The problems associated with the “boom and bust” residential overbuilding in Frederick County have affected the lives of every school child and every motorist in Frederick County. 

Read the Truth about Residential Development, Our Taxes and Our Future.

Read the Truth about the Effects of Residential Development on our Schools.

Read the Truth about the Effects of Residential Development on our Roads.

Friends of Frederick County Position on Crum and COPT/Thatcher Annexations into Frederick City

We believe that our county and city should protect the Monocacy River corridor, productive farmland, scenic vistas, and a buffer between Frederick and Walkersville. At this time there is adequate development planned in the existing “pipeline” of future development in the city and we should develop that first, see that it is done in the most economically, socially and environmentally sustainable manner, and evaluate its impact before bulldozing greenfields.  FoFC believes that existing roads to the north are inadequate, congested and dangerous, and there’s no financial plan to solve that anytime soon.

Background

In September 2009 the City of Frederick’s Mayor and Aldermen[1] voted to annex two farms (total 436 acres) along Route 15 north of Frederick City for 1200 new homes and approximately 2.3 million ft² of non-residential (office, retail, manufacturing, hotel) space. During the Fall 2009 citizens made a good faith effort to gather 20% of city voter signatures to put these annexations to referendum but fell short of our target due to the 45 day time allowed. Judging from overwhelming citizen involvement in that effort and interest in signing the petition for referendum it was clear that citizens of Frederick City do not agree that the development plans for the Crum and COPT/Thatcher properties promote the health, safety and welfare of our city nor county.

Petition to DeAnnex the Crum and COPT/Thatcher Properties

For these reasons, on May 20^th 6:30pm Frederick City Hall Friends of Frederick County launches a petition drive for a charter amendment to change the boundaries of the City of Frederick, MD to exclude the Crum and Thatcher properties.This petition effort, to “de annex” these properties, when put on the ballot will give citizens the opportunity to vote their preference.   The petition can be downloaded off the Friends of Frederick County website (http://www.friendsoffrederickcounty.org/by-campaign/petition-deannexation-referendum/ ) and delivered or mailed to our office.  Petitions will be available at events;  petition drop off points will be announced during the petition drive.  Hear what citizens have to say.

Why deannex the Crum and COPT/Thatcher properties from the City limits?

• Route 15 is one of the most dangerous roads in Maryland – and there is little funding for improvements.  The northern annexations will add 12-15,000 car trips/day to Route 15 and arterial roads.[2] The Maryland State Highway Administration strongly recommended that the cost of planning, design and construction of the Biggs Ford Road interchange be included in the annexation agreements, that cost is estimated at $75-80 million. It was not. The Monocacy Boulevard completion (to cost $75-$80 m) is not even funded yet.[3]
• There are 3500 homes and millions of square feet of commercial space within Frederick City that should be built first before expanding outward.  These approvals include Brick Works, Northgate, Clemson Corner, Market Square, the Ballenger Creek Center and the SAIC-Frederick/NCI facility.  For a complete list of commercial projects see:  http://www.businessinfrederick.com/site_selection/development.htm
• The annexation agreements for Crumland Farm and COPT/Thatcher do not adequately address sewer, schools and fire and rescue services. There is no planned sewer service for the Crum and Thatcher properties at this point [4] and no detailed plans for school and emergency services.
• This farmland has excellent soil for growing food.  If the properties are under Frederick County jurisdiction they will be in an Agricultural Priority Preservation Area (PPA), according to the recently signed Frederick County Comprehensive Plan.

Positions from Voices of Authority

Maryland Department of Planning[5] (7/22/2009) Asks the city to look into potential sewer constraints, the expansive floodplain and the road network impacts in light of the I270/Rte 15 Multi Modal Study.

State Highway Administration[6] SHA strongly recommends that the cost of planning, design and construction of the Biggs Ford Road interchange and park and ride lot be included in the requirements for annexation, as well as dedication of Rte 15 right of way and plans for arterial roads that will need to be constructed once Sunday’s Lane is closed.

