL WITH NEW CONCRETE PER DETAIL 2/A-100
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
1 PROGRESS SET 01/17/25
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
A-2002
A-200 4
A-200
1
A-200
3
D-8
D-8
D-15
D-15
D-27
D-37
D-37
D-35D-35
12' - 8"
EQ EQ
D-36 D-36 D-36 D-36
D-36D-36D-36D-36
D-30D-30 7' - 4"
EQ EQ
D-41
1
2
1. GC SHALL NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT OF ANY CONCEALED CONDITIONS UNCOVERED DURING DEMOLITION THAT
IMPEDES THE EXECUTION OF THE DESIGN AS INDICATED ON THE DOCUMENTS OR POSES ANY HEALTH AND/OR
LIFE-SAFETY HAZARDS.
2. GC SHALL MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO FINISHES ADJACENT TO DEMOLITION AREAS, GC SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
RESTORING ALL FINISHES AFFECTED BY THEIR WORK.
3. REFER TO MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, AND PLUMBING COMPONENTS FOR DEMOLITION OF SUCH MATERIALS,
EQUIPMENT & SYSTEMS.
4. DIMENSIONS ARE BASED ON FIELD SURVEYS BY ARCHITECT. ANY DISCREPANCIES IN DIMENSIONS THAT CONFLICT
WITH DESIGN AS DRAWN MUST BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY.
5. NOTIFY LANDLORD/OWNER IN WRITING 72 HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK ON ANY PROJECT PHASE OR
PERFORMING ANY WORK THAT WILL IN ANY WAY IMPACT THE LANDLORD/OWNER (SUCH AS CONSTRUCTION OF
TEMPORARY BARRICADES, TEMPORARY UTILITY SHUT DOWNS). DO NOT PROCEED WITH SUCH WORK IF THE
LANDLORD/OWNER DOES NOT GRANT PERMISSION.
6. PERFORM ALL WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND PERMITS, NOT LIMITED TO THOSE
REFERENCED HEREIN.
7. PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH DEMOLITION GC TO REVIEW HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TESTING REPORT. GC MUST
NOTIFY LANDLORD/OWNER AND ARCHITECT WHEN HAZARDOUS MATERIALS NOT INCLUDED IN THE REPORT ARE
DISCOVERED PRIOR TO PROCEEDING WITH REMOVAL ACCORDING TO FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAWS.
8. VERIFY EXTENT OF EXISTING CONSTRUCTION IN FIELD, IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY ARCHITECT OF ANY DISCREPANCIES.
9. GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTION OF THE EXPOSED BUILDING, INTERIOR MATERIALS AND FINISHES SUBJECT
TO WEATHER; WATER AND MOISTURE, EXTREME TEMPERATURES DURING THE TERM OF THE CONSTRUCTION
PERIOD. REFER TO SPECIFICATION SECTION 015000 TEMPORARY FACILITIES AND CONTROLS FOR SPECIFICS.
GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MEANS OF A PROTECTION PLAN.
10. PRIOR TO STRUCTURAL MODIFICATIONS INDICATED HEREIN OR OTHERWISE, GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING
ENGINEERED MEANS FOR TEMPORARY SHORING.
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-093
THIRD FLOOR - EXISTING &
DEMO
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-093
1 THIRD LEVEL - EXISTING & DEMO
KEYED NOTES
D-8 REMOVE EXISTING VINYL STAIR TREADS
D-15 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A NEW WINDOW
- TYPICAL, U.N.O. RETAIN EXISTING INTERIOR WINDOW TRIM.
D-27 REMOVE EXISTING DOOR FOR THE INSTALLATION OF NEW DOOR PER
DOOR SCHEDULE
D-30 REMOVE EXISTING BALCONY IN ITS ENTIRETY
D-35 REMOVE PORTION OF EXISTING ROOF FOR INSTALLATION OF NEW
ROOF STRUCTURE, REFER TO STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS
D-36 REMOVE EXISTING DORMERS IN THEIR ENTIRETY, INCLUDING WALLS,
WINDOWS AND ROOF
D-37 REMOVE EXISTING VERTICAL DUCTWORK IN ITS ENTIRETY, REFER TO
MECHANICAL DRAWINGS
D-41 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY IN ITS ENTIRETY, TO BELOW FINISHED
FLOOR IN BASEMENT. INFILL WITH NEW CONCRETE PER DETAIL 2/A-100
GENERAL NOTES: DEMOLITION
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
1 PROGRESS SET 01/17/25
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
A-2002
A-200 4
A-200
1
A-200
3
EQ EQ
7' - 4" V.I.F.
D-35D-3524' - 4"24' - 4" V.I.F.
14
'
-
1
1
"
V
.
I
.
F
.
D-39D-39
D-39D-39
14
'
-
1
1
"
V
.
I
.
F
.
D-39D-39 D-39D-39
24' - 4" V.I.F.
14
'
-
6
"
V
.
I
.
F
.
24' - 4" V.I.F
14
'
-
6
"
V
.
I
.
F
D-38D-38
D-38D-38
D-41
1
2
D-44
EDGE OF
EXISTING
DORMER WALL
EDGE OF
EXISTING
DORMER WALL
DEMO OUTSIDE EDGE TO OUTSIDE EDGE
EDGE OF
EXISTING
DORMER WALL
EDGE OF
EXISTING
DORMER WALL
DEMO OUTSIDE EDGE TO OUTSIDE EDGE
DEMO OUTSIDE EDGE TO OUTSIDE EDGE DEMO OUTSIDE EDGE TO OUTSIDE EDGE
EDGE OF EXISTING
DORMER WALL
EDGE OF EXISTING
DORMER WALL
EDGE OF EXISTING
DORMER WALL
EDGE OF EXISTING
DORMER WALL
DEMO
1. ALL NEW AND EXISTING TO REMAIN ROOF AND DECK PENETRATIONS RELATED TO MECHANICAL, PLUMBING,
AND ELECTRICAL TO BE COORDINATED BY GC.
2. NEW CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROOF SYSTEM SHALL NOT COMMENCE UNTIL ALL PERTINENT SUBMITTALS ARE
PROVIDED AND DEEMED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE DESIGN INTENT OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.
3. GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTION OF THE EXPOSED BUILDING, INTERIOR MATERIALS AND FINISHES
SUBJECT TO WEATHER; WATER AND MOISTURE, EXTREME TEMPERATURES DURING THE TERM OF THE
CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. REFER TO SPECIFICATION SECTION 015000 TEMPORARY FACILITIES AND CONTROLS
FOR SPECIFICS. GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MEANS OF A PROTECTION PLAN.
4. UPON COMPLETION OF NEW ROOFING SYSTEM INSTALLATION, GC SHALL NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT FOR A
DETAILED INSPECTION. IT SHALL BE DEMONSTRATED THAT THE SYSTEM PERFORMS POSITIVE DRAINAGE
ACCORDING TO THE MANUFACTURER'S REQUIREMENTS OF WARRANTY, U.N.O.
5. ARROWS INDICATED ON PLAN REFER TO DIRECTION OF SLOPE OF ROOF SYSTEM TO ALLOW POSITIVE
DRAINAGE.
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-094
ROOF PLAN - EXISTING &
DEMO
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-094
1 ROOF PLAN - EXISTING & DEMO
KEYED NOTES
D-35 REMOVE PORTION OF EXISTING ROOF FOR INSTALLATION OF NEW
ROOF STRUCTURE, REFER TO STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS
D-38 REMOVE ALL EXISTING SHINGLES, UNDERLAYMENT GUTTERS AND
DOWNSPOUTS - TYPICAL (SHEATHING TO REMAIN UNLESS DEEMED
COMPROMISED AFTER SHINGLES ARE REMOVED)
D-39 REMOVE PORTION OF ROOF FROM EXTERIOR SIDE OF EXISTING
DORMER WALL TO OPPOSITE DORMER WALL
D-41 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY IN ITS ENTIRETY, TO BELOW FINISHED
FLOOR IN BASEMENT. INFILL WITH NEW CONCRETE PER DETAIL
2/A-100
D-44 REMOVE EXISTING FLAT ROOF MATERIAL IN ITS ENTIRETY GENERAL NOTES: ROOF
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
1 PROGRESS SET 01/17/25
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
UP
A-201
1
A-2012
A-202 2
STAFF
CLOSET
001
I.T.
002
CONFERENCE
RM.
003
LAUNDRY
LOUNGE
003
ELEV.
LOBBY
004
STAIR 1
005
LAUNDRY
006
ELECTRICAL
009
MECHANICAL
010
STAFF
RESTROOM
014
STAFF
KITCHENETTE
013
SOCIAL/GAME
ROOM
015
SOCIAL/GAME
ROOM
016
COMPUTER
LAB
017
FITNESS
ROOM
018
KITCHENETTE
020
RESTROOM
019
NEW OPENIN
G
6'
-
6
"
NEW OPENING
6' - 6"
SALON /
FLEX
007
MOP SINK
008
SHAFT
LOCATION
ABOVE
EXTERIOR
GRADE
1
1
9 4' - 0"5' - 6"
5
8'
-
0
"
20
'
-
7
5
/
8
"
5' - 7"
9' - 6"
10' - 1 5/8"
8'
-
1
1
/
2
"
9' - 6"8' - 4 3/8"
8'
-
8
"
5'
-
5
1
/
2
"
5' - 5"
9'
-
1
1
"
9'
-
0
"
19' - 7 3/4"
9' - 10"
8
EQEQ
5
7
7
7
1
7
7
10
41
3
4
1' - 0"
1' - 0"
2
3
4
1'
-
0
"
1'
-
0
"
2
3
4
1' - 0"
1' - 0"
1'
-
0
"
1'
-
0
"
2
3
4
3
4
2
1
36
38
38
3838
38
3'
-
4
"
5
5
3' - 6"
5
W-3
W-3 W-3
W-1
W-3
W-3
W-2
W-2
WR-3
WR-3
W-3
WR-3
7
NEW OPENIN
G
6'
-
6
"
1'
-
4
"
3
A-150
A-202 3
A-2013
40
A-403
17
5' - 2"
11
1
/
2
"
54"
A-403
16
A-403
19 A-403 18
15
A-390
9
020
002
003
005
L
006
004
007
008
009
010
014 011
012
013
015016017
018
019
WR-3
B.
CORRIDOR
1
012
B.
CORRIDOR
2
011
44
44
A-403
16
15
MIN
3' - 0"445
G
46
1. ALL WORK PERFORMED SHALL COMPLY WITH CURRENT UNIFORM BUILDING AND FIRE
CODES AND APPLICABLE STATE LAWS AND ORDINANCES AS ADOPTED BY LOCAL
AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION AT THE TIME OF PERMIT ISSUANCE.
2. ALL PLAN DIMENSIONS INDICATED ARE FFROM FACE OF FINISH TO FACE OF FINISH
U.N.O. IN THE EVENT OF A DIMENSION DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THESE DOCUMENTS AND
FIELD DIMENSIONS, NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY.
3. ALL NEW DOOR FRAMES TO BE SET 4" FROM ADJACENT WALL, U.N.O.
4. GC TO PATCH AND REPAIR ALL WALLS THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING DEMOLITION.
5. DRYWALL FINISH SHALL BE LEVEL 4, U.N.O.
6. ALL ACCESSIBLE UNITS AND COMMON SPACES, ALL ELECTRICAL CONDITIONS SHALL
APPLY: CENTER OF TOGGLE SWITCHES SHALL BE 42", TOP OF THE HIGHEST SWITCHING
DEVICES, CONTROLS OR DISCONNECTS SHALL BE 48" AFF.
7. REFER TO MILLWORK DETAILS FOR ELECTRICAL OUTLET LOCATIONS IN ACCESSIBLE
KITCHENS AND KITCHENETTES
REFER TO PLANS
NEW SLAB ON GRADE REINF W/
6X6 W2.9XW2.9 (MATCH
THICKNESS W/ EXISTING SLAB)
DRILL, CLEAN & ADHESIVE
GROUT W/ HILTI HY200
EXISTING SLAB
SOIL-GAS RETARDER MEMBRANE MIN
OF 10 MIL POLYETHYLENE SHEETING
OR EQUIVALENT. OVERLAP SEAMS 12"
3/8" EXPANSION JOINT
DOWEL SLEEVE, DOWEL INTO
EXISTING SLAB W/ #6 18" LONG @ 12"
MIN 4" THICK LAYER OF GAS
PERMEABLE MATERIAL, GENERAL
NOTE #4
4" PERFORATED RADON PIPE (WHERE APPLICABLE)
EQEQ EQEQ
GENERAL NOTES:
1. RADON VENTS SHALL NOT PENETRATE THE ROOF ASSEMBLY THROUGH VALLEYS OR FIRE RETARDANT PLYWOOD. SHIFT
IN ATTIC SPACE TO CLEAR SUCH ASSEMBLIES.
2. ALL CONCRETE SLABS THAT COME IN CONTACT WITH THE GROUND SHALL BE LAID OVER A GAS PERMEABLE MATERIAL
MADE OF EITHER A MINIMUM 4" THICK LAYER OF SAND, OVERLAIN BY A LAYER OR STRIPS OF MATTING DESIGNED TO
ALLOW THE LATERAL FLOW OF SOIL CASES.
3. ALL CONCRETE FLOOR SLABS SHALL BE DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LOCAL BUILDING CODES.
ADDITIONAL REFS: AMERICAN CONCRETE INSTITUTE PUBLICATIONS, "AC1302.1R" & "AC1332 R" OR THE POST TENSIONING
INSTITUTE MANUAL, "DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF POSTTENSIONED SLABS ON GROUND".
4. VENT PIPES SHALL BE INSTALLED SO THAT ANY RAINWATER OR CONDENSATION DRAINS DOWNWARD INTO GROUND
BENEATH THE SLAB OR SOIL-GAS-RETARDER MEMBRANE
5. ALL CONCRETE SLABS THAT COME IN CONTACT WITH THE GROUND SHALL BE LAID OVER A GAS PERMEABLE MATERIAL
MADE UP OF EITHER A MINIMUM 4" THICK UNIFORM LAYER OF CLEAN AGGREGATE, TO ALLOW LATERAL FLOW OF SOIL
GASES.
6. ALL OPENINGS, GAPS AND JOINTS IN FLOOR AND WALL ASSEMBLIES IN CONTACT SOIL OR GAPS AROUND PIPES,
TOILETS, BATHTUBS OR DRAINS PENETRATING THESE ASSEMBLIES SHALL BE FILLED OR CLOSED WITH MATERIALS THAT
PROVIDE A PERMANENT AIR-TIGHT SEAL. SEAL LARGE OPENINGS WITH NON-SHRINK MORTAR, GROUTS OR EXPANDING FOAM
MATERIALS AND SMALLER GAPS WITH AN ELASTOMERIC JOINT SEALANT, AS DEFINED IN ASTM C920-87.
7. VENT PIPES SHALL BE INSTALLED SO THAT ANY RAINWATER OR CONDENSATION DRAINS DOWNWARD INTO THE
GROUND BENEATH THE SLAB OR SOIL-GAS-RETARDER MEMBRANE.
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I
AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-100
BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN -
NEW
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-100
1 BASEMENT LEVEL - NEW CONSTRUCTION
GENERAL NOTES: FLOOR PLANS
KEYED NOTES
1 IN-FILL EXISTING WINDOW OR OPENING TO MATCH SURROUNDING WALL CONSTRUCTION,
REFER TO DETAILS
2 PROVIDE NEW PASSIVE RADON SYSTEM, 4" RADON PIPE, TURN UP TO ROOF - REFER TO
PLUMBING DRAWINGS
3 4" PERFORATED RADON PIPE
4 IN-FILL CONCRETE SLAB PER DETAIL 2/A-100
5 NEW CASED OPENING, PROVIDE 4" PAINTED 1X TRIM SURROUND WITH PAINTED WOOD 1X
JAMB. HEIGHT, 7'-0" A.F.F. REFER TO STRUCTURAL FOR LINTEL DETAILS
7 IN-FILL EXISTING DOOR OR CASED OPENING TO MATCH EXISTING WALL CONSTRUCTION,
REFER TO DETAILS
8 NEW MOP SINK WITH FRP PANEL SURROUND
9 NEW WINDOW IN EXISTING DOOR LOCATION, REFER TO DETAILS
10 5' WIDE PLASTIC LAMINATE FOLDING COUNTER WITH BRACKETS AND CONTINUOUS LEDGER
36 GC TO EVALUATE SLAB CONDITION AFTER STAIRS ARE REMOVED, POSSIBLE PATCH AND
REPAIR
38 SEAL ALL EXISTING BASEMENT EXTERIOR WALLS FROM THE INTERIOR, WITH DRYLOK
MASONRY SEALANT OR EQUAL
40 NEW MECHANICAL LOUVER IN EXISTING WINDOW OPENING, COORD. W/ MECHANICAL
41 PLASTIC LAMINATE COUNTER, FULL LENGTH OF THE ROOM, WITH BRACKETS AND
CONTINUOUS LEDGER - PROVIDE GROMMETS EVERY 24" O.C., COORD. W/ OWNER
44 EXISTING STAIR WALLS TO BE REPAINTED 'PNT-2', CEILINGS TO BE PAINTED ' PNT-5'. ALL
OTHER ELEMENTS TO REMAIN AS IS: RAILING, TREADS & RISERS
45 NEW WINDOW INFILL PER DETAIL TO ACCOMODATE DRYER VENTS
46 3/4" P.T. PLYWOOD FASTENED TO WALLS FOR WALL MOUNTED ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT
SCALE:1" = 1'-0"A-100
2 TYPICAL SLAB REPAIR DETAIL
SCALE:1/16" = 1'-0"A-100
3 RADON GENERAL NOTES
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
1 PROGRESS SET 01/17/25
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
UP DN
UP
A-202
1
A-201
1
A-2012
A-202 2
DN
OFFICE/RECEPTION
104
KITCHEN
110
PANTRY
111
PANTRY
109
COMMUNITY
RM.
112
LIBRARY/LOUNGE
113
ELEVATOR
LOBBY
116
STAIR 1
117
MAIN
ENTRY/LOBBY
102
413 NSF
SUITE 1
404 NSF
SUITE 2
409 NSF
SUITE 4
OPEN TO BELOW
(LAUNDRY EXHAUST)
FULLY ACCESSIBLE
SUITE 3 - 485 NSF
REF
STATION 1 STATION 2
STATION 3
464 NSF
INNKEEPER SUITE
OPEN AIR
VESTIBULE
103
NEW ADA CONC. RAMP
FIRE PUMP
108
RESTROOM
106
32' - 10"
23' - 9"23' - 9 1/4" V.I.F.
26' - 10 1/4" V.I.F 17' - 10"
5' - 7"
4' - 10"
3' - 2"
6'
-
6
"
11
3' - 2"
6'
-
6
"
1
1
12
1212
14
13
1
4' - 3"4' - 3"3' - 4"
15
16
2'
-
3
"
4' - 11"
8
3'
-
9
3
/
4
"
4' - 5"
7
7
7
1
5
2'
-
2
"
5'
-
1
"
17
2
2
2
2
18
18
5'
-
1
0
"
5' - 7 1/2"
9'
-
1
1
"
3'
-
6
"
2'
-
6
"
5
7'
-
4
"
22' - 1 1/2"8' - 3 1/4"
31' - 0"
7
18
11
18
18
5
8' - 2"8' - 2"
16' - 4"12
'
-
4
"
13' - 10"
5'
-
1
1
"
8'
-
9
3
/
4
"
5' - 9"
241
30
34
34
A-401
1
A-401
2
A-401
4
A-401
5
A-401
3
A-403
2
A-403
1
WR-4
WR-4
WR-4
W-1
W-1
W-1
W-1
W-1
W-1
W-2 W-1
W-1
W-2
WR-4
W-3
W-1
W-1
W-1
W-2
W-2
W-1
WR-4
W-1
W-1
W-2
W-1
W-1
W-1
WR-4
W-2
WR-3
W-4
W-2
WR-3
W-1
W-1
W-3
WR-3
WR-3 MR-5
MR-5
W-3
7'
-
5
"
4'
-
3
"
WR-5
W-3
W-1
W-1
A-202 3
A-2013
A-051
2
A-052
4
A-052
3
6
6
A-390
8
101
1-A 1-A
103
1-A1-A
1-C 1-E
1-B 1-B
1-C
1-D
1-B
1-C
1-D
1-C
1-D
1-B
119
118
107
106
105
104
006
108
109
1-C
117
1-E
1-A
1-B
113
115
112
110
111
114
102 116
1ST
CORRIDOR
2
105
1ST
CORRIDOR
1
101
WR-3MOP SINK
107
4444
CLOSET 1
114
CLOSET 2
115
W-1
A-052 1
A-0521
5'
-
0
"
9'
-
0
"
1. ALL WORK PERFORMED SHALL COMPLY WITH CURRENT UNIFORM BUILDING AND FIRE
CODES AND APPLICABLE STATE LAWS AND ORDINANCES AS ADOPTED BY LOCAL
AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION AT THE TIME OF PERMIT ISSUANCE.
2. ALL PLAN DIMENSIONS INDICATED ARE FFROM FACE OF FINISH TO FACE OF FINISH
U.N.O. IN THE EVENT OF A DIMENSION DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THESE DOCUMENTS AND
FIELD DIMENSIONS, NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY.
3. ALL NEW DOOR FRAMES TO BE SET 4" FROM ADJACENT WALL, U.N.O.
4. GC TO PATCH AND REPAIR ALL WALLS THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING DEMOLITION.
5. DRYWALL FINISH SHALL BE LEVEL 4, U.N.O.
6. ALL ACCESSIBLE UNITS AND COMMON SPACES, ALL ELECTRICAL CONDITIONS SHALL
APPLY: CENTER OF TOGGLE SWITCHES SHALL BE 42", TOP OF THE HIGHEST SWITCHING
DEVICES, CONTROLS OR DISCONNECTS SHALL BE 48" AFF.
7. REFER TO MILLWORK DETAILS FOR ELECTRICAL OUTLET LOCATIONS IN ACCESSIBLE
KITCHENS AND KITCHENETTES
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I
AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-101
FIRST FLOOR PLAN - NEW
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-101
1 FRIST LEVEL - NEW CONSTRUCTION
KEYED NOTES
1 IN-FILL EXISTING WINDOW OR OPENING TO MATCH SURROUNDING WALL CONSTRUCTION, REFER TO DETAILS
2 PROVIDE NEW PASSIVE RADON SYSTEM, 4" RADON PIPE, TURN UP TO ROOF - REFER TO PLUMBING DRAWINGS
5 NEW CASED OPENING, PROVIDE 4" PAINTED 1X TRIM SURROUND WITH PAINTED WOOD 1X JAMB. HEIGHT, 7'-0" A.F.F. REFER TO STRUCTURAL FOR LINTEL DETAILS
6 NEW 4" CONCRETE PAD OVER COMPACTED GRAVEL FOR MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT
7 IN-FILL EXISTING DOOR OR CASED OPENING TO MATCH EXISTING WALL CONSTRUCTION, REFER TO DETAILS
8 NEW MOP SINK WITH FRP PANEL SURROUND
11 IN-FILL EXISTING FLOOR PER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS
12 NEW 42" STEEL GUARD RAIL WITH POWDER COATED FINISH, PER DETAILS
13 NEW CONCRETE PATIO, PER DETAILS
14 NEW CONCRETE RAMP WITH STEEL RAILINGS WITH POWDER COATED FINISH, PER DETAILS
15 15" WIDE LOCKABLE FULL HEIGHT PANTRY CABINETS
16 FULL HEIGHT SHELVING, WITH CONT. LEDGER AND BRACKETS PER DETAILS
17 NEW CONCRETE STOOP AND STEPS WITH STEEL RAILINGS WITH POWDER COATED FINISH, PER DETAILS
18 NEW INTERIOR FIXED WINDOW PER INTERIOR ELEVATION
24 IN-FILL WALL WHERE THRU-WALL KITCHEN EQUIPMENT HAS BEEN REMOVED, TO MATCH EXISTING WALL CONSTRUCTION, REFER TO DETAILS SIMILAR TO WINDOW IN-FILL
30 NEW OPEN AIR VESTIBULE, REFER TO SECTION WITH NEW 2X6 WALLS WITH FIBER CEMENT PANEL SIDING ('S-2')
34 NEW 6' HIGH PVC FENCE/SCREEN FOR OUTDOOR MECHANICAL UNITS
44 EXISTING STAIR WALLS TO BE REPAINTED 'PNT-2', CEILINGS TO BE PAINTED ' PNT-5'. ALL OTHER ELEMENTS TO REMAIN AS IS: RAILING, TREADS & RISERS
GENERAL NOTES: FLOOR PLANS
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
1 PROGRESS SET 01/17/25
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
UP
A-202
1
A-201
1
A-2012
A-202 2
450 NSF
SUITE 8
450 NSF
SUITE 9
521 NSF
SUITE 10
565 NSF
SU
I
T
E
1
1
474 NSF
SUITE 7
520 NSF
SUITE 6
530 NSF
SUITE 5 - AVI UNIT
ELEV.
LOBBY
208
STAIR 1
209
TV/LIBRARY
LOUNGE
205
RESIDENT
CLOSET
202
RESIDENT
CLOSET
203
2
2 2
2
10
"
2' - 0"
6'
-
6
"
6'
-
6
"
3' - 2"3' - 2"
11
19
7
6' - 0"4"
5
7
777
7
30' - 5"30' - 5"27' - 10"17' - 2 1/4" V.I.F.
12
'
-
0
3
/
4
"
7' - 8"
5'
-
2
"
3' - 7"
9'
-
1
1
3
/
4
"
20
20
AL
I
G
N
22' - 4 1/4" V.I.F.22' - 4"
A-401
6
A-401
7
A-402
2
A-401
8
A-401
9
A-402
1
WR-4
W-1
W-2
W-1
W-1
W-2 W-1
W-1
W-1
W-1
W-1
W-2
W-2
WR-4
WR-3
W-3
WR-3WR-3
W-1
WR-3 MR-5
MR-5
WR-4
W-2
W-1
W-1
W-1
WR-4
W-1
W-1
W-2
WR-4
W-2
W-1
W-1
W-3 W-3
W-2
W-3A-202 3
A-2013
A-390
7
1-A
1-A
1-A
1-A 1-A
1-A
202
1-A
1-B
1-D
1-C 1-C
1-D
1-B
1-C
1-B
1-C
1-D
1-B
201
1-B 1-D
1-C
203
1000
205
1-G 1-F
206
207
208
1-B
1-D
1-C
1-H
2ND
CORRIDOR
201
44
44
CLOSET 3
204
CLOSET 5
207
CLOSET 4
206
1. ALL WORK PERFORMED SHALL COMPLY WITH CURRENT UNIFORM BUILDING AND FIRE
CODES AND APPLICABLE STATE LAWS AND ORDINANCES AS ADOPTED BY LOCAL
AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION AT THE TIME OF PERMIT ISSUANCE.
2. ALL PLAN DIMENSIONS INDICATED ARE FFROM FACE OF FINISH TO FACE OF FINISH
U.N.O. IN THE EVENT OF A DIMENSION DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THESE DOCUMENTS AND
FIELD DIMENSIONS, NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY.
3. ALL NEW DOOR FRAMES TO BE SET 4" FROM ADJACENT WALL, U.N.O.
4. GC TO PATCH AND REPAIR ALL WALLS THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING DEMOLITION.
5. DRYWALL FINISH SHALL BE LEVEL 4, U.N.O.
6. ALL ACCESSIBLE UNITS AND COMMON SPACES, ALL ELECTRICAL CONDITIONS SHALL
APPLY: CENTER OF TOGGLE SWITCHES SHALL BE 42", TOP OF THE HIGHEST SWITCHING
DEVICES, CONTROLS OR DISCONNECTS SHALL BE 48" AFF.
7. REFER TO MILLWORK DETAILS FOR ELECTRICAL OUTLET LOCATIONS IN ACCESSIBLE
KITCHENS AND KITCHENETTES
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I
AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-102
SECOND FLOOR PLAN -
NEW
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-102
1 SECOND LEVEL - NEW CONSTRUCTION
GENERAL NOTES: FLOOR PLANS
KEYED NOTES
2 PROVIDE NEW PASSIVE RADON SYSTEM, 4" RADON PIPE, TURN UP TO ROOF -
REFER TO PLUMBING DRAWINGS
5 NEW CASED OPENING, PROVIDE 4" PAINTED 1X TRIM SURROUND WITH PAINTED
WOOD 1X JAMB. HEIGHT, 7'-0" A.F.F. REFER TO STRUCTURAL FOR LINTEL
DETAILS
7 IN-FILL EXISTING DOOR OR CASED OPENING TO MATCH EXISTING WALL
CONSTRUCTION, REFER TO DETAILS
11 IN-FILL EXISTING FLOOR PER STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS
19 NEW GWB FAUX COLUMNS, REFER TO DETAILS/ELEVATIONS
20 POWDER COATED STEEL VENTILATED MESH PANEL RESIDENT STORAGE
CAGES, 36"W X 48" D, ULINE OR EQUAL - GC TO FIELD VERIFY FIT PRIOR TO
ORDERING
44 EXISTING STAIR WALLS TO BE REPAINTED 'PNT-2', CEILINGS TO BE PAINTED '
PNT-5'. ALL OTHER ELEMENTS TO REMAIN AS IS: RAILING, TREADS & RISERS
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
1 PROGRESS SET 01/17/25
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
A-202
1
A-201
1
A-2012
A-202 2
595 NSF
SUITE 15
525 NSF
SUITE 12
460 NSF
SUITE 13
STAIR 1
305 ELEV.
LOBBY
301
680 NSF
SUITE 14
** INHABITABLE **
SUPPLY
CLOSET
303 ** INHABITABLE **
RESIDENT
CLOSET
304
2
2
2
2
21
'
-
6
1
/
2
"
21
'
-
6
1
/
2
"
3' - 0 1/2"3' - 0 1/2"
30' - 2"35' - 5 3/4"6' - 1"
8' - 7 1/2"
13
'
-
8
"
ALIGN
33' - 6 1/4"10' - 1"28' - 2"
18
'
-
7
"
18
'
-
7
"
20
21' - 11" V.I.F.
21 21
21' - 11" V.I.F.
21 21
21' - 11" V.I.F.
21 21
21' - 11" V.I.F.
21 21
2
A-103
1
2
5'
-
4
1
/
4
"
12
'
-
1
1
"
15
'
-
9
7
/
8
"
15
'
-
1
0
1
/
2
"
12
'
-
1
1
"
3
A-103
4
A-103
7' - 10"2' - 11"
13' - 4"
8' - 2"
7' - 11 1/2"8' - 0"
A-402
3
A-402
4
A-402
5
A-402
6
DOOR FRAME
18' - 1 1/2"
DOOR FRAME
14' - 1"
WR-6
WR-6
WR-6
WR-6 WR-6
WR-4 WR-4
WR-6 WR-6
WR-4
W-1
W-1
WR-4
W-2
WR-4
W-2
W-1
W-1
W-1
W-1
W-1
W-2
W-1
WR-6
WR-4
WR-4
WR-4
WR-4
WR-4
WR-4
W-1W-2
W-1
WR-6
WR-6
WR-3
WR-3
WR-3
WR-3
W-1
MR-5
MR-5
W-1
WR-4
WR-6
WR-6
A-202 3
A-2013
TEMPERED
GLAZING
A-390
6
301
1-A
1-A
1-B
1-C
302 1-A
1-C
1-B
303
304
305
306
1-B
1-A
1-C
307
1-B
1-C
1-B
WR-344 44
3RD
CORRIDOR
302
1. ALL WORK PERFORMED SHALL COMPLY WITH CURRENT UNIFORM BUILDING AND FIRE
CODES AND APPLICABLE STATE LAWS AND ORDINANCES AS ADOPTED BY LOCAL
AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION AT THE TIME OF PERMIT ISSUANCE.
