CITY OF ABERDEEN
PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
Wednesday, June 10, 2015
A meeting of the Aberdeen Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m., June 10,
2015, in the Council Chambers by Chairman Schlottman.
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Chairman Mark Schlottman, Commissioners Dominique
Edwards, Chuck Glassman, Karen Heavey, Kevin Miller,
Terri Preston, and Amy Snyder
OTHERS PRESENT:
Phyllis Grover, Director of Planning & Community
Development
Kyle Torster, Director of Public Works
John Landbeck, Aberdeen Volunteer Fire Department
Gil Jones, Recording Secretary
Chairman Schlottman extended the Planning Commission’s condolences to former Aberdeen
City Clerk Darlene Ostroski and her family on the passing of her husband Gary.
The minutes of the May 13, 2015, meeting were approved as presented.
AGENDA ITEMS:
1. Review Preliminary Site Plan for MGP Retail Consulting
Location: 621 South Philadelphia Boulevard (site of current Short Stop
Beverage Barn).
Representative: David Bleschner, Bohler Engineering, on behalf of MGP Retail
Consulting.
Mr. Bleschner described the property as 6.82 acres in size, with a zoning of B-3, Highway
Commercial District. The property currently houses the Short Stop Beverage Barn. The proposed
use is for a 36,170 square foot grocery store. The improved site would have enhanced
landscaping, three points of access (two off South Philadelphia Boulevard/Route 40 and one off
Old Philadelphia Road), and on-site forest conservation. The City’s Architectural Review
Committee (ARC) has reviewed and approved the proposed landscaping, lighting, and signage.
Mrs. Grover asked for additional information to be shown on the plan, including a note that the
property is in the City’s Downtown Revitalization District; height of the proposed building;
required parking and provided parking, including handicapped spaces; indication of Wellhead
Zone 1; and owner and developer’s signatures.
Mr. Torster read into the record the comments from the DPW review, to wit: Owner and
developer need to sign plan; Label plan “Preliminary Site Plan” (addressed); Show, label, and
1
dimension Old Philadelphia Road, to include existing paving, proposed improvements (36-foot
road improvement ultimate), and proposed right-of-way of ultimately 60 feet (addressed); Show
18-foot wide improvements from centerline of existing road for the length of the property
fronting Old Philadelphia Road (addressed); Provide addresses for Parcels 2481, 2483, and 1794
(addressed); Provide a 10-foot drainage and utility easement along the east and west property
lines (addressed); Show and label storm water management (SWM) easements connecting to a
public road, these may not contain other easements; Existing water service appears to be within
SWM facility; Minimum of three grid tics in multiples of 250 feet (addressed); Label fire
hydrant as private (addressed); Verify existing or proposed water meter (addressed); Show
proposed water meter close to the State Highway Administration (SHA) right-of-way and
provide/label a drainage and utility easement; Please locate water meter to be outside the SHA
right-of-way; Show existing fire hydrant adjacent to 731 South Philadelphia Boulevard
(addressed); Show existing water meter for Short Stop Beverage Barn (addressed); Show and
label existing monitoring well to remain (addressed); Add note regarding the existing
monitoring well: “Owner and Developer to allow the City unrestricted access to the existing
monitoring wells for maintenance and data collection as part of the City Wellhead Protection
Plan” (addressed); Well access may also require an easement; Add note: “Existing sewer
manholes within the SHA improvements to be rehabilitated as required by the City of Aberdeen”
(addressed); Please provide drainage flow arrows for sewer and storm drains (addressed);
Proposed and existing water and sewer services may not be located within SWM facilities or
easements and must be relocated; Existing water and sewer services will need a private easement
shown and labeled (addressed); We believe there are water and sewer services to parcel 2483,
therefore a note needs to be added that “Existing water and sewer services may need to be
relocated and a private easement be provided;” Provide a legend and symbols complying with
Harford County Standard Detail G-1; Please remove limit of disturbance (addressed); New
water service will require a cut-in tee and include 3 shutoff valves (addressed); Provide a
proposed sewer cleanout at the property line (addressed); If a grease trap is required, the
aforementioned cleanout will be changed to a sewer sampling manhole (addressed); Provide
water and sewer usage calculations complying with Maryland Department of the Environment
(MDE) guidelines on the plan; Note 27 Notice of Intent is required prior to land disturbance;
and provide proper road acceleration and deceleration at the Old Philadelphia Road
improvements.
Mr. Landbeck said he would give the plans to the Fire Chief for review. He questioned whether
an area of 12 feet in the rear of the building is sufficient for a ladder truck. Mr. Bleschner said
there is room for a hose; Mr. Landbeck said a major fire could not be fought from the ground at
that location.