Frederick County Board of Commissioners[7] letter dated 9/2/2009 2, 2009:  Without concurrent construction plans for an interchange and the elimination of the at-grade crossings “will only exacerbate an already dangerous situation and jeopardize the safety of City and County residents.” “The Crumland Farm Agreement (pg 5) does not obligate Petitioners (meaning the developer) to fund any portion of the US 15/Biggs Ford Road interchange. The County Commissioners and the State Highway Administration believe the developers, rather than the taxpayers, should pay for this interchange.”  There is no planned sewer to either property.  Absent private funding for a new school this development will worsen school overcrowding.

Frederick County Fire and Rescue Services Division[8] (5/5/2009)on Crumland Farm annexation:  “With the potential increase in traffic traveling to the site, thus requiring vehicles to cross Route 15, the potential for accidents will increase. An increase in accidents on Route 15 may have an effect on the fire and rescue services, therefore, the Biggs Ford Road interchange should be constructed and operational before the first Use and Occupancy permit is issued for the proposed site.”

Town of Walkersville[9] (8/31/2009)  The Walkersville Burgess and Commissioners voted 3-2 in opposition to both the Crum and COPT/Thatcher annexation proposals and urged the Frederick City Board of Alderman to vote to deny them.

Monocacy Scenic River Citizens Advisory Board River Board (5/11/2009) expresses concern about the proposed alteration of the natural landscape in the 100-year floodplain on the COPT/Thatcher property and the disruption of environmental processes and functions that follow from grading, filling, and building in a floodplain—mainly the natural storage and conveyance of flood waters.

Does your organization have a position?  If so, please send it to deannexation@friendsoffrederickcounty.org.

[2] Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 7^th Edition, pp 268-269.

[3] Thomas, John B. (Pers Comm May 2010).  Cost for Biggs Ford Road interchange at Route 15, and the Monocacy Boulevard interchange, Frederick County Division of Planning.

[4] Tax map 57 and 48 at: http://www.frederickcountymd.gov/index.aspx?NID=1326.

[5] Conrad, Peter G., Director, Local Government Assistance, Maryland Department of Planning.

[6] Slater, Gregory I, Director, Office of Planning and Preliminary Engineering, State Highway Administration

[7] Board of County Commissioners, September 2009 (Jan Gardner, David Gray, John L Thompson, Kai J Hagen and Charles Jenkins), Frederick County MD.

[8] Dmuchowski, Michael P, Battalion Chief/Fire Marshall, Frederick County MD

[9] Hauver, Susan J, Planning and Zoning Administrator, Walkersville MD

In September 2009 the City of Frederick’s Mayor and Aldermen[1] voted to annex two farms along Route 15 north of Frederick City for 1200 new homes and approximately 2.3 million ft² of office space. Click to download the Annexation Resolution for the Crum Farm (09-18) and Resolution 09-19 Thatcher Annexation.

During the Fall 2009 citizens made a good faith effort to gather 20% of city voter signatures to put these annexations to referendum but fell short of our target due to the 45 day time allowed. Judging from overwhelming citizen involvement in that effort and interest in signing the petition for referendum it was clear that citizens of Frederick City do not agree that the development plans for the Crum and COPT/Thatcher properties promote the health, safety and welfare of our city nor county.   Read more details on the annexations, organization positions and related issues here and on the Frederick County government website.

This petition effort, to “de annex” these properties, allows unlimited time for signature gathering and when put on the ballot will give citizens the opportunity to vote their preference.

Download the Deannexation Petition for Referendum Here!

Please return the petition as soon as possible:

• mail it to:  Friends of Frederick County,  4 E Church Street, Frederick MD   21701
• call us at:  240 529 1655
• drop off points to be announced

Contact us:  deannexation@friendsoffrederickcounty.org

I read with interest Rand D. Weinberg’s opinion in The FNP about the recently approved Frederick County Comprehensive Plan. If I am left unconvinced by his argument, it is because of his own actions to organize and contrive a long series of property amendments that show much less concern for the overall public good and the impact on residents than any actions by our current county commissioners in reviewing and drafting our approved plan.

In fact, Weinberg and Blaine Young represent the pointy end of the spear in political efforts to challenge and rewrite county ordinances and zonings to the benefit of their own property and power interests. This is the fox guarding the henhouse, and the cynical use of mock outrage and emotion to elicit sympathy. Outside the comp planning process, these “defenders of property rights” constantly sought individual rezoning of properties to usurp the broad goals of the plans.