2. ALL PLAN DIMENSIONS INDICATED ARE FFROM FACE OF FINISH TO FACE OF FINISH
U.N.O. IN THE EVENT OF A DIMENSION DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THESE DOCUMENTS AND
FIELD DIMENSIONS, NOTIFY ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY.
3. ALL NEW DOOR FRAMES TO BE SET 4" FROM ADJACENT WALL, U.N.O.
4. GC TO PATCH AND REPAIR ALL WALLS THAT ARE DAMAGED DURING DEMOLITION.
5. DRYWALL FINISH SHALL BE LEVEL 4, U.N.O.
6. ALL ACCESSIBLE UNITS AND COMMON SPACES, ALL ELECTRICAL CONDITIONS SHALL
APPLY: CENTER OF TOGGLE SWITCHES SHALL BE 42", TOP OF THE HIGHEST SWITCHING
DEVICES, CONTROLS OR DISCONNECTS SHALL BE 48" AFF.
7. REFER TO MILLWORK DETAILS FOR ELECTRICAL OUTLET LOCATIONS IN ACCESSIBLE
KITCHENS AND KITCHENETTES
1 2
SPRIN
G POINT
11
'
-
8
"
11
'
-
6
"
EQ EQ
8'
-
2
"
11
'
-
8
"
8'
-
2
"
8'
-
2
"
6'
-
3
1
/
2
"
1
8'
-
2
"
5'
-
1
0
1
/
4
"
2' - 9 7/8"
2
8'
-
2
"
6'
-
1
3
/
4
"
2' - 8"
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I
AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-103
THIRD FLOOR PLAN - NEW
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-103
1 THIRD LEVEL - NEW CONSTRUCTION
KEYED NOTES
2 PROVIDE NEW PASSIVE RADON SYSTEM, 4" RADON PIPE, TURN UP TO ROOF
- REFER TO PLUMBING DRAWINGS
20 POWDER COATED STEEL VENTILATED MESH PANEL RESIDENT STORAGE
CAGES, 36"W X 48" D, ULINE OR EQUAL - GC TO FIELD VERIFY FIT PRIOR TO
ORDERING
21 NEW STICK BUILT DORMERS, WALLS OF NEW DORMERS TO ALIGN WITH
OUTER WALLS OF EXISTING DORMERS - VERIFY IN FIELD. REFER TO
STRUCTURAL
44 EXISTING STAIR WALLS TO BE REPAINTED 'PNT-2', CEILINGS TO BE PAINTED '
PNT-5'. ALL OTHER ELEMENTS TO REMAIN AS IS: RAILING, TREADS & RISERS
GENERAL NOTES: FLOOR PLANS
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-103
2 SECTION 1 AT NEW DORMERS
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-103
3 SECTION 2 AT SLOPED ROOF
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-103
4 SECTION 3 AT SLOPED ROOF
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
1 PROGRESS SET 01/17/25
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
1. DRYWALL BULKHEAD TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION TO BE GYP. BD. ON 3-5/8” MTL STUDS (OR 2 X 4 WD STUDS) @ 16” O.C. W/.
KICKERS EVERY THIRD STUD MINIMUM W/ 5/8” GYP. BD.
2. DIMENSIONS ARE CALCULATED FROM FACE OF EXISTING FINISH TO FACE OF NEW FINISH, U.N.O.
3. PATCH CRACKS, NAIL POPS, AND HOLES IN EXISTING DRYWALL CEILINGS. FINISH PER FINISH SCHEDULE AND SPECIFICATIONS.
4. COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LOCATIONS AND FIXTURE TYPES OF SMOKE DETECTORS, EXIT SIGNS, AND
EGRESS AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING.
5. REFER TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION.
6. LOCATIONS OF LIGHT FIXTURES SHALL BE DETERMINED FROM THE ARCHITECTURAL REFLECTED CEILING PLANS.
7. UPON FINDING A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN ARCHITECTURAL AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY
FOR CLARIFICATION.
8. IF GC FINDS DISREPENCIES WITH NEW SPRNKLER HEADS AND ANY FIXTURE LOCATIONS ON RCP, NOTIFY ARCHITECT
IMMEDIATELY
- SURFACE MTD. LIGHT FIXTURE PER ELECTRICAL
- CO/SMOKE DETECTOR PER ELECTRICAL
- SURFACE MOUNTED ROUND LIGHT PER ELECTICAL
- SURFACE MOUNTED ROUND LIGHT PER ELECTICAL
- PENDANT PER ELECTRICAL
GENERAL NOTES
1. DIMENSIONS ARE CALCULATED FROM FACE OF FINISH TO FACE OF FINISH, U.O.N.
2. COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LOCATIONS AND FIXTURE TYPES OF SMOKE
DETECTORS, EXIT SIGNS, AND EGRESS AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING.
3. REFER TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION.
4. LOCATIONS OF LIGHT FIXTURES SHALL BE DETERMINED FROM THE REFLECTED CEILING PLANS.
5. UPON FINDING A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN ARCHITECTURAL AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY FOR CLARIFICATION.
6. COORDINATE SPRINKLER HEADS AND PIPING WITH NEW CEILING SYSTEM AND LIGHTS, NOTIFY ARCHITECT UPON FINDING CONFLICTS
7. ALL DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTION
CEILING SYMBOLS LEGEND
- SLIM RECESSED CAN
- SLIM 2X2 LAY-IN LIGHT FIXTURE PER ELECTRICAL
- BATHROOM FAN PER MECHANICAL
- SUITE BATHROOM VANITY LIGHT PER ELECTRICAL
* NOT ALL FIXTURES APPLY TO EACH SHEET
* REFER TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR MORE INFORMATION
- SURFACE MTD. LIGHT FIXTURE PER ELECTRICAL
COORD W/ MECH. DRAWINGS
1'
-
0
"
8"
1
A-150
ACT
7' -10"
GWB
7' -2"
ACT
7' -10"
GWB
7' -2"
ACT
7' -10"
ACT
7' -10"
ACT
7' -10"
ACT
7' -10"
ACT
7' -10"
ETR
8' -1 1/2"
ETR
8' -1 1/2"
ETR
8' -0"
ETR
8' -0"
LIGHTS TO BE ON DIMMER
ACT
7' -10"
ACT
7' -10"
ACT
7' -10"
3
A-150
EQ
EQ
EQ EQ
EQ EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ
5' - 0"5' - 0"
5' - 0"5' - 0"
3'
-
6
"
3'
-
6
"
EQ EQ
EQ
E
Q
EQ EQ
EQ
E
Q
EQ
EQ
EQ
E
Q
EQ EQ
2'
-
6
"
2'
-
6
"
6"
1' - 8"
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I
AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-150
RCP - BASEMENT FLOOR
RCP
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
GENERAL NOTES - RCP
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
RCP LEGEND
SCALE:1" = 1'-0"A-150
1 SECTION 1 @ BASEMENT CEILING
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-150
2 BASEMENT RCP - NEW
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
SCALE:3/4" = 1'-0"A-150
3 SECTION 2 @ BASEMENT CEILING
GWB
8' -9 7/8"
GWB
8' -9 7/8"
GWB
8' -9 7/8"
GWB
8' -9 7/8"
GWB
8' -9 7/8"
GWB
8' -9 7/8"
GWB
8' -9 7/8"
GWB
8' -9 7/8"
GWB
8' -9 7/8"
GWB
8' -9 7/8"
ACT
8' -10"
ETR
9' -11 1/2"
ETR
9' -11 1/2"
LIGHTS TO BE ON DIMMER
EQ
EQ
5' - 6"
EQ
EQ
5' - 6"
EQ
EQ
EQ EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ EQ
5'
-
6
"
4' - 6"
5'
-
6
"
4' - 6"
5' - 0"11' - 8"10' - 0"
EQ
EQ
EQ EQ
4'
-
4
"
4'
-
6
"
EQ EQ
4'
-
0
"
EQ EQ EQ
EQ EQ
EQ
4' - 6"
EQ
E
Q
5' - 0"
7' - 8"
4'
-
1
0
"
EQ EQ
EQ
E
Q
EQ
EQ
EQ EQ
EQ
E
Q
4' - 6"7' - 0"
EQ
EQ
EQ EQ
EQ
E
Q
3' - 0"
5'
-
0
"
2' - 2"EQ EQ
5'
-
0
"
EQ
EQ
9' - 0"
EQ EQ
11' - 6"11' - 6"11' - 6"
EQ
E
Q
EQ EQ
5'
-
6
"
8'
-
0
"
8'
-
0
"
EQ
E
Q
EQ EQ
EQ
E
Q
EQ EQ
EQ
E
Q
3' - 6"3' - 6"
EQ
E
Q
EQ EQ
4'
-
0
"
4'
-
0
"
5' - 0"5' - 0"
4' - 10"
4' - 10"
EQ
E
Q
- SURFACE MTD. LIGHT FIXTURE PER ELECTRICAL
- CO/SMOKE DETECTOR PER ELECTRICAL
- SURFACE MOUNTED ROUND LIGHT PER ELECTICAL
- SURFACE MOUNTED ROUND LIGHT PER ELECTICAL
- PENDANT PER ELECTRICAL
GENERAL NOTES
1. DIMENSIONS ARE CALCULATED FROM FACE OF FINISH TO FACE OF FINISH, U.O.N.
2. COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LOCATIONS AND FIXTURE TYPES OF SMOKE
DETECTORS, EXIT SIGNS, AND EGRESS AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING.
3. REFER TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION.
4. LOCATIONS OF LIGHT FIXTURES SHALL BE DETERMINED FROM THE REFLECTED CEILING PLANS.
5. UPON FINDING A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN ARCHITECTURAL AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY FOR CLARIFICATION.
6. COORDINATE SPRINKLER HEADS AND PIPING WITH NEW CEILING SYSTEM AND LIGHTS, NOTIFY ARCHITECT UPON FINDING CONFLICTS
7. ALL DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTION
CEILING SYMBOLS LEGEND
- SLIM RECESSED CAN
- SLIM 2X2 LAY-IN LIGHT FIXTURE PER ELECTRICAL
- BATHROOM FAN PER MECHANICAL
- SUITE BATHROOM VANITY LIGHT PER ELECTRICAL
* NOT ALL FIXTURES APPLY TO EACH SHEET
* REFER TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR MORE INFORMATION
- SURFACE MTD. LIGHT FIXTURE PER ELECTRICAL
1. DRYWALL BULKHEAD TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION TO BE GYP. BD. ON 3-5/8” MTL STUDS (OR 2 X 4 WD STUDS) @ 16” O.C. W/.
KICKERS EVERY THIRD STUD MINIMUM W/ 5/8” GYP. BD.
2. DIMENSIONS ARE CALCULATED FROM FACE OF EXISTING FINISH TO FACE OF NEW FINISH, U.N.O.
3. PATCH CRACKS, NAIL POPS, AND HOLES IN EXISTING DRYWALL CEILINGS. FINISH PER FINISH SCHEDULE AND SPECIFICATIONS.
4. COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LOCATIONS AND FIXTURE TYPES OF SMOKE DETECTORS, EXIT SIGNS, AND
EGRESS AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING.
5. REFER TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION.
6. LOCATIONS OF LIGHT FIXTURES SHALL BE DETERMINED FROM THE ARCHITECTURAL REFLECTED CEILING PLANS.
7. UPON FINDING A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN ARCHITECTURAL AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY
FOR CLARIFICATION.
8. IF GC FINDS DISREPENCIES WITH NEW SPRNKLER HEADS AND ANY FIXTURE LOCATIONS ON RCP, NOTIFY ARCHITECT
IMMEDIATELY
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I
AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-151
RCP - FIRST FLOOR RCP
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-151
1 FIRST FLOOR RCP - NEW
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
RCP LEGEND
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
GENERAL NOTES - RCP
GWB
7' -11 7/8"
GWB
7' -11 7/8"
GWB
8' -11 7/8"
GWB
8' -11 7/8"
GWB
7' -11 7/8"
GWB
7' -11 7/8"
GWB
7' -11 7/8"
GWB
7' -11 7/8"
GWB
8' -11 7/8"
GWB
7' -11 7/8"
GWB
7' -11 7/8"
GWB
7' -11 7/8"
GWB
7' -11 7/8"
GWB
7' -11 7/8"
GWB
8' -6"
GWB
8' -11 7/8"
EQ
EQ
4' - 6"
5'
-
8
"
4' - 6"
EQ
E
Q
EQ EQ
EQ
EQ
4' - 6"
5'
-
8
"
4' - 6"
EQ
E
Q
EQ EQ
EQ
EQ
6' - 0"
EQ
EQ
6' - 0"
EQ
E
Q
4' - 0"
EQ
E
Q
4' - 6"
EQ EQ
3'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
EQ
EQ
4' - 10"
EQ
E
Q
EQ
EQ
EQ EQ
EQ
EQ
5' - 4"5' - 4"
EQ EQ
EQ
E
Q
5' - 0"5' - 0"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
5'
-
0
"
EQ EQ
EQ
E
Q
EQ EQ
EQ
E
Q
EQ EQ
3'
-
8
"
6' - 0"
5'
-
0
"
EQ EQ5'
-
0
"
5'
-
4
"
EQ EQ
3'
-
8
"
EQ EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ EQ
EQ
EQ
EQ EQ
3'
-
8
"
EQ EQ
4'
-
8
"
4'
-
0
"
MECH.
COORD W/
8' - 5"10' - 0"10' - 0"10' - 0"EQ
E
Q
10' - 0"10' - 0"10' - 0"8' - 10"EQ
E
Q
10
'
-
6
"
7'
-
6
"
4'
-
2
"
7' - 8"7' - 8"
EQ EQ
EQ
E
Q
1. DRYWALL BULKHEAD TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION TO BE GYP. BD. ON 3-5/8” MTL STUDS (OR 2 X 4 WD STUDS) @ 16” O.C. W/.
KICKERS EVERY THIRD STUD MINIMUM W/ 5/8” GYP. BD.
2. DIMENSIONS ARE CALCULATED FROM FACE OF EXISTING FINISH TO FACE OF NEW FINISH, U.N.O.
3. PATCH CRACKS, NAIL POPS, AND HOLES IN EXISTING DRYWALL CEILINGS. FINISH PER FINISH SCHEDULE AND SPECIFICATIONS.
4. COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LOCATIONS AND FIXTURE TYPES OF SMOKE DETECTORS, EXIT SIGNS, AND
EGRESS AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING.
5. REFER TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION.
6. LOCATIONS OF LIGHT FIXTURES SHALL BE DETERMINED FROM THE ARCHITECTURAL REFLECTED CEILING PLANS.
7. UPON FINDING A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN ARCHITECTURAL AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY
FOR CLARIFICATION.
8. IF GC FINDS DISREPENCIES WITH NEW SPRNKLER HEADS AND ANY FIXTURE LOCATIONS ON RCP, NOTIFY ARCHITECT
IMMEDIATELY
- SURFACE MTD. LIGHT FIXTURE PER ELECTRICAL
- CO/SMOKE DETECTOR PER ELECTRICAL
- SURFACE MOUNTED ROUND LIGHT PER ELECTICAL
- SURFACE MOUNTED ROUND LIGHT PER ELECTICAL
- PENDANT PER ELECTRICAL
GENERAL NOTES
1. DIMENSIONS ARE CALCULATED FROM FACE OF FINISH TO FACE OF FINISH, U.O.N.
2. COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LOCATIONS AND FIXTURE TYPES OF SMOKE
DETECTORS, EXIT SIGNS, AND EGRESS AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING.
3. REFER TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION.
4. LOCATIONS OF LIGHT FIXTURES SHALL BE DETERMINED FROM THE REFLECTED CEILING PLANS.
5. UPON FINDING A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN ARCHITECTURAL AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY FOR CLARIFICATION.
6. COORDINATE SPRINKLER HEADS AND PIPING WITH NEW CEILING SYSTEM AND LIGHTS, NOTIFY ARCHITECT UPON FINDING CONFLICTS
7. ALL DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTION
CEILING SYMBOLS LEGEND
- SLIM RECESSED CAN
- SLIM 2X2 LAY-IN LIGHT FIXTURE PER ELECTRICAL
- BATHROOM FAN PER MECHANICAL
- SUITE BATHROOM VANITY LIGHT PER ELECTRICAL
* NOT ALL FIXTURES APPLY TO EACH SHEET
* REFER TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR MORE INFORMATION
- SURFACE MTD. LIGHT FIXTURE PER ELECTRICAL
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I
AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-152
RCP - SECOND FLOOR
RCP
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-152
1 SECOND FLOOR RCP - NEW
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
GENERAL NOTES - RCP
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
RCP LEGEND
2
A-103
1
2
3
A-103
4
A-103
GWB
8' -2"
GWB
8' -2"
GWB
8' -2"
GWB
8' -2"
GWB
8' -2"
GWB
7' -0"
GWB
7' -0"
GWB
8' -2"
5'
-
0
"
5' - 0"5' - 0"
2'
-
6
"
5' - 4"5' - 4"
EQ EQ
3'
-
0
"
2'
-
6
"
4' - 0"4' - 0"
2'
-
6
"
5' - 0"5' - 0"
5'
-
0
"
6' - 0"
5'
-
0
"
EQ EQ
3'
-
0
"
3'
-
0
"
EQ EQ
3'
-
8
"
EQ EQ
2'
-
6
"
4' - 0"
5' - 0"5' - 0"
5'
-
0
"
2'
-
6
"
4' - 0"
3'
-
0
"
EQ EQ
4' - 0"4' - 0"
3'
-
0
"
5' - 0"5' - 0"
5'
-
0
"
EQ EQ
4'
-
0
"
3'
-
0
"
EQ EQ
EQ EQ
5'
-
0
"
3'
-
6
"
3'
-
8
"
EQ EQ
3'
-
0
"
EQ EQ
4'
-
6
"
EQ EQ
4'
-
2
"
9'
-
6
"
9'
-
6
"
EQ EQ
EQ
E
Q
9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"8' - 4"9' - 0"9' - 0"9' - 0"
- SURFACE MTD. LIGHT FIXTURE PER ELECTRICAL
- CO/SMOKE DETECTOR PER ELECTRICAL
- SURFACE MOUNTED ROUND LIGHT PER ELECTICAL
- SURFACE MOUNTED ROUND LIGHT PER ELECTICAL
- PENDANT PER ELECTRICAL
GENERAL NOTES
1. DIMENSIONS ARE CALCULATED FROM FACE OF FINISH TO FACE OF FINISH, U.O.N.
2. COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LOCATIONS AND FIXTURE TYPES OF SMOKE
DETECTORS, EXIT SIGNS, AND EGRESS AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING.
3. REFER TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION.
4. LOCATIONS OF LIGHT FIXTURES SHALL BE DETERMINED FROM THE REFLECTED CEILING PLANS.
5. UPON FINDING A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN ARCHITECTURAL AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY FOR CLARIFICATION.
6. COORDINATE SPRINKLER HEADS AND PIPING WITH NEW CEILING SYSTEM AND LIGHTS, NOTIFY ARCHITECT UPON FINDING CONFLICTS
7. ALL DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH SMOKE AND CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTION
CEILING SYMBOLS LEGEND
- SLIM RECESSED CAN
- SLIM 2X2 LAY-IN LIGHT FIXTURE PER ELECTRICAL
- BATHROOM FAN PER MECHANICAL
- SUITE BATHROOM VANITY LIGHT PER ELECTRICAL
* NOT ALL FIXTURES APPLY TO EACH SHEET
* REFER TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR MORE INFORMATION
- SURFACE MTD. LIGHT FIXTURE PER ELECTRICAL
1. DRYWALL BULKHEAD TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION TO BE GYP. BD. ON 3-5/8” MTL STUDS (OR 2 X 4 WD STUDS) @ 16” O.C. W/.
KICKERS EVERY THIRD STUD MINIMUM W/ 5/8” GYP. BD.
2. DIMENSIONS ARE CALCULATED FROM FACE OF EXISTING FINISH TO FACE OF NEW FINISH, U.N.O.
3. PATCH CRACKS, NAIL POPS, AND HOLES IN EXISTING DRYWALL CEILINGS. FINISH PER FINISH SCHEDULE AND SPECIFICATIONS.
4. COORDINATE WITH ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LOCATIONS AND FIXTURE TYPES OF SMOKE DETECTORS, EXIT SIGNS, AND
EGRESS AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING.
5. REFER TO ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS FOR LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION.
6. LOCATIONS OF LIGHT FIXTURES SHALL BE DETERMINED FROM THE ARCHITECTURAL REFLECTED CEILING PLANS.
7. UPON FINDING A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN ARCHITECTURAL AND ELECTRICAL DRAWINGS, NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY
FOR CLARIFICATION.
8. IF GC FINDS DISREPENCIES WITH NEW SPRNKLER HEADS AND ANY FIXTURE LOCATIONS ON RCP, NOTIFY ARCHITECT
IMMEDIATELY
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-153
THIRD FLOOR RCP
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-153
1 THIRD FLOOR RCP - NEW
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
RCP LEGEND
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
GENERAL NOTES - RCP
A-202
1
A-201
1
A-2002
A-202 2
2"
/
1
2
"
3" / 12"
3" / 12"3" / 12"
2"
/
1
2
"
2"
/
1
2
"
2"
/
1
2
"
2"
/
1
2
"
9" / 12"9" / 12"9"
/
1
2
"
9" / 12"
6"
/
1
2
"
6"
/
1
2
"
9" / 12"
9" / 12"
9"
/
1
2
"
3"
/
1
2
"
3" / 12"3" / 12"
9"
/
1
2
"
9"
/
1
2
"
9" / 12"
9"
/
1
2
"
9"
/
1
2
"
9" / 12"
9" / 12"
9" / 12"
9"
/
1
2
"
9"
/
1
2
"
9"
/
1
2
"
6"
/
1
2
"
6"
/
1
2
"
2
2
2
2
22
** FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING ROOF SLOPES
23
23
25
22
25
26
25
27
9" / 12"
23 23
22
23
22
23
23 25
23
25
29
1
2
A-202 3
A-2013
1/
2
"
/
1
2
"
1/
2
"
/
1
2
"
1/
2
"
/
1
2
"
1/
2
"
/
1
2
"
1/
2
"
/
1
2
"
1/
2
"
/
1
2
"
42
1. ALL NEW AND EXISTING TO REMAIN ROOF AND DECK PENETRATIONS RELATED TO MECHANICAL, PLUMBING,
AND ELECTRICAL TO BE COORDINATED BY GC.
2. NEW CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROOF SYSTEM SHALL NOT COMMENCE UNTIL ALL PERTINENT SUBMITTALS ARE
PROVIDED AND DEEMED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE DESIGN INTENT OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.
3. GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTION OF THE EXPOSED BUILDING, INTERIOR MATERIALS AND FINISHES
SUBJECT TO WEATHER; WATER AND MOISTURE, EXTREME TEMPERATURES DURING THE TERM OF THE
CONSTRUCTION PERIOD. REFER TO SPECIFICATION SECTION 015000 TEMPORARY FACILITIES AND CONTROLS
FOR SPECIFICS. GC IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MEANS OF A PROTECTION PLAN.
4. UPON COMPLETION OF NEW ROOFING SYSTEM INSTALLATION, GC SHALL NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT FOR A
DETAILED INSPECTION. IT SHALL BE DEMONSTRATED THAT THE SYSTEM PERFORMS POSITIVE DRAINAGE
ACCORDING TO THE MANUFACTURER'S REQUIREMENTS OF WARRANTY, U.N.O.
5. ARROWS INDICATED ON PLAN REFER TO DIRECTION OF SLOPE OF ROOF SYSTEM TO ALLOW POSITIVE
DRAINAGE.
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I
AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-190
ROOF PLAN - NEW
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:3/16" = 1'-0"A-190
1 ROOF PLAN - NEW CONSTRUCTION
GENERAL NOTES: ROOF
KEYED NOTES
2 PROVIDE NEW PASSIVE RADON SYSTEM, 4" RADON PIPE, TURN UP TO ROOF - REFER TO
PLUMBING DRAWINGS
22 NEW ENERGY STAR RATED MIN. 30 YEAR WARRANTED FIBERGLASS ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLES
WITH NEW ROOFING UNDERLAYMENT, PROVIDE RIDGE VENT
23 PROVIDE NEW HALF-ROUND STYLE PREFINISHED ALUMINUM GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS - TIED
TO EXISTING UNDERGROUND SWM, REFER TO CIVIL. MATCH EXISTING SIZE
25 NEW PRE-FINISHED ALUMINUM STANDING SEAM ROOF OVER NEW ROOF SHEATHING PER
STRUCTURAL
26 NEW SLOPED 60 MIL TPO MEMBRANE ROOF OVER NEW ROOF SHEATHING PER STRUCTURAL
27 OVERFRAME EXISTING ROOF TO CREATE A POSITIVE PITCH AWAY FROM NEW FRAMING
29 INFILL EXISTING CHIMNEY VOID TO MATCH EXISTING ROOF CONSTRUCTION
42 NEW TPO ROOFING OVER SLOPED RIGID INSULATION
SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A-190
2 EXISTING TRIM @ SOFFIT
NEW HALF ROUND GUTTERS
EXISTING FASCIA AND SOFFIT TO
REMAIN, GC TO NOTIFY ARCHITECT
IMMEDIATELY IF SALVAGING THE
EXISTING FASCIA/SOFFIT CAN NOT
BE ARCHIVED WITH THE NEW
GUTTER AND ROOF SYSTEM.
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
1 PROGRESS SET 01/17/25
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
D-38
D-36 D-36
D-25 D-25
D-31D-24
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-39 D-39
D-44D-44
Level 1
0' -0"
Level 2
11' -2"
Level 0
-9' -4"
Level 3
21' -6"
D-31
D-36
D-15
D-32D-15
D-38
D-41
D-44
D-36
D-38
D-42
D-32
D-15
D-16
D-24 D-16
D-35
D-39 D-39
D-19 D-15
D-15
D-15 D-16
D-30D-40
D-44D-44
Level 1
0' -0"
Level 2
11' -2"
Level 0
-9' -4"
Level 3
21' -6"
D-36
D-36
D-38
D-15
D-15
D-15
D-32
D-30 D-19
D-24
D-31
D-24
D-16
D-44
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
I CERTIFY THAT THESE DOCUMENTS WERE PREPARED OR APPROVED BY ME, AND THAT I
AM A DULY LICENSED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MARYLAND.LICENSE NUMBER 5980, EXPIRATION DATE 05-14-26
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-200
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -
EXISTING & DEMO
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A-200
1 EAST ELEVATION - EXISTING & DEMO
SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A-200
2 NORTH ELEVATION - EXISTING & DEMO
SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A-200
3 WEST ELEVATION - EXISTING & DEMO
SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A-200
4 SOUTH ELEVATION - EXISTING & DEMO
KEYED NOTES
D-15 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW FOR THE INSTALLATION OF A NEW WINDOW -
TYPICAL, U.N.O. RETAIN EXISTING INTERIOR WINDOW TRIM.
D-16 REMOVE EXISTING WINDOW OR OPENING FOR THE INSTALLATION OF
WALL IN-FILL IN LIKE KIND, PER DETAILS
D-19 REMOVE EXISTING BASEMENT LEVEL EXIT ENCLOSURE
D-24 REMOVE EXISTING CONCRETE STOOP/STEPS AND ASSOCIATED RAILING
D-25 REMOVE EXISTING STEEL BALCONY
D-30 REMOVE EXISTING BALCONY IN ITS ENTIRETY
D-31 REMOVE EXISTING COVERED PORCH IN ITS ENTIRETY
D-32 REMOVE EXISTING SIDING AS NOTED, FOR THE RECEIPT OF NEW FIBER
CEMENT SIDING PER EXTERIOR MATERIALS LEGEND
D-35 REMOVE PORTION OF EXISTING ROOF FOR INSTALLATION OF NEW ROOF
STRUCTURE, REFER TO STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS
D-36 REMOVE EXISTING DORMERS IN THEIR ENTIRETY, INCLUDING WALLS,
WINDOWS AND ROOF
D-38 REMOVE ALL EXISTING SHINGLES, UNDERLAYMENT GUTTERS AND
DOWNSPOUTS - TYPICAL (SHEATHING TO REMAIN UNLESS DEEMED
COMPROMISED AFTER SHINGLES ARE REMOVED)
D-39 REMOVE PORTION OF ROOF FROM EXTERIOR SIDE OF EXISTING
DORMER WALL TO OPPOSITE DORMER WALL
D-40 REMOVE EXISTING THRU-WALL KITCHEN EQUIPMENT
D-41 REMOVE EXISTING CHIMNEY IN ITS ENTIRETY, TO BELOW FINISHED FLOOR
IN BASEMENT. INFILL WITH NEW CONCRETE PER DETAIL 2/A-100
D-42 REMOVE EXISTING ACCESS DOOR IN ITS ENTIRETY
D-44 REMOVE EXISTING FLAT ROOF MATERIAL IN ITS ENTIRETY
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
1 PROGRESS SET 01/17/25
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND
KEY MATERIAL PRODUCT COLOR NOTES
S-1
M-1 NEW BRICK - 1
STYLE
CONTINENTAL BRICK CO. - OR EQUAL
NOTES:
ALL TRIM TO BE FIBER CEMENT - ARCTIC WHITE
6" TRIM AT MATERIAL HORIZONTAL TERMINATIONS/TRANSITIONS - ARCTIC WHITE
PROVIDE 6" TRIM AT ALL CORNERS THAT RECEIVE FIBER CEMENT SIDING
4" AT WINDOWS - ARCTIC WHITE
S-2 FIBER CEMENT PANEL PANEL W/ 4" TRIMJAMES HARDIE OR EQUAL
TBDFIBER CEMENT SIDING JAMES HARDIE OR EQUAL 6" HORIZONTAL LAP
R-1 STANDING SEAM PAC-CLAD OR EQUAL
M-2 EXISTING MASONRY COLOR TBDPAINT W/ POTASSIUM SILICATE PAINT
FOR MASONRY
ARCTIC WHITE
COLOR TBD
COLOR TBD
R-2 ASPHALT SHINGLES PLYGEM OR EQUAL COLOR TBD
Level 1
0' -0"
Level 2
11' -2"
Level 0
-9' -4"
Level 3
21' -6"
ROOF
33' -0"
21
32
2
2
32
17
14
34
1
* BEYOND NEW STOOP
17
28
22
23
1
E E
G
E E
DD D D D D
DD
G
H
A
A
Level 1
0' -0"
Level 2
11' -2"
Level 0
-9' -4"
Level 3
21' -6"
ROOF
33' -0"
2
2
21 21
22
23
1730
31
28
28
2525
39
39
B B B B B B
C C C D D D D D D D D D D C C C
EEEEEEEEFFF F FF
G G G G G G G G G G G G
JMARKFUNCTIONMATERIAL NOTES
WINDOW SCHEDULE
A
B
FIXED
CASEMENT
VINYL
VINYL
1. PROVIDE 1" ALUMINUM MINI BLINDS, CHORD FREE, MANUAL LIFT. TYPICAL OF ALL WINDOWS
2. VERIFY UNIT DIMENSIONS WITH SELECTED MFGR.
3. PROVIDE BUG SCREENS, TYPICAL OF ALL WINDOWS AND APPLICABLE DWELLING UNIT SLIDING DOORS, CASEMENT TO BE INTERNAL
4. PROVIDE AALL WINDOWS WITH LIMIT STOPS, SO THAT OPERABLE OPENING WILL NOT ALLOW A 4" DIA SPHERE TO PASS THROUGH
OPENING.
