Public hearing on Frederick Gateway annexation and proposed cricket stadium continues; commissioners request more studies

The Planning Commission held the first of two public hearings June 9 on proposals to amend conditions of the Frederick Gateway annexation (Resolution O‑9‑23) and to rezone a 24.33‑acre portion of the annexed land to an institutional floating zone to allow a private cricket stadium and related public access amenities. No votes were taken; both items will return to the commission for decision at a future hearing (scheduled for July 14).

Annexation amendment request: Staff explained that the annexation adopted in 2009 included a proffer (paragraph 7b) that required the developer to dedicate or provide legal access to roughly 16 acres of land along the Monocacy River and to construct an approximately 1,600‑foot, 8‑foot‑wide linear path and a small boat launch. The applicant seeks flexibility: rather than dedicating a specific acreage up front the applicant proposes to construct a public recreation area — including a small boat launch, a trail connection to the Monocacy River shared-use path, parking and a picnic pavilion — and to deed perpetual public-access easements for the improvements. The applicant also proposes that the cost of approved parkland improvements be credited against any future parkland-fee or impact-fee obligations that might apply when and if the remainder of the site is later developed under a different zoning or master plan.

Rezoning request and sketch plan: The applicant asked the commission to recommend the city council rezone 24.33 acres from General Commercial to the Institutional Floating Zone (IST) for a cricket stadium and accessory functions. The applicant’s sketch plan shows a largely grassed playing field with limited permanent stadium seating and a secured game-day footprint; applicants emphasized that the proposed design relies on off‑site and shuttle/coach-bus parking rather than a large on-site asphalt parking field. The applicant said the stadium’s typical match day would be roughly three hours; the proposed facility was presented with a maximum design capacity of up to 25,000 spectators (applicant said that such high attendance would be rare, and that typical events are expected to be smaller), and the season would operate several months of the year with off‑season use for community and cultural events.

Public and staff concerns raised at the hearing: numerous members of the public and commissioners asked for more information and expressed concerns about transportation, parking, floodplain filling, sewer and utilities and impacts on neighboring properties. Key issues included:

- Floodplain and environmental review: Staff noted that much of the annexation area lies in the Monocacy River floodplain and that the applicant is pursuing the necessary Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) / MDE and FEMA reviews; the commission heard that the applicant expects to place engineered fill to develop a portion of the riverfront area and that MDE and FEMA review and county and city hydrology sign-offs will be required.

- Sewage and utilities: County staff commented that an existing 36‑inch county sewer main runs within an easement along the river and that deep fill over the pipe constrains gravity sewer connections; the county told the commission that private pumping stations are allowed to serve a single lot but that pumping stations serving two or more lots are typically public and must be dedicated to county ownership. The commission asked for clarity on how sewer connections and pumping‑station ownership/maintenance will be addressed.

- Transportation and parking: State Highway Administration (SHA) comments were referenced; SHA told staff that a traffic impact study will be required and flagged a risk of traffic queuing onto I‑70 ramps during peak periods that must be studied. The applicant presented a traffic‑management concept emphasizing shuttle/coach bus, remote parking at locations such as the Frederick Fairgrounds, Harry Grove Stadium and other off‑site lots and named a private traffic‑management firm with national experience. Commissioners and members of the public pressed for details: how many shuttle buses would be required for large events, where off‑site parking will be guaranteed, whether those off‑site lots are within the LMC’s allowed 1,320‑foot off‑site parking distance, and what measures will prevent spillover parking in adjacent neighborhoods and at nearby park‑and‑ride lots.

- Noise, lighting, public-safety and event management: Staff cited the city noise ordinance and said the project must comply with applicable limits. Commissioners sought specifics on event hours, frequency of non‑cricket rentals (music, festivals), and emergency‑vehicle access for large crowds.

Public testimony: more than a dozen residents and neighborhood representatives urged the commission to defer action until the applicant submits detailed reports. Comments included concerns that the I‑70 eastbound ramp and Old National Pike intersections currently experience backup; that the stadium’s proposed reliance on remote parking could shift parking burdens to nearby neighborhoods and county lots; that the proposed riverfront fill could affect downstream flooding; and that there is insufficient information in the record on which to base a recommendation to council. Several speakers urged denial or continued review until SHA, FEMA, MDE, county sewer and hydrology analyses are complete.

Commission direction and next steps: Commissioners did not vote. Staff and the applicant agreed the project will return for the second required public hearing; the Commission asked the applicant to provide:

- A detailed traffic‑management plan with quantitative bus counts, loading/unloading timing, gross parking counts tied to ticketing scenarios, and analysis of the I‑70 ramp and nearby intersections per SHA guidance; - Documentation from MDE/FEMA related to the floodplain fill and the Conditional Letter of Map Revision process (and hydrology manager review); - Clarification of sewer capacity and pumping‑station ownership or dedications required by Frederick County; and - A draft schedule of expected event types, anticipated annual event counts and proposed event controls for noise, hours and security.

The annexation amendment and rezoning application will return to the Planning Commission and then to City Council; the applicant is scheduled to present a parks-and-recreation concept to the Recreation and Parks Commission the following day. Commissioners requested the additional studies and said they would expect that information well in advance of the July 14 public hearing so the public and the commission can review the technical analyses.