Mrs. Edwards asked what specific areas would be dedicated for public use, as stated on the plan.
Mr. Bleschner said this would be for road widening. Mr. Torster said the intent is to have this
section of Old Philadelphia Road widened, as it is pretty narrow at that point. Mrs. Edwards
asked about the SWM micro bio-retention facility. Mr. Bleschner said the storm water needs to
be captured and treated. This facility is a shallow depression that goes from the parking lot to the
facility, then through a filter into a pipe that percolates out. The State requires that such water be
gone from the facility within 24 hours.
Mr. Glassman asked how much of Old Philadelphia Road would be improved and how the extra
traffic would be handled. Mr. Torster said each new project along Old Philadelphia Road would
2
address their particular frontage and have the road widened accordingly. Mr. Glassman asked if
these improvements would extend to Route 40. Mr. Torster said yes, they would eventually. Mr.
Glassman expressed concern over the condition of Old Philadelphia Road and putting more
traffic on it that would eventually dump onto Route 40. Mr. Torster said the City is currently
developing an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (APFO) that would address these issues. In
addition, the City will be doing paving and have electronic traffic counters placed to determine
the true volume of traffic.
Mrs. Snyder asked if the same entrances as currently exist off Route 40 would be retained. Mr.
Bleschner said they would.
Mr. Miller concurred with Mr. Glassman on the condition of Old Philadelphia Road and who
would be required to improve the area toward Route 40. Mrs. Grover said without an APFO, the
City cannot ask MGP to improve beyond the limits of their property frontage. Mr. Glassman
indicated that the new restaurant at Route 40 and Old Philadelphia Road did not do road
improvements. Mrs. Grover said they wouldn’t need to, as they only did remodeling of the
building. Mr. Torster said the City has been looking at this road for some time and will be
looking at improvements this summer. He reiterated this will need to be done piecemeal until the
APFO is in place. As such, he is comfortable with the improvements to be made by MGP.
Mr. Miller said the island on Old Philadelphia Road shows a restricted traffic movement. Mrs.
Grover asked for confirmation that the primary access would be off Route 40. Mr. Bleschner said
yes, but on second thought feels the Old Philadelphia Road action should be made a full turn.
Mr. Miller asked if a traffic study was done by the City. Mr. Torster said numbers are being
gathered for such a study.
Mrs. Heavey expressed concern over the line of sight, regardless of traffic volume. Mr.
Bleschner said they are doing a line-of-sight study and will provide the results to the City. Mrs.
Heavey asked why there is an access off Old Philadelphia Road. Mr. Landbeck said a second,
non-Route 40 access is needed for emergency vehicles. Mr. Bleschner said foliage that needs to
be cleared will be cleared, that they have determined there would be a 300-foot sight distance
just from clearing their property; if necessary, they may seek sight easements from adjoining
properties.
Mr. Schlottman asked about the extent of road improvements. Mr. Torster said it would be to the
centerline of the road. Mr. Schlottman asked how storm water would be handled that may puddle
in the roadway. Mr. Bleschner said they will establish a crown in the road, so that should help.
Mr. Schlottman referenced the heavy traffic between MD Route 715 and Route 40. Mr. Torster
said the electronic counters would be able to give a vehicle classification and speed analysis, as
well as the number of vehicles. Mr. Schlottman asked if this is going to be a Lidl market. Mr.
Bleschner said he is not at liberty to talk about it.
Lt. Robin Wales of Harford County Emergency Services read her comments into the record, to
wit: Aberdeen Police Department/Emergency Services must have a list of three emergency
contacts for notification, response, and securing purposes, if not a 24-hour operation; For all new
or altered buildings with an automatic sprinkler system or a supervised, automatic fire detection
system, a Knox box must be installed per NFPA 1, Part III, 3-6. They shall be keyed for the
Aberdeen Volunteer Fire Department, 410-272-2211. If hydrants will be privately maintained, a
3
hydrant shall be added on the property within 100 feet of the structure. Recommend the usage of
non-combustible landscaping directly next to the buildings, as traditional wooden mulch
increases the likelihood of nuisance fires from outdoor smoking. Public safety wireless radio
communications inside a building are essential to the safety of those occupying the structure as
well as fire, law enforcement, and emergency medical providers responding to a call for help.
For buildings greater than 5,000 square feet, higher than 50 feet, contain underground storage or
parking, and are constructed of materials that impeded wireless radio signals that may adversely
affect the response of public safety providers, please consider including wiring, electrical
connections, and other infrastructure that may be needed for an in-building 800 megahertz
amplifier. The Department of Emergency Services will test coverage in your facility once
construction is finished (call 410-638-4900 for this assistance). The Department of Emergency
Services is requesting the building display 10- to 12-inch address numbers and letters which can
be clearly visible from South Philadelphia Boulevard.