5. PROVIDE ACCESSIBLE COMPLIANT LOCKING HARDWARE AT ALL WINDOWS IN ACCESSIBLE UNITS. INCLUDING THAT THE LOCK IS
MOUNTED NO MORE THAN 48" A.F.F. THE LOCK REQUIRES NO PINCHING, TWISTING, OR GRASPING TO OPERATE AND THE LOCK
REQUIRES NO MORE THAN 5 LBS OF FORCE TO OPERATE
6. " * " = DENOTES TEMPERED GLAZING
7. RETAIN EXISTING WINDOW TRIM, MATCH NEW WHERE EXISTING CANNOT BE SALVAGED
A B
C
3' - 0"
5'
-
0
"
3' - 0"
4'
-
0
"
REFER TO STOP NOTE BELOW
FE
K
GDC
JH
D
E
F
G
H
J
K
3' - 2 1/2"3' - 0 1/2"3' - 0 1/2"
EXISTING WINDOWS TO BE REPLACE, FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS
5'
-
2
1
/
2
"
5'
-
2
1
/
2
"
5'
-
1
0
1
/
2
"
3' - 1 3/4"
7'
-
1
1
"
3' - 8 1/2"
2'
-
8
"
3' - 3"
6'
-
0
1
/
2
"
2'
-
0
"
4' - 0"
ø 3' - 4 "
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS. PROVIDE FROSTED FILM ON RESTROOM WINDOWS
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS
VINYL
VINYL
VINYL
VINYL
VINYL
VINYL
VINYL
VINYL
SINGLE HUNG
SINGLE HUNG
SINGLE HUNG
SINGLE HUNG
SINGLE HUNG
FIXED TRIM
PANEL
FIXED
FIXED
FIXED
L LOCATION OF WINDOW IS IN BASEMENT CONF. ROOM. FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS VINYLFIXED
2' - 9"
2'
-
9
"
L
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-201
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -
NEW CONSTRUCTION
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND
SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A-201
2 NORTH ELEVATION - NEW CONSTRUCTION
KEYED NOTES
1 IN-FILL EXISTING WINDOW OR OPENING TO MATCH SURROUNDING WALL
CONSTRUCTION, REFER TO DETAILS
2 PROVIDE NEW PASSIVE RADON SYSTEM, 4" RADON PIPE, TURN UP TO ROOF - REFER
TO PLUMBING DRAWINGS
14 NEW CONCRETE RAMP WITH STEEL RAILINGS WITH POWDER COATED FINISH, PER
DETAILS
17 NEW CONCRETE STOOP AND STEPS WITH STEEL RAILINGS WITH POWDER COATED
FINISH, PER DETAILS
21 NEW STICK BUILT DORMERS, WALLS OF NEW DORMERS TO ALIGN WITH OUTER WALLS
OF EXISTING DORMERS - VERIFY IN FIELD. REFER TO STRUCTURAL
22 NEW ENERGY STAR RATED MIN. 30 YEAR WARRANTED FIBERGLASS ARCHITECTURAL
SHINGLES WITH NEW ROOFING UNDERLAYMENT, PROVIDE RIDGE VENT
23 PROVIDE NEW HALF-ROUND STYLE PREFINISHED ALUMINUM GUTTERS AND
DOWNSPOUTS - TIED TO EXISTING UNDERGROUND SWM, REFER TO CIVIL. MATCH
EXISTING SIZE
25 NEW PRE-FINISHED ALUMINUM STANDING SEAM ROOF OVER NEW ROOF SHEATHING
PER STRUCTURAL
28 EXISTING TRIM TO REMAIN, REPAINT. WHERE NEEDED, SCRAPE AND PATCH WOOD TO
PREP FOR NEW PAINT
30 NEW OPEN AIR VESTIBULE, REFER TO SECTION WITH NEW 2X6 WALLS WITH FIBER
CEMENT PANEL SIDING ('S-2')
31 NEW 10" PIN MOUNTED METAL BUILDING NUMBERS
32 NEW SIDING PER EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND
34 NEW 6' HIGH PVC FENCE/SCREEN FOR OUTDOOR MECHANICAL UNITS
39 NEW HALF ROUND GALVANIZED HALF ROUND WINDOW WELL, GC TO CONFIRM SIZE IN
FIELD. REMOVE EXISTING WELL
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
1 PROGRESS SET 01/17/25
2 35% PROGRESS SET 03/14/25
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A-201
3 NORTH ELEVATION 2
SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A-201
1 EAST ELEVATION - NEW CONSTRUCTION
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
WINDOW LEGEND & SCHEDULE
Level 1
0' -0"
Level 2
11' -2"
Level 0
-9' -4"
Level 3
21' -6"
ROOF
33' -0"
22
23
28
28
14
1
32
2
33
1
21 21
25 25
2
B B B B B B
D D D D D D D
KKKKKK
D D D D
K KKKKKKK
Level 1
0' -0"
Level 2
11' -2"
Level 0
-9' -4"
Level 3
21' -6"
ROOF
33' -0"
2221
21
22
17
35
2' - 6"
12' - 0"
23
33 28
34
1
39
A A
A
A
D D
H
D D
EEEE
G G
EE
EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND
KEY MATERIAL PRODUCT COLOR NOTES
S-1
M-1 NEW BRICK - 1
STYLE
CONTINENTAL BRICK CO. - OR EQUAL
NOTES:
ALL TRIM TO BE FIBER CEMENT - ARCTIC WHITE
6" TRIM AT MATERIAL HORIZONTAL TERMINATIONS/TRANSITIONS - ARCTIC WHITE
PROVIDE 6" TRIM AT ALL CORNERS THAT RECEIVE FIBER CEMENT SIDING
4" AT WINDOWS - ARCTIC WHITE
S-2 FIBER CEMENT PANEL PANEL W/ 4" TRIMJAMES HARDIE OR EQUAL
TBDFIBER CEMENT SIDING JAMES HARDIE OR EQUAL 6" HORIZONTAL LAP
R-1 STANDING SEAM PAC-CLAD OR EQUAL
M-2 EXISTING MASONRY COLOR TBDPAINT W/ POTASSIUM SILICATE PAINT
FOR MASONRY
ARCTIC WHITE
COLOR TBD
COLOR TBD
R-2 ASPHALT SHINGLES PLYGEM OR EQUAL COLOR TBD
D D D
DD
MARK FUNCTION MATERIAL NOTES
WINDOW SCHEDULE
A
B
FIXED
CASEMENT
VINYL
VINYL
1. PROVIDE 1" ALUMINUM MINI BLINDS, CHORD FREE, MANUAL LIFT. TYPICAL OF ALL WINDOWS
2. VERIFY UNIT DIMENSIONS WITH SELECTED MFGR.
3. PROVIDE BUG SCREENS, TYPICAL OF ALL WINDOWS AND APPLICABLE DWELLING UNIT SLIDING DOORS, CASEMENT TO BE INTERNAL
4. PROVIDE AALL WINDOWS WITH LIMIT STOPS, SO THAT OPERABLE OPENING WILL NOT ALLOW A 4" DIA SPHERE TO PASS THROUGH
OPENING.
5. PROVIDE ACCESSIBLE COMPLIANT LOCKING HARDWARE AT ALL WINDOWS IN ACCESSIBLE UNITS. INCLUDING THAT THE LOCK IS
MOUNTED NO MORE THAN 48" A.F.F. THE LOCK REQUIRES NO PINCHING, TWISTING, OR GRASPING TO OPERATE AND THE LOCK
REQUIRES NO MORE THAN 5 LBS OF FORCE TO OPERATE
6. " * " = DENOTES TEMPERED GLAZING
7. RETAIN EXISTING WINDOW TRIM, MATCH NEW WHERE EXISTING CANNOT BE SALVAGED
A B
C
3' - 0"
5'
-
0
"
3' - 0"
4'
-
0
"
REFER TO STOP NOTE BELOW
FE
K
GDC
JH
D
E
F
G
H
J
K
3' - 2 1/2"3' - 0 1/2"3' - 0 1/2"
EXISTING WINDOWS TO BE REPLACE, FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS
5'
-
2
1
/
2
"
5'
-
2
1
/
2
"
5'
-
1
0
1
/
2
"
3' - 1 3/4"
7'
-
1
1
"
3' - 8 1/2"
2'
-
8
"
3' - 3"
6'
-
0
1
/
2
"
2'
-
0
"
4' - 0"
ø 3' - 4 "
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS. PROVIDE FROSTED FILM ON RESTROOM WINDOWS
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS
FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS
VINYL
VINYL
VINYL
VINYL
VINYL
VINYL
VINYL
VINYL
SINGLE HUNG
SINGLE HUNG
SINGLE HUNG
SINGLE HUNG
SINGLE HUNG
FIXED TRIM
PANEL
FIXED
FIXED
FIXED
L LOCATION OF WINDOW IS IN BASEMENT CONF. ROOM. FIELD VERIFY ALL DIMS VINYLFIXED
2' - 9"
2'
-
9
"
L
SHEET NAME:
JOB NUMBER:
DRAWING NUMBER:
ALL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION OF ALL DIMENSIONS.
ALL REQUIRED PERMITS SHALL BE ACQUIRED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK.
A R C H I T E C T H E R E B Y E X P R E S S L Y R E S E R V E S H I S C O M M O N L A W C O P Y R I G H T A N D O T H E R P R O P E R T Y R I G H T S I N T H E S E P L A N S.
THESE PLANS AND DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, CHANGED, OR COPIED IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER, WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING THE EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT OF ZAVOS ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN, LLC. NOR ARE THEY TO BE ASSIGNED TO
ANY THIRD PARTY WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING SAID WRITTEN PERMISSION AND CONSENT.
C O P Y R I G H T 2 0 25 Z A V O S A R C H I T E C T U R E + D E S I G N, L L C. C
www.za-d.com
21 BYTE COURT, SUITE I
P.301.698.0020F R E D E R I C K, MD 2 1 7 0 2
QUALITY CONTROL REVIEW
SD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
DD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
CD REVIEWER INITIALS DATE: .
PROJECT ADDRESS:
ZA+D
ZA+D
nteriorsi
assivp
ZA+D esignd
Redefining the Building Potential
BZ 3/13/25
BZ 4/14/25
A-202
EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS -
NEW CONSTRUCTION
24211
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH RD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
SAN MAR - THE FINDLAY
BLDG.
PRINTS ISSUED
NO. DESCRIPTION DATE
3 65% PROGRESS SET 04/21/25
SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A-202
1 WEST ELEVATION - NEW CONSTRUCTION
SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A-202
2 SOUTH ELEVATION - NEW CONSTRUCTION
KEYED NOTES
1 IN-FILL EXISTING WINDOW OR OPENING TO MATCH SURROUNDING WALL CONSTRUCTION, REFER
TO DETAILS
2 PROVIDE NEW PASSIVE RADON SYSTEM, 4" RADON PIPE, TURN UP TO ROOF - REFER TO
PLUMBING DRAWINGS
14 NEW CONCRETE RAMP WITH STEEL RAILINGS WITH POWDER COATED FINISH, PER DETAILS
17 NEW CONCRETE STOOP AND STEPS WITH STEEL RAILINGS WITH POWDER COATED FINISH, PER
DETAILS
21 NEW STICK BUILT DORMERS, WALLS OF NEW DORMERS TO ALIGN WITH OUTER WALLS OF
EXISTING DORMERS - VERIFY IN FIELD. REFER TO STRUCTURAL
22 NEW ENERGY STAR RATED MIN. 30 YEAR WARRANTED FIBERGLASS ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLES
WITH NEW ROOFING UNDERLAYMENT, PROVIDE RIDGE VENT
23 PROVIDE NEW HALF-ROUND STYLE PREFINISHED ALUMINUM GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS - TIED
TO EXISTING UNDERGROUND SWM, REFER TO CIVIL. MATCH EXISTING SIZE
25 NEW PRE-FINISHED ALUMINUM STANDING SEAM ROOF OVER NEW ROOF SHEATHING PER
STRUCTURAL
28 EXISTING TRIM TO REMAIN, REPAINT. WHERE NEEDED, SCRAPE AND PATCH WOOD TO PREP FOR
NEW PAINT
32 NEW SIDING PER EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND
33 NEW VERTICAL CIRCULATION TOWER
34 NEW 6' HIGH PVC FENCE/SCREEN FOR OUTDOOR MECHANICAL UNITS
35 NEW FIBER CEMENT PANEL SYSTEM INLAID IN BRICK, FUTURE ART OPPORTUNITY, REFER TO
SECTION
39 NEW HALF ROUND GALVANIZED HALF ROUND WINDOW WELL, GC TO CONFIRM SIZE IN FIELD.
REMOVE EXISTING WELL
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
EXTERIOR MATERIAL LEGEND
SCALE:1/8" = 1'-0"A-202
3 SOUTH ELEVATION 2 - NEW CONSTRUCTION
SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"
WINDOW LEGEND & SCHEDULE
Legend Untitled Map
Write a description for your map.
.-
- - - -
$ -
oogle Earth
e sell Copernicus
a.
-- -AP -
- S - - - qat_
-. - -' S - S --
'-S •_ * a - --
-- - -- --4'
S fr- k
' '- •S •bL.I
,I" S
!\\\\\<
:: 0, Search
soft, Vantor I MD NAP, DolT I EsriHERE, iPCjEsri Community Maps Contril
e. pp; ui.er orrc
MD MAP, Doll Esri HERE, WC Esri Communi Ma -s Contributors,
Page of
HOMEOWNER CERTIFICATION APPLICATION
PART 2 – DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION
Property address
Property name
5. Detailed description of rehabilitation work Use this page to describe all work or create a comparable format with this information.
Number items consecutively to describe all work, including building exterior and interior, additions, site work, landscaping, and new construction.
Number Feature Date of Feature
Describe existing feature and its condition
Photo numbers Drawing numbers
Describe work and impact on feature
Number Feature Date of Feature
Describe existing feature and its condition
Photo numbers Drawing numbers
Describe work and impact on feature
900 The Terrace, Hagerstown, MD 21742
01 Slate roof 1910
Nails are coming through slates due to age of slate. Many slates show cracks, holes, and even crumbling. Slate are alsoslanted and sliding.
150-200 slates will be replaced/repaired to ensure slates are secure, sound, and eliminate roof leaks.
02 Soffitt 1910
Two holes found on the fascia wood on front of house needs to be replaced and painted.
Gutter will be removed and replaced to replace the wood fascia sections and paint. The hole repairs will prevent rodentsand weather from entering holes and prevent further damage.
Page RI
HOMEOWNER CERTIFICATION APPLICATION
PART 2 – DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION
Property address
Property name
5. Detailed description of rehabilitation work Use this page to describe all work or create a comparable format with this information.
Number items consecutively to describe all work, including building exterior and interior, additions, site work, landscaping, and new construction.
Number Feature Date of Feature
Describe existing feature and its condition
Photo numbers Drawing numbers
Describe work and impact on feature
Number Feature Date of Feature
Describe existing feature and its condition
Photo numbers Drawing numbers
Describe work and impact on feature
900 The Terrace, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Page RI
HOMEOWNER CERTIFICATION APPLICATION
PART 2 – DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION
Property address
Property name
5. Detailed description of rehabilitation work Use this page to describe all work or create a comparable format with this information.
Number items consecutively to describe all work, including building exterior and interior, additions, site work, landscaping, and new construction.
Number Feature Date of Feature
Describe existing feature and its condition
Photo numbers Drawing numbers
Describe work and impact on feature
Number Feature Date of Feature
Describe existing feature and its condition
Photo numbers Drawing numbers
Describe work and impact on feature
900 The Terrace, Hagerstown, MD 21742
Page RI
HOMEOWNER CERTIFICATION APPLICATION
PART 2 – DESCRIPTION OF REHABILITATION
Property address
Property name
5. Detailed description of rehabilitation work Use this page to describe all work or create a comparable format with this information.
Number items consecutively to describe all work, including building exterior and interior, additions, site work, landscaping, and new construction.
Number Feature Date of Feature
Describe existing feature and its condition
Photo numbers Drawing numbers
Describe work and impact on feature
Number Feature Date of Feature
Describe existing feature and its condition
Photo numbers Drawing numbers
Describe work and impact on feature
900 The Terrace, Hagerstown, MD 21742
900 The Terrace, Hagerstown
Part 1 and 2, November 2025
1.Front
2.West Side
900 The Terrace, Hagerstown
Part 1 and 2, November 2025
3.East Side
Page 1 of 6
INVOICE
Bill To
Seifarth, Bryan
900 The Terrace
Hagerstown, MD 21742
Champion Home Improvements, llc.
4920 Niagara Rd #207
College Park, Md 20740
Phone: (301) 277-7200
Email: championremodeler@gmail.com
Fax: (240) 206-0628
Web: www.mychampionhome.com
Payment
terms Due upon receipt
Invoice #Seifarth - Slate roof repairs
keep copper
Date 09/23/2025
Business /
Tax #MHIC 44848
Description Quantity Total
Slate Roofing 1 $5,600.00
Champion will furnish all labor and materials to repair slate roof.
Option 3 : - repair existing leaking slate tiles no warranty due to age of existing slate......
$5600
Multiple leaks showing inside attic. Multiple sings of water, stained wood. Customer has placed
buckets were he was identified water leaks.
Found multiple leaks After inspecting roof from the outside.
Nails are coming through slates due to age of slate. Many slates show cracks, holes, and some
are crumbling.
Found slate that are slanted (close to falling)
Repair existing copper ridge.
150-200 slates would need to be replaced/repaired.
Two holes found on fascia that needs to be replaced and painted. (Gutter needs to be removed
in order to repair.
Flashing metal on chimneys needs to be sealed.
90 Day repair warranty
Pick up and haul away all work related debris
Price includes all labor, materials, delivery and taxes.
Page 2 of 6
Any undetected rotted wood is $10 per ln ft.
Having a yearly inspection of your roof and gutter system by a trained slate roofer will help
ensure that your roof continues to do its job and can help prevent major repair bills.
Annual inspection $250 includes gutter cleaning
Financing available - With approved credit 1 $0.00
Payments start as low as $160 per month. with no money down financing.
Contact us today to pre-qualify for a loan that fits your budget.
*** Apples to Apples Price Match Assurance ***
Licensed - Bonded - Insured
Over 30 years experience
COVID-19 NOTICE: Due to the pandemic some materials are being delayed or temporarily discontinued
by the manufacturer. We appreciate your patience during these extraordinary days. We will
keep you informed if your project is affected.
AHS 1 $0.00
$1125 payment shown as a discount.
Subtotal $5,600.00
Discount $1,125.00
Total $4,475.00
Thank you for your patronage. We appreciate our customers.
Page 3 of 6
Page 4 of 6
Page 5 of 6
Page 6 of 6
By signing this document, the customer agrees to the services and conditions outlined in this
document. All home improvement contractors and subcontractors must be licensed. If you have
any questions, contact the MHIC, DPOR or DCRA.
You the buyer have 5 business days from the date of signing to cancel this agreement.
MHIC #44848 Licensed and bonded in MD, DC #8414 & VA 2705039107
Signed on: 09/30/2025
Seifarth, Bryan
303 International Circle, Suite 150, Hunt Valley, Maryland 21030 - 410.853.7128 - www.trileaf.com
November 26, 2025 Maryland Historical Trust Attn: Dr. Dixie Henry 100 Community Place, Third Floor Crownsville, MD 21032-2023
Phone: 410-697-9553 Email: dixie.henry@maryland.gov RE: Milestone Towers – Smithsburg High School / Trileaf Project #766917 66 North Main Street, Smithsburg, MD 21783 Washington County, Smithsburg Quadrangle (USGS)
Latitude: 39° 39’ 35.298” N, Longitude: 77° 34’ 22.321” W Dear Dr. Henry: Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Review at the referenced property. Our client proposes to construct a 195-foot-tall monopole communications tower, with an overall height of 199 feet including attachments, and associated ground-based equipment, within a new 60-foot by 40-foot (2,400 square feet) fenced compound. The project also includes a proposed 12-foot-wide gravel access drive that will extend approximately 150 feet generally southeast and connect with an existing asphalt drive. The site is currently manicured grass-covered lawn. The antennas will be licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
In accordance with the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for Review of Effects on Historic Properties for
Certain Undertakings Approved by the Federal Communications Commission, dated September 2004, a cultural resource investigation has been conducted. Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on,
or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering or culture, that is listed, or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on an Indian Religious Site.
Summary reports of this investigation, maps, photographs and other information are provided in the attached Form 620. As noted in Attachment 5, there are No Historic Properties in the APE for Direct Effects and No Adverse Effects to the Historic Properties in the APE for Visual Effects. Therefore, it is recommended that the proposed undertaking proceed without further archaeological review. We appreciate your cooperation in this regard and anticipate your concurrence with these findings. Please call me at (410) 853-7128 ext. 902 or email e.boone@trileaf.com if you need any additional information or have any
questions. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely,
Elsie Boone Assistant Project Manager
FCC Form FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Approved by OMB 3060 – 1039
Notification Date: See instructions for
File Number: public burden estimates General Information
1) (Select only one) ( ) NE – New UA – Update of Application WD – Withdrawal of Application
2) If this application is for an Update or Withdrawal, enter the file number of the pending application currently on file. File Number:
Applicant Information
3) FCC Registration Number (FRN):
4) Name:
Contact Name
5) First Name: 6) MI: 7) Last Name: 8) Suffix:
9) Title:
Contact Information
10) P.O. Box: And /Or 11) Street Address:
12) City: 13) State: 14) Zip Code:
15) Telephone Number: 16) Fax Number:
17) E-mail Address:
Consultant Information
18) FCC Registration Number (FRN):
19) Name:
Principal Investigator
20) First Name: 21) MI: 22) Last Name: 23) Suffix:
24) Title:
Principal Investigator Contact Information
25) P.O. Box: And /Or 26) Street Address:
27) City: 28) State: 29) Zip Code:
30) Telephone Number: 31) Fax Number:
32) E-mail Address:
Milestone Towers
0005523832
Matt Penning
12110 Sunset Hills Road, Suite 100
Reston VA 20140
(703)944-4332
0011724176
Trileaf Corporation
matt@milestonetowers.com
Michael Hart
Senior Historian/Architectural Historian
303 International Circle Suite 150
Hunt Valley MD 21030
(410)853-7128
e.boone@trileaf.com
1 of 15
NE
620
FCC Form 620
New Tower (NT ) Submission Packet
0011799314
7AM EST 11/28/2025
May 2014
Professional Qualification
33) Does the Principal Investigator satisfy the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards? ( ) Yes ( ) No
34) Areas of Professional Qualification:
( ) Archaeologist
( ) Architectural Historian
( ) Historian
( ) Architect
( ) Other (Specify) __________________________________________________________________________________________
Additional Staff
35) Are there other staff involved who meet the Professional Qualification Standards of the Secretary of the Interior? ( ) Yes ( ) No
If “YES,” complete the following:
X
X
X
X
36) First Name: 37) MI: 38) Last Name: 39) Suffix:
40) Title:
41) Areas of Professional Qualification:
( ) Archaeologist
( ) Architectural Historian
( ) Historian
( ) Architect
( ) Other (Specify) ____________________________________________________________________________________________
Scott Emory
X
Senior Project Archaeologist
2 of 15 FCC Form 620
May 2014
Site Information
Tower Construction Notification System
1) TCNS Notification Number:
Site Information
2) Positive Train Control Filing Subject to Expedited Treatment Under Program Comment: ( ) Yes ( ) No
3) Site Name:
4) Site Address:
5) Detailed Description of Project:
6) City: 7) State: 8) Zip Code:
9) County/Borough/Parish:
10) Nearest Crossroads:
11) NAD 83 Latitude (DD-MM-SS.S): ( ) N or ( ) S
12) NAD 83 Longitude (DD-MM-SS.S): ( ) E or ( ) W
Tower Information
13) Tower height above ground level (include top-mounted attachments such as lightning rods): ___________________ ( ) Feet ( ) Meters
14) Tower Type (Select One):
( ) Guyed lattice tower
( ) Self-supporting lattice
( ) Monopole
( ) Other (Describe):
Project Status
15) Current Project Status (Select One):
( ) Construction has not yet commenced
( ) Construction has commenced, but is not completed Construction commenced on: _______________
( ) Construction has been completed Construction commenced on: _______________
Construction completed on: _______________
301839
Smithsburg High School
66 North Main Street
Smithsburg MD
WASHINGTON
21783
39-39-35.3
077-34-22.3
X
X
60.7 X
3 of 15
X
X
FCC Form 620
E School Lane and N Main Street
May 2014
E School Lane and N Main Street
New 199ft-tall monopole communications tower, and associated equipment, within a new 60ft x 40ft fenced compound,
and a new 12ft-wide gravel access drive that will extend approximately 150ft southeast and connect with an existing
asphalt drive.
X
Determination of Effect
14) Direct Effects (Select One):
( ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)
( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE
( ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE
( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE
15) Visual Effects (Select One):
( ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)
( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE
( ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE
( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE
4 of 15
X
X
FCC Form 620
May 2014
Tribal/NHO Involvement
1) Have Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs) been identified that may attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties which may be affected by the undertaking within the APEs for direct and visual effects? ( ) Yes ( ) No
2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ___________________ Number of Tribes/NHOs: _________________ 2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: _________________
301839 7
X
0
Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS
3) Tribe/NHO FRN:
4) Tribe/NHO Name:
Contact Name
5) First Name: 6) MI: 7) Last Name: 8) Suffix:
9) Title:
Dates & Response
10) Date Contacted ______________ 11) Date Replied _______________
( ) No Reply
( ) Replied/No Interest
( ) Replied/Have Interest
( ) Replied/Other
Bad River Band of Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians
09/24/2025
X
Lawrence Plucinski
THPO
Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS
3) Tribe/NHO FRN:
4) Tribe/NHO Name:
Contact Name
5) First Name: 6) MI: 7) Last Name: 8) Suffix:
9) Title:
Dates & Response
10) Date Contacted ______________ 11) Date Replied _______________
( ) No Reply
( ) Replied/No Interest
( ) Replied/Have Interest
( ) Replied/Other
Delaware Nation
09/24/2025
X
Billie Anderson
TCNS Coordinator
5 of 15 FCC Form 620
May 2014
Tribal/NHO Involvement
1) Have Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs) been identified that may attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties which may be affected by the undertaking within the APEs for direct and visual effects? ( ) Yes ( ) No
2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ___________________ Number of Tribes/NHOs: _________________ 2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: _________________
301839 7
X
0
Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS
3) Tribe/NHO FRN:
4) Tribe/NHO Name:
Contact Name
5) First Name: 6) MI: 7) Last Name: 8) Suffix:
9) Title:
Dates & Response
10) Date Contacted ______________ 11) Date Replied _______________
( ) No Reply
( ) Replied/No Interest
( ) Replied/Have Interest
( ) Replied/Other
Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma
09/25/2025 09/25/2025
X
Lora Nuckolls
Director
Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS
3) Tribe/NHO FRN:
4) Tribe/NHO Name:
Contact Name
5) First Name: 6) MI: 7) Last Name: 8) Suffix:
9) Title:
Dates & Response
10) Date Contacted ______________ 11) Date Replied _______________
( ) No Reply
( ) Replied/No Interest
( ) Replied/Have Interest
( ) Replied/Other
Seneca-Cayuga Nation
09/25/2025
X
William Tarrant
THPO
6 of 15 FCC Form 620
May 2014
Tribal/NHO Involvement
1) Have Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs) been identified that may attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties which may be affected by the undertaking within the APEs for direct and visual effects? ( ) Yes ( ) No
2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ___________________ Number of Tribes/NHOs: _________________ 2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: _________________
301839 7
X
0
Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS
3) Tribe/NHO FRN:
4) Tribe/NHO Name:
Contact Name
5) First Name: 6) MI: 7) Last Name: 8) Suffix:
9) Title:
Dates & Response
10) Date Contacted ______________ 11) Date Replied _______________
( ) No Reply
( ) Replied/No Interest
( ) Replied/Have Interest
( ) Replied/Other
Shawnee Tribe
09/24/2025
X
Tonya Tipton
THPO
Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS
3) Tribe/NHO FRN:
4) Tribe/NHO Name:
Contact Name
5) First Name: 6) MI: 7) Last Name: 8) Suffix:
9) Title:
Dates & Response
10) Date Contacted ______________ 11) Date Replied _______________
( ) No Reply
( ) Replied/No Interest
( ) Replied/Have Interest
( ) Replied/Other
Tuscarora Nation
09/24/2025
X
Bryan Printup
TCNS Rep
7 of 15 FCC Form 620
May 2014
Tribal/NHO Involvement
1) Have Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs) been identified that may attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties which may be affected by the undertaking within the APEs for direct and visual effects? ( ) Yes ( ) No
2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ___________________ Number of Tribes/NHOs: _________________ 2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: _________________
301839 7
X
0
Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS
3) Tribe/NHO FRN:
4) Tribe/NHO Name:
Contact Name
5) First Name: 6) MI: 7) Last Name: 8) Suffix:
9) Title:
Dates & Response
10) Date Contacted ______________ 11) Date Replied _______________
( ) No Reply
( ) Replied/No Interest
( ) Replied/Have Interest
( ) Replied/Other
Wyandotte Nation
09/24/2025
X
Sherri Clemons
THPO
8 of 15 FCC Form 620
May 2014
Other Tribes/NHOs Contacted
Tribe/NHO Information
1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):
2) Name:
Contact Name
3) First Name: 4) MI: 5) Last Name: 6) Suffix:
7) Title:
Contact Information
8) P.O. Box: And /Or 9) Street Address:
10) City: 11) State: 12) Zip Code:
13) Telephone Number: 14) Fax Number:
15) E-mail Address:
16) Preferred means of communication:
( ) E-mail
( ) Letter
( ) Both
Dates & Response
17) Date Contacted _______________ 18) Date Replied _______________
( ) No Reply
( ) Replied/No Interest
( ) Replied/Have Interest
( ) Replied/Other
9 of 15 FCC Form 620
May 2014
Historic Properties
Properties Identified
1) Have any historic properties been identified within the APEs for direct and visual effect? ( ) Yes ( ) No
2) Has the identification process located archaeological materials that would be directly affected, or sites that are of cultural or religious significance to Tribes/NHOs? ( ) Yes ( ) No
3) Are there more than 10 historic properties within the APEs for direct and visual effect? If “Yes”, you are required to attach a Cultural Resources Report in lieu of adding the Historic Property below. ( ) Yes ( ) No
Historic Property
4) Property Name:
5) SHPO Site Number:
Property Address
6) Street Address:
7) City: 8) State: 9) Zip Code:
10) County/Borough/Parish:
Status & Eligibility
11) Is this property listed on the National Register?
Source: _______________________________________________________________________________________
( ) Yes ( ) No
12) Is this property eligible for listing on the National Register?
Source: _______________________________________________________________________________________
( ) Yes ( ) No
13) Is this property a National Historic Landmark? ( ) Yes ( ) No
14) Direct Effects (Select One):
( ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE
( ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE
( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE
15) Visual Effects (Select One):
( ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE
( ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE
( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE
SHA Small Structure 21065X0
X
X
WA-IV-273
MD 66 over Tributary to Beaver Creek
Smithsburg MD
WASHINGTON
21783
MEDUSA
X
X
X
X
X
X
10 of 15 FCC Form 620
May 2014
Historic Properties
Properties Identified
1) Have any historic properties been identified within the APEs for direct and visual effect? ( ) Yes ( ) No
2) Has the identification process located archaeological materials that would be directly affected, or sites that are of cultural or religious significance to Tribes/NHOs? ( ) Yes ( ) No
3) Are there more than 10 historic properties within the APEs for direct and visual effect? If “Yes”, you are required to attach a Cultural Resources Report in lieu of adding the Historic Property below. ( ) Yes ( ) No
Historic Property
4) Property Name:
5) SHPO Site Number:
Property Address
6) Street Address:
7) City: 8) State: 9) Zip Code:
10) County/Borough/Parish:
Status & Eligibility
11) Is this property listed on the National Register?
Source: _______________________________________________________________________________________
( ) Yes ( ) No
12) Is this property eligible for listing on the National Register?
