May 13 2014 Complete Agenda

MAYORANDCITYCOUNCIL
WORKSESSION
Tuesday,May13,20141:00P.M.
AClosedSessionisscheduledfrom11:00A.M.1:00P.M.todiscusslegalandpersonnelmatters.
AGENDA
1. CALLTOORDER
2. REPORTONCLOSEDSESSIONTuesday,May13,201411:00a.m.1:00p.m.
3. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSANDRECOGNITIONS
4. COMMENTSFROMTHEPUBLIC
AnypersonwhomaywishtospeakonamatterscheduledfordiscussionontheWorkSessionAgenda
maybeheardduringCommentsfromthePublicforaperiodofthree(3)minutesorsuchtimeasmay
bedeemedappropriatebytheCouncilPresident.Anyonewishingtobeheardshallstatetheirname,
addressandtheAgendaitemonwhichheorshewishestospeak.
5. NEWBUSINESS
A. SHASpringMeetingpresentedbyDistrictEngineerDonnieDrewerandAssistantDistrictEngineer
DallasBaker
B. DiscussionofCodeAmendmentstoChapter110,EntitledZoningpresentedbyPlanningand
CommunityDevelopmentDirector
1. WindTurbines
2. DowntownDesignOverlayZone
C. DiscussionofCodeAmendmentstoChapter1,GeneralProvisionsandChapter58,Offenses
andMiscellaneousProvisionspresentedbyCitySolicitor
1. Includedateofbirthaspartofproperidentificationrequirements
2. Addassistedopeningknifetolistofprohibiteditems
6. ADJOURN

WORK SESSION -MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, MAY 13, 2014

2. Report on Closed Session May 13, 2014 11:00 a.m.
1:00 p.m. Legal and Personnel Matters

NOTICE OF CLOSED SESSION OF MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL OF OCEAN CITY

AUTHORITY: State Government Article: Section 10-508(a) Annotated Code of Maryland
PURPOSES:
X
1. To discuss:
(i) the appointment, employment, assignment, promotion, discipline, demotion,
compensation, removal, resignation or performance evaluation of
appointees, employees or officials over whom it has jurisdiction; or
(ii) any other personnel matter that affects one or more specific individuals;

2. To protect the privacy or reputation of individuals with respect to a matter that is
not related to public business

3. To consider the acquisition of real property for the public purpose and matters
directly related thereto;

4. Consider a matter that concerns the proposal for a business or industrial
organization to locate, expand or locate in the state;
5. Consider the investment of public funds;
6. Consider the marketing of public securities;
X 7. Consult with counsel to obtain legal advice;

8. Consult with staff, consultants or other individuals about pending or potential
litigations;

9. Conduct collective bargaining negotiations or consider matters that relate to the
negotiations;

10. Discuss public security if the public body determines that public discussion
would constitute a risk to the public or public security, including;
a) the deployment of fire and police services and staff; and
b) the development and implementation of emergency plans
11. Prepare, administer or grade a scholastic, licensing or qualifying examination;

12. Conduct or discuss an investigative proceeding on actual or possible criminal
conduct;

13. Comply with a specific constitutional, statutory or judicially imposed
requirement that prevents public disclosures about a particular proceeding or
matter; or

14. Before a contract is awarded or bids are opened, discuss a matter directly related
to a negotiation strategy or the contents of a bid or proposal, if public discussion
or disclosure would adversely impact the ability of the public body to participate
in the competitive bidding or proposal process

DATE AND TIME: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 11:00 a.m.
PLACE: City Hall
SUBJ ECT: Legal and Personnel Matters
VOTE: UNANIMOUS
OTHER: FOR:
AGAINST:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
REPORT OF CLOSED SESSION
OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF OCEAN CITY

Prior to this open session of the Mayor and City Council being held on Tuesday, May 13,
2014, a closed session was held on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 at 11:00 a.m. The following is
a report of the closed session.
1. A statement of the time, place, and purpose of the closed session is attached.
2. A record of the vote of each member as to closing the session is attached.
3. A citation of the authority under the law for closing the session is attached.
4. (a) Topics of Discussion: Legal and Personnel Matters
(b) Persons present:
Mayor Richard Meehan
City Manager David Recor
Council President Lloyd Martin
Council Secretary Mary Knight
Council Members Doug Cymek; Margaret Pillas; Brent Ashley; Dennis Dare and
J oe Mitrecic
City Solicitor Guy Ayres
Planning & Community Development Director Matt Margotta
Police Chief Ross Buzzuro
Lt. Mark Pacini
Executive Office Associate Diana Chavis

Action(s) taken:
Motion to close meeting:

Time adjourned:


4. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

Any person who may wish to speak on a matter scheduled for discussion on the Work
Session Agenda may be heard during Comments from the Public for a period of three
(3) minutes or such time as may be deemed appropriate by the Council President.
Anyone wishing to be heard shall state their name, address and the subject on which
he or she wishes to speak.


5. NEW BUSINESS

A. SHA Spring Meeting presented by District Engineer Donnie
Drewer and Assistant District Engineer Dallas Baker

TOWN OF
The White Marlin Capital of the World

TO: The Honorable Mayor, Council President and Members of Council
FROM: David L. Recor, ICMA-CM, City Manager
RE: Maryland State Highway Administration Spring Meeting
DATE: May 6, 2014

ISSUE(S): Bi-annual meeting with the Maryland State Highway
Administration (SHA)

SUMMARY: SHA District Engineer Donnie Drewer and Assistant District
Engineer Dallas Baker will discuss pedestrian safety efforts, Rt.
90, Rt. 50 Bridge and various Rt. 50 and Coastal Highway
projects.

FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable

RECOMMENDATION: Refer to Mayor and Council

ALTERNATIVES: Not applicable

RESPONSIBLE STAFF: Not applicable

COORDINATED WITH: Hal Adkins, Public Works Director
Terence McGean, City Engineer
Donnie Drewer, SHA District Engineer
Dallas Baker, Assistant District Engineer

ATTACHMENT(S): Agenda

Agenda Item # 5A
Council Meeting May 13, 2014
SHA Spring Meeting Agenda
Mayor and Council Work Session May 13, 2014

1. Update on Pedestrian Safety Projects:
a. Signal at 54
th
Street
b. Median modifications for closure of non-signalized pedestrian depressions
c. Bump-outs on Baltimore Ave.
d. Median modifications for added landscape/fence barrier
e. Road diet
f. What steps would be necessary for SHA to consider conversion of the entire Coastal
Highway median by:
Removal of the brick pavers
Installation of lighting conduit foundations, and LED lighting
Creation of elevated curbed planters (similar to 9
th
14
th
Street)
Reinstallation of pavers only on the perimeters
No reconstruction of the current curbing

2. Rt. 90 Dualization, letter from Mayor to County, request for inclusion in Consolidated
Transportation Program plan.

3. Status of sidewalk widths after DPL pole replacement project.

4. Update on Walmart temporary signal.

5. Project schedule for dual left turn at Seahawk & 50.

6. Status of Rt. 50 milling/paving: Herring Creek west to MD 818.

7. Are there any further developments in the planned West Ocean City pedestrian enhancements
(sidewalks, pedestrian study @ Rt. 50/Elm Street)?

8. Cost for street lighting on Coastal Highway. Why is this the Citys responsibility and not State
Highway?

9. Problem with traffic signal lights becoming unreadable during snow events.

10. Did MDOT/SHA receive a request for an additional signalized pedestrian crossing at 101
st
Street?
Status?

11. Rt. 50 Bridge:
Has any consideration been given to reducing the overall quantity of fence openings
on the Rt. 50 Bridge?
Have the two LED Lights that were not functioning been corrected? If not, when?
Would it be feasible to paint the drawbridge walkways and side rails (the sections that
are visible to motorists)?
Would it be feasible to repaint the horizontal panels on the concrete walls that were
painted a red tone years ago?

12. What is the permitted status of the new gas main, and temporary patched road cuts, from 94
th

Street South to 66
th
Street?


5. NEW BUSINESS

B. Discussion of Code Amendments to Chapter 110, Entitled
Zoning presented by Planning and Community
Development Director

1) Wind Turbines

TOWN OF

THRU: David L. Recor, ICMA-CM, City Manager
FROM: Kay Stroud, Zoning Analyst
RE: Code Amendment to Article V, Section 110-883 Small Wind Energy Systems
DATE: April 24, 2014

ISSUE(S): Consideration to amend Article V, Code Section 110-883 Small
Wind Energy Systems.

SUMMARY: The Planning & Zoning Commission held a public hearing on
Tuesday, April 15, 2014, to consider staff recommendations
regarding small wind energy systems.

The Commission favorably presents this code amendment as
enabling legislation to allow applicants with open waterfront
property to locate a turbine closer to the shoreline provided they
obtain approval from appropriate regulatory agencies. The
current code does not address the placement of turbines on open
waterfront property.

FISCAL IMPACT: None

RECOMMENDATION: Amend Article V, Code Section 110-883(b)(2).

ALTERNATIVES: Further amendments or denial of request.

RESPONSIBLE STAFF: R. Blaine Smith, Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning
Kay Stroud, Zoning Analyst

COORDINATED WITH: Matthew G. Margotta, AICP, Director, Planning & Community
Development

ATTACHMENT(S): 1) Recommendation
2) Transcript
3) Draft Ordinance

Agenda Item # 5B(1)

RECOMMENDATION TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

TO AMEND CHAPTER 110 ARTICLE V CODE SECTION 110-883
SMALL WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS

File PZ #14-14100002

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

On Tuesday, April 15, 2014, the Planning Commission conducted a public
hearing to consider amending by adding the language highlighted below to Code Section
110-883, Small Wind Energy Systems:

(b) (2) Minimum yard requirement: (Setback). The base of the tower shall be
set back from all adjacent property lines, public rights-of-way, and public utility lines a
distance equal to 1.1 times the total height. A turbine may be located closer to a
property line if the abutting property owner grants appropriate easements. Properties
located on open waterfront may locate a turbine closer to the shoreline provided they
obtain approval from appropriate regulatory agencies. Notwithstanding the provisions of
section 110-95 of this zoning code, a variance to the setback from adjacent property
lines may not be granted by the board of zoning appeals.

The Planning Commission initiated this amendment. The members reviewed the
current ordinance and listened to testimony from Zoning Administrator Blaine Smith as to
how prior Conditional Use applicant J im Motsko had all the approvals from MDE, but
could not obtain an easement over open water from that agency. Administrator Smith
explained that changing this language does not change the process of Conditional Use,
but acts as enabling legislation to allow applicants with open waterfront property to go
through the process.

Mr. Motsko testified that by current regulation, he is allowed a tower of no more
than 33 in height. When installing a wind turbine system, having a taller tower than 33
is more cost-effective and efficient. Also, a taller tower keeps the turbine out of line of
sight for neighbors so that the bay vista is less interrupted.

At the conclusion of the meeting, the Commission voted unanimously (5-0) to
forward the recommendation to the Mayor and City Council for consideration. For your
information, the transcript of the public hearing is also included.

/ks

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
April 15, 2014

PRESENT IN ATTENDANCE
J ohn Staley Blaine Smith
Palmer Gillis Kay Stroud
Peck Miller Will Esham
Lauren Taylor
J oel Brous

This meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission was held on Tuesday, April 15,
2014, in the City Hall Council Chambers located on Baltimore Avenue and 3
rd
Street,
Ocean City, Maryland. J ohn Staley, Commission Secretary/Vice-Chairperson, called the
public hearing to order.

STALEY: Its 7 oclock, we can go. Public Hearing. To consider amending Code
Section 110-883 Small Wind Energy Systems (b) (2) minimum yard requirement
setback: The base of the tower shall be set back from all adjacent property lines, public
rights-of-way, and public utility lines, at a distance equal to one.one times of the total
height. The turbine may be located closer to a property line if the abutting property
owner grants appropriate easements. Properties located on open waterfront may locate
a turbine closer to the shoreline provided they obtain approval from appropriate
regulatory agencies, notwithstanding, the provisions of Section 110-95 of this zoning
code, a variance to the setback from adjacent property lines, may not be granted by the
Board of Zoning Appeals. The applicant is the Planning and Zoning Commission, File
14- 14100002, and before we do this have to read this(omitted unnecessary portions
of that page read mistakenly). Prior to each hearing, the chairman shall read the
following statement: Any person in attendance may object to a Commission member
taking part in this public hearing due to a conflict of interest. The Chairman shall decide
by a majority vote whether the challenged person may take part. Is there anyone
challenging anyone here at the Commission? Seeing none, okay. (Again omitting
portions not necessary to transcript). Call to order this hearing. Blaine?