Motion by Mr. Miller, seconded by Mr. Glassman, to approve the Preliminary Site Plan,
with incorporation of staff comments and changes. Motion passed, 6-1 (Mrs. Heavey voting
no).
2. Review Preliminary Subdivision Plan for MGP Retail Consulting
Location: 621 South Philadelphia Boulevard (site of current Short Stop
Beverage Barn).
Representative: David Bleschner, Bohler Engineering on behalf of MGP Retail
Consulting.
Mr. Bleschner pointed out the various roads and easements.
Mrs. Grover asked that the summarization of the plan be added to the document; state that the
forest conservation requirements would be met on site, per State requirements; and delete Notes
13 and 18. Mrs. Grover indicated the City’s ARC has reviewed and approved the proposed
landscaping, lighting, and signage.
Mr. Torster read into the record the comments from the DPW, to wit: Owner and developer need
to sign plan; Provide curve data at Old Philadelphia Road; Provide a 10-foot drainage and utility
easement around the monitoring wells; Show and label SWM easements for the SWM swale;
Revise so that SWM easements do not contain other easements; Provide a separate water meter
easement outside the SHA right-of-way; Add note regarding the existing monitoring wells:
“Owner and Developer to allow the City unrestricted access to the existing monitoring wells for
maintenance and data collection as part of the City Wellhead Protection Plan;” Existing water
and sewer services may not be located within SWM facilities or easements; Add note: “Existing
water and sewer services may need a private easement;” Provide water and sewer usage
calculations complying with MDE guidelines and a letter signed, sealed, and dated by the
engineer; SWM outfall may require an off-site easement; and proposed ingress/egress and
drainage and utility easements should be labeled private.
There were no questions or comments from the Planning Commission.
4
Motion by Mr. Miller, seconded by Mr. Glassman, to approve the Preliminary Subdivision
Plan, with incorporation of staff comments. Motion passed unanimously.
3. Review Concept Plan for Stadium Towne Center
Location: Interstate 95 and Maryland Route 22 (Churchville Road).
Representative: Dudley Campbell, Bay State Land Services.
Mr. Campbell indicated this is a critical point of the project. The feasibility has always stemmed
on a full, signalized traffic light intersection at Route 22. He reviewed the history of the previous
project related to traffic flow (right in, right out). A traffic study has been submitted to the SHA;
they have tentatively concurred that a light here is feasible, per the preliminary figures. The SHA
will not proceed with a full intersection study unless the City gives some degree of concept
approval. The plan will still have to come back before the ARC and Planning Commission. If the
SHA doesn’t approve the intersection, the synergy of the project changes.
Mr. Campbell reviewed the layout of the project and said that some national companies and “big
box” stores have expressed interest, but won’t commit until the intersection is approved. He also
reviewed the concept architecture and confirmed the proposed 7-story hotel would be a Hyatt. A
convenience store and restaurant are also planned for the project. The main entry road has been
aligned to the Sherwood property that adjoins the rear of this proposed shopping center, in the
event of a future connection between the two. In short, Mr. Campbell is looking for a “unique”
concept plan approval.
Mrs. Grover said the Planning Commission has looked at concept plans in the past, most notably
for Frito-Lay. She also reminded the Planning Commission that the new Integrated Business
District (IBD) regulations have taken effect.
Mr. Torster said that since this is now a concept plan, he won’t go over the DPW comments, but
will give a couple of comments as to what may be required later, such as the APFO and
questions on traffic, water getting to this spot, and if a water tower may be needed. There is an
issue with getting water to this particular area. The City has hired an engineering firm to see if
we are near the tipping point of needing a water tower in this area. Another issue is whether there
is adequate water pressure. Some prior development proposals have also looked at this issue. The
City Manager has asked for information as to where we are on the possible tipping point, how
many equivalent dwelling units are available, who would be required to erect a water tower, and
when. Mr. Torster said he hopes to know something from the engineers on this by the end of
June. He is not coming out for or against this project, but just wants the current facts to be
known. Mr. Campbell concurred with this viewpoint and said water was an issue 10 years ago,
however, the hotel would need a pressure pump anyway to achieve the fire flows. Back then, a
pressure tank wasn’t needed, but an assessment would have been levied to the property in the
event one was eventually needed. Mrs. Snyder asked if a location has been identified for a tower.