Source: _______________________________________________________________________________________
( ) Yes ( ) No
13) Is this property a National Historic Landmark? ( ) Yes ( ) No
14) Direct Effects (Select One):
( ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE
( ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE
( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE
15) Visual Effects (Select One):
( ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE
( ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE
( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE
Smithsburg Historic District
X
X
WA-IV-259
Water and Main Streets
Smithsburg MD
WASHINGTON
21783
MEDUSA
X
X
X
X
X
X
11 of 15 FCC Form 620
May 2014
Local Government Involvement
Local Government Agency
1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):
2) Name:
Contact Name
3) First Name: 4) MI: 5) Last Name: 6) Suffix:
7) Title:
Contact Information
8) P.O. Box: And /Or 9) Street Address:
10) City: 11) State: 12) Zip Code:
13) Telephone Number: 14) Fax Number:
15) E-mail Address:
16) Preferred means of communication:
( ) E-mail
( ) Letter
( ) Both
Dates & Response
17) Date Contacted _______________ 18) Date Replied _______________
( ) No Reply
( ) Replied/No Interest
( ) Replied/Have Interest
( ) Replied/Other
Additional Information
19) Information on local government’s role or interest (optional):
Washington County Historic District
Meghan Jenkins
GIS Coordinator
100 West Washington Street Suite 2600
Hagerstown MD 21740
(240)313-2430
mjenkins@washco-md.net
X
09/23/2025 10/01/2025
Ms. Jenkins responded via email stating that the proposed tower location is in an area of tree planting that was done in
agreement with the Washington County Public Schools and County Water Quality Department.
X
12 of 15 FCC Form 620
May 2014
Other Consulting Parties
Other Consulting Parties Contacted
1) Has any other agency been contacted and invited to become a consulting party? ( ) Yes ( ) No
Consulting Party
2) FCC Registration Number (FRN):
3) Name:
Contact Name
4) First Name: 5) MI: 6) Last Name: 7) Suffix:
8) Title:
Contact Information
9) P.O. Box: And /Or 10) Street Address:
11) City: 12) State: 13) Zip Code:
14) Telephone Number: 15) Fax Number:
16) E-mail Address:
17) Preferred means of communication:
( ) E-mail
( ) Letter
( ) Both
Dates & Response
18) Date Contacted _______________ 19) Date Replied _______________
( ) No Reply
( ) Replied/No Interest
( ) Replied/Have Interest
( ) Replied/Other
Additional Information
20) Information on other consulting parties’ role or interest (optional):
X
Washington County Historical Society
To Whom It May Concern
135 West Washington Street
Hagerstown MD 21740
(301)797-8782
info@washcohistory.org
X
09/23/2025
X
13 of 15 FCC Form 620
May 2014
Designation of SHPO/THPO
1) Designate the Lead State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) based on the location of the tower.
SHPO/THPO
Name: ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2) You may also designate up to three additional SHPOs/THPOs if the APEs include multiple states. If the APEs include other countries, enter the name of the National Historic Preservation Agency and any state and provincial Historic Preservation Agency.
SHPO/THPO Name: ________________________________________________________________________________________________
SHPO/THPO Name: ________________________________________________________________________________________________
SHPO/THPO Name: ________________________________________________________________________________________________
Certification
I certify that all representations on this FCC Form 620 Submission Packet and the accompanying attachments are true, correct, and complete.
Party Authorized to Sign
First Name: MI: Last Name: Suffix:
Signature: Date: _______________
FAILURE TO SIGN THIS APPLICATION MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF THE APPLICATION AND FORFEITURE OF ANY FEES PAID.
WILLFUL FALSE STATEMENTS MADE ON THIS FORM OR ANY ATTACHMENTS ARE PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND/OR IMPRISONMENT (U.S. Code, Title 18, Section 1001) AND/OR REVOCATION OF ANY STATION LICENSE OR CONSTRUCTION PERMIT (U.S. Code, Title 47, Section 312(a)(1)), AND/OR FORFEITURE (U.S. Code, Title 47, Section 503).
14 of 15 FCC Form 620
Maryland Historical Trust
Elsie Boone
11/26/2025
Elsie Boone
May 2014
Attachments :
Type Description Date Entered
Other Cover Letter 11/26/2025
Resumes/Vitae Resumes 11/26/2025
Photographs Photos 11/26/2025
Map Documents Maps 11/26/2025
Other CDs 11/26/2025
Area of Potential Effects APE 11/26/2025
Tribal/NHO Involvement Tribal 11/26/2025
Historic Properties for Direct Effects Direct APE 11/26/2025
Historic Properties for Visual Effects Visual APE 11/26/2025
Local Government Involvement Local Government 11/26/2025
Public Involvement Public Involvement 11/26/2025
State-Specific Forms State-Specific 11/26/2025
FCC Form 620
May 2014
15 of 15
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 1. Consultant Information
Provide a current copy of the resume or curriculum vitae for the Principal Investigator and any
researcher or other person who contributed to, reviewed, or provided significant input into the
research, analysis, writing or conclusions presented in this filing.
A current copy of the resume for the Principal Investigator and any researcher or other person who
contributed to, reviewed, or provided significant input into the research, analysis, writing, or conclusions
presented in this filing.
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
ELSIE BOONE
ASSISTANT PROJECT MANAGER
Education
Environmental Science, B.S. University of Maryland, Baltimore County / Baltimore, MD
Areas of Expertise
Ms. Boone has experience performing National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews for wireless telecommunications projects. Ms. Boone also has experience performing site inspections and conducting environmental due diligence pursuant to EPA All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) and the American Society
of Testing and Materials (ASTM) for commercial real estate and lending projects, assisting in wetland delineation and permitting, performing Migratory Bird Evaluations, and assisting in rare, threatened, and endangered species monitoring surveys for bamboovine, swamp pink, and rough wood-aster in the Cecil County, Maryland area.
Environmental service expertise includes:
Phase I Environmental Site Assessments
Indoor Air Quality Assessments Information Section 7 Consultation National Wetland Inventory Maps Flood Insurance Rate Maps
Critical Habitat Maps Environmental Evaluation Summaries Archaeological and Architectural Impacts Soil Characterization
Field Reconnaissance Section 106 Compliance NEPA Environmental Assessments
Migratory Bird Evaluations
Form 620/621 Submittals Historical Topographic Maps and Aerial Imagery Local Government Consultation Native American Consultation
Land Use History Preliminary Risk Assessments Joint Permit Applications Rare, Threatened, & Endangered Species Surveys
Certifications/Affiliations
Geographic Information Systems Certification – UMBC Certified Asbestos Inspector (MD) – (License #250000099) 40-Hour OSHA HAZWOPER Adult/Infant CPR & First Aid Certified Environmental Professional (EP) as defined by ASTM Standard E1527-21 (AAI)
Professional Resume
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 2. Site Information – Photographs
You are required to provide photographs and maps as part of this filing. Additional site information can
be provided in an optional attachment.
Photograph Requirements:
Except in cases where no Historic Properties were identified within the Areas of Potential Effects, submit
photographs as described below. Photographs should be in color, marked so as to identify the project,
keyed to the relevant map or text, and dated; the focal length of the lens and the height of the camera
should be noted. The source of any photograph included but not taken by the Applicant or its consultant
(including copies of historic images) should be identified on the photograph.
a. Photographs taken from the site should show views from the proposed location in all
directions. The direction (e.g., north, south, etc.) should be indicated on each photograph,
and, as a group, the photographs should present a complete (360 degree) view of the area
around the proposed site.
Please reference the following directional photographs of the project area, which were taken
by Scott Emory on September 22, 2025, unless otherwise noted.
b. Photographs of all listed in and eligible properties within the Areas of Potential Effects.
Please reference the following photographs of all NRHP-listed and eligible properties within
the APE-VE for the project area, which were taken by Scott Emory on September 22, 2025,
unless otherwise noted.
c. If any listed or eligible properties are visible from the proposed site, photographs looking
at the site from each historic property. The approximate distance in feet (meters) between
the site and the historic property should be included. If any listed or eligible properties are
within the APE, photos looking at each historic property should be included.
Please reference the following photographs from all visible NRHP-listed and eligible
properties, looking in the direction of the project area, which were taken by Scott Emory on
September 22, 2025, unless otherwise noted.
Aerial photographs of the site were obtained via Google Earth and Esri, Imagery, and are
dated to 2023 and 2024, respectively.
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Site Location & Surrounding Properties
Site Location
Aerial Photographs (2023)
Milestone Towers – Smithsburg High School 66 North Main Street
Smithsburg, MD 21783
Easement
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 3. Site Information – Map Requirements
Include one or more 7.5-minute quad USGS topographical maps that:
a. Identify the Areas of Potential Effects for both Direct and Visual Effects. If a map is copied from
the original, include a key with the name of quad and date.
b. Show the location of the proposed site and any access roads or other easements including
excavations.
c. Show the locations of each property listed.
d. Include keys for any symbols, colors, or other identifiers.
e. Submit color maps whenever possible.
The following maps have been attached to this report:
Site Vicinity Map – Smithsburg Quadrangle (2023)
7.5-min Topographic Quad Map with Project Location
Aerial Imagery with Project Location and APE
Modern Soil Map with Project Location
Map of Architectural Resources within the APE-VE
Historical Map of Project Location
Map of Shovel Test Pit Locations and Project Boundary
Smithsburg Quadrangle, Maryland (2023)
Contour Interval = 20 Feet Scale 1 Inch = ~2,000 Feet Latitude: 39° 39’ 35.298” N, Longitude: 77° 34’ 232.321” W
North
Site Vicinity Map
Milestone Towers – Smithsburg High School 66 North Main Street
Smithsburg, MD 21783
Site Location
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 4. Site Information – Additional Site Information
Describe any additional structures, access roads, utility lines, fences, easements, or other construction
planned for the site.
The proposed project is for a monopole telecommunications tower site in Smithsburg, Washington
County, MD. Smithsburg High School (39° 39’ 35.30” N, 77° 34’ 22.32” W) is located within a grassy
manicured field located east of the Smithsburg High School at 66 North Main Street.
With this project, Milestone Towers proposes to construct a 199-foot-tall monopole communications
tower with an overall height of 199 feet, including attachments, and associated ground-based equipment,
within a new 60-foot by 40-foot (2,400 square feet) fenced compound. The project also includes a
proposed 12-foot-wide gravel access drive that will extend approximately 150 feet generally southeast
and connect with an existing asphalt drive. The site is currently manicured grass-covered lawn.
Total acreage of the project area is approximately 0.22 acre (0.09 hectare).
The construction drawings provided by Milestone Towers are included in this attachment.
SITE
TITLE SHEET
T-1
66 N MAIN STREET
SMITHSBURG HIGH SCHOOL
SMITHSBURG, MD 21783
T-1 TITLE SHEET
=-1 SITE PLAN
=-1A SITE LOCATION PLAN WITH ARIAL IMAGE
=-2 PROPERTY ADJOINERS
=-3 ENLARGED SITE PLAN
=-4 COMPOUND PLAN
=-5 MONOPOLE ELEVATION
=-6 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DETAILS
=-7 SITE DETAILS
=-8 SIGNAGE DETAILS
L-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN DETAILS
Mi l e s t o n e
T ow e rs
NEW 199' MONOPOLE
CODE COMPLIANCE
SITE INFORMATION VICINITY MAP SHEET INDEX
SUBMITTALS
PROJECT TEAM
6100 EXECUTIVE BLVD.
ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
communication services, inc.
PHONE: (202) 408-0960
SUITE 430
Mi l e s t o n e
T ow e rs
SMITHSBURG HIGH SCHOOL
66 N MAIN STREET
SMITHSBURG, MD 21783
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Professional Certification. I hereby certify that these documents were prepared
or approved by me, and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under
the laws of the State of Maryland, License No. 17641, Expiration Date:
12/27/2025
DRAWING APPROVALS
TRUE NORTHMAGNETIC NORTHSCALE: 1 2,000'
SCOPE OF WORK:
PROPERTY INFORMATION:
SUBJECT PARCEL
S,TE
SUB0,TTALS
E;ECUT,9E BL9'
R2C.9,LLE 0'
FRPPXQLFDWLRQ VHUYLFHV LQF
P+21E
SU,TE
Mi l e s t o n e
T ow e rs
S0,T+SBUR* +,*+ SC+22L
1 0A,1 STREET
S0,T+SBUR* 0'
:AS+,1*T21 C2U1T<
Professional Certification. I hereby certify that these documents were prepared
or approved by me, and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under
the laws of the State of Maryland, License No. 17641, Expiration Date:
12/27/2025
LE*E1'
L,1E T<PES
S,TE PLA1
=
9,C,1,T< 0AP
TRUE 12RT+
S,TE ,1)2R0AT,21 12TES
TRUE 12RT+
S,TE PLA1
CLOSEST HOUSE
SIDE YARD (WEST)
SIDE YARD (EAST)
REAR YARD (NORTH)
MONOPOLE SETBACKS
PROPOSEDREQUIRED
1,027.5'
511.6'
835.8'
±658.1' EAST
FRONT YARD R.O.W. (SOUTH)199.0'702.0'
199.0'
199.0'
199.0'
199.0'
SITE LOCATION
PLAN WITH
ARIAL IMAGE
Z-1ATRUE NORTH
SITE LOCATION PLAN WITH ARIAL IMAGE
SUBMITTALS
6100 EXECUTIVE BLVD.
ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
communication services, inc.
PHONE: (202) 408-0960
SUITE 430
Mi l e s t o n e
T ow e rs
SMITHSBURG HIGH SCHOOL
66 N MAIN STREET
SMITHSBURG, MD 21783
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Professional Certification. I hereby certify that these documents were prepared
or approved by me, and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under
the laws of the State of Maryland, License No. 17641, Expiration Date:
12/27/2025
PROPERTY
ADJOINERS
Z-2
SUBJECT PARCEL
1
ADJOINERS
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
SUBMITTALS
6100 EXECUTIVE BLVD.
ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
communication services, inc.
PHONE: (202) 408-0960
SUITE 430
Mi l e s t o n e
T ow e rs
SMITHSBURG HIGH SCHOOL
66 N MAIN STREET
SMITHSBURG, MD 21783
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Professional Certification. I hereby certify that these documents were prepared
or approved by me, and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under
the laws of the State of Maryland, License No. 17641, Expiration Date:
12/27/2025
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
49
SUBMITTALS
6100 EXECUTIVE BLVD.
ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
communication services, inc.
PHONE: (202) 408-0960
SUITE 430
Mi l e s t o n e
T ow e rs
SMITHSBURG HIGH SCHOOL
66 N MAIN STREET
SMITHSBURG, MD 21783
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Professional Certification. I hereby certify that these documents were prepared
or approved by me, and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under
the laws of the State of Maryland, License No. 17641, Expiration Date:
12/27/2025
ENLARGED
SITE PLAN
Z-3TRUE NORTH
ENLARGED SITE PLAN
COMPOUND PLAN
Z-4COMPOUND PLAN
TRUE NORTH
6U%M,TTAL6
E;ECUT,9E %L9D
ROC.9,LLE MD
FRPPXQLFDWLRQ VHUYLFHV LQF
PHONE 4-
6U,TE 4
Mi l e s t o n e
T ow e rs
6M,TH6%UR* H,*H 6CHOOL
N MA,N 6TREET
6M,TH6%UR* MD
:A6H,N*TON COUNT<
Professional Certification. I hereby certify that these documents were prepared
or approved by me, and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under
the laws of the State of Maryland, License No. 17641, Expiration Date:
12/27/2025
MONOPOLE ELEVATION
MONOPOLE
ELEVATION
Z-5
68%MITTAL6
E;E&8TIVE %LV'
5O&.VILLE M' 5
FRPPXQLFDWLRQ VHUYLFHV LQF
P+ONE -
68ITE
Mi l e s t o n e
T ow e rs
6MIT+6%85* +I*+ 6&+OOL
N MAIN 6T5EET
6MIT+6%85* M'
:A6+IN*TON &O8NT<
Professional Certification. I hereby certify that these documents were prepared
or approved by me, and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under
the laws of the State of Maryland, License No. 17641, Expiration Date:
12/27/2025
EROSION AND
SEDIMENT CONTROL
DETAILS
Z-6
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE DETAILSILT FENCE DETAILTREE PROTECTION FENCE DETAIL
SUBMITTALS
6100 EXECUTIVE BLVD.
ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
communication services, inc.
PHONE: (202) 408-0960
SUITE 430
Mi l e s t o n e
T ow e rs
SMITHSBURG HIGH SCHOOL
66 N MAIN STREET
SMITHSBURG, MD 21783
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Professional Certification. I hereby certify that these documents were prepared
or approved by me, and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under
the laws of the State of Maryland, License No. 17641, Expiration Date:
12/27/2025
UTILITY FRAME DETAIL COMPOUND SURFACING DETAIL
GALVANIZED CHAIN LINK FENCE AND GATE DETAIL
ELEVATION
GRAVEL ACCESS ROAD DETAIL
GENERATOR DETAILS
TOP VIEW
RIGHT SIDE VIEW END VIEW
SITE DETAILS
Z-7
SUBMITTALS
6100 EXECUTIVE BLVD.
ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
communication services, inc.
PHONE: (202) 408-0960
SUITE 430
Mi l e s t o n e
T ow e rs
SMITHSBURG HIGH SCHOOL
66 N MAIN STREET
SMITHSBURG, MD 21783
WASHINGTON COUNTY
Professional Certification. I hereby certify that these documents were prepared
or approved by me, and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under
the laws of the State of Maryland, License No. 17641, Expiration Date:
12/27/2025
Mileston e
T owers
PROPOSED NEW GENERATORCONCRETE PAD
WHITE BACKGROUND W/BLACK LETTERING
2
BLUE BACKGROUND W/BLACK LETTERING 0 0
DANGER
SITE X X X X X X X X
DIESEL FUEL
NO SMOKING
NO OPEN FLAMES WHITE BACKGROUND W/BLACK LETTERING
RED BACKGROUND W/BLACK LETTERING
YELLOW BACKGROUNDW/ BLACK LETTERING IN CASE OF EMERGENCY
CALL: 800-611-5868
(NON-SPILL RELATED)
2" HIGH BLACK LETTERS ONWHITE BACKGROUND(STICKERS)
DIESEL FUEL
240 GALLONS GREEN W/ WHITE
LETTERING
EMERGENCY
1.800.579-2872
CALL T-MOBILE 24-HOUR HOTLINE
SPILL RESPONSE AND RECOVERY
DANGER - DIESEL )UEL - SIGN 1 SITE ID - SIGN 2
WHITE BACKGROUND W/BLACK LETTERING
)UEL TAN. - SIGN EMERGENCY RESPONSE - SIGN 4
SIGN .EY PLAN
TOP
BOTTOM
TOP
BOTTOM
TOP
BOTTOM
TOP
BOTTOM
NOTICE
.
SIGNAGE
DETAILS
=-8
SITE SIGNAGE DETAILS
GENERATOR SIGNAGE DETAILS
R) :ARNING SIGNMAR.ETING ID SIGN
NO TRESPASSING SIGN
R) NOTICE SIGN
R) NOTICE SIGN 2
SUBMITTALS
100 E;ECUTIVE BLVD.
ROC.VILLE MD 20852
FRPPXQLFDWLRQ VHUYLFHV LQF.
PHONE 202 408-090
SUITE 40
Mi l e s t o n e
T ow e rs
SMITHSBURG HIGH SCHOOL
N MAIN STREET
SMITHSBURG MD 2178
:ASHINGTON COUNTY
Professional Certification. I hereby certify that these documents were prepared
or approved by me, and that I am a duly licensed professional engineer under
the laws of the State of Maryland, License No. 17641, Expiration Date:
12/27/2025
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 5. Area of Potential Effects
You are required to provide two attachments regarding the Determination of Effect: Areas of Potential
Effect and Mitigation of Effect (if applicable).
Areas of Potential Effect Guidelines:
a. Describe the APE for direct effects and explain how this APE was determined.
Under the NPA for FCC Projects, the Direct APE (APE-DE) “is defined as the area of potential
ground disturbance and any property, or any portion thereof that will be physically altered or
destroyed by the undertaking” (FCC 2004). On November 24, 2008, the FCC further clarified that
the APE-DE is limited to the tower or non-tower structure on which the collocation will be
mounted as well as the lease area including the access route and utility corridor. The APE-DE for
this project consists of the 40-foot by 60-foot (2,400 square feet) fenced compound, 10-foot-wide
landscaping buffer surrounding the lease area, 12-foot-wide gravel turnaround, and 12-foot-wide
by 225-foot-long gravel access drive that will extend south then east connecting with an existing
asphalt drive.
b. Describe the APE for visual effects and explain how this APE was determined.
Per the NPA, the Visual APE (APE-VE) is the “geographic area in which the project has the potential
to introduce visual elements that diminish or alter the setting, including the landscape, where the
setting is a character-defining feature of a historic property that makes it eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)” (FCC 2004). The presumed APE-VE for construction of
new facilities is the area from where the tower will be visible: a. Within a ½ mile from the tower
site if the proposed tower is 200 feet or less in height; b. Within ¾ of a mile from the tower site if
the proposed tower is more than 200 but no more than 400 feet in overall height; or c. Within 1½
miles from the tower site if the proposed tower is more than 400 feet in overall height.
Taking into consideration the maximum height of the proposed undertaking (199 feet), the scale
of the installation, and nearby historic properties, Trileaf determined that the APE for visual
effects, according to the above definition, would encompass a ½-mile radius from the subject
property.
Mitigation of Effect Guidelines:
In the case of where an Adverse Visual Effect or Adverse Direct Effect has been determined you must
provide the following:
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 5. Continued
a. Copies of any correspondence and summaries of any oral communication with the SHPO/THPO
and any consulting parties.
N/A
b. Describe any alternatives that have been considered that might avoid, minimize, or mitigate
any adverse effects. Explain the Applicant’s conclusion regarding the feasibility of each
alternative.
N/A
For each property identified as a Historic Property in the online e-106 form:
a. Indicate whether the Applicant believes the proposed undertaking would have a) no effect; b)
no adverse effect; or, c) an adverse effect. Explain how each such assessment was made.
Provide supporting documentation where necessary.
Trileaf Senior Project Archaeologist IV, Scott Emory, performed this survey in response to the planned
use of the above-described parcel and the potential impacts that such use might present to any
archaeological and architectural cultural resources within the project area. Mr. Emory meets the
Secretary of the Interior’s Historic Preservation Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology
and is currently certified by the Register of Professional Archaeologists.
The records search for this project included a review of the Maryland Historical Trust’s online cultural
resources database (MEDUSA) for any known historic properties within the project's APE for Direct
Effects and a ¾-mile radius for the APE for Visual Effects. The records search was expanded to include
any previously recorded archaeological resources within a 1-mile buffer of the current project
location. Based on a review of these records, the project is not located within the boundaries of any
NRHP-listed or NRHP-eligible resources. One (1) NRHP-eligible Historic Site and one (1) NRHP-eligible
Historic District were identified within the project’s ½-mile APE for Visual Effects. No archaeological
studies or sites have been recorded within the APE-DE. A total of six (6) archaeological studies and six
(6) archaeological sites were previously recorded within a 1-mile radius of the project site.
Based on the findings of this survey, it is recommended that there are No Historic Properties in the
APE-DE and No Adverse Effect to Historic Properties in the APE-VE. It is therefore recommended that
project clearance be granted with no further investigation or evaluation of the project area.
Please see the attached Cultural Resources Survey Report for additional information.
Smithsburg High School
Trileaf Project #766917
Client #Smithburg High School
66 North Main Street Smithsburg, MD 21783
Prepared For: Milestone Towers Milestone Tower LP-III Reston, VA 20190
CULTURAL RESOURCES SURVEY
PREPARED AND WRITTEN BY:
Trileaf Corporation
303 International Circle
Suite 150
Hunt Valley, Maryland 21030
Scott Emory, M.A., RPA
Sr. Project Archaeologist IV
410-853-7128
s.emory@trileaf.com
Michael Hart, M.A.
Assistant Project Manager/Architectural Historian
and
Kaitlen Hitt
Field Archaeologist
Trileaf Project # 766917
Lead Agency
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
September 2025
Cultural Resources Survey of the Smithsburg High School
Telecommunication Project, Smithsburg, Washington County,
MD Trileaf Project #766917
i
ABSTRACT AND MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
In June and September 2025, Trileaf Corporation (Trileaf) performed a cultural resource inventory survey for a proposed monopole telecommunications tower located in Smithsburg, Washington County, MD. The proposed project is located within a grassy lawn area.
Milestone Towers proposes to construct a 195-foot-tall monopole communications tower with an overall height of 199 feet, and associated ground-based equipment, within a new 40-foot by 60-foot (2,400 square feet) fenced compound. The project also includes a proposed 12-foot-wide gravel access drive that will extend approximately 45 feet south then 180 feet east and connect with an existing asphalt drive. The site is currently manicured grass-covered lawn. Total acreage of the new construction area is approximately
0.22 acre (0.09 hectare).
Trileaf Senior Project Archaeologist IV, Scott Emory, M.A., RPA, performed the present cultural resources survey to identify and evaluate the potential impacts that the above-described Project might present to
Historic Properties within both the Direct and Visual Areas of Potential Effects. As such, the present survey was designed to discover all NRHP-eligible or listed archaeological and above ground cultural resources present within the Project area.
The field survey of the project area, which included a visual inspection and shovel testing, yielded no evidence for the presence of archaeological or architectural properties within the Direct APE for the current project. In addition, one (1) NRHP-eligible historic district and one (1) NRHP-eligible historic property
were identified within the proposed project’s Visual APE (0.5-mile radius).
Based on these findings, Trileaf recommends No Historic Properties in the APE-DE and No Adverse Effect to Historic Properties in the APE-VE. It is therefore recommended that project clearance be granted with no further investigation or evaluation of the project area relative to those resources.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT AND MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ................................................................................................. i
FIGURES .................................................................................................................................................................... iii
TABLES ...................................................................................................................................................................... iii
SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Area of Potential Effects (APE) .................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Project Plans and Photographs .................................................................................................................... 3
SECTION 2.0 - PROJECT SETTING ....................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Soils ................................................................................................................................................................. 3
2.2 Elevations ....................................................................................................................................................... 3
2.3 Environmental Setting .................................................................................................................................. 3
2.4 Cultural Setting ............................................................................................................................................. 6
SECTION 3.0 – RESEARCH ...................................................................................................................................... 8
3.1 Background Research ................................................................................................................................... 8
3.2 Research Design ........................................................................................................................................... 18
3.3 Site Probability ............................................................................................................................................ 18
SECTION 4.0 – FIELD METHODS AND RESULTS ............................................................................................ 18
4.1 Archaeology.................................................................................................................................................. 18
4.2 Above Ground Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................ 21
SECTION 5.0 – CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................ 22
5.1 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................................. 22
5.2 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................................... 22
REFERENCES CITED ............................................................................................................................................ 23
APPENDIX A: PROJECT LOCATION PHOTOGRAPHS ................................................................................. 26
APPENDIX B: RESUMES ....................................................................................................................................... 37
iii
FIGURES
Figure 1: General Location of Proposed Cell Tower Installation. ................................................................................. 2
Figure 2: Detailed View of Proposed Cell Tower Location and Installation (Milestone Towers 2025)........................ 4
Figure 3: Detailed View of Proposed Cell Tower Location and Installation (Milestone Towers 2025)........................ 4
Figure 4: Location of Proposed Cell Tower Location on Modern Soil Map (USDA, NRCS 2024). ............................ 5 Figure 5: Project Location ca. 1858 and 1877 (Taggert 1859; Lake, Griffing and Stevenson 1877). ......................... 11
Figure 6: Project Location ca. 1912 (United States Geological Survey [USGS] 1912). ............................................. 12
Figure 7: Project Location ca. 1972 (USGS 1953 [rev 1972]). ................................................................................... 13
Figure 8: Project Location ca. 1981 (Google Earth 2025). .......................................................................................... 14
Figure 9: Project Location ca. 1988 (Google Earth 2025). .......................................................................................... 15 Figure 10: Architectural Resources within the ½-mile APE-VE. ................................................................................ 17
Figure 11: Shovel Test Pit Location and Project Boundary Map (Google Earth 2025)............................................... 20
TABLES
Table 1: Archaeological Surveys within 1-mile of the Project Location. .................................................................... 16
Table 2: Archaeological Resources within 1-mile of the Project Location. ................................................................ 16
Table 3: Shovel Test Pit Descriptions.......................................................................................................................... 19
Table 4: Description of the Subject Property. .............................................................................................................. 21
Table 5: Description of Historic Resources within the ½-mile APE-VE for the Project Location. ............................. 21
1
SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION
The FCC requires licensees and their representatives to consider the effects of their actions on historic properties, in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (Federal Communications Commission 1996). The NHPA (54 U.S.C. § 300308) defines a historic property as any “prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion on, the National Register of Historic Places, including artifacts, records, and material remains related to such a property or resource.” Applicants are required to assess and report all potential effects to Historic Properties as part of the Section 106 process prior to construction.
Trileaf Senior Project Archaeologist IV, Scott Emory, M.A., RPA, performed the present cultural resources survey to identify and evaluate the potential impacts that the above-described Project might present to Historic Properties within both the Direct and Visual Areas of Potential Effects. As such, the present survey
was designed to discover all NRHP-eligible or listed archaeological and above ground cultural resources present within the Project area.
Archival research prior to field investigations was conducted by Senior Project Archaeologist IV Scott
Emory (B.A. Anthropology, University of Delaware and M.A. Maritime History/Underwater Archaeology, East Carolina University) and Assistant Project Manager/Architectural Historian Michael Hart (B.A. History/Anthropology and M.S. Social Science Education, Florida State University). Fieldwork was conducted by Senior Project Archaeologist IV Scott Emory. Photography and final report production was conducted by Senior Project Archaeologist IV Scott Emory. Mr. Emory meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Historic Preservation Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology and is currently certified by the Register of Professional Archaeologists. Mr. Hart has been certified as meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Historic Preservation Professional Qualifications Standards for Architectural Historian. Maps and graphics were produced by Trileaf Field Archaeologist Kaitlen Hitt (B.S. Anthropology, Kennesaw State University). All work on the current project was completed between June 25-26 and September 18-29, 2025.
1.1 AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS (APE)
Under the NPA for FCC Projects, the Direct APE (APE-DE) “is defined as the area of potential ground disturbance and any property, or any portion thereof that will be physically altered or destroyed by the undertaking” (FCC 2004). On November 24, 2008, the FCC further clarified that the APE-DE is limited to the tower or non-tower structure on which the collocation will be mounted as well as the lease area including the access route and utility corridor. The APE-DE for this project consists of the 40-foot by 60-foot (2,400 square feet) fenced compound, 10-foot-wide landscaping buffer surrounding the lease area, 12-foot-wide gravel turnaround, and 12-foot-wide by 225-foot-long gravel access drive that will extend south then east
connecting with an existing asphalt drive.
Per the NPA, the Visual APE (APE-VE) is the “geographic area in which the project has the potential to introduce visual elements that diminish or alter the setting, including the landscape, where the setting is a
character-defining feature of a historic property that makes it eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)” (FCC 2004). The presumed APE-VE for construction of new facilities is the area from where the tower will be visible: a. Within a ½ mile from the tower location if the proposed tower is
200 feet or less in height; b. Within ¾ of a mile from the tower location if the proposed tower is more than 200 but no more than 400 feet in overall height; or c. Within 1½ miles from the tower location if the proposed tower is more than 400 feet in overall height.
Taking into consideration the maximum height of the proposed undertaking (199 feet) and the scale of the installation, Trileaf determined that the current project’s APE for visual effects will encompass a ½-mile radius from the subject property (Figure 1).
2
Figure 1: General Location of Proposed Cell Tower Installation.
3
1.2 PROJECT PLANS AND PHOTOGRAPHS
Please reference Figures 2 and 3 to review the construction drawing provided by Milestone Towers. Also, please reference Appendix A to review photographs of the project area, which were taken by Scott Emory on September 22, 2025, unless otherwise noted.