In the years leading up to 2006, the cabal of development interests they represent sought to constantly amend county regulations, particularly the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, by text amendment in order to justify special interests. That practice was ended, but not without their objections and an attempt by Delegate Galen Clagett to support those interests by amending state law. They obfuscate the ends and absorb the time and energy of government to achieve ends for the very few, the opposite of the goals our legislators should seek to accomplish.

If property owners built future dream castles of wealth based on a property zoning, they held no current value, only imagination. That given the future development pressure and the wealth to determine it arrived, they may have found a value that did not exist presently. As my father, a staunch property rights believer, says, “If it was farmland when you bought it, why shouldn’t it stay farmland when you sell it.” A deed is not a lottery ticket, and a zoning designation is not a crystal ball.

Someday I hope that we will look to undeveloped property and farmland as our most valuable resource. The true economic value is underrealized today. Our local waterways and the Chesapeake Bay, and our very sustainability of population and shared long-term economic success, depend upon an adjustment in our recognition of land resources’ full value.

Changing our expectations, our values, our lifestyles, this may seem an unworthy hardship, an unnecessary adjustment, but we cannot proceed at our current pace of developmentand land and population impacts if our future is to accommodate our best common interests. Our crowded roads and stressed schools provide examples of our quality-of-life impacts.

I am not certain if the citizen lessons on our past civic life have been truly ingrained and safeguarded for the future of Frederick County. In the efforts by these “defenders” to strangle our interests in favor of their own, we can see that we have an important election looming in Frederick County, when we can either maintain the positive change we achieved in 2006 when electing our current board, or we can fall back to a planning process directed by favoring individual properties, which Weinberg and Young appear to prefer.

Jack Lynch

writes from Frederick

Originally published in Frederick News Post May 08, 2010

http://www.fredericknewspost.com/sections/opinion/display_lte.htm?storyid=104688

After established deadlines, HB 1141 (amending Article 66B) prohibits the annexation of  any property that is not included in a Municipal Growth Element.  This Growth Element must contain a detailed analysis of the growth impacts of annexing and developing properties in the municipality’s planned growth area. Prior to adopting this Growth Element, a municipality must “meet and confer” with the county in which it is located. 

 The City of Frederick established a Tier 3/Outer Growth Boundary in its Comprehensive Plan and Municipal Growth Element.  The City proposes the construction of a North South Parallel Road on the east side of Frederick through one portion of Tier 3.  In addition, the Tier 3/Outer Growth Boundary that surrounds the City includes thousands of acres of agricultural land which the City now deems eligible for annexation and development.  The construction of the Parallel Road would accelerate annexations and developments in Tier 3.  These and other developments in Tier 3 would involve the construction of thousands of residential units and hundreds of thousands of square feet of commercial space.  They would have massive impacts on public services and facilities and require huge taxpayer funded infrastructure investments to accommodate this growth.  The City did not offer the requisite analysis of these impacts and costs in its Comprehensive Plan.  

Our Position

FoFC has actively followed this issue with citizen letters to the city and county asking that the City and County “meet and confer” to clarify how the infrastructure on these large annexation agreements will be paid.

If you are interested in the correspondence please contact us:  240 529 1655, or jwiles@friendsoffrederickcounty.org.

Posted on 16 November 2009

Frederick City is poised to grow by more than 500 acres thanks to the recent annexation of two area farms, but the move remains controversial. While development advocate Bruce Dean, (left) a lawyer specializing in annexations with McEvoy & Dean, and other supporters say expanding the city’s boundaries is key to attracting good jobs, opponents such as Janice Wiles of Friends of Frederick County (right) worry about the impact of that expansion on schools, fire protection and other public services.

Point: The City of Frederick needs more land.

Bruce Dean – McEvoy & Dean

Washington-Baltimore is one of the few areas of the country expected to grow tremendously in the next 10 to 20 years. The fact is, growth is the reality. Annexing land located just outside of the city, to the north, for employment and mixed uses has been part of the long-term plans both for Frederick County and the city for years and years.

