Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pud Rezoning Sharpsburg Pike topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews PUD rezoning proposal for large Sharpsburg Pike parcel; staff flags open‑space and integration concerns
Summary
Planning staff reviewed a PUD concept plan for about 100 acres near Sharpsburg Pike and I‑70 and told the mayor and council that open space, housing mix and sequencing raise questions about whether the project meets the city’s PUD performance standards.
HAGERSTOWN, Md. — Planning staff on June 10 walked the mayor and council through a proposed PUD zoning overlay and concept plan for about 100 acres near Sharpsburg Pike and the I‑70 interchange, and urged the council to weigh implementation risks, open‑space usability and whether the project meets the PUD performance standards in the city’s Land Management Code.
Deputy director for planning and zoning Stefan Bockmiller led the presentation, explaining that the PUD process allows a generalized “bubble” concept plan that can secure a zoning overlay before detailed engineering. He said the staff’s draft findings of fact address whether the site is suitable, can be served by public water and sewer, and whether transportation and design requirements can be met.
Staff and several council members expressed concern that the applicant’s plan clusters housing types (single‑family, townhouses, apartments) into separate “pods” rather than mixing them, which conflicts with the PUD expectation that housing types be intermixed except where needed to transition to neighboring uses. Bockmiller also said the plan relies on Phase 2 of development to provide much of the required open space; staff and the Planning Commission questioned what would happen if Phase 2 never proceeds.
Council members criticized how much of the proposed “open space” consisted of narrow strips, stormwater basins and green remnants along roads that would not function as recreational amenities. One council member said the plan appears to use those remnants to meet a 10% open‑space threshold and urged staff to recommend language saying the configuration is inadequate.
Transportation and access drew sustained attention. The concept plan would shorten Day Road and add new collector roads; staff urged the council to avoid imposing off‑site roadway conditions in the zoning decision and reserve those details for land‑development review with the county, state and the developer. School capacity was noted in public comment but staff advised the council not to treat it as a legal standard because the city lacks a public‑facilities ordinance for schools.
Bockmiller asked the council whether to: approve the overlay, approve with conditions, remand the application to the Planning Commission for revisions, or deny it. Councilmembers asked staff to draft findings that highlight the open‑space configuration, reliance on Phase 2 to meet requirements, and the lack of integration of housing types, to inform whatever decision the council reaches at a later meeting.