SECTION 2.0 - PROJECT SETTING
2.1 SOILS
According to the U.S. Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey of Washington County, Maryland, the northern 90 percent of the proposed lease area and eastern one-half of the access easement is underlain by Deposit gravelly loam (Dk). Deposit gravelly loam soils occur on floodplains from gravelly alluvium derived from sandstone and shale and/or quartzite, are somewhat poorly drained, with moderately high to high permeability. They rarely flood, never pond, and consist of a gravelly loam Ap-horizon from 0 to 11 inches, followed by a gravelly loam Bw-horizon from 11 to 24 inches, a very gravelly clay loam C-horizon from 24 to 44 inches, a very gravelly sandy clay loam Agb-horizon from 44 to 48 inches, and an extremely gravelly sandy clay loam C-horizon from 48 to 79 inches, subsurface.
The western half of the access easement is underlain by Murrill gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes (MsB). Murrill soils occur on low terraces and floodplains from gravelly alluvium derived from sandstone and shale and/or quartzite, are well drained, with moderately high to high permeability. They do not flood or
pond and consist of a gravelly loam Ap-horizon from 0 to 6 inches, followed by two (2) layers of gravelly clay loam Bt-horizon from 6 to 39 inches and 39 to 57 inches, and a silty clay loam 2BC-horizon from 57 to 72 inches, subsurface (Figure 4; USDA, NRCS 2025).
2.2 ELEVATIONS
Elevations range between 680-840 feet (207.3–256 meters) above mean sea level (AMSL) in the surrounding area, with the project area elevation at approximately 722 feet (220.1 meters) AMSL. Located in the headwaters of the Antietam Creek watershed, the project setting generally drains to the north into a tributary that empties into Little Grove Creek which then flows west for roughly 3.5 miles (mi) (5.6 kilometer [km]) before emptying into Antietam Creek just south of Leitersburg.
2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project site is located within the Northern Blue Ridge section of the East and Central Farming and
Forest Region. This physiography in this section exhibits rugged mountains with steep slopes, sharp crests, and narrow valleys, flanking narrow to broad valleys and basins. Stream dissection is deep and intricate, flowing through gorges and gaps in the mountains. The total average annual precipitation is 36 to 45 inches
(in) (915 to 1,145 millimeters [mm]) evenly occurring throughout the year. The average annual temperature is 49 to 56 degrees F (9 to 14 degrees C). Forest vegetation is composed largely of hardwood trees such as oak, black cherry, yellow poplar, and maple, with areas of pine, red spruce, birch, and hemlock found on
the higher elevations. Combined with areas of grasslands and field crops, this setting provides a wide range of resources for animal and human exploitation, including food (e.g., nuts, berries, fruit, and roots), shelter, and fuel (USDA, NRCS 2006).
4
Figure 2: Detailed View of Proposed Cell Tower Location and Installation (Milestone Towers 2025).
Figure 3: Detailed View of Proposed Cell Tower Location and Installation (Milestone Towers 2025).
5
Figure 4: Location of Proposed Cell Tower Location on Modern Soil Map (USDA, NRCS 2024).
6
2.4 CULTURAL SETTING
The prehistoric traditions of the Middle Atlantic region have been briefly summarized below. These traditions apply, in varying degrees, throughout the State. They are considered the cultural context in which the interpretation of cultural information is assessed, specifically in terms of NRHP eligibility. These dates should be accepted as broad, chronological reference points for Maryland’s archaeological record that set the background for regional variations. The Paleoindian period (ca. 13,000-8,000 B.C.) characterizes the beginning of human habitation in the Mid-Atlantic Region. Paleoindian finds in West Virginia and Maryland are poorly represented, with a few intact sites, including the Higgins Site, and over a hundred isolated stone tools found (Dent 1995; Ebright 1992). Archeological investigations of Paleoindian sites in the Mid-Atlantic Region, such as the Shawnee-
Minisink Site along the Delaware River (McNett 1985) and the Thunderbird Site in the Shenandoah Valley (Gardner 1974), have offered new evidence toward our understanding of Paleoindian subsistence, technology, and settlement in Maryland. Traditional theories suggest that Paleoindians hunted late
Pleistocene megafauna, such as mastodon and elk, based on the finds of large fluted stone points at megafaunal kill sites (Willey 1966). Evidence from archeological excavations of Mid-Atlantic Region Paleoindian sites, however, indicates that aboriginal diets may have included game like deer, hare, turkey
and fish, and plant foods such as wild grape, black walnut and blackberry (Dent 1985, 1995; Ebright 1992; Gardner 1980:19-20; McNett 1985). Paleoindian tool kits reflected hunting activities as the major focus of the diet, including diagnostic Clovis, Mid-Paleo, and Dalton point styles, as well as scrapers, burins, gravers, utilized flakes, knives, and hammerstones (Gardner 1980; Custer 1984; Funk 1972). Paleoindian sites can be divided into several types based on artifact assemblage and stone tool/debitage distribution. Based on the Flint Run complex sites in the Shenandoah Valley, the Paleoindian settlement systems during the Pleistocene were based on the distribution of cryptocrystalline lithic material sources and a delimited territory which was located within approximately 20 miles of a central base camp. A model of five functionally related site types was developed by Gardner (1977):
1) Quarries, procurement of lithic materials for inclusion in tool kits consisting of bifacial knives, scrapers, wedges, cores, and flake tools (Stewart 1980);
2) Quarry reduction areas, where lithic materials would be worked down into more easily transported forms (Wall 1976);
3) Quarry related base camps, macro band settlements where intra-band social and economic activities were carried out (Gardner 1979); 4) Base camp maintenance stations, micro band units at resource procurement/exploitation areas such as floodplain swamps were additional lithic maintenance activities would be carried out (Gardner 1977). An example of a base camp is the Thunderbird site in Virginia; 5) Outlying hunting sites, short-term hunting camps either within the core settlement area or beyond. The model was based on a selective mobility within a territory based on access to cryptocrystalline materials
as opposed to models depicting highly mobile populations constantly in search of game. Smaller, specialized sites, such as quarries and reduction sites, were utilized for brief periods by smaller groups than those at base camps (Dent 1995). The Higgins Site Paleoindian occupation represents a small, short-term campsite occupied by a highly mobile small band (Ebright 1992). The documentation of Paleoindian sites is rare in northeastern West Virginia and western Maryland and so far is typically confined to isolated
7
projectile points. The paucity of Paleoindian sites in the region may be partially explained or related to both a lack of research and the lack of known available cryptocrystalline lithic sources in the region. The Archaic Period (8,000 – 1,000 B.C.) is often divided into early, middle, and late periods, and is noted for drastic environmental changes that effect settlement patterns and substance practices. However, the
subsistent settlement patterns that existed during the Paleoindian period did not change drastically during the Early Archaic period (8000 B.C. – 6500 B.C.). This is evident by the continued re-occupation of the same locales previously utilized during the Paleoindian period indicating the continuation of a quarry-based
subsistence pattern (Gardner 1974). One of the few changes was the projectile point form which evolved from fluted and non-fluted triangle forms to notched points possibly reflecting a change from hand-held spears to the use of a atlatl (Gardner 1976). Toolkits of the Early Archaic included ground stone tools and
chipped-stone axes in addition to what would have been found in Paleoindian toolkits (Geier 1990:70; Dent 1995:170; Gardner 1989). Early Archaic people began to exploit a greater variety of habitats as well as a wider variety of lithic resources (Gardner 1976). By the end of the Early Archaic period sites are found in habitats far removed from the traditional Paleo-environments and are exploiting a wider range of food and lithic resources (Wall 1981). The settlement patterns that developed during the latter part of the Early Archaic carried over into the Middle Archaic period (6500 B.C. – 3000 B.C.) as adaptations to a deciduous forest environment. The populations became more sedentary with the stability and availability of various resources, fostering a sense of territoriality based on the given resources located within a physiographic province or drainage basin (Custer 1986). The Middle Archaic subsistent pattern evolved from the specialized hunting pattern of the
previous two periods to a generalized foraging adaptation influenced by seasonally available resources (Wall 1981). The tool kit of the Middle Archaic reflected this adaption, with multipurpose tools made from an assortment of lithic materials, drills, stone axes and ground stone tools (Gardner 1980). Grinding tools,
such as mortars and pestles, indicate the increased reliance on plants in the diet. The Higgins Site produced fragments of mortars and pestles within its Middle Archaic component (Ebright 1992). Drills and other wood-working tools, such as adzes and celts, were also found in a Middle Archaic tool kit (Dent 1995:
176). Diagnostic tool forms include LeCroy, Kanawha, Stanly, Morrow Mountain, Guilford, Halifax, other bifurcate/ notched-base, contracting-stem, and side notched point types. The Late/Terminal Archaic Period (3000 B.C. – 1200 B.C.) settlement pattern continued with a generalized foraging adaptation, fusion-fission patterns, and an increase of a sedentary lifestyle. Settlement patterns tended to focus more along interior drainages of first order streams, with larger social groupings and increased sedentary lifestyles (Mouer 1991; Wall 1981; Kavanagh 1982). The tool kit of the Late Archaic people grew to include soapstone bowls, net-sinkers, bi-pitted mullers and ground and polished axes, reflecting technology designed for maximum exploitation in a broader spectrum of the environment (Stewart 1980), such as riverine base camps and smaller transient camps into the uplands and mountain zones. Evidence of territory development occurred within the region during the Late Archaic period
through the development of stylistic and territorial zones of diagnostic lithic artifacts. Diagnostic artifacts found in the Late Archaic period include Broadspear variants, such as Savannah River and the Holmes projectile points, Notched Broadspear, Perkiomen, Dry Brook, and Dry Brook Orient projectile points.
The Woodland Period (1200 B.C. – A.D. 1600) was marked by increased sedentism and a gradual shift to the exploitation of domesticated cultigens. The Early Woodland Period (1200 B.C. – 500 B.C.) represents an increased sedentary lifestyle for aboriginal peoples, with larger, long-term sites being serviced by outlying extraction sites (Mouer 1991). Climate evolved into a more stable, moister condition, which allowed for more stable living conditions. Domesticated cultigens, such as corn, beans, and squash, were gradually incorporated into the daily diet. Wild grasses, such as amaranth, and wild plants like polygonum, mustard, and grape, provided additional sources of sustenance (McLearen 1991). Settlement patterning during this period in Western Maryland may have continued to rely on seasonal procurement strategies as horticulture was likely limited within the region (Wall 1981).
8
Regional trade networks that began during the Late Archaic more fully developed during the Early Woodland period. The advent of ceramics and elaborate burial ceremonialism characterize the Early Woodland period in eastern West Virginia and western Maryland. While located on the periphery of cultural development in the Ohio Valley to the west and the eastern coastal region, the region appeared to remain somewhat isolated from these influences due to the natural barriers of the Appalachian Plateau and Ridge
and Valley physiographic region (Wall 1981). Nonetheless, manifestations of trade can be seen in the archeological record and are traceable to the Adena culture in the Ohio Valley. Among the items traded included exotic chert projectile points and cache blades, copper items, polished celts, gorgets, and tubular
pipes. Additional trade items such as marine shell allude to possible eastern coastal trade networks (Wall 1981).
The Middle Woodland period (500 B.C. – A.D. 1000) is marked by a continuation of sedentism and long-distance trade, with movement from large aggregate base camps to smaller seasonal encampments. Throughout eastern Maryland and much of the east coast a shell tempered ware (Mockley) became a clear signature of a Middle Woodland occupation. Wall (1981) noted that in western Maryland the Middle Woodland period is less clearly understood due to the paucity of identified components and a lack of definitive ceramic and projectile point information, but that clarification of the point and ceramic types associated with the Middle Woodland may potentially lead to more sites being recognized and a better understanding formulated. To the west in the Ohio Valley the Hopewell proceeded to further elaborate upon their predecessors the Adena, building larger earthen works, increasing domesticate crops, and intensifying trading networks.
The Late Woodland period (1000 A.D. – 1600 A.D.) is characterized by sedentism and the rise of semi-permanent villages. Village sites would typically be situated near a fresh water source with access to arable land to produce crops. The cultivation of domesticated plants was wide-spread by this period but
exploitation of game and wild plants were still supplemented with forages of locally available resources. Hunting and foraging sites were found in far fewer environments and in lower numbers during this period demonstrating a possible greater reliance on horticulture (Wall 1981). Floodplain locations represented
favorable locales for village sites, likely based on the availability of fertile bottomland soils for agricultural practices and the ease of clearing the land in these areas. Stockade fortifications have been found at some Late Woodland Period village sites, possibly indicating defensive measures used to protect from attacking parties (Griffin 1967). Evidence of stockade settlements began around 1300 A.D. to 1400 A.D.
In western Maryland and northeastern West Virginia, several village sites dating to the Late Woodland period have been identified primarily along or near the Potomac River. Most likely due to the physical topography of the region and the limited availability of broad floodplain settings, many of the sites also contained evidence of occupations that pre-date the Late Woodland settlements. A major cultural manifestation documented within the region is the Monongahela Woodland complex which flourished from A.D. 1000 – A.D. 1635. The ringed villages and hamlets are typically located in two environmental
settings; high bottomlands and hilltops/saddles overlooking rivers (Womsley 1974). The core ofMonongahela settlement is located within southwestern Pennsylvania near the Monongahela andYoughiogheny River confluence, although sites have been documented in western Maryland in both Garrett
and Allegany Counties, primarily along the Potomac River (Wall 1981).
SECTION 3.0 – RESEARCH
3.1 BACKGROUND RESEARCH
Background research, including a review of archival sources, was conducted for the current project location prior to the initiation of field investigations. The aim of this research was to determine the likelihood of encountering sensitive historic properties within the current project area. To assess the potential for
9
encountering prehistoric archaeological resources within the project area, a review of previously recorded archaeological sites and surveys was conducted using the site files and holdings of the MD SHPO. To assess the potential for historic period archaeological and architectural resources within the project area, various documents were reviewed, including historic maps and the databases of both the MD SHPO and NRHP.
The vast forests and mountainous terrain of the Washington County region proved to be a formidable
challenge to Europeans during the initial exploration and settlement of Maryland’s western frontier in the mid-eighteenth-century. The first settlers into the region included Scots-Irish and German settlers migrating from Pennsylvania. Glowing reports of the land’s fertility and abundance of natural resources brought back
by the early explorers prompted an intense interest in land speculation and fur trade. Daniel Dulany, an agent for Lord Baltimore, purchased large tracts of land within the Frederick area in the early 1730s and had his agent, Thomas Cresap, onsite to sell the surveyed tracts to Pennsylvania Germans migrating into the area
(Stegmaier et al 1976:13). Cresap, at the bequest of Dulany, surveyed additional tracts of land further west at the confluence of the North and South Branches of the Potomac, eventually establishing a combined home and trading post at the confluence in 1742, eventually designated as Oldtown (Stegmaier et al 1976:15). Unlike Dulany, the Ohio Company of Virginia, organized in 1747 by a number of prominent Virginians, saw western Maryland as a vantage point to access the Indian fur trade in the Ohio Valley. In 1749, Christopher Gist, an agent for the Ohio Company, arrived at the south side of the Potomac River directly across from Wills Creek, a few miles west of Cresap’s Oldtown, and set about constructing a trading post (Stegmaier et al 1976:15; Feldstein 2006:9). Cresap and a local Native American, Nemacolin, were hired by the Company to survey a potential route from the trading post to the confluence of the Monongahela and Allegany Rivers, roughly 138 kilometers (86 mi) to the northwest (Stegmaier et al 1976:20).
While the Coastal and Piedmont areas of Maryland witnessed the growth of agriculture, the mountainous
western Maryland region was not so fortunate. In response to the French threat, Fort Mount Pleasant was constructed in 1754-55 on the west bank of Wills Creek to protect the settlers. The fortification was enlarged in 1755 and renamed Fort Cumberland by General Edward Braddock after the Duke of Cumberland (Feldstein
2006:9). Braddock’s desire to return to Fort Cumberland and prepare the assault on Fort Duquesne was hampered by the shortage of wagons, munitions, and troop supplies, but eventually he obtained the necessary provisions and returned to the fort on May 10, 1755. On June 10, the main body of the army, consisting of
1,300 soldiers in the 44th and 48th Regiments, 260 men in independent companies, 350 Virginians, 60 Marylanders, and 80 North Carolinians, 10 Pennsylvania Indian scouts, started out for Fort Duquesne. Part of Braddock’s troops followed the earlier path surveyed by Cresap and Nemacolin across the steep passes to the south, which became known as Braddock’s Road, while a second group of soldiers traveled through the Narrows, a natural cut through the Wills and Haystack Mountains to the north (Feldstein 2006:72). By July 8 Braddock’s army was a few miles from Fort Duquesne, having suffered numerous attacks from Indian scouting parties and small parties of French soldiers in the last 20 miles of the journey (Stegmaier et al 1976:42). With the defeat of Braddock’s troops at the Monongahela, western Maryland was left open to attacks from the French and Indian forces, and the Ohio Company with few options to sustain its financial interests in the fur trade.
The conclusion of the American Revolution witnessed an increase in population within Washington County.
Originally part of Frederick County, Washington County, named after George Washington, was established on September 6, 1776 (Maryland State Archives 2025). Elizabethtown, laid out in 1762 by early immigrant and pioneer Jonathan Hagar, was selected as the site of the new county courthouse. Elizabethtown was
eventually renamed Hagerstown after the founder and formally incorporated in 1813 (Maryland State Archives 2025). Population growth in nearby Cumberland and the outlying villages precipitated a sense of separation from Washington County, and in 1789 Allegany County was separated from the western part of
Washington County (Lowdermilk 1971:267). The county's 1790 population of 15,800 increased to 18,659 by 1800 (Salvatore 1997).
Transportation improvements within Washington County opened the region to expanded commerce and development. In 1806, the Cumberland (National) Road was authorized by Congress to connect the populated region of the eastern seaboard to the Ohio River. Construction of the road from Cumberland to the Ohio River in Wheeling, West Virginia, commenced in 1811 and was completed by 1818 (Stegmaier et al 1976:102).
10
Locally, the Bank Road segment of the turnpike, constructed from the Conococheague to Cumberland, was completed by 1822, providing a continuous paved road from Hagerstown to the Ohio river (Williams 1906:151). The effort was monumental, requiring grubbing, clearing and grading of the alignment, removal of stone from the alignment, transport of stone by wagon to the site, and grading and sorting of stone into various sizes, all by hand. Fueled by the financial opportunities, a variety of road improvement projects were
promoted by various charter companies, such as the Hagerstown and Boonsborough Turnpike Company (1819) and the Baltimore, Liberty and Hagerstown Turnpike Company (1815), and often financed by local banks (Williams 1906:152).
The nineteenth century witnessed an increase in transportation projects within county, as well as a focus on the mineral resources buried beneath the terrain. The potential significance of the mineral wealth in the upper region of the Potomac River was noted as early as the 1736 survey of Lord Fairfax’s holdings, where a “Coal
mine” was recorded near George’s Creek (Stegmaier et al 1976:17). In addition, the discovery of marble north of Rohrersville in the Pleasant Valley region provided a source of raw material for buildings and headstones and employment for the local residents (Salvatore 1997). Coal, timber and other goods exported from the upper reaches of the Potomac River were generally transported by flat boats to the markets at Harpers Ferry and Georgetown during spring freshets. To address the deficiencies in waterway transportation, an artificial waterway system was proposed to be constructed along the Potomac River. In May 1828, Congress appropriated $1,000,000 of the projected $4,500,000 cost to construct the Chesapeake and Ohio canal from Georgetown to Cumberland (Stegmaier et al 1976:122). Concurrent with the construction of the canal, the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad sought to establish its foothold in the region. By 1831 the rail line reached Frederick, and on November 1, 1842, the first locomotive on the line arrived in Cumberland (Stegmaier et al 1976:130).
The growth of overland transportation routes facilitated the expansion of agricultural production and development of rural communities. The village of Smithsburg, established in 1814 by Christopher Smith who purchased a large tract called Shadrach's Lot, grew rapidly during the mid- to late 19th century as a center for commerce and public interaction with the surrounding farms. Incorporated in 1841, by 1860, the town included 460 white residents (224 males, 236 females) and 13 free black residents (6 males, 7 females) (Figure 5). Occupations included a milliner, a confectioner, a hotel keeper, a Lutheran minister, a butcher, a physician,
coach and carriage makers, a post mistress, and a laundress (Mueller 1991). The opening of the Western Maryland Railroad through the project area in 1873, connecting the community to Baltimore and Hagerstown and on to the C&O Canal at Williamsport, further encouraged commercial and population growth in the region. While grain crops provided the primary cash crops for early farmers, the late 19th century witnessed a transition from grains to fruit crops, mainly peaches and apples. While the project site itself consisted of undeveloped land, a robust community of businesses, residences, churches and other buildings were centered
on Smithsburg just to the south (Figure 5).
Despite the population growth in the larger cities such as Hagerstown, much of Washington County remained rural and agricultural into the 20th century. The 1912 topographic map of the project area shows the tower lease area in an open setting on the west side of Bradbury Avenue adjacent to a small tributary of Grove Creek (Figures 6). By the early 1970’s Smithsburg High School had been constructed in the project area just west of the APE-DE, with Smithsburg Elementary School built on the southwest side of North Main Street (Figure 7). Interestingly, the topographic map shows a small pond just east of the project site. The 1981 aerial photograph of the project setting confirms the presence of a small pond or borrow pit in a wooded setting east
of the tower lease area with the access easement extending along the south side of the pond (Figure 8). By 1988, however, the pond has been infilled and the woods cleared away, creating an open grassy setting flanking the stream (Figure 9). The setting remained unchanged from the conditions depicted on the 1988
image, other than new trees planted across portions of the proposed tower lease area. In addition, a fiber line has been installed along the extant dirt lane leading west from a handhole at the driveway apron to the high school facility.
There are no archaeological sites or surveys within the Direct APE. However, six (6) surveys were previously recorded within 1-mile of the project area. A summary of these archaeological surveys follows.
11
Figure 5: Project Location ca. 1858 and 1877 (Taggert 1859; Lake, Griffing and Stevenson 1877).
12
Figure 6: Project Location ca. 1912 (United States Geological Survey [USGS] 1912).
13
Figure 7: Project Location ca. 1972 (USGS 1953 [rev 1972]).
14
Figure 8: Project Location ca. 1981 (Google Earth 2025).
15
Figure 9: Project Location ca. 1988 (Google Earth 2025).
16
Survey Number Year Title Author
CR 58 2011 Phase I Archaeological Survey, Monocacy-Ringgold-Carroll 138-230kV Conversion Project, Carroll, Frederick, and Washington Counties, Maryland.
Glenn, Jonathan, David L. Cremeens, and Michael P. Kenneally
WA 190 2019 Phase I archaeological investigation: The Potomac Edison Company (a FirstEnergy Company) Ringgold-Catoctin rebuild project, Washington and Frederick Counties, Maryland.
Petyk, Richard C.
FR 254 2009 Phase I Archaeological Survey, USA Storage Project - PL-1 Pipeline Retest Stations, Frederick and Washington Counties, Maryland.
Dugas, Lisa M
WA 38 1991 Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Allegheny Power System Ringgold-Liberty 138KV Electric Transmission Line, Washington and Frederick Counties, Maryland, Franklin and Adams Counties, Pennsylvania
Ballweber, Hettie L.
MD 1 v. 4 1981 The M/DOT Archaeological Resources Survey, Volume 4: Western Maryland Wesler, Kit W., Dennis J. Pogue, Aileen F. Button, Robert J. Hurry, Gordon J. Fine, Patricia A. Sternheimer, and E. Glyn Furgurson FR 11 1977 Archeological Reconnaissance of the Loudon to Leidy Pipeline Geasey, Spencer O.
Table 1: Archaeological Surveys within 1-mile of the Project Location.
In addition, six (6) archaeological resources have been previously recorded within a 1-mile radius of the
project site. A summary of these archaeological resources follows.
Site Number Year Resource
Type
Cultural Affiliation NRHP
Eligibility
Distance from
Project (km)
18WA32 1975 Unknown; reported burials Prehistoric, possibly Archaic Unevaluated 1.52
18WA447 1991 Short-term camp; artifact concentration
Archaic; early 19th century Unevaluated 1.24
18WA31 1975 Short-term camp or base camp
Archaic Unevaluated 1.58
18WA448 2018 Short-term camp Prehistoric Unevaluated 1.14
18WA30 1975 Base camp Archaic Unevaluated 0.97
18WA93 2018 Possible short-term camp Late Woodland Unevaluated 1.06
Table 2: Archaeological Resources within 1-mile of the Project Location.
A review of the Maryland Historical Trust’s (MHT) online database, MEDUSA, and the National Register Information System website (http://www.nr.nps.gov/) was conducted for the project area on June 25, 2025, by Scott Emory, Trileaf Senior Project Archaeologist IV. Based on this review, no NRHP-listed, NRHP-eligible or potentially eligible historic properties were recorded within the APE for Direct Effects. One (1) NRHP-listed Historic District and one (1) NRHP-eligible Historic Property were identified within the project’s ½-mile APE for Visual Effects (Figure 10).
The National Park Service Historic Trails Interactive GIS map was also reviewed. A National Historic Trail is recognized by the National Park Service as carrying the same significance as being listed in the NRHP
and is therefore considered a Historic Property. No known portion of a National Historic Trail intersects with the project or is located within a ½-mile of the project location.
17
Figure 10: Architectural Resources within the ½-mile APE-VE.
18
3.2 RESEARCH DESIGN
Trileaf designed the Phase I archaeological survey to locate and identify all archaeological and above ground cultural resources within the Direct APE, defined as the 60-foot by 80-foot lease area including the 40-foot by 60-foot fenced compound and 10-foot-wide landscape buffer, plus a 25-foot buffer, the 12-foot-wide gravel turnaround, and 12-foot-wide access drive that will extend approximately 45 feet south then 180 feet east and connect with an existing asphalt drive, and to evaluate the potential significance of any newly identified archaeological sites. A cultural resource is gauged to be significant if it meets at least one of four criteria for eligibility for listing in the NRHP:
A. Associated with significant events in the broad patterns of national history, B. Associated with the lives of persons significant in our past, C. Representative of a type, period, or method of construction, or the work of a master,
D. Capable of yielding important information about the past.
Criterion D typically applies to archaeological sites. In order to be capable of yielding important information about the past, generally a site must possess artifacts, soil strata, structural remains, or other
cultural features that make it possible to test historical hypotheses, corroborate and amplify currently available information, or reconstruct the sequence of the local archaeological record. To be considered significant, archaeological sites must demonstrate sufficient integrity to answer important research
questions. These questions are developed in association with temporally, regionally, and thematically defined historic contexts or study units (U.S. Department of the Interior 1997).
3.3 SITE PROBABILITY
In general, most predictive site location models include distance to a permanent water source as a major factor in determining the existence and probable density of archaeological sites. There is a higher probability of encountering precontact archaeological sites closer to a source of fresh water, although distance will vary from location to location depending on an area’s topography and accessibility. There is a greater likelihood of encountering precontact sites on and around landforms located near rivers, streams, and natural freshwater lakes. In contrast, historic period sites, can be found more equally distributed across the uplands and valleys
due to the ability to access water by excavating wells.
Based on the topography of the project area, historic aerial photographs, distance to a permanent water source, and taking into consideration current land use, historic and recent commercial and residential development in the region, we believe there is a low probability for encountering undisturbed archaeological artifacts or features within the proposed project’s APE for direct effects.
SECTION 4.0 – FIELD METHODS AND RESULTS
4.1 ARCHAEOLOGY
The field investigation at this location was conducted by Scott Emory on September 22, 2025. Standard archaeological field equipment included shovels, trowels, and a quarter-inch wire mesh sifting screen. Based on the Maryland Historical Trust’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeological Investigations in
Maryland, the field survey techniques utilized were a combination visual inspection of the project setting and shovel-testing at 49.2 ft (15-m) intervals, with a standard shovel test unit consisting of a hand-excavated hole, approximately 17.7 in (45 cm) in diameter and/or deep enough to reach culturally sterile subsoils.
As shown in Table 3, the tower lease area, access easement, and utility easement consisted of a truncated subsoil occasionally capped with fill associated with the infilling of the pond. STP 2 depicts the typical soil profile consisting of a 4.7-inch-thick (in) (12 centimeter [cm]) yellowish brown (10YR 5/4) silt loam A-
19
horizon containing 50 percent gravels and some cobbles overlying an 11-in-thick (28 cm) yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) mottled with brown (10YR 4/3) and light gray (10YR 7/2) silt loam fill containing 20% gravels and some cobbles, followed by a brown to light brown (7.5YR 5/3-6/3) silty clay B-horizon containing 40 percent gravels and some cobbles (Table 3; Figure 11; Appendix A, Photograph 17). No artifacts or cultural features were recorded in the test pits or elsewhere in the APE-DE. Total archaeological field time: 1 person,
4 hours.
STP No. STP Location Depth (cm below surface) Soil Description Artifacts Recovered Latitude/ Longitude 1 NW corner A: 0-30 10YR5/4 SiLo; 50% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'35.57"N / 77°34'22.58"W
B: 30-59 7.5YR6/4 SiLo; 70% gravels, some cobbles N/A
2 NE corner A: 0-12 10YR5/4 SiLo; 50% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'35.47"N / 77°34'21.96"W
Fill: 12-40 10YR5/6 mottled w/ 10YR4/3 and 7/2 SiLo; compact; 20% gravels, some cobbles
N/A
B: 40-60 7.5YR5/3-6/3 SiCl; 40% gravels, some cobbles; bedrock at 43 cmbs in east half of STP, slopes downward to west
N/A
3 Tower center A: 0-20 10YR5/4 SiLo; 50% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'35.28"N / 77°34'22.32"W
B: 20-30 7.5YR5/6 SiClLo; 70% gravels, some cobbles N/A
4 SW corner A: 0-18 10YR5/4 SiLo; 40% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'35.08"N / 77°34'22.70"W
Fill: 18-44 10YR6/4 SiLo; 70% gravels, some cobbles N/A
B: 44-54 7.5YR5/6 SiClLo; 70% gravels, some cobbles N/A
5 SE corner A: 0-15 10YR5/3 SiLo; 20% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'34.98"N / 77°34'22.08"W
Fill: 15-33 10YR5/4 mottled w/ 10YR5/6 SiLo; 60% gravels, some cobbles N/A
B: 33-40 7.5YR5/3-6/3 SiCl; 50% gravels, some cobbles N/A
40+ Bedrock 6 Access easement A: 0-13 10YR5/3 SiLo; 40% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'34.79"N / 77°34'22.45"W
Fill: 13-34 10YR5/6 mottled w/ 10YR5/4 and 7/2 SiLo; 60% gravels, some cobbles N/A
B: 34-56 10YR4/4 SiLo; 70% gravels, some cobbles N/A
56+ Cobble impasse
7 Access easement A: 0-20 10YR4/4 SiLo; 40% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'34.49"N / 77°34'22.21"W
B: 20-37 7.5YR5/6 SiCl; 60% gravels, some
cobbles
N/A
8 Access easement A: 0-20 10YR4/4 SiLo; 40% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'34.40"N / 77°34'21.57"W
Fill: 20-47 10YR5/4 SiLo; 70% gravels, some cobbles N/A
B: 47-58 7.5YR5/6 SiClLo; 70% gravels, some cobbles N/A
9 Access easement Fill: 0-30 7.5YR5/4 SaClLo; 40% gravels, some cobbles, asphalt chunks, road gravels N/A 39°39'34.31"N / 77°34'20.94"W
30+ Cobble impasse
10 Access easement Not excavated – in driveway apron 39°39'34.14"N / 77°34'20.35"W
Table 3: Shovel Test Pit Descriptions.
20
Figure 11: Shovel Test Pit Location and Project Boundary Map (Google Earth 2025).
21
4.2 ABOVE GROUND CULTURAL RESOURCES
As noted above, a review of the MD SHPO databases and the National Register Information System website (http://www.nr.nps.gov/) was conducted on June 25, 2025, by Scott Emory, Senior Project Archaeologist IV with Trileaf. The results of that review indicated that the project’s ¾-mile APE-VE contains one (1) NRHP-eligible historic district and one (1) NRHP-eligible historic property.