ESHAM: Under the penalties of perjury, do you hereby swear to tell the whole truth and
nothing but the truth?

SMITH: I do. This request was advertised in the Ocean City Digest on March 27
th
and
October 3
rd
(meaning April 3
rd
) stating the time, date, place, and purpose of this meeting.
And because it was not site specific, there was no posting of property specifically. It was
just public notice, we put it on our website and other types of notice, but it ran in the
newspaper giving notice that this particular hearing was taking place for this particular
code amendment. To give a little bit of history, a few years ago, Mr. J im Motsko came to
the Planning Commission wanting to put a turbine and he shared his interest with the
Planning Commission. At that time, the Planning Commission made a motion and
second to initiate the code change to allow wind turbines in Ocean City and pretty much
all zoning districts. Some of those districts, it wouldve been a special exception or
conditional use or permitted by right under certain criteria. When your recommendation
got to the Mayor and Council, it was determined by them that it would be a conditional
use application so that there would be a public hearing and to safeguard neighboring
1
properties. So they didnt allow it by right or allow it to go through the Board of Zoning
Appeals, it was done through Conditional Use, so they would stay part of the process
and the final decision maker as they were put in place. And I recall, at the public
hearing, discussion took place about the setbacks on waterfront properties. And it was
determined that they would have to meet the same setback as though it was an
adjoining property unless you could get a prescriptive easement from that adjacent
property owner, and that is still in the Code that you could get a prescriptive easement
from the adjacent property owner. But when Mr. Motsko approached the MD
Department of the Environment who are the trustees of the water, the regulators of the
water area, they were okay with it being done, but they could not grant an easement, per
se. I dont know if that wouldve been an act of Congress or what, but they didnt the
position where they can grant easements over the water. There are riparian rights over
water, and there are rights to those adjacent properties within those riparian areas, but
that didnt qualify, as we determined, as a prescriptive easement. So then, we
reappeared to this Commission and got a consensus from you all that if we changed the
language, properties adjacent to water could be done by approval of the appropriate
agency, not as a prescriptive easement, per se. And thats why this new language is in
here, because theyve already received an authorization, if you will, but not an easement
per se, so it didnt qualify with the original language of the code, and were here tonight
to change the language in this manner so its not a prescriptive easement, but just an
approval from appropriate regulatory agency, just as if you were to go get a pier over
water, you get approval from the regulatory agency, which could be MDE, DNR, Core of
Engineers, and the Board of Port Wardens, they are the regulatory agencies when you
have structures over water. The interesting part about this is, the wind turbine would not
be over the water, but the point was about the prescriptive easement, if it were to fall,
because of its height, it may fall in the water. So the Mayor and Council felt they should
be a party to it if you will. So if they would give a prescriptive easement, just as an
adjacent property might give a prescriptive easement, or give approval rather, in this
case, then weve met our test to protect adjacent properties, if they do sign off on it, and
I believe thats the intent of this. I would go one step further and say because of the
Critical Area Criteria, regardless of the approval and/or easement in the case of adjacent
property, you still have to meet the minimum setback from the lot line or bulkhead to the
base of the tower, which in Mr. Motskos case is just a 10 setback, he could build a
building literally within 10 of the shoreline, and that was discussed at the Mayor and
Council level when the concern came up about interrupting the vista along bayfront
properties; that buildings themselves can be as close as 10, and they can be as much
as 50 high and his tower was going to be that or less, so comparatively speaking, it
wasnt any more invasive on that easement than others. I think knowing he could meet
all the tests but one, and that was to get an easement from the MDE, he couldnt obtain
that, so he got all the way through the process except for the easement with the state.
He has the approval, or the authorization from them to go forward, they have no
concern, but to meet our ordinance we have to modify it to get rid of the word easement.
And thats the point of this code amendment to existing regulation. Its still a Conditional
Use, it still has to go through the process, the only difference is how the regulatory
agency will view it.

TAYLOR: I remember from the original legislation that it, for some reason, if its
abandoned it has to be removed within a certain time

SMITH: Yes, theres a lot of language to that effect, how its kept, maintained, painted

2
TAYLOR: Right.

SMITH: noise levels, all those things. And the other thing is, with this new language,
he still has to go through the Conditional Use process, and neighboring properties will
still have their opportunity if theres something adverse to the point where it should not
be, so its not a given, but its enabling legislation, if you will. To make it so he can meet
the test.

TAYLOR: I have to admire Mr. Motskos stamina.

STALEY: Persistence

TAYLOR: Persistence, right! How many years since you came in with what you thought
was a simple request?

SMITH: If I could lay

MOTSKO: It just makes sense to do this, its common sense.

TAYLOR: Right.

SMITH: Well, the other thing, and its only coincidental, but again, were not talking
about site specific, this is for all waterfront properties. If you were to look at his survey
plat, he meets the radius on the uplands part, except where his bulkhead is on an angle,
and its in front of his own property only, its amazing! But thats the way it is, its over
their jurisdiction, and we need to change the language.

MILLER: We all agreed to this some time ago.

TAYLOR: Yeah, we have to close the hearing and deliberate.

STALEY: Yeah.

SMITH: Yeah, this came from our earlier work session.

MILLER: Oh, okay.

TAYLOR: So, I move we close the hearing.

STALEY: Can we do that? Weve got to go all the way through the whole thing.

SMITH: Yeah, yeah.

STALEY: Thats what I thought. Okay, Blaine are you?

SMITH: Thats it.

STALEY: Alright, the applicants presentation. J immy? You making a presentation? I
guess you are.