These annexations along U.S. 15 satisfy a specific, demonstrated city need — for large parcels of undeveloped land to accommodate large new employers seeking a campus-like environment. When completed, these annexations are expected to add between 7,000 and 8,000 good, white-collar jobs and will contribute significantly to the tax base. Creating places for this type of jobs so that more people can work here instead of traveling down I-270 for work is good for Frederick and its citizens.

For the people who oppose the annexations, I don’t think there’s much of an alternative plan beyond ‘no growth.’ To my knowledge, they’ve not recommended alternate locations for the type of large office campuses that the city needs to accommodate future growth and provide residents with opportunities to work, live and recreate in the city. The big thing that keeps coming up is traffic, that this annexation will make traffic worse.

If Frederick tries to keep people out, it won’t stop the growth — it’ll just push it farther out, to Pennsylvania, to Washington County, to West Virginia — and people will drive through here and the roads will still be clogged. The alternative, which I favor, and which is consistent with the Smart Growth principles that are so widely embraced in this state, is to provide places for people to work and live in Frederick at locations, such as these annexation sites, that can be efficiently served with public water and sewer facilities.

Counterpoint: We cannot grow our way out of our problems.

Janice Wiles – Friends of Frederick County

These annexations will raise our taxes, congest our roads and either overcrowd our schools or drain our personal coffers to pay for a new school. For the past two decades the sprawl development model has consumed more than 14 million acres of land in the U.S. and vastly changed the land around us in Frederick County. We cannot grow our way out of problems and in fact will create new problems. Not only does development on such scale fragment and destroy wildlife habitat, pollute our streams and pave over rich and productive farmland, it has a direct impact on our lives by creating more traffic.

Citizens are demanding a more common sense approach to growth that preserves open spaces, natural resources and farmland, promotes local businesses, and fosters modes of transportation that do not clog our roadways. Already inadequate and highly congested, and doing double duty as a local road for Frederick residents, U.S. 15 is one of the most dangerous roads in Maryland. The northern annexations will add 12,000 to 15,000 car trips per day to Route 15 and arterial roads.

Instead of annexed land that can be home to major employment campuses for large, Fortune 500 companies such as Bechtel, IBM, MedImmune, State Farm, and the like, Friends of Frederick County promotes local economic growth, based as much as possible on using our local goods and services. We imagine Frederick County’s urban areas and political leaders working together to learn to build our community assets incorporating sustainable agriculture, green building, renewable energy, community capital, zero-waste manufacturing and independent retail — all vital components of a “sustainable community.”

There is no evidence to support the claims that the Fortune 500 corporations would employ local Frederick residents. Meanwhile, studies such as www.livingeconomies.org show that by supporting local owned businesses – ones that can fit into the millions of square feet of office space available in Frederick City – we can also create jobs without compromising the environment.

Republished from 270 Inc Business Magazine.

Letter to the Editor
September 03, 2009

It is unfortunate that city and county elected officials are debating the Crum and Thatcher annexations in the letters to the editor. It would be much more productive if the majority of the city elected officials would have met with the Frederick County Board of County Commissioners as requested to discuss the issues surrounding these annexations.

A recent change to the annexation proposal identifies a new school site within the proposed development as requested by Frederick County Public Schools. This will allow a future school to be considered for state funding. However, the city’s Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance will permit development to proceed even though Monocacy Elementary School, which serves the area, is currently at 114 percent of capacity. It appears the city officials expect taxpayers to build a new school or expect students to deal with extreme overcrowding. It should not be lost on city residents that this decision will potentially delay the needed renovation of Frederick High School because new school seats not currently in the plan will be needed in the city.

The City of Frederick does not have sewer capacity to serve these proposed developments, and no agreement exists with the county to provide sewer. City officials agree that there is no sewer capacity yet claim to have planned adequately for these projects. The ability to flush is essential!

The mayor and Alderman Paul Smith do not dispute that the city has not required the developers to pay for the needed transportation improvements/interchange on U.S. 15. Thus, this burden shifts to the taxpayers. Worse yet, the city is agreeing to allow the construction of 350 to 450 new houses prior to any improvements on U.S. 15. This will exacerbate existing traffic safety issues at the crossover on U.S. 15 to Hayward Road and Willow Road. The county commissioners agree with the Maryland State Highway Administration that public safety will be at risk if these developments proceed without a new grade-separated interchange. Public safety should come first.