Trileaf Assistant Project Manager/Architectural Historian, Michael Hart, meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Historic Preservation Professional Qualifications Standards for Architectural History and has reviewed those resources identified within the APE for the current project in Tables 4 and 5, below.
Project # and Status of Subject Property (Monopole)
Project Name/ Address of Subject Property Photograph of Subject Property Description of Subject Property Summary of Effects on Subject Property
766917 Not Eligible or Contributing
Smithsburg High School 66 North Main Street, Smithsburg, MD 21783 39.65975611111111 -77.57283027777777
The Subject Property is not an individually listed historic structure. Further, it is not a designated National Historic Landmark nor is it a property listed in, or eligible for listing on the NRHP.
No Effect The proposed design is minor and necessary for the community. This will have no effect on the Subject Property.
Table 4: Description of the Subject Property.
Listed or Formally Eligible Historic Resource
Name and/or Address of Historic Resource in Smithsburg, MD 21783
Photograph of Historic Resource Summary of Criteria and/or Description of Historic Resource
Summary of Effects on Historic Resource
WA-IV-273 Eligible
SHA Small Structure 21065X0 MD 66 over Tributary to Beaver Creek
This resource was determined to be eligible for listing on the NRHP in 2015 under Criterion C (Design/Architecture) by the MD SHPO. (MEDUSA 2025)
No Adverse Effect The proposed project is the construction of a 199-foot-tall monopole telecommunications tower. The project will have an overall height of 199 feet. Due to distance, vegetation (including tree coverage around the parent parcel) and other modern intrusions in the form of utility lines, the proposed project will have no adverse effect on any character-defining features WA-IV-259 Eligible
Smithsburg Historic District Water and Main Streets
This resource was determined to be eligible for listing on the NRHP in 2004 under Criterion A (Event) and Criterion C (Design/Architecture) by the MD SHPO. (MEDUSA 2025)
No Adverse Effect The proposed project is the construction of a 199-foot-tall monopole telecommunications tower. The project will have an overall height of 199 feet. Due to distance, vegetation (including tree coverage around the parent parcel) and other modern intrusions in the form of utility lines, the proposed project will have no adverse effect on any character-defining features
Table 5: Description of Historic Resources within the ½-mile APE-VE for the Project Location.
22
SECTION 5.0 – CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 CONCLUSIONS
The field survey of the project area, which included a visual inspection and shovel test pits, yielded no evidence for the presence of archaeological properties within the current project area or 25-foot (8.3 meter)
boundary of the APE-DE.
There have been six (6) previous archaeological surveys conducted within a mile of the current project area, and six (6) previously recorded archaeological sites. No NRHP-listed or eligible properties have been previously recorded within the project area’s APE-DE; however, one (1) NRHP-eligible historic district and one (1) NRHP-eligible historic property have been recorded within the project’s ½-mile APE-VE.
The National Park Service Historic Trails Interactive GIS map was also reviewed. A National Historic Trail is recognized by the National Park Service as carrying the same significance as being listed in the NRHP and is therefore considered a Historic Property. No known portion of a National Historic Trail intersects with the project or is located within a ½-mile of the project location.
5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on these findings, Trileaf recommends No Historic Properties in the APE-DE and No Adverse Effect to Historic Properties in the APE-VE. It is therefore recommended that project clearance be granted with no further investigation or evaluation of the project area relative to those resources. However, in the unlikely event that human remains are uncovered through the course of construction, work is to immediately cease,
and proper area authorities notified.
23
REFERENCES CITED
Custer, Jay F. 1984 Delaware Prehistory Archeology: An Ecological Approach. University of Delaware Press, Newark, Delaware. 1986 Late Woodland Cultures of the Middle Atlantic Region. University of Delaware Press, Newark, Delaware. Dent, Richard J.
1985 Amerind Society and the Environment: Evidence from the Upper Delaware valley. In Shawnee Minisink, Charles McNett, editor. Academic Press, New York, New York.
1995 Chesapeake Prehistory: Old Traditions, New Directions. Interdisciplinary Contributions to Archeology series. Plenum Press, New York, New York. Ebright, Carol 1992 Early Native American Prehistory on the Maryland Western Shore: Archaeological Investigation at the Higgins Site. Report prepared for the Maryland State Railroad Administration. Maryland State Highway Administration Project Planning Division, Environmental Evaluation Section, Archaeological Report Number 1. Federal Communications Commission 2004 Appendix B – Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for Review of Effects on Historic Properties for Certain Undertakings Approved by the Federal Communications Commission. Feldstein, Albert L.
2006 Allegany County. Arcadia Publishing, Charleston, South Carolina. Funk, Robert G.
1972 Early Man in the Northeast and the Late Glacial Environment. Man in the Northeast 4:7-39. Gardner, William M. 1974 The Flint Run Paleoindian Complex: A Preliminary Report 1971-73 Seasons. Occasional Publication No. 1. Archeology Laboratory, Department of Anthropology, The Catholic University of America, Washington, D.C. 1976 Paleo-Indian to Early Archaic: Continuity and Change in Eastern North America during the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene. Paper presented at the Ninth International Congress of Prehistoric and Protohistoric Sciences. 1977 Flint Run Paleoindian Complex and Its Implications for Eastern North American Prehistory. In
Amerinds and their Paleoenvironmetns in Northeastern North America. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 288: 257-263
1979 Paleoindian Settlement Patterns and Site Distribution in the Middle Atlantic. Paper presented to the Anthropological Society of Washington. Washington, D.C.
1980 Settlement-Subsistence Strategies in the Middle and South Atlantic Portions of the Eastern United States during the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene. Paper presented at the American Anthropological Association Meetings, Washington, D.C.
24
1989 An Examination of Cultural Change in the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene (circa 9200 to 6800 B.C.). In Paleoindian Research in Virginia: A Synthesis, J. Mark Wittkofski and Theodore R. Reinhart, editors, pp. 5-51. Archeological Society of Virginia, Special Publication No. 19. TheDietz Press, Richmond, Virginia.
Geier, Clarence R. 1990 The Early and Middle Archaic Periods: Material Culture and Technology. In Early and Middle Archaic Research in Virginia: A Synthesis. Theodore R. Reinhart and Mary Ellen N. Hodges,
editors, pp. 81-98. Archeological Society of Virginia, Special Publication No. 22. The Dietz Press, Richmond, Virginia.
Google Earth 2025 Aerial photograph, 66 North Main Street, Smithsburg, MD.
Griffin, James B. 1967 Eastern North American Archeology: A Summary. Science 156:175-191.
Kavanagh, Maureen 1982 Archeological Resources of the Monocacy River Region, Frederick and Carroll Counties, Maryland. Submitted to the Maryland Historical Trust, Frederick County Planning Commission, Carroll County Planning and Zoning Commission.
Lake, Griffing & Stevenson 1877 An Illustrated Atlas of Washington County, Maryland. Philadelphia: Lake, Griffing & Stevenson.
Lowdermilk, Will H. 1971 History of Cumberland. Reprint of the 1878 edition. Regional Publishing Company, Baltimore, Maryland.
Maryland Historical Trust - MEDUSA 2025 Archives Search for 66 North Main Street, Smithsburg, MD. Webpage, https://mht.maryland.gov/secure/medusa/, accessed June 25, 2025.
Maryland State Archives
2025 Washington County, Maryland – Historical Chronology. Webpage, https://msa.maryland.gov/msa/mdmanual/36loc/wa/chron/html/wachron.html, accessed September 25, 2025.
McNett, Charles W., ed. 1985 Shawnee-Minisink. Academic Press, New York, New York.
Mouer, Daniel
1991 The Formative Transition in Virginia. In PaleoIndian Research in Virginia: A Synthesis, edited by T.R. Reinhardt and M.E. Hodges, pp. 1-88. Council of Virginia Archeologists, Richmond, Virginia.
Mueller, Julianne 1991 Smithsburg Historic District, Maryland Inventory of Historic Places form. One file at the Maryland Historical Trust, Crownsville, MD.
National Park Service
2025 National Register of Historic Places Website. www.nps.gov/nr/, accessed September 2025.
25
Salvatore, Susan 1997 Rohrersville Historic District, Maryland Inventory of Historic Places form. One file at the Maryland Historical Trust, Crownsville, MD. Stegmaier, Harry I., Jr., David M. Dean, Gordon E. Kershaw, and John B. Wiseman
1976 Allegany County: A History. McClain Printing Company, Parsons, West Virginia. Stewart, Michael
1980 Prehistoric Settlement and Subsistence Patterns and the Testing of Prehistoric Site Location
Models in the Great Valley of Maryland. Doctoral dissertation, Catholic University of America,
Washington, D.C.
Taggert, Thomas 1859 A Map of Washington County. Hagerstown, MD: F.M. Kee and C.G. Robertson.
United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA, NRCS) 2006 Land Resource Regions and Major Land Resource Areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. United States Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. 2025 United States Department of Agriculture Website. www.nrcs.usda.gov/, accessed June 25, 2025. U.S. Department of the Interior 1997 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, National Register Bulletin. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB-15_web508.pdf, accessed September 2025. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 1912 Hagerstown, MD 15-minuite quadrangle map. Washington, D.C.
1953 Smithsburg, MD 7.5-minute quadrangle map. Revised 1972. Washington, D.C.
2023 Smithsburg, MD 7.5-minute quadrangle map. Washington, D.C. Wall, Robert D.
1976 The Lockhart Site: Functional Analysis in a Paleo-Indian Complex. M.A. thesis, Department of
Anthropology, Catholic University of America, Washington, D.C.
1984 An Archaeological Study of the Proposed Crellin Sewage Treatment Facility, Garrett County, Maryland. On file at the Maryland Historical Trust, Crownsville, Maryland.
Willey, Gordon R. 1966 An Introduction to American Archeology Vol. I: North and Middle America. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. Williams, Thomas J. C. 1906 A History of Washington County, Maryland. Chambersburg, Pa.: J.M. Runk & L.R. Titsworth. Womsley, William D. 1974 The Monongahela Culture: A Study of Marginality. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation, Dept. of
Anthropology, Pennsylvania State University, State College.
26
APPENDIX A: PROJECT LOCATION PHOTOGRAPHS
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
APPENDIX B: RESUMES
38
39
40
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 6. Tribal and NHO Involvement
At an early stage in the planning process, the Nationwide Agreement requires the Applicant to gather
information from appropriate Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (“NHOs”) to assist in the
identification of Historic Properties of religious and cultural significance to them. Describe measures
taken to identify Indian tribes and NHOs that may attach religious and cultural significance to Historic
Properties that may be affected by the construction within the Areas of Potential Effects (“APE”) for
direct and visual effects. If such Indian tribes or NHOs were identified, list them and provide a summary
of contacts by either the FCC, the Applicant, or the Applicant’s representative. Provide copies of
relevant documents, including correspondence. If no such Indian tribes or NHOs were identified, please
explain.
Trileaf Corporation completed the Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS) on September
23, 2025, and received the notification of interested tribes on September 26, 2025. The attached
FCC Notification email lists the Tribes identified through the TCNS process. A second notice will
be sent to all interested tribes/organizations, after a period of 30 days and the consultation
process will continue per the FCC’s guidelines. Any relevant comments from Tribes received by
Trileaf will be forwarded to your office.
1
Michael Romanoski
From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov
Sent:Friday, September 26, 2025 2:02 AM
To:Tribal
Cc:tcnsweekly@fcc.gov
Subject:NOTICE OF ORGANIZATION(S) WHICH WERE SENT PROPOSED TOWER CONSTRUCTION
NOTIFICATION INFORMATION - Email ID #9332596
Categories:Mike
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organizaƟon. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Applicant:
Thank you for using the Federal CommunicaƟons Commission's (FCC) Tower ConstrucƟon NoƟficaƟon System
(TCNS). The purpose of this electronic mail message is to inform you that the following authorized persons were sent the
noƟficaƟon that you provided through TCNS, which relates to your proposed antenna structure. The informaƟon was
forwarded by the FCC to authorized TCNS users by electronic mail and/or regular mail (leƩer). We note that the review
period for all parƟes begins upon receipt of the Submission Packet pursuant to SecƟon VII.A of the NPA and noƟficaƟons
that do not provide this serve as informaƟon only.
Persons who have received the noƟficaƟon that you provided include leaders or their designees of federally-
recognized American Indian Tribes, including Alaska NaƟve Villages (collecƟvely "Tribal NaƟons"), NaƟve Hawaiian
OrganizaƟons (NHOs), and State Historic PreservaƟon Officers (SHPOs). For your convenience in idenƟfying the
referenced Tribal NaƟons and NHOs and in making further contacts, the City and State of the Seat of Government for
each Tribal NaƟon and NHO, as well as the designated contact person, is included in the lisƟng below. We note that
Tribal NaƟons may have SecƟon 106 cultural interests in ancestral homelands or other locaƟons that are far removed
from their current Seat of Government. Pursuant to the Commission's rules as set forth in the NaƟonwide ProgrammaƟc
Agreement for Review of Effects on Historic ProperƟes for Certain Undertakings Approved by the Federal
CommunicaƟons Commission (NPA), all Tribal NaƟons and NHOs listed below must be afforded a reasonable opportunity
to respond to this noƟficaƟon, consistent with the procedures set forth below, unless the proposed construcƟon falls
within an exclusion designated by the Tribal NaƟon or NHO. (NPA, SecƟon IV.F.4).
The noƟficaƟon that you provided was forwarded to the following Tribal NaƟons and NHOs. A Tribal NaƟon or
NHO may not respond unƟl a full Submission Packet is provided. If, upon receipt, the Tribal NaƟon or NHO does not
respond within a reasonable Ɵme, you should make a reasonable effort at follow-up contact, unless the Tribal NaƟon or
NHO has agreed to different procedures (NPA, SecƟon IV.F.5). In the event a Tribal NaƟon or NHO does not respond to a
follow-up inquiry, or if a substanƟve or procedural disagreement arises between you and a Tribal NaƟon or NHO, you
must seek guidance from the Commission (NPA, SecƟon IV.G). These procedures are further set forth in the FCC's Second
Report and Order released on March 30, 2018 (FCC 18-30).
1. TCNS Coordinator Billie Anderson - Delaware NaƟon - 31064 State Highway 281 (PO Box: 825) Anadarko, OK -
tcns@delawarenaƟon-nsn.gov - 405-247-2448 (ext: 1403) - electronic mail
2
Exclusions: The Delaware NaƟon of Oklahoma Historic PreservaƟon Office has developed the following consultaƟon
procedures for all TCNS projects idenƟfied as undertakings by the Federal CommunicaƟons Commission. In the email
subject line, please specify whetherthe project is for a tower, small cell, or collocaƟon. Our response can be given faster
with this informaƟon.
2. TCNS Rep Bryan Printup - Tuscarora NaƟon - 5226 Walmore Rd Via: Lewiston, NY - bprintup@heƞ.org - 716-264-
6011 (ext: 103) - electronic mail
If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Tuscarora NaƟon within 30 days aŌer noƟficaƟon
through TCNS, the Tuscarora NaƟon has no interest in parƟcipaƟng in pre-construcƟon review for the proposed site. The
Applicant/tower builder,
however, must immediately noƟfy the Tuscarora NaƟon in the event archaeological properƟes or human remains
are discovered during construcƟon, consistent with SecƟon IX of the NaƟonwide ProgrammaƟc Agreement and
applicable law.
3. THPO Lawrence Plucinski - Bad River Band of Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians - (PO Box: 39) Odanah, WI -
thpo@badriver-nsn.gov; deputyTHPO@badriver-nsn.gov - 715-682-7123 - electronic mail
If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa
Indians within 30 days aŌer noƟficaƟon through TCNS, the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians
has no interest in parƟcipaƟng in pre-construcƟon review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder,
however, must immediately noƟfy the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians in the event
archaeological properƟes or human remains are discovered during construcƟon, consistent with SecƟon IX of the
NaƟonwide ProgrammaƟc Agreement and applicable law.
4. THPO William Tarrant - Seneca-Cayuga NaƟon - 23701 S 655 Road (PO Box: 453220) Grove, OK -
wtarrant@sctribe.com - 918-787-5452 (ext: 344) - electronic mail and regular mail
Exclusions: Please refrain from sending review informaƟon via email. We request all informaƟon to be sent via mail to PO
Box 453220, Grove, OK 74345.
5. Director Lora Nuckolls - Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma - 70400 East HWY 60 WyandoƩe, OK -
celltower@estoo.net - 918-238-5151 (ext: 1840) - regular mail
Exclusions: Submit one printed color copy by US postal mail or other parcel carrier of all documentaƟon to:
Eastern Shawnee Tribe
AƩn: Cell Tower Program
70500 E. 128 Rd.
WyandoƩe, OK 74370
3
Provide a 1-page cover leƩer with the following informaƟon:
a. TCNS Number
b. Company Name
c.Project Name, City, County, State
d. Project type
e. Project coordinates
f. Contact informaƟon
The Eastern Shawnee Procedures document is available and highly recommended for guidance; send an email to
celltower@estoo.net requesƟng our most current copy.
If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma within 30 days
aŌer noƟficaƟon through TCNS, the Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma has no interest in parƟcipaƟng in pre-
construcƟon review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder,
however, must immediately noƟfy the Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma in the event archaeological properƟes or
human remains are discovered during construcƟon, consistent with SecƟon IX of the NaƟonwide ProgrammaƟc
Agreement and applicable law.
6. THPO Sherri Clemons - WyandoƩe NaƟon - 8 Turtle Drive WyandoƩe, OK - sclemons@wyandoƩe-naƟon.org - 918-
678-6344 - electronic mail
Exclusions: Please refrain from sending informaƟon via mail. We ONLY accept informaƟon via email to:
sclemons@wyandoƩe-naƟon.org. We will advise if we require addiƟonal informaƟon.
7. THPO Tonya Tipton - Shawnee Tribe - 29 South 69A Highway Miami, OK - tcns@shawnee-tribe.com - 918-542-
2441 (ext: 103) - electronic mail
Exclusions: In the case of projects with NO ground disturbance such as antennae on the sides of buildings or exisƟng
poles, the Shawnee Tribe concurs that no known historic properƟes will be negaƟvely impacted by the project. The
Shawnee Tribe DOES NOT wish to consult on those projects with NO ground disturbance.
If the project DOES involve ground disturbance at all, the Shawnee Tribe would like to ACCEPT your invitaƟon for
consultaƟon and will provide a review.
If you have any quesƟons, you may contacƩhe Shawnee Tribe via email at TCNS@shawnee-tribe.com
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
The noƟficaƟon that you provided was also forwarded to the following SHPOs in the State in which you propose
to construct and neighboring States. The informaƟon was provided to these SHPOs as a courtesy for their informaƟon
and planning. You need make no effort at this Ɵme to follow up with any SHPO that does not respond to this
noƟficaƟon. Prior to construcƟon, you must provide the SHPO of the State in which you propose to construct (or the
4
Tribal Historic PreservaƟon Officer, if the project will be located on certain Tribal lands), with a Submission Packet
pursuant to SecƟon VII.A of the NPA unless the project is excluded from SHPO review under SecƟon III D or E of the NPA.
8. SHPO Elizabeth Hughes - Maryland Historical Trust - 100 Community Place Third Floor Crownsville, MD -
mht.secƟon106@maryland.gov - 410-697-9541 - electronic mail
9. Historic PreservaƟon Supervisor Barbara Frederick - Pennsylvania State Historic PreservaƟon Office - Pennsylvania
Historical & Museum Commission 400 North St, 2nd Floor Harrisburg, PA - bafrederic@pa.gov - 717-772-0921 -
electronic mail
10. Deputy SHPO Susan M Pierce - West Virginia Division of Culture & History, Historic PreservaƟon Office - 1900
Kanawha Boulevard East Charleston, WV - susan.pierce@wvculture.org - 304-558-0240 - electronic mail
11. Deputy SHPO Susan Pierce - West Virginia Division of Culture & History, Historic PreservaƟon Office - 1901
Kanawha Boulevard East Charleston, WV - susan.pierce@wvculture.org - -- - electronic mail
TCNS automaƟcally forwards all noƟficaƟons to all Tribal NaƟons and SHPOs that have an expressed interest in
the geographic area of a proposal. However, if a proposal for PTC wayside poles falls within a designated exclusion, you
need not expect any response and need not pursue any addiƟonal process with that Tribal NaƟon or SHPO. In addiƟon, a
parƟcular Tribal NaƟon or SHPO may also set forth policies or procedures within its details box that exclude from review
certain faciliƟes (for example, a statement that it does not review collocaƟons with no ground disturbance; or that
indicates that no response within 30 days indicates no interest in parƟcipaƟng in pre-construcƟon review).
Please be advised that the FCC cannot guarantee that the contact(s) listed above have opened and reviewed an
electronic or regular mail noƟficaƟon. If you learn that any of the above contact informaƟon is no longer valid, please
contact the FCC by emailing tcnshelp@fcc.gov. The following informaƟon relaƟng to the proposed tower was forwarded
to the person(s) listed above:
NoƟficaƟon Received: 09/23/2025
NoƟficaƟon ID: 301839
Excluded from SHPO Review: No
Tower Owner Individual or EnƟty Name: Milestone Towers
Consultant Name: Michael Romanoski
Street Address: 1515 Des Peres Rd. Ste 200
Suite 200
City: St. Louis
State: MISSOURI
Zip Code: 63131
Phone: 314-997-6111
5
Email: tribal@trileaf.com
Structure Type: MTOWER - Monopole
LaƟtude: 39 deg 39 min 35.3 sec N
Longitude: 77 deg 34 min 22.3 sec W
LocaƟon DescripƟon: 66 North Main Street
City: Smithsburg
State: MARYLAND
County: WASHINGTON
Detailed DescripƟon of Project: New 199Ō-tall monopole communicaƟons tower, and associated equipment, within a
new 60Ō x 40Ō fenced compound, and a new 12Ō-wide gravel access drive that will extend approximately 150Ō
southeast and connect with an exisƟng asphalt drive.
Ground ElevaƟon: 219.2 meters
Support Structure: 59.4 meters above ground level
Overall Structure: 60.7 meters above ground level
Overall Height AMSL: 279.9 meters above mean sea level
If you have any quesƟons or comments regarding this noƟce, please contact the FCC using the electronic Help Request
form located on the FCC's website at:
hƩps://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=hƩps-3A__www.fcc.gov_wireless_available-2Dsupport-
2Dservices&d=DwIFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-
v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=tVy9dfE6fJUkHc15_Itk39MNoGtgWe1vmeedh3_FbFk&m=hG-
JCSMvkhhvGefDXDWwa2cfvhC1VZng4ql_qZaIN0NtOgTCcB3tEGKcEptjavkq&s=6Gm-h4i-
oIOi3CYmfuyif88FNTF954Fd5Csh_f5xE7M&e=
You may also call the FCC Support Center at (877) 480-3201 (TTY 717-338-2824). Hours are from 8:00 a.m. to
6:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday (except Federal holidays). To provide quality service and ensure security,
all telephone calls are recorded.
Thank you,
Federal CommunicaƟons Commission
----------
This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint EssenƟals. Visit the following link to report this email as
spam:
hƩps://us1.proofpointessenƟals.com/app/report_spam.php?mod_id=11&mod_opƟon=logitem&report=1&type=easysp
am&k=k1&payload=53616c7465645f5f175555ee05534f4fe9761312a3416a64509ac384db18f02427874874fc1084ef01e2
0132af60e21714c316ef7280f3f008b17e7b8938bd84bd080ee6fa0d254de0760c1cb78d0e05167045fa89bb1be46b5bb80
a8b4e6b511ef97bbf962c469b72e09fdf3f38049edc0d47f458d840ebd231a5ab111260c0da8d3c4a5673ba4141093b8223
d16bf0476cefc9aa6605cd65e793f47ce4d1ea
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 7. Historic Properties Direct Effects
a. List all properties within the APE for direct effects.
Project # and
Status of
Subject
Property
(Monopole)
Project Name/ Address of
Subject Property
Photograph of Subject Property Description of Subject Property Summary of
Effects on Subject
Property
766917
Not Eligible
or
Contributing
Smithsburg High School
66 North Main Street,
Smithsburg, MD 21783
39.65975611111111
-77.57283027777777
The Subject Property is not an
individually listed historic
structure. Further, it is not a
designated National Historic
Landmark nor is it a property
listed in, or eligible for listing on
the NRHP.
No Effect
The proposed
design is minor and
necessary for the
community. This
will have no effect
on the Subject
Property.
b. Provide the name and address (including U.S. Postal Service ZIP Code) of each property in the
APE for direct effects, not listed in part “a” (above), that the Applicant considers to be eligible
for listing in the National Register as a result of the Applicant’s research. For each such property,
describe how it satisfies the criteria of eligibility (36 C.F.R. Part 63). For each property that was
specifically considered and determined not to be eligible, describe why it does not satisfy the
criteria of eligibility.
There are no additional properties in the APE for direct effects not listed in part “a.”
c. Describe the techniques and the methodology, including any field survey, used to identify
Historic Properties within the APE for direct effects.1 If no archeological field survey was
performed, provide a report substantiating that: i) the depth of previous disturbance exceeds
the proposed construction depth (excluding footings and other anchoring mechanisms) by at
least 2 feet; or, ii) geomorphological evidence indicates that cultural resource-bearing soils do
not occur within the project area or may occur but at depths that exceed 2 feet below the
proposed construction depth.2
1 Pursuant to Section VI.D.2.a. of the Nationwide Agreement, Applicants shall make a reasonable and good faith
effort to identify above ground and archeological Historic Properties, including buildings, structures, and historic
districts, that lie within the APE for direct effects. Such reasonable and good faith efforts may include a field survey
where appropriate.
2 Under Section VI.D.2.d. of the Nationwide Agreement, an archeological field survey is required even if none of
these conditions applies, if an Indian tribe or NHO provides evidence that supports a high probability of the
presence of intact archeological Historic Properties within the APE for direct effects.
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 7. Continued
The field investigation at this location was conducted by Scott Emory on September 22, 2025.
Standard archaeological field equipment included shovels, trowels, and a quarter-inch wire mesh
sifting screen. Based on the Maryland Historical Trust’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeological
Investigations in Maryland, the field survey techniques utilized were a combination visual
inspection of the project setting and shovel-testing at 49.2 ft (15-m) intervals, with a standard
shovel test unit consisting of a hand-excavated hole, approximately 17.7 in (45 cm) in diameter
and/or deep enough to reach culturally sterile subsoils.
As shown in Table 3, the tower lease area, access easement, and utility easement consisted of a
truncated subsoil occasionally capped with fill associated with the infilling of the pond. STP 2
depicts the typical soil profile consisting of a 4.7-inch-thick (in) (12 centimeter [cm]) yellowish
brown (10YR 5/4) silt loam A-horizon containing 50 percent gravels and some cobbles overlying
an 11-in-thick (28 cm) yellowish brown (10YR 5/6) mottled with brown (10YR 4/3) and light gray
(10YR 7/2) silt loam fill containing 20% gravels and some cobbles, followed by a brown to light
brown (7.5YR 5/3-6/3) silty clay B-horizon containing 40 percent gravels and some cobbles. No
artifacts or cultural features were recorded in the test pits or elsewhere in the APE-DE. Total
archaeological field time: 1 person, 4 hours.
Based on the findings of this survey, Trileaf recommends that there are No Historic Properties in
the Direct APE. It is therefore recommended that project clearance be granted with no further
investigation or evaluation of the project area relative to those resources.
Please refer to the Cultural Resources Report provided in Attachment 5 for additional information.
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
STP
No.
STP Location Depth (cm
below surface)
Soil Description Artifacts
Recovered
Latitude/
Longitude
1 NW corner A: 0-30 10YR5/4 SiLo; 50% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'35.57"N / 77°34'22.58"W
B: 30-59 7.5YR6/4 SiLo; 70% gravels, some cobbles N/A
2 NE corner A: 0-12 10YR5/4 SiLo; 50% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'35.47"N / 77°34'21.96"W
Fill: 12-40 10YR5/6 mottled w/ 10YR4/3 and 7/2
SiLo; compact; 20% gravels, some cobbles
N/A
B: 40-60 7.5YR5/3-6/3 SiCl; 40% gravels, some cobbles; bedrock at 43 cmbs in east half
of STP, slopes downward to west
N/A
3 Tower center A: 0-20 10YR5/4 SiLo; 50% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'35.28"N / 77°34'22.32"W
B: 20-30 7.5YR5/6 SiClLo; 70% gravels, some
cobbles
N/A
4 SW corner A: 0-18 10YR5/4 SiLo; 40% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'35.08"N / 77°34'22.70"W
Fill: 18-44 10YR6/4 SiLo; 70% gravels, some cobbles N/A
B: 44-54 7.5YR5/6 SiClLo; 70% gravels, some
cobbles
N/A
5 SE corner A: 0-15 10YR5/3 SiLo; 20% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'34.98"N / 77°34'22.08"W
Fill: 15-33 10YR5/4 mottled w/ 10YR5/6 SiLo; 60%
gravels, some cobbles
N/A
B: 33-40 7.5YR5/3-6/3 SiCl; 50% gravels, some
cobbles
N/A
40+ Bedrock
6 Access
easement
A: 0-13 10YR5/3 SiLo; 40% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'34.79"N / 77°34'22.45"W
Fill: 13-34 10YR5/6 mottled w/ 10YR5/4 and 7/2
SiLo; 60% gravels, some cobbles
N/A
B: 34-56 10YR4/4 SiLo; 70% gravels, some cobbles N/A
56+ Cobble impasse
7 Access
easement
A: 0-20 10YR4/4 SiLo; 40% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'34.49"N / 77°34'22.21"W
B: 20-37 7.5YR5/6 SiCl; 60% gravels, some cobbles N/A
8 Access
easement
A: 0-20 10YR4/4 SiLo; 40% gravels, some cobbles N/A 39°39'34.40"N / 77°34'21.57"W
Fill: 20-47 10YR5/4 SiLo; 70% gravels, some cobbles N/A
B: 47-58 7.5YR5/6 SiClLo; 70% gravels, some
cobbles
N/A
9 Access easement Fill: 0-30 7.5YR5/4 SaClLo; 40% gravels, some cobbles, asphalt chunks, road gravels N/A 39°39'34.31"N / 77°34'20.94"W
30+ Cobble impasse
10 Access easement Not excavated – in driveway apron 39°39'34.14"N / 77°34'20.35"W
Table 1: Shovel Test Pit Descriptions
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Figure 1: Map of Shovel Test Pit Location (Google Earth 2022).
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 8. Historic Properties Visual Effects
Historic Properties Identified for Visual Effects Guidelines
a.Provide the name and address (including U.S. Postal Service ZIP Code) of each property in the
APE for visual effects that is listed in the National Register, has been formally determined
eligible for listing by the Keeper of the National Register, or is identified as considered eligible
for listing in the records of the SHPO/THPO, pursuant to Section VI.D.I.a. of the Nationwide
Agreement.
Listed or Formally Eligible Historic Resource
Name and/or Address of Historic Resource in Smithsburg, MD 21783
Photograph of Historic Resource Summary of Criteria and/or Description of Historic Resource
Summary of Effects on Historic Resource
WA-IV-273
Eligible
SHA Small Structure
21065X0
MD 66 over Tributary
to Beaver Creek
This resource was
determined to be eligible
for listing on the NRHP in
2015 under Criterion C
(Design/Architecture) by
the MD SHPO. (MEDUSA
2025)
No Adverse Effect
The proposed project is the
construction of a 199-foot-
tall monopole
telecommunications tower.
The project will have an
overall height of 199 feet.
Due to distance, vegetation
(including tree coverage
around the parent parcel)
and other modern intrusions
in the form of utility lines,
the proposed project will
have no adverse effect on
any character-defining
features
WA-IV-259
Eligible
Smithsburg Historic
District
Water and Main
Streets
This resource was
determined to be eligible
for listing on the NRHP in
2004 under Criterion A
(Event) and Criterion C (Design/Architecture) by
the MD SHPO. (MEDUSA
2025)
No Adverse Effect
The proposed project is the
construction of a 199-foot-
tall monopole telecommunications tower.