3
MOTSKO: Well, I didnt, Im not really planning on it, but I just want to mention a few
things. Thank you for your time, first of all. The, I have the ability to put a smaller
turbine up, a 33 pole. And alls Im asking is to have a taller pole so it will be much more
cost-effective and efficient. The degree of, its like a, the higher it goes, the so much
more effective it becomes. And I can comply and stay within that setbacks with the 33
one. Im asking for the other, the height, in case it falls into the water, because it, it
makes much more common sense and it captures more wind if your elevation is a little
bit higher, thats all.

MILLER: Is he allowed to go that extra height?

SMITH & MOTSKO: Yeah.

MILLER: Then thats good news.

TAYLOR: It actually gets it farther away from the neighbors.

SMITH: It does two things, as Lauren is saying. Because hes going up, it gets it out of
their vista, the turbine itself, and all they see is the pole because of the profile of their
house, so it does that and I think, he moves it, because if he did the 33 its brought back
almost in line with the neighbor. So it does have a better appli-, in this particular case.
This language, and again, he has to file for his Conditional Use, and that would be
weighed with the testimony as to the appropriateness of it at that location. So, hell be
able to testify that thats the benefit of having this, and it becomes more permissive when
he makes the Conditional Use unless somebody has other adverse effect that we dont
now know about.

BROUS: How high is the proposal, and I know it doesnt, but in this case Im curious as
to how high is it.

SMITH: Its like 40-

MOTSKO: It would be under the 50 limit.

SMITH: Its like 45. Yeah, yeah. But the extra height does make it better in its
application.

BROUS: I see, okay.

GILLIS: It doesnt interfere in any way with any of the flights from Patuxent Air Base?

COMMISSION: (laughter)

MILLER: Wallops.

STALEY: The flight of the birds.

BROUS: Sea gulls.

GILLIS: Well, its Patuxent is the one that did the one in Princess Anne.

4
SMITH: Let me ask you a minute. Monty Lewis, how tall is his, do you know?

MOTSKO: 33 I think, 33.

SMITH: Yeah, hes more or less across the bay. Because weve got a few of them
theres one at South Point, theres Monty Lewis thats in Keyser Point on the very end on
the, so its almost like right over the bay, if you will; and I dont know that theres been
issues, you know, that Ive seen or heard of. David Quillen has the one at South Point,
and you know, its right there to his home and stuff, it seems like they work.

STALEY: All right. Is anyone in favor of the application? Seeing none. Testimony
opponents testimony there is none. Questions and answers by the staff.

MILLER: No questions.

STALEY: No questions. J immy, do you have any questions? Then we can have a
motion to adjourn the hearing.

TAYLOR: So moved.

GILLIS: Ill second it.

STALEY: (gavel) Hearings done. Are you ready to vote?

COMMISSIONERS IN UNISON: Yes.

STALEY: Okay, Lauren?

TAYLOR: I recommend that we can amend code section 110-8833 with the

STALEY: 110-325?

TAYLOR: No, its Code Section 8-, I dont even know

ESHAM: 110-883 isnt it?

TAYLOR: 883, right. To reflect change in language properties located on open
waterfront may locate a turbine closer to the shoreline provided they permission from
appropriate regulatory agencies.

STALEY: Alright, second?

MILLER: Second.

STALEY: Any other questions? All in favor?

COMMISSIONERS IN UNISON: Aye.

STALEY: Opposed? Alright Blaine.

5
SMITH: J ust a little bit of trivia. When a turbine was approved at 15
th
Street and
Boardwalk, and it was a roof-mounted turbine. Three of them actually. And weve had
no negative feedback since theyve been installed and put in operation.

TAYLOR: Are they in operation?

MILLER: Have you seen the design?

SMITH: Yeah.

TAYLOR: Last time I knew they were not actually operational.

SMITH: Yeah, theyve operated and theyre very neutral, I mean unless you know
theyre up there you dont normally look for them, or you walk down the Boardwalk, you
dont, and Ive seen them spinning, and you dont hear them.

TAYLOR: Theyre spinning but theyre not connected.

SMITH: Now that may be, I dont know if theyre actually functioning.

TAYLOR: There was some regulatory hiccup which she was working on, and I dont
know, that was last month like maybe or something, but they were just free-spinning.

SMITH: But to say that much, Ive had at least three other inquiries, some of which are
roof-mount, and another one is a mono-pole. So there is interest out there that this is
something, you know, with energy conservation or you know, things like that. We are
seeing more solar and wind power being looked at.

MILLER: I can say from a design standpoint, the one at 15
th
Street, its attractive. Its
a

TAYLOR: Its the house next to Harrison Hall.

SMITH: Right between Harrison Hall and the Commander.

MILLER: But its really, its a nice looking design to put on any house, it looks like its
part of the roof.

TAYLOR: And the poor guy installing it, he rented the crane and did the whole thing, the
OSHA guy came back and decided that the guy on the roof didnt have enough harness.

GILLIS: Fall protection?

TAYLOR: And stopped the whole thing, so they had to bring the crane and the lift back
another day and

STALEY: Okay, I have a motion to adjourn?

BROUS: Thats me.

STALEY: All in favor?
6

COMMISSIONERS: Aye.

STALEY: (gavel)

Respectfully submitted by
Karen (Kay) Stroud
Zoning Analyst
April 21, 2014
7
First Reading _______________________

Second Reading _____________________

ORDINANCE 2014-

AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 110, ENTITLED ZONING, OF THE CODE OF
THE TOWN OF OCEAN CITY, MARYLAND

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED AND ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND
CITY COUNCIL OF OCEAN CITY THAT CHAPTER 110, ENTITLED ZONING, OF THE
CODE OF THE TOWN OF OCEAN CITY, MARYLAND BE, AND IT IS HEREBY,
AMENDED TO ADD LANGUAGE TO SUBSECTION 110-883 SMALL WIND ENERGY
SYSTEMS, AS FOLLOWS:

Sec. 110-883. Small wind energy systems.

. . .

(b) (2) Minimum yard requirement: (Setback). The base of the tower shall
be set back from all adjacent property lines, public rights-of-way, and public utility
lines a distance equal to 1.1 times the total height. A turbine may be located
closer to a property line if the abutting property owner grants appropriate
easements. Properties located on open waterfront may locate a turbine closer to
the shoreline provided they obtain approval from appropriate regulatory
agencies. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 110-95 of this zoning code,
a variance to the setback from adjacent property lines may not be granted by the
board of zoning appeals.

