(5/27) The Town Council, in a vote of 3-2, sent the Comprehensive Plan back to the Planning Commission to remove the 115-acre Staley property from future development and keep it as it is currently zoned, industrial agriculture. This decision is in response to Walkersville residents stating their objections to the inclusion of any development at the draft Comprehensive Plan public workshop review meeting in April.
Town Attorney Leslie Powell explained to the Commission that the entire Plan was sent back for review because the main focus of the Plan is "slow growth," and if the Commission removes the Staley property from future development without exploring other properties, the entire Plan won’t make sense. "If you just take the Staley property out, the Plan will not be consistent with the other work that has been done," said Powell.
Chair David Ennis asked why the Burgess and Commissioners didn’t just remove the Staley property from the Plan and approve the rest of it. Powell explained that the "slow growth" view that the Commission created was interwoven throughout the Plan and the removal of one item could unravel the rest of it.
If the Staley property is removed from the Plan for development, the Town would have approximately 20 to 25 units available for future development, according to Staff Liaison Susan Hauver. She explained that subdividing larger lots would be the Town’s best option. Member Jeremy Peterson concurred, adding that there are properties in Town sitting dormant that could be changed to residential zoning to meet the demand for "slow growth."
Vice-Chair Mike Kuster said he was concerned with just changing the Staley property back to its original zoning, industrial agriculture, saying "that zoning doesn’t fit the neighborhood." If the property was changed fully to industrial, it wouldn’t be fair to the Longley Green townhome residents, which are located East of the Staley property, because with that zoning, they would likely end up with an industrial development such as warehouses and solar panel fields in their back yards. Conversely, changing the zoning completely to agriculture would put Staley in a difficult position as to what to do with his property.
Mike Staley, owner of the Staley property, asked if the Commission would consider making half of his property available for residential use and leaving the other as agricultural. He suggested they could develop the 28 acres of land closest to the already existing Townhomes at Longley Green. He also mentioned that his farm is currently leased by a resident who was against developing Staley's farm at the public hearing in April. Kuster added, "This is a farm, but it is also at the end of Main Street. This is where you would naturally see the next development go."
An avid supporter of having some development in the Plan, Commissioner Mary Ann Brodie Ennis was encouraged to hear Staley's suggestion to develop half the property. "A town that doesn’t grow, dies," she said. "This would be a good opportunity to create affordable housing in Walkersville." Resident Chris Reagan argued that a town the size of Walkersville would be unlikely to die from no development. "As Frederick continues to spread, Walkersville looks more attractive as an escape from the sprawl that is Frederick," he said.
Ennis pointed out that most of the residents who were present at the Council’s public meeting live on Devilbiss Road. "I heard people say develop anywhere but the Staley property. So, it’s not that they don’t want growth, but that they don’t want it in their backyards."
The Commission decided to hold off on any decisions about the Plan until all members were present, as Members Russell Winch and Nathan Shatto were not at the meeting. Once the Commission makes their changes, the Plan will need to hold another public hearing.
Read other news articles on Walkersville