Fire and emergency medical services have not been discussed with the county commissioners and the city does not consider fire and rescue in evaluating adequate public facilities. There is no fire station anywhere near these proposed properties or even on the west side of U.S. 15. Who will build and staff this fire/EMS station? This cost will shift to the taxpayers.

It is absolutely clear that sewer, schools, roads and fire/EMS are not adequate and have not been fully considered or planned for by city officials. I urge the mayor and aldermen to pause, meet with the commissioners, and develop plans including funding before approving these annexations. Otherwise, the taxpayers will be stuck with overcrowded schools, safety hazards on U.S. 15, and a bill to pick up the tab!

Slow down and avoid another mistake.

Jan H. Gardner is president of the Frederick County Board of County Commissioners.

http://www.fredericknewspost.com…

>>>>The argument that building roads causes more traffic problems is a generalization that should never be used as a standard to determine when and where new roads are built.<<<<

If you can show me an example of a municipality that has “built its
way out of” traffic congestion problems, I’ll eat my hat.

Abundant evidence shows that the solution to traffic congestion
problems isn’t to build new roads; it’s to take cars off the existing
ones. I believe we can best do that by building a robust local job
base, pursuing “main street”-style development, and emphasizing more
efficient rail transportation.

There’s $200 billion in stimulus money available to build
infrastructure. Columbia, MD is aggressively pursuing it; I suggest we
do the same. Frederick is well-positioned to get stimulus money to
build out next-generation infrastructure such as modern rail systems.

>>>>The current transit system that we do have (operated by the County) does not pay for itself; it is highly subsidized by the State; and there is no projection that it could become self-sustaining.<<<<

Exactly the same thing could be said about our road systems.

>>>>Both of these properties constitute the northern most areas for development by the city in plans that were adopted at least twenty years ago.<<<<

I think that’s an excellent reason to rethink development in these
areas. Those old plans were created in an environment much different
than the current day, without the knowledge and experience we now
possess.

>>>>Some people argue that the development of the Crumland and Thatcher properties would be “sprawl,” but that is not an accurate description.<<<<

Actually, it is entirely fitting and accurate to describe what’s
planned for these properties as sprawl:

–Put the school out where nobody wants it.
–Segregate the housing into subdivisions.
–Build the office space somewhere else, separate from the housing,
schools, retail, etc.

That’s a textbook example of sprawl.

>>>>The City government is not going to be micromanaging which businesses establish themselves here and which do not.  The City may have a small say in this, but it will be market forces that primarily dictate this.<<<<

When the City allows office parks to be built, that’s exactly what it
does: it micromanages its business climate, and prevents market forces
from working.

Downtown merchants are starving for foot traffic. By putting big
office parks out on the outskirts of town instead of maximizing
downtown office space, the City cripples their ability to survive and
thrive.

By promoting the sprawl development favored by large, mature
companies, the City tilts the playing field against fast-growing
small- and medium-sized firms that benefit from concentrated
development.

I look forward to meeting you; I’ll be sure to introduce myself next
time I see you. Thanks again for your kind response,

Chris Charuhas

#1 The first and most important issue we raise is that these proposals will most certainly create a death trap on route 15 – endangering our families, our kids and visitors to our county. Both Willow Road andBiggs Ford Road are at grade, unsignalized intersections allowing people access to a 4-lane road where cars drive 60 miles/hour. These developments are not just buildings on farmland, they will house real people, driving real cars, entering a real road, to compete for road space with other real people driving real fast. I cannot stretch my imagination far enough to think that this proposal is safe and smart for our community. We recommend that you think about the public safety of our citizens; a vote in favor of the Crum and Thatcher annexation is a vote in favor of creating a death trap on highway 15.

#2. The second most important issue – and related to the first is about developer proffers. If developers proffer new workable interchanges along highway 15 please be cautious and scrutinize their ability to pay.It is my understanding that such a proffer would cost well over $50 million/interchange. Let’s take a lesson from recent history just south east of here in Lake Linganore. In 2005 Land Stewards proffered $65 million for schools and roads in that area. John Clark of Land Stewards repeatedly promised these proffers to the Board of County Commissioners, yet in 2008 Land Stewards went bankrupt and Frederick Countyreceived nothing of these proffers.