INTRODUCED at a meeting of the City Council of Ocean City, Maryland held on
May 5, 2014.

ADOPTED AND PASSED by the required vote of the elected membership of the
City Council and approved by the Mayor at its meeting held on ____________________,
2014.

ATTEST:

_____________________________ _________________________________
KELLY L. ALLMOND, Clerk RICHARD W. MEEHAN, Mayor

Approved as to Form: _________________________________
LLOYD MARTIN, President

_____________________________ __________________________________
GUY R. AYRES, III, Solicitor MARY P. KNIGHT, Secretary


5. NEW BUSINESS

B. Discussion of Code Amendments to Chapter 110, Entitled
Zoning presented by Planning and Community
Development Director

2) Downtown Design Overlay Zone

TOWN OF

THRU: David L. Recor, ICMA-CM, City Manager
FROM: Kay Stroud, Zoning Analyst
RE: Code Amendments to Chapter 110, Article IV, Divisions 23-25, Downtown Design
Overlay Zone and Underlying Zoning Districts
DATE: May 6, 2014

ISSUE(S): Consideration of code amendments pertaining to the Downtown
Design Overlay Zone and Underlying Zoning Districts.

SUMMARY: The Planning & Zoning Commission held a public hearing on
Tuesday, April 1, 2014 to consider staff and Ocean City
Development Corporation code amendment recommendations.

The Commission favorably presents these code amendments, as
highlighted on the attached Recommendation.

FISCAL IMPACT: None

RECOMMENDATION: Amend sections of Zoning Code as recommended.

ALTERNATIVES: Further amend or denial of request.

RESPONSIBLE STAFF: R. Blaine Smith, Assistant Director, Planning & Zoning
Kay Stroud, Zoning Analyst

COORDINATED WITH: Matthew G. Margotta, AICP, Director, Planning & Community
Development

ATTACHMENT(S): 1) Recommendation
2) Minutes of April 1, 2014 Public Hearing

Agenda Item # 5B(2)

RECOMMENDATION TO MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

TO AMEND CHAPTER 110 ARTICLE IV CODE SECTIONS 110-831.1 831.27(e)(2)
e.(ii); 110-831.28; Sections 110-482; 110-484; 110-485; 110-487; Sections 110-662;
110-663; 110-665; 110-667; Sections 110-692; 110-695; 110-697; Section 110-847;
110-861.1; 110-861.2; 110-861.4; and 110-861.6

DOWNTOWN DESIGN OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT and UNDERLYING ZONING
DISTRICTS

File PZ #14-14100001

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

On Tuesday, April 1, 2014, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing
to consider amending by adding the language highlighted below and removing the
language with strike outs below to Code Sections 110-831.1 831.27(e)(2) e.(ii); 110-
831.28; Sections 110-482; 110-484; 110-485; 110-487; Sections 110-662; 110-663; 110-
665; 110-667; Sections 110-692; 110-695; 110-697; Section 110-847; Sections 110-
861.1; 110-861.2; 110-861.4; and 110-861.6

Downtown Design Overlay Zone District and Underlying Zoning Districts

Amend DIVISION 23. DOWNTOWN DESIGN OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT
Section 110-831.1. Purpose and intent.

(a) The purpose of the Downtown Design Overlay Zone is to implement the
Downtown Design Guidelines manual as prepared by the Ocean City
Development Corporation (OCDC) and the Department of Planning (Department)
and adopted by the Mayor and City Council on November 18, 2002.

(d) The intent of Downtown Design Guidelines and the Downtown Design
Overlay Zone is for Ocean City to have:

(13) Promote a centralized solid waste collection program.
(14) Promote a master plan for drainage.

Amend section 110-831.2. General provisions.
(d) The Downtown Design Overlay Zone applies to all property and
buildings in the underlying zoning districts except the easterly facades of buildings facing
the boardwalk (Atlantic Avenue) and the 25 feet west of the Boardwalk frontage along
each street end; and buildings located east of the boardwalk.

(e) If a development project is unable to meet all of the requirements and
suggestions in Downtown Design Guidelines, the Department/OCDC shall work with
the property owner or developer to assure the project meets the overall objectives to the
extent possible.

(h) Plans for development and redevelopment in the underlying zones shall be
reviewed by the OCDC for conformance with Downtown Design Guidelines.

Amend section 110-831.9. Materials and textures.
(a)
(4) Wood, fiber cement, or other composite materials, as may be
approved by the Department and OCDC.

Amend section 110-831.11. Porches.
(9) Cantilever balconies are discouraged. Cantilever balconies when considered
shall be visually supported by columns or brackets. Other porch designs are subject to
approval.

Amend section 110-831.14. Awnings.
(8) Awnings shall not be back-lit. Awnings are allowed light penetration through
the valance via translucent vinyl on the main side facing the street. The awning can have
internal lighting to light the copy panel and offer down lighting for the storefront.

Amend section 110-831.15. Colors.
(c) Trim and Detail colors should provide contrasting accent.

(g) All other color concepts are subject to approval. A recommended palette of
colors for design standards area that follows the Sherwin Williams color palette for
Colonial and Arts & Crafts or equivalent selections and solid white color. Other colors
subject to review. Trim shall be white.

Amend section 110-831.17. Roofs.
( c ) Roofs shall should be gabled or hipped. Parapets and possibly flat roofs
under certain conditions may be considered by OCDC. This requirement shall not apply
to porches and other appurtenances.

( l ) Flat roofs in new development are prohibited.

Amend section 119-831.22. Off street parking.
Off street parking requirements and standards are defined in the underlying
district regulations. See section 110-831.28. Development Incentives for parking
modifications.

Amend section 110-831.24. Fencing and screening.
(1) Fences shall be made of wood, metal, or synthetic material as approved by
the Department and OCDC.

Amend section 110-831.26. Landscaping.
(a) Landscape is an important feature to define, unify and enhance development.
In addition to the requirements of chapter 98, article II, Landscaping, chapter 30, section
30-553. Intensely developed areas the following principles apply.