Mrs. Grover and Mr. Torster both said yes. Mr. Schlottman asked about the cost of a water
tower. Mr. Campbell said it would be about $250,000, but would also depend on the lines,
feeders, and pressure. Mr. Landbeck said from a fire department standpoint the pressure can be
created but the need is for volume. He also suggested a fire hydrant be placed at the tee
intersection of Centerfield Drive and Long Drive. Mr. Torster said the tower would provide both
capacity and pressure.
5
Mrs. Grover asked Mr. Campbell to give some background on the traffic study. Mr. Campbell
said Traffic Concepts did the plan in November and submitted it to the SHA, including the
proposed traffic light layout shown on the concept plan. This layout was given to Mr. Campbell
by the SHA in order to be shown on the plan. Mr. Campbell said the numbers related to this
intersection work, but again, the SHA will not approve such an intersection if the City doesn’t
express a desire for the project.
Mr. Glassman expressed his hope that if the tower is not needed now, that the City will be
proactive and plan for the future need of the tower, as development seems to be headed in that
direction. Mr. Torster said his department is developing a capital infrastructure improvement
schedule that would help address this issue.
Mr. Glassman pointed out that it is approximately 450 feet from the proposed shopping center
light to the light at the I-95 off-ramp, plus the light at Long Drive. He assumes the SHA has done
its calculations on this; his concern is 3 lights in close proximity to one another. Mr. Campbell
said the SHA report indicated the lights would need to be staged, perhaps back to Beards Hill
Road.
Mrs. Snyder asked what the proposed access road into the complex would connect to. Mr.
Campbell said years ago it was thought that a way could be found to connect back to Ripken
Stadium. That didn’t happen, but the City’s Department of Planning and Community
Development required that the road be shown as theoretically connecting, in case this through
road does some day come to fruition.
Mr. Miller also expressed concern over the location of the traffic lights. He asked if the traffic
study included traffic to and from Ripken Stadium. Mr. Campbell said such counts are included.
Ms. Preston said she likes the concept, but is concerned that if the water issues cannot be
resolved, the project will not go forward. She expressed disappointment that the City didn’t do
something to address this situation years ago. Mr. Campbell said there are many ways to deal
with this issue, perhaps through a bond and assessment to each building. Mr. Torster said an
APFO development study would show if water capacity is there.
Mrs. Heavey expressed concern with the proposed light. She cited other locations, such as
Arundel Mills, where the roads enter into a shopping area without a specific intersection. She
asked if any other access methods have been considered. Mr. Campbell said if the intersection is
not there, there will be no project; the current retail market is such that companies want direct
access. Mrs. Heavey asked about the distances between the various lights, both current and
proposed. Mr. Campbell said the distance from the light at the I-95 off-ramp to the proposed
light is 500 feet from centerline to centerline; from the proposed light to the light at Long Drive
it is 770 feet. Mr. Campbell added that the SHA wants the proposed light to align with the
southbound I-95 on-ramp. Mr. Torster opined that most retail traffic will be during the middle of
the day. He feels this arrangement is not ideal, but he is comfortable with it, and feels it will be
no worse than what we currently have at the intersections of Route 22 and Beards Hill Road,
Middelton Road, or Paradise Road.
6
Mrs. Heavey felt it would be good to see the traffic study. Mr. Campbell said if the concept is
approved, he will have it available. He reminded everyone that any proposed plan will need to
come back before the Planning Commission for approval.
Mr. Schlottman opined that controlled intersections are a by-product of development, citing
Route 24. He reviewed the placement of the lights and the traffic layout of the plan and felt this
to be similar to traveling a block in Baltimore City.
Mr. Campbell said if the Planning Commission approves the concept plan, then a letter will need
to be crafted by the City and sent to the SHA stating same.
Mrs. Heavey felt that since the Planning Commission is an advisory board, is it up to them or the
City Council to approve this, as the Council may have other ideas about this plan. Mrs. Grover
said the Planning Commission’s approval action on the concept plan and letter would suffice
from an administrative standpoint.
Mrs. Snyder said this is the kind of shopping area she looks for when she travels, since it’s close
to an Interstate highway, has the type of businesses she frequents, and is easy on, easy off. Mr.
Schlottman cited the fact that this property is right off I-95. He feels we may be able to capture
some of the business that currently goes to the Maryland House rest stop along I-95.
Lt. Wales said since this is now a concept plan, she will save her comments until the preliminary
site plan is presented.
Motion by Ms. Preston, seconded by Mr. Glassman, to approve the Concept Plan for
Stadium Towne Center. Motion passed, 6-1 (Mrs. Heavey voting no).
There being no further business or public comment, the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
_____________________________
Planning Commission Chairman
_____________________________
Recording Secretary
_____________________________
Date of Approval
7