#3. The Crum Farm proposal is residential sprawl – We’ve all heard about the social, economic and environmental costs of sprawl. At a time when we should be scrutinizing every penny we spend – lets look at the economic costs alone. Historically there has NEVER been a place where residential sprawl has paid for itself. Never. The actual cost of extending water and sewer, busing kids, extending and building new road networks, adding more police and fire protection and building new schools – cost all of us taxpayers a lot.

We express our concern with the City taking any action that will add additional tax burden to the citizens during an economic recession and when people are struggling. Let me remind you again of the numbers that compare how much a farmer and a homeowner each cost us[1]:

• For every $1 a residential taxpayer pays its government – the government pays out $1.14 for services…a revenue loss of 14 cents for each tax dollar. There is 12 cents less revenue loss when the residential development is build where city services already exist (ie services cost $1.02 vs $1.14).

• For every $1 a farmer taxpayer pays its government the government pays out 53 cents for services…a revenue gain of 47 cents for each tax dollar.

The Crum Farm development is asking tax payers to subsidize this development. Judging from what city taxpayers have said in two city surveys during the past 9 years – they DO NOT WANT city sprawl and instead favor infill and redevelopment[2].

If city officials ignore citizen requests because current code makes it difficult for developers to turn a hearty and rapid profit on infill and redevelopment then city officials should probably fix THAT problem – and not exacerbate it by adding additional debt to our city coffers. We recommend that you give the current city residents what they have been asking for during the last nine years, by facilitating prudent and careful planning for infill and redevelopment in Frederick City and leave this property outside the growth line where it serves as a Catoctin Mountain Scenic Byway anchor that draws millions in tourism revenue to our county every year.

# 4. Is more housing necessary? There are approximately 28,000 dwelling units in the pipeline between theFrederick City and County. Estimates are that Fort Detrick will require around 4500.

#5. The Thatcher Property proposed office park, over 6 miles from the heart of Frederick City, is an example of job sprawl. Like residential sprawl, job sprawl necessitates additional transportation, adds challenges to workforce development, compromises regional innovation and the provision of social services. We recommend that you leave the Thatcher property outside the city’s growth line where it will remain in agriculture enhancing our Catoctin Mountain Scenic Byway and protecting the Monocacy River.

#6. Seriously consider Article 66B. Nearly 100 years ago the State of Maryland enacted guiding legislation to help local governments with planning and zoning. Rewritten in 1992, Article 66B encourages economic growth while limiting development sprawl, and protecting the State’s natural resources and environment.We ask that Frederick City recognize why 66B was written and its importance. Respecting state policy that was enacted to protect our natural resources and our pocket books is a good thing. Why don’t we think about a more appropriate location for economic development? Perhaps you won’t be able to have one gigantic office complex, but instead could put office space in various - already urbanized and accessible locations. Perhaps you could put housing in existing mixed use areas where there are already amenities, public transportation, schools and roads? And you can leave farmland as farmland - for crop production purposes.

#7. Take a look at what Frederick County is doing Frederick County Planners and Commissioners have recently released their DRAFT comprehensive plan. That plan took citizen input to heart and responded with a plan that reflects taxpayer interests. The plan states that development emphasis is on reinvestment in our growth areas by encouraging infill and redevelopment projects which are compatible with existing neighborhoods and districts. Why won’t Frederick City listen to the citizen interests?

It is truly inconceivable that you are considering these developments and putting the citizens of this city and county deeper into debt. But since we know that several of our city decision makers are if favor, Friends of Frederick County asks that you tell us in real dollars what these developments will cost the taxpayer before you vote to make us pay for them.

submitted to the Frederick City Planning Commission on June 8, 2009 by Janice Wiles,

Executive Director, Friends of Frederick County

Friends of Frederick County is a Member pf Catoctin Mountain National Scenic Byway Advisory Committee

Janice Wiles is a member of the  Frederick County Sustainability Commission

Janice Wiles is a 2009 National Women’s History Project “Women Taking the Lead to Save the Planet” honoree

Aspire Frederick (2001) and Frederick City Questionaire (August 2008).