Amend section 110-831.27. Signs.
( c ) General provisions.
(2) A sign may be illuminated, unless otherwise prohibited, if illumination is
confined to the surface of the sign. The sign and illumination shall be located and
arranged to avoid excessive glare or reflection onto any public street or sidewalk,
into the path of oncoming vehicles, or onto any adjacent property.

(e ) Permitted signs.
(1)
i. One. A-frame sign per business not to exceed 8 square feet in size and
4 feet in height from grade, on private property (except for City approved
in public right-of-way), and may only be out during business hours. A-
frame signs maybe doublesided.

j.Temporary banners for City permitted special events permitted 2 days
before the event and removed within 2 days after the event. A maximum
of 2 banners allowed along the buildingstreetside on the face of the
building. Each banner may be up to 12 square feet in size.

(2)
e.
( ii ) Projecting signs One projecting sign per business, no larger
than 14 square feet. Buildings on corner lots may have one
projecting sign facing each street. No such sign may project more
than three feet four feet from any wall. Projecting signs must be a
minimum of eight feet above grade, and the maximum height of
any projecting sign may not exceed the height of the building to
which it is attached or 15 feet 20 feet above grade, whichever is
lower.The Mayor and City Council may approve signs that project
over or into public way as regulated by section 66-14 of the Code,
after input by the Ocean City Development Corporation OCDC.

f. Window signs, which do not cumulatively exceed 25 percent of the area
aggregate glazed area of the window on which they are placed on the first
floor and ten 10 percent on all floors above the first floor.

Amend section 110-831.28. Development incentives.

(2) Benefits of incentives program.

a. Parking:

3. To promote first floor commercial uses in appropriately zoned districts,
a project will be permitted to satisfy 50 percent of its commercial parking
requirements with reduced parking space sizes. Minimum parking space
size shall be 18 8 x 18. Such commercial uses must be permitted in the

district exclusive of residential uses including single family, multiple
family, two family, hotel and motel units, cover a minimum of 75 percent
of the frontage of a property, and be accessible to the general public.

c. A project that provides a pitched roof (no greater than nine feet by 12 feet
9/12 pitch) and dormers may use 50 percent of its upper floor area for residential
and commercial uses, notwithstanding the definition of building height in section
110-2 of the zoning code, unless otherwise prohibited by the building code.
Dormers must be of traditional style and must appear to be part of a functioning
interior.

Amend DIVISION 9. DM DOWNTOWN MARINE DISTRICT
Section 110-482. Permitted uses.

(4) Commercial parking lots and parking garages (3/4 ton max.)
(5) Detached single family dwellings and townhouses.
(18) Art shops and galleries.
(19) Bakeries, retail only.
(20) Bicycle sales, rentals, repairs and service. (Indoor and Outdoor)
(21) Camera and photographic supply stores.
(22) Candy shops.
(23) Catering services.
(24) Clothing, clothing accessory, wearing apparel stores.
(25) Convenience/carryout food store.
(26) Delicatessen business.
(27) Food and beverage stores.
(28) Gift shops.
(29) Hardware stores.
(30) Laundromats, self service only.
(31) Offices including business, professional, medical and dental.
(32) Optical sales and services.
(33) Physical therapy, health services and fitness centers.
(34) Shoe sales and repair.
(35) Sporting goods stores.
(36) Studios for artists, photographers, teachers, sculptors and musicians.
(37) Tobacco shops.
(38) Travel agencies.

Amend section 110-484. Uses permitted by conditional use.

(5) Nightclubs in hotels and motels with more than 50 units.

Amend section 110-485. Permitted accessory uses.

(3) Bicycle sales, rentals, repairs and service.
(5) Candy shops.
(6) Catering services.
(15) Gift shops.
(22) Public and private parking garages.
(29) Tobacco shops.

Amend section 110-487. Off-street parking spaces.
Signs shall be permitted and maintained in accordance with the provisions
contained in section 110-831.27. Off-street parking spaces shall be provided in
accordance with the provisions contained in article V, division 3 of this chapter unless
otherwise modified in district regulations.

Amend DIVISION 15. DMX DOWNTOWN MIXED USE DISTRICT

(22) Detached single family, townhouses and two family residential dwellings
units.
(38) Multiple family and townhouses residential dwelling units.
(56) Two family residential dwellings units.

Amend section 110-663. Uses permitted by special exception.
(1) Outside arts, crafts and entertainment activities, incidental to the primary use
of the premises, within the front yard setback.
(3) Entertainment: indoor and outdoor.


Off-street parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with the provisions
contained in article V, division 3 of this chapter unless otherwise modified in district
regulations.

Amend DIVISION 16. M MANUFACTURING DISTRICT

(6) Detached single family and two family dwellings and townhouses.
(14) Multiple family residential/townhouse dwelling units.
(24) Candy shops.
(29) Gift shops.
(38) Tobacco shops.

(5) Candy shops.
(10) Entertainment; indoor and outdoor.
(14) Gift shops.

(28) Tobacco shops.

contained in article V, division 3, of this chapter unless otherwise modified in district
regulations.

Amend DIVISION 24. DR DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT
Section 110-847. Off-street parking spaces.
regulations.

Amend DIVISION 25. I-1 INLET DISTRICT
Section 110-861.1. Permitted uses.

(16) Commercial parking lots and garages (3/4 ton max.)
(19) Detached single family dwellings and two family dwellings townhouses.
(21) Employee housing on site.

Amend section 110-861.2. Uses permitted by special exception.
(6)Outdoor display of merchandise as specified in section 110-94(6)

Amend section 110-861.4. Permitted accessory uses.
(18) Employee housing on-site.

Amend section 110-861.6. Off-street parking spaces.
regulations.

PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSON
MINUTES
APRIL 1, 2014

ATTENDEES: Members Staff
Pam Buckley Blaine Smith
J ohn Staley Kay Stroud
Lauren Taylor Will Esham
J oel Brous Matt Margotta
Chris Shanahan Robert Nelson
Peck Miller
Palmer Gillis

CALL TO ORDER 6:30 PM

I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

Minutes of February 4, 2014 approved unanimously, Lauren Taylor made motion,
Peck Miller seconded (7-0).

