Committee advances comprehensive-plan implementation ordinance after narrow amendment votes

The committee recommended a favorable vote to the full council on O-14-25, the ordinance implementing parts of Annapolis’ Comprehensive Plan 2040, after approving two amendments and rejecting a third that would have struck a Dock Street provision.

The ordinance and its amendments were described as creating new standards that would allow some rooftop structures to project above existing height limits in a limited area. Alderman Henley introduced an amendment to require that three conditions be met (changing “or” to “and” in the text) before any rooftop projection could exceed a height limit; the committee approved that amendment. Planning staff explained the three conditions are intended to reduce visual impacts of equipment and other rooftop elements.

The ordinance matters because it sets zoning text for a portion of the C-2 zone near City Dock, potentially allowing rooftop projections for mechanical equipment or complementary uses under specified conditions. The changes do not itself approve any new building project; any future development would still require site-plan review, historic-preservation review and, where applicable, Board of Appeals review, planning staff said.

Committee debate focused on the Dock Street section. Alderman Henley said the legislation as drafted used “or” among three conditions and that he believed it should read that all three conditions must be satisfied before exceeding height limits — “all this amendment 1 does is change or to and,” Henley said. Chris Kubiak, planning and zoning, said the three points are “meant to minimize the impact of any of the structures that may be located on the roof” and described screening as a tool to “visually obscure to the extent possible.”

Committee members asked what screening might look like. Kubiak answered it could range from color choices to architectural features or integrated green-roof elements and said the standard would be applied during site-plan and historic-preservation review.

An administration-sponsored amendment (amendment 2) was also approved after debate; a third amendment (amendment 3), which would have struck the Dock Street–specific provision (page 10 line 16 through page 11 line 26), failed after a recorded vote. The sponsor of amendment 3 argued the provision narrowed the change to a single block and risked “nibbling at the fabric of our height limits.” Supporters of the ordinance said the Dock Street language was a narrowly targeted option intended to align design standards with the adjacent public investment in the park and to preserve the existing skyline while allowing limited flexibility.

Members of the committee asked whether the Historic Preservation Commission would see the height portion of the proposal. Several aldermen said they had expected a presentation to that commission; planning staff and the chair agreed to request follow-up outside the meeting and to cc the planning director and the Historic Preservation Commission chair.

Director Kubiak and other planning staff reiterated that the ordinance creates the regulatory framework only; any individual redevelopment will undergo further public review steps that will test traffic, pedestrian safety and other site-specific impacts. One alderman pressed whether traffic mitigations (for Dock Street) would be addressed in later reviews; staff replied those impacts are examined during the usual planning and permitting process. Committee members asked also about definitions for “mechanical penthouse” and “green roof”; staff said rules and committee work on those definitions were expected in the rules and environmental matters committees.

After discussion the committee called a final favorable recommendation on O-14-25 to the full council.

The committee record shows the sequence of actions: amendment 1 (change from “or” to “and”) — approved; amendment 2 (administration) — approved; amendment 3 (strike Dock Street section) — failed; final motion — favorable recommendation to the full council.

The ordinance and amendments will next proceed to the full council for final consideration.