Westminster council approves Wakefield Valley amendment to add 35 lots, dedicate Parcel X as open space

The Westminster Mayor and Common Council voted to adopt Resolution 26‑10 approving the fourth amendment to the Wakefield Valley general development plan (DP 24‑01), which adds 35 density rights to Parcel W and dedicates Parcel X as passive open space.

Planning staff presented the application and timeline before the council. "Parcel W is 38.2934 acres, and Parcel X is 16.0695 acres," planning staff member Dave Debo said, summarizing the proposal and the planning commission's favorable recommendation subject to conditions. Debo also noted county review will still be required for stormwater management and school‑capacity review.

Shelley Schafer Miller, who spoke on behalf of the applicant, said the amendment is an initial step in a larger subdivision and permitting process and argued the change reduces gross density relative to the 1978 plan. "Tonight, you will hear testimony that the overall density with this plan would be 1.24 density units per acre," Miller said, describing the project's approach and the requirement for subsequent preliminary subdivision review.

Experts for the applicant provided technical detail. Martin Hackett, accepted as an expert in land‑use design, told the council the plan would preserve substantial open space and that no additional municipal water allocation is required under a memorandum of understanding included in the packet. Hackett summarized open‑space figures presented by the applicant and said the layout would preserve about 26 acres of mature trees on Parcel W and create roughly 18.84 acres of new open space adjacent to Wakefield Valley Park.

Traffic consultant Michael Lenhart of Lenhart Traffic Consulting described the traffic‑impact study for 35 lots. Lenhart said the study scoped eight intersections, applied Carroll County level‑of‑service standards and found all eight intersections operated at acceptable levels (D or better). He cautioned one intersection (Md‑140 and Warrior/Meadow Branch) shifts from a B to a D during morning peak when comparing a 25‑lot to a 35‑lot scenario.

Members of the public asked questions during the hearing. Jenna McKee, a resident of Carroll Lutheran Village, requested clarity about whether a proposed trail connection would be limited to village residents or open to the public and urged permanent preservation and native plantings on Parcel X. Neighbor Galen Lewis asked whether the subdivision would use public water (staff said public water will be provided, not individual wells) and whether street lighting would be installed (that detail will be addressed during the subdivision process). David Berry asked about house size and road standards; the applicant indicated homes are expected to be two‑story, higher‑end single‑family residences (roughly 2,500–3,500 square feet shown in application materials) and that the proposed road section includes 30 feet of paving with a 50‑foot right of way.

Council discussion focused on the planning commission and staff review and the conditions recommended in the public‑hearing report. Council member Huff moved adoption of Resolution 26‑10; after discussion and a voice vote the mayor and common council approved the resolution. The council president said the adopted amendment must be consistent with what returns to the planning and zoning commission during preliminary subdivision review.

Next steps: the amendment approval moves the proposal to the preliminary subdivision stage, where the planning and zoning commission and county agencies will review traffic mitigation, stormwater controls, landscape compliance and school‑capacity impacts before any building permits are issued.