II. SITE PLAN:

1) Site Plan extension for temporary commercial parking lot located at 2204
Philadelphia Avenue (expired on March 2, 2014)
APPLICANT: JACQUELINE DEGROFT (ORIGINAL FILE #12-18100001)

Blaine Smith, Administrator, presented the site plan for renewal for two years with same
conditions as the past approval.

MOTION/Taylor SECONDED/Shanahan (7-0) Motion to approve the 2-year
extension as presented.

2) Site Plan extension for a 2,596 square foot addition to the Sunsations store at
9219 Coastal Highway, Unit 10, part of the Decaba Condominium Plat with
associated parking to be located on the parcel of land formerly known as 9305
Coastal Highway. The site is described as Lots 11-17 and 20-26, Block L of the
Oceanbay City Plat, further described as located on the west side of Coastal
Highway between 92nd and 94th Streets, and locally known as 9201 Coastal
Highway, in the Town of Ocean City, Maryland. (expired on February 21, 2014)
APPLICANT: RICHARD JARVIS FOR AVI SIBONY (ORIGINAL FILE #12-18100012)

Blaine Smith, Administrator, presented this site plan for extension in order to finish
development of this site. Richard J arvis was present to answer questions.

MOTION/Miller SECONDED/Shanahan (7-0) Motion to approve 18-month
extension with condition: Sign area to be boxed in, cleaned up, and landscaped per
prior approval by Memorial Day (May 26, 2014).

1

Planning & Zoning Commission
MINUTES
April 1, 2014

3) Site Plan Review and Preliminary Resubdivision request of three (3) proposed
townhouse units: (2) three-bedroom units and (1) four-bedroom unit. The site of this
application is described as Lot 114 of the Bayside Keys Plat; further described as
located on the north side of Bradley Road and locally known as 714 Bradley Road, in the
Town of Ocean City, Maryland.
APPLICANT: BUCHANAN DEVELOPERS INC. (FILE #14-18100001)

Blaine Smith presented the application and explained to the Commission that this was a
review for the site plan and also a request for a preliminary subdivision. Staff
recommendations were presented as follows:

1. Design Guidelines, per Section 110-181, apply to all of the corporate limits of the
Town of Ocean City.

2. Trash refuse containers and recycling containers shall comply with the minimum
standards set forth in Chapter 70 subject to the Solid Waste Department approval.
All exterior garbage or rubbish containers shall be screened from the street on all
but one side by an opaque fence, landscaping, an earth berm or other suitable
opaque enclosure. The average height of the enclosure shall be one foot more
than the height of the container but shall not be required to exceed eight feet in
height.

3. The project shall comply with all regulations pertaining to stormwater management,
Chapter 30, Environment, Article III Stormwater Management, prior to issuance of
a building permit.

4. All construction and/or repairs of curb cuts, sidewalks and streets and/or street
amenities shall be approved by the Department of Engineering and shall be
installed in accordance with the specifications and standards of that department.
Any existing curb cuts that are being abandoned must be removed and replaced
with a sidewalk subject to city specifications.

5. It is the policy of the Planning Commission to require 8 wide sidewalks on all
public streets adjoining the project. Pervious pavers may be considered to meet
this need subject to specifications set forth by the Engineering Department.

6. The parking lot shall be paved in accordance with Chapter 74 of the Town Code.

7. All landscape shall be installed in accordance with Chapter 30, Article VII, Atlantic
Coastal Bays Critical Area criteria, where applicable.

2

MINUTES
April 1, 2014

8. Location, height, type, and direction of lighting designed per Section 110-876(h)
Lighting Requirements, including at a minimum a photometric plan to illuminate site
and off-street parking areas expressed in footcandles throughout the property. This
section shall not apply in the Downtown Design Overlay Zones per Section 110-
831.23 Lighting (Lower Downtown Area) and Section 110-865.21(1)(b) (Upper
Downtown Design Area).

9. It is required that the owner provides a location survey verifying compliance with
minimum setbacks when the building foundation is completed above grade.

10. The building and any porch covered with a roof shall not be located over tiebacks
and deadmen which support existing bulkheads. It is required that the
owner/developer verify the location of existing tiebacks and deadmen prior to
issuance of a building permit.

11. The project is subject to impact fees adopted by the Mayor and City Council.

12. All site plan approvals are subject to building code, fire code and all other
applicable governmental regulations.

13. All work shall be completed as shown on the approved site plan and any revisions
to the approved site plan shall be in accordance with Section 110-184.

14. Subdivision approval subject to the final plat being prepared and recorded in
accordance with Chapter 78, Article III, Final Plat. Provide cross-easement for
parking and driveway. Individual water and sewer utilities be extended to each lot.

15. Final site plan approval shall expire eighteen (18) months after the date of
approval unless a building permit for the project is obtained prior thereto pursuant
to Section 110-52(c)(2).

16. Subject to obtaining a building permit for all site work.

MOTION/Miller SECONDED/Gillis (7-0) Motion to approve 18-month extension with
condition: Sign area to be boxed in, cleaned up, and landscaped per prior approval by
Memorial Day (May 26, 2014).

4) Site Plan Review of addition of new toilet facility (420.84 sq. ft.) and exterior dining
area at Guidos Burritos II. The site of the application is described as approximately 12
lots of the Isle of Wight Plat; further described as located on the northwest corner of 33
rd

Street and Coastal Highway, and locally known as 3303 Coastal Highway, in the Town
of Ocean City, Maryland.
APPLICANT: STEVEN J. CIRILE (FILE #14-18100002)

3

MINUTES
April 1, 2014

Blaine Smith presented the application. Steven Cirile was present to answer
Commission questions.

MOTION/Miller SECONDED/Gillis (7-0) Motion to approve site plan as presented
with any staff recommendations, but if possible, design the access on the west side of
the building to be for 2-way traffic for those vehicles ingressing/egressing from the 33
rd

Street curb cut.

