Planning commission declines to recommend on proposed in‑home daycare; forwards concerns to Board of Zoning Appeals

Kelly Hess, who lives at 27 Fairview Avenue in Taneytown, asked the Planning Commission for a favorable recommendation to the Board of Zoning Appeals to operate an in‑home daycare from the 27 side of a duplex. Commissioners voted to withhold a recommendation and let the Board of Zoning Appeals decide after receiving additional documentation and public notice.

The issue: Hess told the commission she wants to open an in‑home daycare to provide lower‑cost infant and toddler care. “My passion is children. I love children,” she said, and described the unit she proposes to use, saying the daycare would operate only on the 27 side of the duplex, with a porch in front and a backyard that has a swing set but no pool. She said she rents the property: “I don’t. My dad does. We rent from my dad.”

Why it matters: Commissioners identified several zoning and safety questions they want addressed before recommending approval to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Those included how many children the state will license at the site, how the town zoning code’s floor‑area occupancy rule applies, restroom access, supervision when children use an upstairs bathroom, and parking and drop‑off logistics.

What the commission heard and flagged: Daryl, a planning staff member, advised that state licensing can set the number of children and told the commission the state “has allowed to have up to, if that's what your coordinator agrees with, up to 8 children.” Commissioners noted an earlier inspection by the fire marshal had referenced six children. The commission also cited a town zoning provision (cited at the hearing as “20‑205‑708”) that they said limits home‑occupancy uses to no more than 25% of the first‑floor gross floor area; commissioners observed that the applicant’s first‑floor area was recorded at 544 square feet, and that 25% of that area would constrain usable program space.

Hess said she has one restroom located upstairs and plans to accompany children who need assistance to the toilet; she also said she will install a gate and use cameras to monitor children when she escorts one child upstairs. She told the panel she has permission from the property owner to operate the daycare and indicated she had not yet finalized licensing with the state or the fire marshal.

Commission action and next steps: After discussion the commission voted to take no formal position and to let the Board of Zoning Appeals make the decision. Commissioners asked staff to record the commission’s comments for the Board of Zoning Appeals file, and staff said the BZA hearing will be posted, property owners will receive mailed notices and the hearing will be advertised in the paper once the packet is complete.

Commissioners asked staff to relay specific comments including concerns about: the small first‑floor area relative to the cited 25% limit; the single restroom location; how diapering and food preparation would be separated; supervision protocols for children going upstairs; and whether additional written consent from adjacent residents would be available. The commission did not record a roll‑call vote for its motion; the outcome was recorded on voice vote as in favor of leaving the matter to the Board of Zoning Appeals.

What the applicant must provide: Staff and commissioners requested that Hess obtain any written guidance or approvals from the state licensing specialist and the fire marshal addressing the number of children and the site’s safety, and that she collect any written comments from neighbors if available, to be included in the BZA packet. The commission also noted the town code citation so the BZA can consider the 25% floor‑area occupancy provision when it rules.

Looking ahead: The BZA hearing will be scheduled after staff receives the outstanding materials and completes the required public notices.