The project will have an
overall height of 199 feet.
Due to distance, vegetation
(including tree coverage
around the parent parcel)
and other modern intrusions
in the form of utility lines,
the proposed project will
have no adverse effect on
any character-defining
features
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 8. Continued
b. Provide the name and address (including U.S. Postal Service ZIP Code) of each Historic
Property in the APE for visual effects, not listed in part “a”, identified through the comments
of Indian Tribes, NHOs, local governments, or members of the public. Identify each individual
or group whose comments led to the inclusion of a Historic Property in this attachment. For
each such property, describe how it satisfies the criteria of eligibility (36 C.F.R. Part 63).
As of the date of this report, Trileaf Corporation has not received comments from Indian Tribes,
NHOs or members of the public that identify Historic Properties in the APE for visual effects.
c. For any properties listed in the above Historic Properties list, that the Applicant considers no
longer eligible for inclusion in the National Register, explain the basis for this
recommendation.
N/A
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 9. Local Government
a. If any local government has been contacted and invited to become a consulting party pursuant
to Section V.A. of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement, list the local government agencies
contacted. Provide a summary of contacts and copies of any relevant documents (e.g.,
correspondence or notices).
On September 23, 2025, Ms. Meghan Jenkins, GIS Coordinator for the Washington County Historic
District, was notified of the proposed project. They have been invited to comment on the
proposed project’s potential effect on Historic Properties and to indicate whether they are
interested in consulting further on the proposed project. On October 1, 2025, Ms. Jenkins
responded via email stating that the proposed tower location is in an area of tree planting that
was done in agreement with the Washington County Public Schools and County Water Quality
Department. On November 20, 2025, Ms. Jenkins was forwarded correspondence with the County
regarding the intent to replace any trees that are removed to another location on campus. At this
time, Ms. Jenkins has not yet expressed any desire to be a consulting party regarding effects on
historic properties. If any further correspondence should be received, it will be submitted as an
addendum to this submission. A copy of Trileaf Corporation’s correspondence is attached.
b. If a local government agency will be contacted but has not been to date, explain why and when
such contact will take place.
N/A
303 International Circle, Suite 150, Hunt Valley, Maryland 21030 - 410.853.7128 - www.trileaf.com
September 23, 2025
Washington County Historic District Attn: Meghan Jenkins – Senior Planner 100 West Washington Street, Suite 2600 Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Phone: (240) 313-2430 Email: mjenkins@washco-md.net
RE: Milestone Towers – Smithsburg High School / Trileaf Project #766917 66 North Main Street, Smithsburg, MD 21783 Washington County, Smithsburg Quadrangle (USGS)
Latitude: 39° 39’ 35.298” N, Longitude: 77° 34’ 22.321” W
Greetings:
Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a Section 106 Review at the referenced property. Our client proposes to construct a 195-foot-tall monopole communications tower, with an overall height of 199 feet including attachments, and associated ground-based equipment, within a new 60-foot by 40-foot (2,400 square feet) fenced compound. The project also includes a proposed 12-foot-wide gravel access drive that will extend approximately 150 feet generally southeast and connect with an existing asphalt drive. The site is currently manicured grass-covered lawn. The antennas will be licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering or culture, that is listed, or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on an Indian
Religious Site.
Trileaf is requesting information regarding this tower’s potential effect on Historic Properties. All information
received will be forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) as part of the Section 106 review process. Additionally, this invitation to comment is separate from any local planning/zoning process that may apply to this project.
If you wish to comment or be considered a consulting party, please respond within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter. If a response is not received within thirty (30) days, it will be assumed that you have no objections to this undertaking. A site topography map and aerial photograph are enclosed for your reference.
Please call me at (410) 853-7128 ext. 902 or email e.boone@trileaf.com if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.
Sincerely,
Elsie Boone
Assistant Project Manager
From:Elsie Boone
To:Jenkins, MeghanSubject:RE: Invitation to Comment - Proposed Telecommunications Project - Trileaf #766917
Date:Thursday, November 20, 2025 9:26:00 AM
Attachments:Re Smithsburg High School - Washington County comment.msgimage008.pngimage009.pngimage010.pngimage011.pngimage012.pngimage013.pngimage014.pngimage015.png
Hi Meghan,
Please see attached email correspondence between our client and the County regarding the tree planting areas that may be
disrupted during construction of the proposed tower. It sounds like the plan would be to work on replacing any trees that need
removed to another location on campus.
Please let me know if you have any questions or additional comments/concerns. Please also let me know if you have any
comment on the tower’s potential effects on historic properties in the area in particular.
Thank you,
Elsie Boone
Assistant Project Manager
303 International Circle, Suite 150Hunt Valley, MD 21030
Office: (410) 853-7128 ext. 902
Mobile: (443) 966-4013
From: Jenkins, Meghan <mjenkins@washco-md.net>
Sent: Wednesday, October 1, 2025 3:52 PM
To: Elsie Boone <e.boone@trileaf.com>
Subject: RE: Invitation to Comment - Proposed Telecommunications Project - Trileaf #766917
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know
the content is safe.
Hello Elsie,
The location of your proposed telecommunications tower is an area of tree planting that was done in agreement with
the Washington County Public Schools and the County Water Quality Department. Is your organization aware that thearea is a formal tree reforestation area? The HDC would like to be involved in this process however I don’t know if can
provide further comment knowing there is a potential issue with the site as proposed on your documentation. You canview those on our web application here:
https://washcomd.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/b1d24a5239bb4ea8af8da1a88b472964
Thank you.
Meghan Jenkins, GISP
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Coordinator | Historic District Commission (HDC)747 Northern AvenueHagerstown, MD 21742P: (240) 313-2439 | F: (240) 313-2431www.washco-md.net
(Pronouns: she/her/hers)
Get Connected and See Updates
NOTICE: This e-mail, including any attachments, is intended solely for the use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential, proprietary and privileged
information, the unauthorized disclosure or use of which is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this email or if you received this e-mail in error,please immediately notify the sender by reply email and delete this e-mail and any attachments from your system. Thank you.
Book time to meet with me
From: Elsie Boone <e.boone@trileaf.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 10:05 AM
To: Jenkins, Meghan <mjenkins@washco-md.net>
Subject: Invitation to Comment - Proposed Telecommunications Project - Trileaf #766917
WARNING!! This message originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution
when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.
Any claims of being a County official or employee should be disregarded.
Good morning,
Please see the attached in reference to a second proposed telecommunications project on an existing communications facility in
Smithsburg, MD.
As part of our property consultation, we invite a local government contact to comment, if desired, on the potential effects the
project may have on historic properties.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Elsie Boone
Assistant Project Manager
303 International Circle, Suite 150
Hunt Valley, MD 21030Office: (410) 853-7128 ext. 902Mobile: (443) 966-4013
From:Reed, Alexander
To:Proulx, Jeffrey; Matthew PenningCc:Matt Forkas; Rollins, Robert; Swauger, John
Subject:Re: Smithsburg High School - Washington County comment
Date:Wednesday, October 29, 2025 1:23:03 PM
Attachments:image001.pngimage002.pngimage003.pngimage004.png
image005.png
image006.png
image007.png
image008.png
Outlook-2t5uawei.png
Outlook-cid_image0.png
Outlook-cid_image0.png
Outlook-cid_image0.pngOutlook-cid_image0.png
Good afternoon!
Thank you for reaching out. We understand that the cell tower is going to be located in one of our tree
plantings and we would love to work with you all to replace any trees that are removed to another location on
campus. The trees are counted towards the impervious acreage treatment goals that EPA has given to the
County (of which WCPS properties are included) so we have zero objections to replacing the trees somewhere
else on campus. My cell is 240-203-0431 if you would like to speak more about any of this.
All the best,
Alex Reed
Watershed Specialist
16232 Elliott Parkway
Williamsport, MD 21795-4083
P: 240-313-2677 | C: 240-203-0431
www.washco-md.net
Get Connected and See Updates
NOTICE: This e-mail, including any attachments, is intended solely for the use of the addressee(s) and may
contain confidential, proprietary and privileged information, the unauthorized disclosure or use ofwhich is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this email or if you received this e-mail in error,please immediately notify the sender by reply email and delete this e-mail and any attachments from your
system. Thank you.
From: Proulx, Jeffrey <ProulJef@wcps.k12.md.us>
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2025 1:12 PM
To: Matthew Penning <matt@milestonetowers.com>; Reed, Alexander <areed@washco-md.net>
Cc: Matt Forkas <matthew@milestonetowers.com>; Rollins, Robert <RolliRob@wcps.k12.md.us>
Subject: RE: Smithsburg High School - Washington County comment
WARNING!! This message originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution
when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.Any claims of being a County official or employee should be disregarded.
Alex, By way of this email, I am connecting you with staff of Milestone Communications. We have been working on plans
to install a cellular communications tower adjacent to the Smithsburg HS stadium. I recall from the planning we did a few years ago, that WCPS was told the tree planting that were done could be takenout if we needed to develop property that was idle at the time.
We have come to that point in Smithsburg. What are our options? Would we need to replant the trees that are takenout?
I appreciate your thoughts and comments on this matter. Jeff
Jeffrey M. Proulx | Chief Operating Officer
Cultivating learning communities that spark curiosity, ignite creativity, and inspire success
301.766.2827 (office) 240.983.5039 (mobile)
Washington County Public Schools | www.wcpsmd.com
10435 Downsville Pike, Hagerstown, MD 21740
From: Matthew Penning <matt@milestonetowers.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2025 9:36 AM
To: Proulx, Jeffrey <ProulJef@wcps.k12.md.us>
Cc: Matt Forkas <matthew@milestonetowers.com>
Subject: Re: Smithsburg High School - Washington County comment
Caution: This email originated from outside of WCPS. Do not click links or open attachments, unlessyou recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi Jeff, Good morning - it'll probably be faster if we work with this through Alex Reed or whoever is familiar with the
project.
Meghan is the coordinator for the HDC and most likely just looking at the GIS at potential issues before sheworks with the HDC on their review / comment on our project. Let me know if you'd like me to reach out to Alex (and contact information, if you have it) -
Thanks,
Matt Penning
Director of Development
matt@milestonetowers.com703.865.4697 (office)
1801 Old Reston Ave, #101
Reston, VA 20190
milestonetowers.com
From: Proulx, Jeffrey <ProulJef@wcps.k12.md.us>
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2025 8:15 AM
To: Matthew Penning <matt@milestonetowers.com>
Cc: Matt Forkas <matthew@milestonetowers.com>
Subject: RE: Smithsburg High School - Washington County comment
Matt,
We were under the understanding that if the trees needed to come out, we could take them out at a later date. Dothey want them replanted in another area on the campus?
Alex Reed, is the person we worked with on establishing the planting areas.
Jeff
From: Matthew Penning <matt@milestonetowers.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2025 5:05 PM
To: Proulx, Jeffrey <ProulJef@wcps.k12.md.us>
Cc: Matt Forkas <matthew@milestonetowers.com>
Subject: Fw: Smithsburg High School - Washington County comment
Caution: This email originated from outside of WCPS. Do not click links or open attachments, unless
you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hi Jeff -
Good afternoon sir - we received the below comment from Washington County HDC in regards to towerlocation at Smithsburg HS. They are engaged as part of our NEPA / Historic Review process. I believe we discussed the tree reforestation on-site as not being a major concern. Is there anyone at theCounty you recommend we speak with?
The project is slated to go before Smithsburg BZA on Dec 3, tentatively.
Let me know your thoughts or if you want to discuss further. Thanks,Matt Penning
Director of Development
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 10. Other Consulting Parties and Public Notice
List additional consulting parties that were invited to participate by the Applicant, or independently
requested to participate. Provide any relevant correspondence or other documents.
On September 23, 2025, the Washington County Historical Society was notified of the proposed project.
They were invited to comment on the proposed project’s potential effect on Historic Properties and to
indicate whether they are interested in consulting further on the proposed project. A copy of Trileaf’s
correspondence with the Historical Society is attached. As of this date, no response has been received
from the Historical Society. Should a response be received, a copy will be forwarded to all consulting
parties as an addendum to this packet.
You are required to provide a Public Notice Attachment.
Attached, please find a copy of a legal notice regarding the proposed telecommunications tower
construction that was posted in the Herald-Mail on September 26, 2025. As of the date of this submission
packet, no comments regarding this notice have been received by Trileaf Corporation. Should a response
be received, copies will be forwarded to all consulting parties as an addendum to this submission packet.
303 International Circle, Suite 150, Hunt Valley, Maryland 21030 - 410.853.7128 - www.trileaf.com
September 23, 2025
Washington County Historical Society 135 West Washington Street Hagerstown, Maryland 21740 Phone: (301) 797-8782
Email: info@washcohistory.org
RE: Milestone Towers – Smithsburg High School / Trileaf Project #766917 66 North Main Street, Smithsburg, MD 21783 Washington County, Smithsburg Quadrangle (USGS) Latitude: 39° 39’ 35.298” N, Longitude: 77° 34’ 22.321” W
To Whom It May Concern:
Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a Section 106 Review at the referenced property. Our client proposes to construct a 195-foot-tall monopole communications tower, with an overall height of 199 feet including attachments, and associated ground-based equipment, within a new 60-foot by 40-foot (2,400 square feet) fenced compound. The project also includes a proposed 12-foot-wide gravel access drive that will extend approximately 150 feet generally southeast and connect with an existing asphalt drive. The site is currently manicured grass-covered lawn. The antennas will be licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on or within the viewshed of a building, site,
district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering or culture, that is listed, or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on an Indian Religious Site.
Trileaf is requesting information regarding this tower’s potential effect on Historic Properties. All information received will be forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) as part of the Section 106 review
process. Additionally, this invitation to comment is separate from any local planning/zoning process that may apply to this project.
If you wish to comment or be considered a consulting party, please respond within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter. If a response is not received within thirty (30) days, it will be assumed that you have no objections to this undertaking. A site topography map and aerial photograph are enclosed for your reference.
Please call me at (410) 853-7128 ext. 902 or email e.boone@trileaf.com if you need additional information or
have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.
Sincerely,
Elsie Boone Assistant Project Manager
NT SUBMISSION PACKET – FCC FORM 620
Approved by OMB
3060-1039
See instructions for
Public burden estimates
Applicant’s Name: Milestone Towers
Project Name: Smithsburg High School
Project Number: 766917
FCC Form 620
Attachment 11. SHPO Specific Forms
N/A
From:towernotifyinfo@fcc.gov
To:Elsie Boone
Subject:Section 106 Notification of SHPO/THPO Concurrence- Email ID #11976391
Date:Thursday, January 8, 2026 10:17:37 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
This is to notify you that the Lead SHPO/THPO has concurred with the following filing:
Date of Action: 01/08/2026Direct Effect: No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)
Visual Effect: No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APEComment Text: None
File Number: 0011799314
TCNS Number: 301839Purpose: New Tower Submission Packet
Notification Date: 7AM EST 11/28/2025
Applicant: Milestone Towers
Consultant: Trileaf CorporationPositive Train Control Filing Subject to Expedited Treatment Under Program Comment: No
Site Name: Smithsburg High SchoolSite Address: 66 North Main Street
Detailed Description of Project: New 199ft-tall monopole communications tower, andassociated equipment, within a new 60ft x 40ft fenced compound, and a new 12ft-wide gravel
access drive that will extend approximately 150ft southeast and connect with an existingasphalt drive.
Site Coordinates: 39-39-35.3 N, 77-34-22.3 WCity: Smithsburg
County: WASHINGTON State:MD
Lead SHPO/THPO: Maryland Historical Trust
NOTICE OF FRAUDULENT USE OF SYSTEM, ABUSE OF PASSWORD ANDRELATED MISUSE
Use of the Section 106 system is intended to facilitate consultation under Section 106 of theNational Historic Preservation Act and may contain information that is confidential, privileged
or otherwise protected from disclosure under applicable laws. Any person having access toSection 106 information shall use it only for its intended purpose. Appropriate action will be
taken with respect to any misuse of the system.
Lloyd Yavener, Chair Michael Lushbaugh
Justin Bedard, Vice Chair Tyler Milam
Ann Aldrich Gregory Smith
Brianna Candelaria Randal Leatherman,
BOCC Rep HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
WWW.WASHCO-MD.NET
747 Northern Avenue | Hagerstown, MD 21742 | P: 240.313.2430 | F: 240.313.2431 | TDD: 7-1-1
DATE: January 15, 2026
TO: Board of Zoning Appeals
c/o Katie Rathvon
747 Northern Avenue
Hagerstown, MD 21742
FROM: Meghan Jenkins, HDC Staff
SUBJ: AP2025-034, 20659 National Pike, Boonsboro
The Rural Village of Beaver Creek where this property is located has not been surveyed in its entirety for historic
resource purposes but there are several excellent examples of stone architecture scattered throughout the village, of
which, this structure is included. The subject property does contain resources identified in the Washington County
Historic Sites Survey/Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties #WA-II-099, Christian Newcomer House. The main house
is a 2 ½ story coursed fieldstone structure with a 1 ½ story el addition to the rear. It has had modern additions extending
to the north for both more living space and an attached garage but otherwise the main house is intact from the survey.
The barn from the farm complex has had modern siding and framing added but the stone end walls and foundation
appear to be retained as well. The complex is associated with Christian Newcomer, who was a prominent early leader of
the Brethren Church. Overall, this farm complex retains enough integrity to continue to be significant for vernacular
stone architecture and associations with Newcomer. The proposed use of the property as a primary residence is
consistent with its use historically. In addition, the applicant also wishes to utilize existing buildings for Banquets and
Receptions. The use of large open grassy areas and currently paved/gravel areas is also proposed. As these accessory
uses proposed would utilize existing buildings or are of a temporary nature, staff does not feel they will adversely impact
the historic resources. The applicant should note that the Historic District Commission would strongly recommend
reviewing the Design Guidelines for Historic Structures for Washington County prior to exterior work or property
grading to ensure any work will not negatively impact the resources.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this application.
Sincerely,
Meghan Jenkins
Att: 1, WA-II-099 documentation
303 International Circle, Suite 150, Hunt Valley, Maryland 21030 - 410.853.7128 - www.trileaf.com
December 4, 2025 Washington County Historic District
Attn: Mr. Meghan Jenkins 100 West Washington Street, Suite 2066 Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
Phone: (240) 313-2430 Email: mjenkins@washco-md.net RE: The Towers, LLC – Sharpsburg / US-MD-5102 – Trileaf Project #746609 5404 Mondell Road, Sharpsburg, Maryland 21782 Washington County, Shepherdstown Quadrangle (USGS) Latitude: 39° 27’ 47.32” N, Longitude: 77° 45’ 18.29” W
Greetings: Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a Section 106 Review at the referenced property. Our client
proposes to construct a new 195-foot-tall monopole communications tower with an overall height of 199 feet including appurtenances. The tower and associated ground-based equipment will be installed within a new 50-foot by 50-foot (2,500 square feet) fenced compound within a larger 75-foot by 75-foot (5,625 square feet) lease
area. Access will be granted via a proposed 12-foot-wide gravel access drive within a larger 30-foot-wide access and utility easement that will extend approximately 200 feet, generally northeast away from the compound, to an existing lot associated with the residential and agricultural development on the parcel. This easement will extend
an additional approximately 650 feet further southeast to connect to Mondell Road. This site is currently an agricultural field. The antenna will be licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering or culture, that is listed, or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on an Indian Religious Site. Trileaf is requesting information regarding this tower’s potential effect on Historic Properties. All information received will be forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) as part of the Section 106 review process. Additionally, this invitation to comment is separate from any local planning/zoning process that may
apply to this project. If you wish to comment or be considered a consulting party, please respond within thirty (30) days of the date of
this letter. If a response is not received within thirty (30) days, it will be assumed that you have no objections to this undertaking. A site topography map and aerial photograph are enclosed for your reference.
Please call me at (410) 853-7128 ext. 902 or email e.boone@trileaf.com if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.
Sincerely,
Elsie Boone
Assistant Project Manager
Shepherdstown Quadrangle, West Virginia (2023)
Contour Interval = 20 Feet Latitude: 39° 27’ 47.32” N, Longitude: 77° 45’ 18.29” W
North
Site Vicinity Map
The Towers, LLC – Sharpsburg 5404 Mondell Road Sharpsburg, MD 21783
Site Location
Site Location & Surrounding Properties
Site Location
Aerial Photographs (2025)
The Towers, LLC – Sharpsburg 5404 Mondell Road
Sharpsburg, MD 21783
Easement
PlanSite
C-1
Know what's below.Call before you dig.
ve
r
t
i
c
a
l
br
i
d
g
e
DetailsSite
C-2
Know what's below.Call before you dig.
ve
r
t
i
c
a
l
br
i
d
g
e
Know what's below.Call before you dig.
ve
r
t
i
c
a
l
br
i
d
g
e
AntennaDetails &
Elevation
C-3
Lloyd Yavener, Chair Michael Lushbaugh
Justin Bedard, Vice Chair Tyler Milam
Ann Aldrich Gregory Smith
Brianna Candelaria Randal Leatherman,
BOCC Rep HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION OFWASHINGTON COUNTY, MARYLAND
WWW.WASHCO-MD.NET 747 Northern Avenue | Hagerstown, MD 21742 | P: 240.313.2430 | F: 240.313.2431 | TDD: 7-1-1
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJ:
December 23, 2025
Board of Zoning Appeals
c/o Katie Rathvon
747 Northern Avenue
Hagerstown, MD 21742
Meghan Jenkins, HDC Staff
AP2025-031, 5404 Mondell Road, Special Exception for Commercial Communication
Tower
Historic District Commission (HDC) staff reviewed the special exception documentation provided
by the applicant. Staff offers the following for the consideration of the Board of Zoning Appeals:
1.The applicant states “the property is a non-residential use in the middle of an area of
residential and agricultural zoning districts…”. This property’s existing land use is a mix of
residential and agricultural and is consistent with adjacent land uses. It is not non-residential
which is mentioned in more than one place in this application. The proposed change of this
special exception will introduce commercial use in an area predominantly incongruous with
commercial activity due to nearby existing land use, preservation easements and
government owned lands. These existing conditions are consistent with the purpose of the
Preservation Zoning District as stated in the Zoning Ordinance. Staff has attached a map of
preserved lands adjacent to this site as well as the existing zoning of this area.
2.The applicant states “tree cover existing around the property on adjacent properties will
further minimize the need for additional screening.” The tree cover surrounding this
property is primarily deciduous and will provide limited screening for several months out of
the year. This is supported by several of the photo simulations provided. Staff recommends
screening facilities using native evergreen mixed species.
3.The visual impact survey using photo simulations, while appreciated, did not provide a GIS
generated viewshed to inform the locations the technician chose to photograph nor to show
the full impact of visibility. The photos where no visibility were noted were not provided for
context. Staff would suggest that the BZA request a GIS generated viewshed analysis that
indicates the level of visibility of the tower to ensure that the areas of potential impact can
be seen and photographed in a logical and consistent manner. The tower’s visibility to
residents will not be limited to roads so the supplement of the viewshed analyses will help
determine impact more appropriately. Staff has provided a basic GIS viewshed indicating
widespread visibility of this site.
4.The applicant has provided no documentation regarding the existing co-location facility on
the Sharpsburg Water Tower which is less than a mile from this proposed location. Their
narrative regarding viable co-location is generalized and provides little detail regarding their
alternative analyses completed.
5.While this proposed tower is not located in the Appalachian Trail Corridor, Antietam Overlay
or Historic Preservation zoning districts which require stealth technology, it should be noted
that this proposed tower is within half a mile of the Antietam Overlay 2 and less than a mile
of the Antietam National Battlefield. The Antietam Overlays were designed to minimize
impacts of residential and commercial uses within view of the Battlefield. The viewshed
analyses used to create these areas more than 40 years ago did not take into account a 199’
tower as a commercial use for their delineation. The intent of the AO is to ensure that uses
are compatible with the agricultural and historic character of the area. While outside of the
AO this commercial use will not be compatible, and stealth technology should be required
should this application proceed. Staff has provided a zoning map with distance buffers for
visual reference.
6.The applicant responded to “consideration shall be given to the view shed associated with
the scenic and historic areas and the use of stealth technology to minimize the visibility of
the proposed tower” with minimal information that was generalized. The only historic
resource directly referenced in their documentation is Antietam Battlefield and there are
other resources within a ½ mile, including the Sharpsburg National Register district or
resources directly on this site which should have their impacts considered. The applicant can
utilize the Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties MEDUSA to locate these resources and
provide appropriate resource impact analyses. Visibility varies in these areas but there are
impacts and, if approved, mitigation of these impacts such as stealth technology is
recommended for this site. Staff has provided a map of known National Register sites
including the basic viewshed analysis.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this application.
Sincerely,
Meghan Jenkins, GISP
HDC Staff
Att:
Map of National Register of Historic Places with viewshed
Map of existing zoning conditions with distance buffers
Map of Antietam National Battlefield with viewshed
AP2025-031, Mondell Tower
POWEL
WARh'1NGl This m.ip was aHted by theW.uhln(Jton County Pl.1rvwrc De,iMrtment and is lnlendcd tor 1he rtdpltnt, uw onty ll n no1 for �r� d1stribUtion to th• public, and lhoud not be sc.ilfd « copted. � mod1ficloons or chances to fflmap are problbit!dwMout the �ss prior wntten �owl of the Plltlnlfll 0,ep�ment GIS Souorces of the NG coru.a1ned hereon .-,e !com v.tnou, publ,c llgiet'ICllff � tn� hive vi.fl testrictfQnS or d1$Cl�rs.
• TowerSite
� Viewshed Analysis D National Register Historic Places
3,000
Feet
1 inch equals 3,000 feet
Th-t parc:el l1ni:-� J.hown on thn map ;:ne df'rivtd from a v,a�ty of ,ources whrch have the.r own a«urac.y st.11.nd.-rcb. The p:i,rc.el lones au, ,1p,prox1rn1t� *"d for 1nform,u:ionJ1I purposes ONLY They are nol gu;u.ariteH by W.nhlngton County M;uyfand or the MafYland De�1tn\f'nt of t �:sessn'lcinu .11nd Ta:uitions to� free of e-rr0rs induding t-rror, of om1U1ot1, com.m1uion, po$1bgnaf accuracy or •nv attnbute$ ,1J)QC1,ued w11h real prq�rry They $),.all nol be copied, reprodfj(ed or scaled In any w•v without the eJCptess p1ior wntten approval of Washington County M;uyl,11nd PbMmg ;and Zoning Dop,11r1m•nt This d.3ta, DOES NOT replac.• an ;acc;ur.11-wr-wy b',' a, hten.s.cd ptof,euiono11I and information sh•II be venfi� wing the relev;ant deed.s, plats and other recorded leg.al documents by the user
AP2025-031, Mondell Tower
/
/
1...-
,,. ,,. ,,.
WARh'1NGl This m.ip was aHted by theW.uhln(Jton County Pl.1rvwrc De,iMrtment and is lnlendcd tor 1he rtdpltnt, uw onty ll n no1 for �r� d1stribUtion to th• public, and lhoud not be sc.ilfd «copied_� mod1ficloons or chances to fflmap are problbit!dwMout the �ss prior wntten �owl of the Plltlnlfll 0,ep�ment GIS Souorces of the NG coru.a1ned hereon .-,e !com v.triou, publ,c. llgiet'ICllff � tnay h111e vi.fl testrictfQnS or d1$Cl�rs.
• TowerSite
r _, Site Buffer (miles)
G:] Antietam Overlay 1 t:::J Antietam Overlay 2
lS:S:J Antietam Overlay 3
E] Historic Preservation Overlay
rz..;i Rural Business
A(R)
-EC
p
RV
TOWN
,,.
3,000
Feet
.... \
\/
\ 'I
� i� � ��1!O,qO�
. . \, ,\. . I
... . I I
I
I
I
I
I
.. . . . . . . . U"' � p u��i �-
--,,--�'l::<Sll -'-/'\� ,,. ;,; re)� ,,-
J Th-t parc:el l1ni:-� J.hown on thn map ;:ne df'rivtd from a v,a�ty of ,ources whrch have the.r own a«urac.y st.11.nd.-rcb. The p:i,rc.el lones au, ,1p,prox1rn1t� *"d for 1nform,u:ionJ1I purposes ONLY They po$1bgnaf accuracy or •nv attnbut�$ ,1J)o<:1,ued w11h real prq�rry They $),.all nol be copied, reprodfj(ed or scaled In any w•v without the eJCptess p1ior wntten approval of Washington County M;uyl,11nd Pbnnmg ;and Zoning Dop,11r1.m•nt This d.ata, DOES NOT repla(.♦ an ;acc;ur.11-1 inch equals 3,000 feet
are nol gu;u.ariteH by W.nhlngton County M;uyfand or the MafYland De�1tn\f'nt of t �:sessn'lcinu .11nd Ta:uitions to � free of e-rr0rs induding t-rror, of om1U1ot1, com.n'11Uion, wr-wy by a hcen.s.cd ptofeuiono11I and information shall be venfi� wing the relev;ant deed.s, plats and other rMorded leg.al documents by the user
AP2025-031, Mondell Tower
WARh'1NGl This m.ip was aHted by theW.uhln(Jton County Pl.1rvwrc De,iMrtment and is lnlendcd tor 1he rtdpltnt, uw onty ll n no1 for �r� d1stribUtion to th• public, and lhoud not be sc.ilfd « copted. � mod1ficloons or chances to fflmap are problbit!dwMout the �ss prior wntten �owl of the Plltlnlfll 0,ep�ment GIS Souorces of the NG coru.a1ned hereon .-,e !com v.tnou, publ,c llgiet'ICllff � tn� hive vi.fl testrictfQnS or d1$Cl�rs. 3,000
• TowerSite 00 Viewshed Analysis Feet
Antietam National Battlefield 1 inch equals 3,000 feet
Th-t parc:el l1ni:-� J.hown on thn map ;:ne df'rivtd from a v,a�ty of ,ources whrch have the.r own a«urac.y st.11.nd.-rcb. The p:i,rc.el lones au, ,1p,prox1rn1t� *"d for 1nform,u:ionJ1I purposes ONLY They are nol gu;u.ariteH by W.nhlngton County M;uyfand or the MafYland De�1tn\f'nt of t �:sessn'lcinu .11nd Ta:uitions to� free of e-rr0rs induding t-rror, of om1U1ot1, com.m1uion, po$1bgnaf accuracy or •nv attnbute$ ,1J)QC1,ued w11h real prq�rry They $),.all nol be copied, reprodfj(ed or scaled In any w•v without the eJCptess p1ior wntten approval of Washington County M;uyl,11nd PbMmg ;and Zoning Dop,11r1m•nt This d.3ta, DOES NOT replac.• an ;acc;ur.11-wr-wy b',' a, hc;en.s.cd ptof,euiono11I and information sh•II be venfi� wing the telev;ant deed.s, plats and other rec;orded leg.al doa.ments by the user
303 International Circle, Suite 150, Hunt Valley, Maryland 21030 - 410.853.7128 - www.trileaf.com
January 12, 2026 Washington County Historic District Attn: Mr. Meghan Jenkins Senior Planner 100 West Washington Street Suite 2600 Hagerstown, Maryland 21740 240-313-2430 mjenkins@washco-md.net
RE: The Towers, LLC – Mt Briar / Client #US-MD-5131 – Trileaf Project #778831 4220 Chestnut Grove Road, Keedysville, MD 21756
Washington County, Keedysville Quadrangle (USGS) Latitude: 39°25’ 50.57” N, Longitude: 77° 41’ 32.94” W
Greetings: Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Review at the referenced property. Our client proposes
to construct a new 195-foot-tall monopole communications tower, with an overall height of 199 including attachments, and associated ground-based equipment within a new 50-foot by 50-foot (2,500 square feet) fenced compound within an overall 60-foot by 60-foot (3,600 square feet) lease area. Access and utilities will be granted via a new 30-foot-wide easement that will extend approximately 175 feet southeast, connecting to an existing drive that further extends approximately 0.20 miles northeast to connect with Chestnut Grove Road. The proposed
lease area site is currently forested land. The antennas will be licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering or culture, that is listed, or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places, or located in or on an Indian
Religious Site. Trileaf is requesting information regarding this tower’s potential effect on Historic Properties. All information
received will be forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) as part of the Section 106 review process. Additionally, this invitation to comment is separate from any local planning/zoning process that may apply to this project.