III. PUBLIC HEARINGS:

1) Pursuant to the provisions of Article II, Section 5, Conditional Uses, a request has
been filed under the provisions of Section 110-861.3(5), Uses permitted by Conditional
Use in the I-1 Inlet District, to permit water-related parasail and wave-runner recreational
activity for a period of five (5) years. The site of the request is described as Block 21S of
the Sinepuxent Beach Company Plat of 1891, further described as located on the west
side of Philadelphia Avenue, the south side of Sunset Park, and on Sinepuxent Bay near
the Inlet, and known locally as 700 S. Philadelphia Avenue, in the Town of Ocean City,
Maryland.
APPLICANT: GRAHAM BOSTIC (FILE #14-12100001)

Blaine Smith presented the application, giving history of the prior approval for the same
watersport operation and owner. A new commercial site plan for Buccaneers Caye at
Shipwreck Code a proposed restaurant, tiki bar and playground was approved on
October 15, 2013, causing Mr. & Mrs. Bostic to seek BZA approval for a shared parking
facility agreement (granted on November 14, 2013) prior to filing for this Conditional Use
permit.

Angie Bostic, applicant, testified on behalf of the application, which is the same as the
prior approval except for a period of five (5) years.

J oseph R. Tozzi, proprietor of the Oceanic Fishing Pier, was present as the adjacent
neighbor, asking that the provision to maintain 50 yards between the two watersports in
that basin, be included as a condition of approval with this new application.

MOTION/Taylor SECONDED/Miller (7-0) Motion to send a favorable recommendation
to the Mayor and City Council for five (5) years with the following conditions:

1) All prior conditions of approval to remain in effect with following commission
recommendations:

1. One (1) parasail boat and a maximum of twelve (12) wave-runner vessels
subject to minimum off-street parking requirements.

4

MINUTES
April 1, 2014

2. Should construction begin on the restaurant which has been given site plan
approval with included parking plan (Buccaneers Caye at Shipwreck Cove
File #13-18100014 approved on October 15, 2013) within the life of the
Conditional Use, it will be required that the operator of the watersport
discontinue its operation until they meet with the Planning & Zoning
Commission to determine that the two uses can co-exist on the premise
without any adverse affects to vehicular and pedestrian movement for
patrons and public, and for adequate parking during construction. See also
BZA 2390 #13-09400021 letter of approval for shared parking facility
between the restaurant and Sea Rocket Adventures and associated
watersports.

3. This approval to be limited to this applicant only and is not transferable
without Planning Commission authorization.

4. The wave-runner operation and the parasail boat shall stay a clear distance
of 50 yards within the basin from the north side of the Oceanic Fishing Pier.

5. The approval is valid for five (5) years as requested.

2) To consider amending the Zoning Code, Division 23 DOWNTOWN DESIGN
OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT, specifically Sections 110-831.1 861.6, for all the
incorporated zoning districts (B-1 boardwalk, I-1 Inlet, DMX downtown mixed use, DM
downtown marine, DR downtown residential, and M-1 manufacturing).
APPLICANT: PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION (FILE #14-14100001)

Matt Margotta, Planning and Community Development Director, Blaine Smith, Assistant
Director, Planning and Zoning; and Glenn Irwin, Executive Director of the Ocean City
Development Corporation were sworn. The stated intention is to create more uniformity
within all the underlying zones and better define the regulation of the Downtown Design
Overlay District. Blaine reviewed the proposed changes for the Commission. The
Commissioners discussed the changes and determined to remove electronic signage
from this application and to set up a separate public hearing for this item in the near
future.

MOTION/Miller SECONDED/Taylor (7-0) Motion to send a favorable recommendation
to the Mayor and City Council to amend Section 110-831.1 831.28; and Sections 110-
482; 110-484; 110-485; 110-487; 110-662; 110-663; 110-665; 110-667; 110-692; 110-
695; 110-697; 110-847; 110-861.1; 110-861.2; 110-861.4; and 110-861.6 with these
conditions:

1) Remove create in Section 110-831.1(d)(13) and (14) and use promote.
2) Remove electronic signage from this amendment as stated above.
5

MINUTES
April 1, 2014

ADJOURNMENT @ 8:30 p.m.

________________________________
John Staley Commission Sec. Date

6


5. NEW BUSINESS

C. Discussion of Code Amendments to Chapter 1, General
Provisions and Chapter 58, Offenses and Miscellaneous
Provisions presented by City Solicitor

1) Chapter 1: Include date of birth as part of proper
identification requirements

TOWN OF

RE: Discussion of code amendment to Chapter 1, Entitled General Provisions
DATE: May 6, 2014

ISSUE(S): Amendment to Chapter 1 regarding proper identification

SUMMARY: The proposed ordinance will amend Chapter 1, Section 8:
Violations and penalties by including date of birth as a
requirement for proper identification. Adding date of birth to
this section assists in positively identifying those who are cited.

FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve amendment for first reading May 19, 2014.

ALTERNATIVES: Do not amend.

RESPONSIBLE STAFF: Chief Ross Buzzuro
Lt. Mark Pacini

COORDINATED WITH: Guy Ayres, City Solicitor

ATTACHMENT(S): Proposed ordinance

Agenda Item # 5C(1)


5. NEW BUSINESS

C. Discussion of Code Amendments to Chapter 1, General
Provisions and Chapter 58, Offenses and Miscellaneous
Provisions presented by City Solicitor

2) Chapter 58: add assisted opening knife to list of
prohibited items

TOWN OF

RE: Discussion of Code amendment to Chapter 58, Offenses and Miscellaneous Provisions
DATE: May 6, 2014

ISSUE(S): Amendment to Chapter 58 regarding prohibited acts

SUMMARY: The proposed ordinance will amend Chapter 58, Sections 121
and 123 regarding the definition of assisted opening knife and
adding same to the list of prohibited items.

FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.

RECOMMENDATION: Approve amendment for first reading May 19, 2014.

ALTERNATIVES: Do not amend code.

RESPONSIBLE STAFF: Chief Ross Buzzuro
Lt. Mark Pacini

COORDINATED WITH: Guy, Ayres, City Solicitor

ATTACHMENT(S): Proposed ordinance

Agenda Item # 5C(2)

May 13 2014 Complete Agenda

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

May 13 2014 Complete Agenda

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MAYORANDCITYCOUNCIL

You might also like