If you wish to comment or be considered a consulting party, please respond within thirty (30) days of the date of this letter. If a response is not received within thirty (30) days, it will be assumed that you have no objections to this undertaking. A site topography map and aerial photograph are enclosed for your reference. Please call me at (410) 853-7128 or email e.boone@trileaf.com if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard. Sincerely,
Elsie Boone Assistant Project Manager
Keedysville Quadrangle, Maryland (2023) Contour Interval = 20 Feet
Scale 1 Inch = ~2,000 Feet Latitude: 39°25’ 50.57” N, Longitude: 77° 41’ 32.94” W
North
Site Vicinity Map
The Towers, LLC – Mt Briar 4220 Chestnut Grove Road Keedysville, Maryland 21756
Site Location
Site Location & Surrounding Properties
Site Location
Aerial Photographs (2023)
The Towers, LLC – Mt Briar 4220 Chestnut Grove Road
Keedysville, Maryland 21756
Easement
PlanSite
C-1
Know what's below.Call before you dig.
ve
r
t
i
c
a
l
br
i
d
g
e
DetailsSite
C-2
Know what's below.Call before you dig.
ve
r
t
i
c
a
l
br
i
d
g
e
Know what's below.Call before you dig.
ve
r
t
i
c
a
l
br
i
d
g
e
C-3
AntennaDetails &
Elevation
303 International Circle, Suite 150, Hunt Valley, Maryland 21030 - 410.853.7128 - www.trileaf.com
December 18, 2025 Washington County Historic District Commission
100 West Washington Street, Rm 2001 Hagerstown, MD 21740 Phone: 240-313-2430 Email: askplanning@washco-md.net RE: Arcola Towers – Whitehall / Trileaf Project # 770617 10944 White Hall Road, Smithsburg, MD 21783 Washington County, Funkstown Quadrangle (USGS) Latitude: 39° 36’ 51.69” N, Longitude: 77° 38’ 45.77” W To whom it may concern:
Trileaf Corporation is in the process of completing a NEPA Review at the referenced property. Our client proposes to construct a 187-foot monopole communications tower with an overall height of 189 feet, including attachments.
Associated equipment will be located within a 50-foot by 50-foot (2,500 square feet) fenced compound in an overall 75-foot by 75-foot (5,625 square feet) lease area. The project includes a 30-foot wide access and utility easement extending southwest, then east away from the lease area approximately 0.16 miles toward White Hall
Road. The proposed location is currently an agricultural field. The antenna will be licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Our investigation includes determining if the site is contained in, on or within the viewshed of a building, site, district, structure or object, significant in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering or culture, that is listed, or eligible for listing on the State or National Registers of Historic Places or located in or on an Indian
Religious Site. Trileaf is requesting information regarding this tower’s potential effect on Historic Properties. All information received will be forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) as part of the NEPA review process. Additionally, this invitation to comment is separate from any local planning/zoning process that may apply to this project. If you wish to comment or be considered a consulting party, please respond within thirty (30) days of the date of
this letter. If a response is not received within thirty (30) days, it will be assumed that you have no objections to this undertaking. A site topography map and aerial photograph are enclosed for your reference.
Please call me at (410) 853-7128 or email m.grasham@trileaf.com if you need additional information or have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this regard.
Sincerely,
McKayla Ordak Assistant Project Manager
Site Location & Surrounding Properties
Site Location
Aerial Photographs (2023)
Arcola Towers – Whitehall 10944 White Hall Road Smithsburg, MD 21783
Easement
Funkstown Quadrangle, Maryland (2023) Contour Interval = 20 Feet
Scale 1 Inch = ~2,000 Feet Latitude: 39° 36’ 51.69” N, Longitude: 77° 38’ 45.77” W
North
Site Vicinity Map
Arcola Towers – Whitehall
10944 White Hall Road
Smithsburg, MD 21783
Site Location
6100 EXECUTIVE BLVD.
ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
PHONE: (202) 408-0960
SUITE 430
112 N. WASHINGTON ST
MIDDLEBURG, VA 20117
PHONE: (571) 895 3990
SUITE 201
T-1
Z-1
187'
187'
187'
590.1'
2181.2'
281.2'
2150.4'
SIDE YARD (NORTHEAST)
SIDE YARD (SOUTHWEST)
REAR YARD (NORTHWEST)
FRONT YARD (SOUTHEAST)
MONOPOLE SETBACKS
PROPOSEDREQUIRED
187'
6100 EXECUTIVE BLVD.
ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
PHONE: (202) 408-0960
SUITE 430
112 N. WASHINGTON ST
MIDDLEBURG, VA 20117
PHONE: (571) 895 3990
SUITE 201
187' 703.9'CLOSEST OFF SITE RESIDENCE
50'
50'
50'
549.8'
2173.2'
256.7'
21282'
SIDE YARD (NORTHEAST)
SIDE YARD (SOUTHWEST)
REAR YARD (NORTHWEST)
FRONT YARD (SOUTHEAST)
COMPOUND SETBACKS
PROPOSEDREQUIRED
50'
Z-2
6100 EXECUTIVE BLVD.
ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
PHONE: (202) 408-0960
SUITE 430
112 N. WASHINGTON ST
MIDDLEBURG, VA 20117
PHONE: (571) 895 3990
SUITE 201
Z-3
Z-4
6100 EXECUTIVE BLVD.
ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
PHONE: (202) 408-0960
SUITE 430
112 N. WASHINGTON ST
MIDDLEBURG, VA 20117
PHONE: (571) 895 3990
SUITE 201
6100 EXECUTIVE BLVD.
ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
PHONE: (202) 408-0960
SUITE 430
112 N. WASHINGTON ST
MIDDLEBURG, VA 20117
PHONE: (571) 895 3990
SUITE 201
Z-5
Z-6
6100 EXECUTIVE BLVD.
ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
PHONE: (202) 408-0960
SUITE 430
112 N. WASHINGTON ST
MIDDLEBURG, VA 20117
PHONE: (571) 895 3990
SUITE 201
Z-7
SITE SIGNAGE DETAILS
6100 EXECUTIVE BLVD.
ROCKVILLE, MD 20852
PHONE: (202) 408-0960
SUITE 430
112 N. WASHINGTON ST
MIDDLEBURG, VA 20117
PHONE: (571) 895 3990
SUITE 201
707 North Calvert St., Baltimore, MD 21202 | 410.545.8500 | 1.800.323.0502 | Maryland Relay TTY 800.735.2258 | roads.maryland.gov
December 2, 2025
Ms. Elizabeth Hughes
State Historic Preservation Officer
Maryland Historical Trust
100 Community Place
Crownsville, MD 21032-2023
Dear Ms. Hughes:
Introduction and Project Description
This letter serves to inform the Maryland Historical Trust (MHT) of the finding by the Maryland
Department of Transportation State Highway Administration (SHA), on behalf of the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA), that there will be no historic properties affected by the
proposed Project No. WA468C21, I-70 Bridge Nos. 2109403 and 2109404 over Licking Creek
and Bridge No. 2109300 on US 40 Ramp, in Washington County.
The proposed work includes removal of the existing steel beam bridges and the construction of
new, wider steel beam bridges for Bridge Nos. 2109403, 2109404, and 2109300. Stormwater
management measures will be constructed throughout the limits of the project. The work also
includes widening and resurfacing of the approach roadways and portions of westbound and
eastbound I-70 bridges over Licking Creek, as well as along the ramp and bridge from I-70
eastbound to US 40 crossing I-70 westbound. Additionally, it involves utility relocation, pipe
replacement and stormwater management, the placement of traffic barriers, signage, and
pavement markings. All work would take place within existing SHA right-of-way (ROW). A
location map is included as Attachment 1.
Project plans are included as Attachment 2. Note that these plans are draft and are subject to
change. These plans constitute an interagency/intra-agency deliberative communication that is
not for public disclosure under the Annotated Code of Maryland, General Provisions Article § 4-
344 (Maryland Public Information Act).
Funding
Federal funds are anticipated for this project.
Ms. Elizabeth Hughes
Page Two
Area of Potential Effects
In determining the Area of Potential Effects (APE) for this project, SHA considered the ways in
which the undertaking may cause alterations in the character or use of historic properties, should
such properties exist, that could diminish the integrity of those characteristics that would qualify
a property for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).
The project involves replacement of I-70 Bridge Nos. 2109403, 2109404, and 2109300 within
existing ROW south of Pecktonville in Washington County. The project also includes traffic
barriers, resurfacing, and stormwater management along I-70 and within the median. The steel
girder dual bridge, crossing Licking Creek, and the US 40 ramp bridge are bordered by trees,
partially screening them from view. The area surrounding the bridge includes scattered buildings
and agricultural fields and retains a rural character.
Although wider and longer, the replacement dual bridge and ramp bridge will be constructed
along the same alignments and at similar elevations to the originals, maintaining the existing
visual appearance. Construction is anticipated to occur within existing SHA ROW. The APE is
therefore defined as the limits of direct construction disturbance for the proposed bridge
replacement, as indicated on the attached map within the USGS quadrangle for Cherry Run
(Attachment 3). The archaeology survey area is defined as the worst-case limits of disturbance
(LOD) and is coterminous with the APE.
Identification Methods and Results
Potentially significant architectural and archaeological resources were both researched as part of
the historic properties investigation for the proposed structure repairs.
Architecture: SHA Consultant Architectural Historian Matt Manning examined the State of
Maryland GIS Cultural Resources Database, the Maryland Inventory of Historic Properties
(MIHP), and Google Street View to identify architectural historic properties within the APE.
Bridge Nos. 2109403, 2109404, and 2109300 are part of I-70 and are exempt from Section 106
requirements under the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's Exemption Regarding
Historic Preservation Review Process for Effects to the Interstate Highway System (Federal
Register Vol. 70, No. 46). No other architectural resources are present within the APE; the C&O
Canal National Historical Park (WA-VI-048) is immediately south of the project area but outside
the APE. SHA has determined the project will not affect architectural historic properties.
Archaeology: SHA Senior Archaeologist Richard Ervin assessed the archaeological potential of
the survey area based on review of the SHA GIS Cultural Resources Database, historic maps,
USGS mapping, aerial imagery, and SCS soil survey data. No field visit was made based on the
availability of information about the survey area.
Ms. Elizabeth Hughes
Page Three
The APE is largely unexamined for archaeology, and no sites are recorded in the survey area,
which has been disturbed by construction of the existing interstate highway and bridges.
However, there are a number of sites recorded in the immediate vicinity. Soils in the immediate
vicinity of the I-70 bridges over Licking Creek are mapped as Opequon-Rock outcrop complex,
25 to 65 percent slopes, and occasionally flooded Philo gravelly sandy loam, settings where
significant archaeological sites are considered unlikely to occur. Soils on the approach roads
include gently sloping Downsville gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes and Monongahela
gravelly loam, 3 to 8 percent slopes, where sites are recorded in the vicinity of the survey area.
Plans dated August 2025 indicate that the LOD is confined to previously disturbed SHA ROW.
Archaeological sites in proximity to but outside the APE include 18WA10 (Late Archaic/
Transitional base camp or village), which has been partially disturbed and paved over by a
parking area and storage bins associated with a salt barn. No work is proposed within the site
boundary, and site 18WA10 would not be impacted by the project. Site 18WA171 (prehistoric
lithic scatter) has been marginally impacted by what appears to be another SHA facility,
although the site appears to be largely outside the footprint of that facility. Site 18WA171 would
not be impacted by the proposed project.
Based on prior disturbance, the project as designed would not impact significant archaeological
resources, and no further archaeological work is warranted. Project plans will be monitored to
ensure that there are no impacts to archaeological sites 18WA10 or 18WA171.
Review Request
Please examine the attached maps and plans. We request your concurrence by January 5, 2025,
that there would be no historic properties affected by the I-70 Replacement of Bridge Nos.
2109403, 2109404, and 2109300 in Washington County.
By electronic copy, we invite the Washington County Department of Planning and Zoning/
Historic District Commission and the Washington County Historical Trust, Inc., to provide
comments and participate in the Section 106 process. Pursuant to the requirements of the
implementing regulations found at 36 CFR Part 800, SHA seeks their assistance in identifying
historic preservation issues as they relate to this specific project (see 36 CFR §800.2[c][3] and
[5], and §800.3[f] for information regarding the identification and participation of consulting
parties, and §800.4, and §800.5 regarding the identification of historic properties and assessment
of effects). For additional information regarding the Section 106 regulations, see the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation’s website, www.achp.gov, or contact SHA or MHT. If no
response is received by January 5, 2025, we will assume that these offices decline to participate.
SHA will also assume concurrence by MHT with the finding of No Properties Affected if no
response is received within 30 days following receipt of this letter. Please call Matt Manning at
410-545-8560 (or email at MManning@mdot.maryland.gov) with questions regarding
Ms. Elizabeth Hughes
Page Four
architectural history for this project. Richard Ervin may be reached at 410-545-2878 (or via
email at RErvin@mdot.maryland.gov) with concerns regarding archaeology.
Sincerely,
Steve Archer
Assistant Division Chief
Environmental Planning Division
Attachments
cc: Ms. Meghan Jenkins, Staff to Washington County Department of Planning and Zoning/
Washington County Historic District Commission
Ms. Pat Schooley, Washington County Historical Trust, Inc.
Ms. Irene Enweze, Environmental Manager, SHA- EPLD
Mr. Richard Ervin, Archaeologist, SHA-EPLD
Mr. Matt Manning, Architectural Historian, SHA-EPLD
Digitally signed by
Steve Archer
Adobe Acrobat
version:
2025.001.20813
$WWDFKPHQW
Concurrence with the MDOT State Highway Administration’s
Determination(s) of Eligibility and/or Effects
Project Number: WA468C21 MHT Log No._________________
Project Name: I-70 Bridge Nos. 2109403 and 2109404 over Licking Creek and Bridge
No. 2109300 on US 40 Ramp
County: Washington
Letter Date: December 2, 2025
The Maryland Historical Trust has reviewed the documentation attached to the referenced letter and
concurs with the MDOT State Highway Administration’s determinations as follows:
Effect:
[ ] No Properties Affected
[ ] No Adverse Effect
[ ] Conditioned upon the following action(s) (see comments below)
[ ] Adverse Effect
Comments:
By: ______________________________________ _____________________
MD State Historic Preservation Office/ Date
Maryland Historical Trust
Return by U.S. Mail or Facsimile to:
Mr. Steve Archer, Assistant Division Chief, Environmental Planning Division,
MDOT State Highway Administration, P.O. Box 717, Baltimore, MD 21203-0717
Telephone: 410-545-8870 and Facsimile: 410-209-5046
Master No. 15123
cc: Enweze
Ervin
Manning
U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Office of Chief Readiness
Support Officer
Springfield, VA 20598-0075
1
January 12, 2026 Mr. Lloyd Yavener, Chairperson Historic District Commission
Washington County Planning and Zoning Department 747 Northern Ave. Hagerstown, MD 21742 Phone: (240) 313-2430 Email: askplanning@washco-md.net
New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740; Initiation of Consultation and Finding of No Historic Properties Affected Dear Mr. Yavener:
This letter is provided to initiate consultation on a proposed Department of Homeland Security (DHS) U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) undertaking subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) in Hagerstown, Maryland (Figures 1–4). ICE is proposing to purchase, occupy and rehabilitate a 53.74-acre warehouse property in support of
ICE operations. Proposed site improvements may include, but are not limited to, installing,
upgrading, or rehabilitating existing parking areas, fencing, site lighting, landscaping, drainage/stormwater, recreation areas, and cameras. Tentage and a guard shack may also be installed. No site improvements are expected to be taller than the existing structure or expand beyond the current site boundaries, and all work and construction staging will occur within the
previously developed parcel (Figure 4).
As part of the undertaking, ICE may conduct exterior and interior modifications to the existing warehouse facility. Exterior upgrades may include, but are not limited to, painting or sealing the exterior of the structure; installing, removing, or modifying bays (truck bays, window bays, or
doors); repairing or replacing the existing roof or cladding materials; adding security equipment;
or adding exterior personnel/guest access controls. The interior of the structure may be renovated or rebuilt to support ICE operational requirements, which may include but are not limited to construction of holding and processing spaces, office space, public-facing visitor spaces, and installation of amenities, such as cafeterias, bathrooms, and health care spaces.
ICE has determined that the Area of Potential Effects (APE) for this undertaking consists of the subject property and adjacent resources with a potential viewshed of the proposed undertaking (Figure 5).
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
2
The subject property is an existing warehouse constructed in 2022 (Figures 5–10). As part of the historic development of the property, the ground has been extensively disturbed to accommodate
utilities, parking, and warehouse size requirements. Potential ground disturbing work will be
consistent in depth and method of disturbance with past modifications to the site. Maximum ground disturbance to construct piers and fence posts are anticipated to be no more than four feet in depth. Due to the substantial past disturbance, ICE finds the potential for encountering intact archaeological resources is low, and ICE does not recommend any further archaeological
investigations at the property.
The subject property is a modern industrial site, and adjacent buildings within the northern portion of the APE consist primarily of similar industrial resources constructed in the 1990s and early 2000s (Figures 12 and 13; see Figure 5). The subject property and all modern industrial resources do not rise to the level of exceptional importance under Criteria Consideration G, per National Register
Bulletin 15, and are recommended Ineligible for the National Register of Historic Place (NRHP)
under all criteria.
Resources to the east and south of the subject property consist of several mid-twentieth century residences (see Figure 5) Based on aerial photographs, these resources along Rauch and Hopewell Roads appear to have been built primarily between 1952 and 1974. None of the structures have been evaluated for inclusion on the NRHP; however, all will have only limited
visibility to the proposed undertaking. Regardless of eligibility, the proposed undertaking will not affect these resources’ integrity or ability to be included on the NRHP.
The remaining resource within the APE is WA-I-368, a two-story residence and associated farm complex that was originally surveyed in 1967 and resurveyed in 1975 (Figure 14; see attachment). Other previously recorded resources along Hopewell Road (WA-I-022/Milestone
Farm, WA-I-357/Sprecher’s Mill House, and WA-I-364/Salisbury Mill Site and House), will not have visibility to the proposed undertaking.
As examined in 1975, the house was a tripartite structure two stories high and totally sheathed with asbestos shingles (Figure 15). WA-I-368 likely originally consisted of a log frame building before expanding into its current tripartite form. Its original survey form notes the structure was
constructed no later than 1820 when its owner, Matthew Van Lear, passed and left it to his family. Research indicates that the Van Lear family, owner of nearby Mount Tammany, a NRHP-listed Georgian residence built in 1780, had extensive influence in this region. It is possible that the log, and later, encapsulated log and frame structure was built in the 1790s during the farming boom catapulting Williamsport to national importance. Though owned by
Matthew Van Lear, it is also possible the house served as a residence for a sibling or child given
Matthew Van Lear’s ownership of Mount Tammany during this period.
Expanded over the years, the structure retains many of its original ornamentation elements, including its 6/6 windows, orientation, and general symmetry of design, which date the structure to no later than roughly 1790–1810. Also present on the lot are the foundation of a barn and a
well-preserved springhouse (Figure 16), both of which date to c. 1887. Though the auxiliary
springhouse remains in good condition (Figure 17), the roof of the residence has partially burned and completely collapsed, as has one of its porches and the rear of the structure (Figures 18–20).
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
3
Due to the severe structural condition and development of the adjacent area, the residence has lost integrity of design, workmanship, setting, feeling, and association.
ICE has determined that the main residence of WA-I-368 is Ineligible for the NRHP under all
criterions. ICE has withheld commenting on the extant stone springhouse due to a lack of information on the structure. It is possible that, were the springhouse evaluated as part of a multiple property documentation form survey of masonry auxiliary resources in the county or Williamsport, that the springhouse could be determined Contributing under Criterions A or C.
ICE notes that, regardless of the eligibility of part or all of WA-I-368, the proposed undertaking
will not impact any aspects of integrity that remain, and no effects to WA-I-368 will occur. Therefore, pursuant to 36 CFR 800.5(b), ICE has determined that the undertaking will result in a finding of No Historic Properties Affected.
In accordance with 36 CFR 800.3, ICE has invited the Hagerstown Planning Department and the
Washington County Historic Preservation Commission, both certified local governments, to
participate in consultation for this undertaking. ICE has also invited the following federally-recognized Tribes to participate in consultation: the Delaware Nation, Oklahoma; and the Seneca-Cayuga Nation. ICE has not received any comments from the Planning Department, Historic Preservation Commission, or Tribes at the time of this letter.
Please provide any comments on the undertaking and ICE’s finding within 30 calendar days of the date of receipt of this letter. Written correspondence may be submitted to Alexis Price via e-mail at alexis.t.price@associates.ice.dhs.gov. If you have questions or wish to discuss the undertaking, please contact Alexis Price at 443-635-4661. Thank you for your cooperation on this undertaking.
Sincerely,
Gabrielle Fernandez Environmental Protection Specialist Office of the Chief Readiness Support Officer Department of Homeland Security
Gabrielle.Fernandez@hq.dhs.gov
GABRIELLE M
FERNANDEZ
Digitally signed by
GABRIELLE M
FERNANDEZ
Date: 2026.01.13
09:47:02 -05'00'
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
4
Figure 1. Project site location map.
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
5
Figure 2. Project site on USGS topographic map.
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
6
Figure 3. Aerial view of project site.
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
7
Figure 4. Proposed project site plan.
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
8
Figure 5. Area of Potential Effects (APE) for cultural resources.
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
9
Figure 6. North elevation.
6 Figure 7. East elevation.
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
10
Figure 8. West elevation.
Figure 9. South elevation.
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
11
Figure 10. Interior of office space.
Figure 11. Interior of warehouse.
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
12
Figure 12. North adjoining property.
Figure 13. North adjoining property.
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
13
Figure 14. Southwest adjoining property, depicting Resource WA-I-368.
Figure 15. Resource WA-I-368 as it appeared in 1975, facing east.
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
14
Figure 16. Springhouse at Resource WA-I-368 as it appeared in 1975, facing northeast.
Figure 17. Google Earth Streetview of springhouse at Resource WA-I-368 in 2025, facing
northeast.
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
15
Figure 18. GoogleEarth Streetview of western portion of residence at Resource WA-I-368 from
Wright Road in 2025, facing northeast.
Figure 19. GoogleEarth Streetview of eastern portion of residence at Resource WA-I-368 from
(Old) Wright Road in 2025, facing northeast.
Re: New ICE Baltimore Processing Facility, 10900 Hopewell Road, Hagerstown, Maryland 21740
16
Figure 20. GoogleEarth Streetview of western portion of residence at Resource WA-I-368 from
(Old) Wright Road in 2025, facing southwest.
Record #Type MIHP#Record
Status
Task Name Comments
Historic District
Commission Updated by Script from EPR.
Task Name Comments
Historical Review Not a property/project for HDC review
Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR.
Task Name Comments
Historic District
Commission added standard note to the plan.
Historic District
Commission Updated by Script from EPR.
Task Name Comments
Historical Review reviewed by HDC at their 12/3 meeting and supported based on documentation provided. Uploaded to
documents.
Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR.
Task Name Comments
Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR.
Historical Review HDC has not review in WM
Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR.
Task Name Comments
Historical Review No HDC review in this rural village for new construction
Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR.
Task Name Comments
Historical Review
Even thought this permit is not technically in a review area for the HDC and the porch area of removal is
under the threshold, staff has reached out via email to the applicant to get further details and see if
anything can be done to keep the porch line intact. Will update once I hear back from the applicant.
Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR.
Task Name Comments
Historic District
Commission Requesting standard note.
Historic District
Commission Updated by Script from EPR.
Task Name Comments
Historical Review Added to February Agenda
Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR.
Task Name Comments
Historical Review no permit review by hdc in clear spring
Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR.
Task Name Comments2,520 SQ. FT. ONE STORY POLE BUILDING ON
CONCRETE SLAB TO REAR OF DWELLING TO BE Folder Status Status Date
18-Dec-25 102 CUMBERLAND STREET
2,128 SQ. FT. DETACHED TWO STORY GARAGE
ON CONCRETE SLAB, SECOND FLOOR TO BE
USED AS UNFINISHED WORKSHOP AND FULL
BATHROOM, FRAME CONSTRUCTION, PRE
ENGINEERED ROOF TRUSSES, TO BE PLACED IN
SAME LOCATION OF DEMOLISHED GARAGE
Folder Status Status Date
Note 18-Dec-25
Passed - Info 18-Dec-25
Days in Review:0
CL2025-0005
Town of Clear Spring
Residential Building
Permit
V310 Revisions
Required 16-Dec-25
08-Jan-26 SP-25-045 8505 FAHRNEY
CHURCH ROAD
DEMOLITION OF EXTERIOR BALCONIES AND
FRONT COVERED PORCH, GUTTING ALL
INTERIOR LEVELS OF STRUCTURE TO CREATE
INDIVIDUAL SUITES, ASSOCIATED ROOMS, AND
COMMUNITY USE ROOMS FOR THE PURPOSE
OF YOUNG ADULT HOUSING AND STAFFING,
975 SQ. FT. THREE STORY ADDITION TO BE USED
Folder Status Status Date
Note 09-Jan-26
No Comments
Received 09-Jan-26
Days in Review:1
2025-05780
Non-Residential
Addition-Alteration
Permit
II0055 Review 10-Dec-25
26-Dec-25
8505 FAHRNEY CHURCH
ROAD
BOONSBORO, MD 21713
BUILDING RENOVATION AND PARKING LOT
EXPANSION
Folder Status Status Date
Note 09-Jan-26
Revisions Required 09-Jan-26
Days in Review:14
SP-25-045 Site Plan II0055 In Review 26-Nov-25
02-Dec-25
17504 SNYDERS LANDING
ROAD
SHARPSBURG, MD 21782
REVISION TO REPLACE LEFT FRONT WOODEN
PORCH WITH 147 SQ. FT. CONCRETE SLAB,
REPLACE FRONT DOOR THRESHOLD TO MATCH
NEW PORCH (PORCH ROOF TO REMAIN),
REPLACE RIGHT WOODEN PORCH WITH 140 SQ.
FT. CONCRETE SLAB (PORCH ROOF TO REMAIN),
REMOVE PORCH ROOF AND CONCRETE SLAB AT
BAY WINDOW AREA AND REPLACE WITH
LANDSCAPING AND SHRUBBERY
Folder Status Status Date
Note 10-Dec-25
Passed - Info 10-Dec-25
Days in Review:8
2024-
04219.R02 Revision Closed 20-Nov-25
02-Dec-25 SI-09-009 14603 FAIRVIEW
CHURCH ROAD, PARCEL 3
1,800 SQ. FT. STORAGE BUILDING ON
CONCRETE SLAB TO REAR OF DWELLING, PRE-
ENGINEERED ROOF TRUSSES, METAL SIDES AND
ROOF
MOUNT TABOR EVANGELICAL CHURCH, PARCEL
3
Folder Status Status Date
Note 02-Dec-25
Passed - Info 02-Dec-25
Days in Review:0
2025-05520 Residential New
Construction Permit Approved 19-Nov-25
17-Nov-25 LOR 41 E. FREDERICK
STREET, PARCEL F
540 SQ. FT. METAL DETACHED ONE CAR
GARAGE ON CONCRETE SLAB TO REAR OF
DWELLING, PRE-ENGINEERED ROOF TRUSSES
Folder Status Status Date
No Comments
Received 24-Nov-25
Note 02-Dec-25
Passed - Info 02-Dec-25
Days in Review:15
WI2025-0024
Town of Williamsport
Residential Building
Permit
Approved 17-Nov-25
14-Nov-25 S-24-014 20313 LOCUST
GROVE ROAD, LOT 5
DEMOLITION OF 3,900 SQ. FT. SINGLE FAMILY
DWELLING INCLUDING FOUNDATION AND
DETACHED GARAGE
THEODORE & SHARON LAPKOFF, LOT 5
Folder Status Status Date
Note 04-Dec-25
Approved 04-Dec-25
Days in Review:20
2025-05388 Residential Demolition
Permit III071 Approved 12-Nov-25
12-Dec-25 12158 OREBANK ROAD
CLEAR SPRING, MD 21722
REMAINDER LOT FROM PLAT 11874 INTO A
DWELLING LOT.
Folder Status Status Date
Note 15-Dec-25
Approved 15-Dec-25
Days in Review:3
S-25-034 Preliminary-Final Plat V132 Approval
Letter Issued 06-Nov-25
16-Dec-25 204 WEST CHAPLINE
STREET, LOT 136
INSTALLATION OF (16) 7.04 KW ROOF
MOUNTED SOLAR PANELS ON DWELLING
Folder Status Status Date
Note 17-Dec-25
Passed - Info 17-Dec-25
Days in Review:1
SH2025-0006
Town of Sharpsburg
Residential Building
Permit
II0656 Closed 14-Oct-25
09-Jan-26 20432 LANDIS ROAD
HAGERSTOWN, MD 21740
SUBDIVISION OF 2 EXISTING LOTS OF RECORD,
LOTS 1-6 NORTH SIDE OF LANDIS ROAD AND
LOTS 7-13 ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF LANDIS
ROAD.
Folder Status Status Date
Revisions Required 13-Jan-26
Days in Review:4
S-25-021 Preliminary-Final Plat II0138 In Review 14-Jul-25
Historic Review Activity 11/20/2025 thru 01/21/2026
Open Date Date Assigned Location Description Workflow Info
Record #Type MIHP#Record
Status
Historic Review Activity 11/20/2025 thru 01/21/2026
Open Date Date Assigned Location Description Workflow Info
Historical Review Added to February meeting per HDC Pole building policy
Task Name Comments
Historical Review Not a tax credit app therefore no HDC review
Historical Review Updated by Script from EPR.
Task Name Comments
Historical Review Added to February 4 agenda
Activity Count:13
No Comments
Received
Note Passed - Info
1 1 0
0 1 0
0 2 0
0 2 1
0 1 1
0 1 0
0 1 1
0 1 1
0 1 1
1 1 1
2 12 6Total2 2 13
Town of Williamsport Residential Building Permit Total 0 0 1
Town of Sharpsburg Residential Building Permit Total 0 0 1
Town of Keedysville Residential Building Permit Total 0 0 1
Town of Clear Spring Residential Building Permit Total 0 0 1
Site Plan Total 0 1 1
Revision Total 0 0 1
Residential New Construction Permit Total 0 0 2
Residential Demolition Permit Total 1 0 2
Preliminary-Final Plat Total 1 1 2
Non-Residential Addition-Alteration Permit Total 0 0 1
Review Activities Summary
Application Type Application Number Approved Revisions
Required
Total
21-Jan-26 LOR 13511 MAUGANSVILLE
ROAD
DEMOLITION OF 3,256 SQ. FT. DWELLING AND
FOUNDATION
Folder Status Status Date
Note 21-Jan-26
Days in Review:0
2026-00212 Residential Demolition
Permit I252 Review 20-Jan-26
09-Jan-26 74 NORTH MAIN STREET INSTALLATION OF (20) 9.1 KW ROOF MOUNTED
SOLAR PANELS ON DETACHED GARAGE
Folder Status Status Date
Note 13-Jan-26
Passed - Info 13-Jan-26
Days in Review:4
KV2026-0002
Town of Keedysville
Residential Building
Permit
II0988 Approved 06-Jan-26
30-Dec-25 LOR 21245 MOUNT LEAN
ROAD
CONCRETE SLAB TO REAR OF DWELLING TO BE
USED AS A GARAGE, (7) OVERHEAD DOORS,
METAL ROOF AND SIDES, PRE-ENGINEERED
ROOF TRUSSES
Note 09-Jan-26
Days in Review:10
2025-05908 Residential New
Construction Permit Review 21-Dec-25