Town Council - Regular Meeting

Hey,

good evening. As a courtesy to everyone, please take a moment and silence any devices you have that may interrupt this evening smoothly. Welcome to the mayor and common council meeting of Westminster, incorporated February 5th, 1819. We are gathered here in historic city hall, originally in a state built in 1842 by Colonel John K. Longwell. The city acquired this building in 1939 and it has since been the venue where the mayor and council conducts the city business. I'm sure some of you who come to these meetings regularly recognize we are very short staff this evening up here. Mayor is sick. One of our council members is stuck on an airplane. He was supposed to be back, but everybody knows what's going on with the airlines these days. Then of course we have one vacant council seat. So it is just a three to seat. Um, now we'll begin as we do every meeting with the pledge of allegiance followed by a moment of silence. And gentlemen, if you could please remove your pledge algiance to the flag to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with all. Thank you very much. One interesting fact about Westminster is in 1892, Westminster held a massive homecoming celebration for Governor Frank Brown, a Carol County native known as Farmer Brown. While he was officially sworn in at the state house in Annapolis, the local festivities centered around St. John's Catholic Church in Westminster. The local inauguration featured a parade and a grand reception marking one of the largest public events in the town's 19th century history. Moving on, the council typically convenes on the second and

fourth Monday of each month. Please note that these meetings are open to the public here at city hall and are also streamed live on the city's YouTube page as well as the community media center website. We extend our gratitude to the media center for their partnership in ensuring the public has access to these meetings. Access that is utilized by a young man here in town named Alex Zeleleski. And I'd like to take a moment and thank him because it's my understanding that he almost never misses one of these meetings. He is a senior in the Carol County public school system. So vote on him and one day he might be sitting right up here. Copies of tonight's agenda and the entire information packet that the council will be using are available online on the city's website. Hard copies of the agenda are available here in the front of the room for those of you that are in in attendance. We have one public hearing this evening and typically the mayor uh conducts those public hearings. But of course, she is sick this evening, but I will be taking off my hat as council president, putting on my uh temporary mayoral hat to run this public meeting. So, I'll hand the gle to myself. Um, public hearings in the city of Westminster, like I said, are conducted by mayor by the mayor. Um, I'm going to now read a statement relative to this public hearing. Public hearing, Wakefield Valley General Development Plan, amendment DP24-01, parcel W and parcel S. Start time of this meeting is 703. This public hearing has been properly published in the Carol County Times uh meeting of all and meeting all state malin requirements. Public hearing on Wakefield Valley General Development Plan Amendment DP24-01, parcel W and parcel X to add up to 35 new density rights to part parcel W and

conduct single family uh I'm sorry, construct single family detached dwelling units and dedicate parcel X for open space. Now I'll turn it over to staff for a report. Mr. Deepo,

thank you. So parcel W is 38.2934 acres and parcel X is 16.0695 acres. Parcel W and parcel X are owned by WB Westminster LLC and zone C conservation zone. Out of no requests or plan to reszone the properties. WV Westminster LLC the applicant submitted an application to amend the Wakefield Valley Development Plan which is referred to DP 2401. This is the proposed fifth requested amendment to the Wakefield Valley Fenby Farm general development plan. On July 18th, 2024, DP2401 was introduced to the commission of the planning commission to add 25 new density rights to parcel W and construct to construct single family detached dwellings and dedicate parcel X to Carol Lutheran Village for open space. Carol Lutheran Village provided a letter dated October 10th, 2022 regarding its support of the proposed amendment and the preservation and dedication to Carol Ruin Village of Parcel X. Carol Ruan Village also expressed its desire to de or lease parcel X to the city as part of the approval of DP2401. This plan proposed to essentially develop the entire 38.29 29 acres of parcel W with very little open space. On October 30th, 2024, the request by request of the applicant staff met with the applicant and was provided the first amendment to PP 2401 to increase the 32 new density rights to partial W for single family detached dwellings and dedicate parcel X for open space. This plan also proposed again to essentially develop the entire 38.29 29 acres of parcel W with minimum open space along the edges of the parcel. On December 19th, 2024, at the request of the

applicant, staff met and was provided a proposed second amendment to DP2401 to increase 35 new density rights to partial W for single family detach dwellings and again dedicate parcel X for open space. This plan proposed to develop the southern and western half of parcel w the larger open space area along Bell Road. Staff shared their concerns with placing houses adjacent to the Wakefield Valley Event Center and the lack of presence along Bell Road consistent with the existing development pattern. On April 1st, 2025, the applicant provided staff a proposed third amendment to DP2401 with a revised development layout while maintaining the 35 new density rights to partial W and again to dedicate partial extra open space. This plan proposed to develop the northern and western half of the parcel W with a larger open space adjacent to the Wakefield Valley Park and the event center and Durban House. or on May 15, 2025, the proposed third amendment was reintroduced to the commission. Commission was concerned with the narrowness of the locks along the internal roadway, the location of the two houses along Bell Road at the entrance to the development, and the lack of additional houses along Bell Road. Subsequently, the commission requested that DP2401 be scheduled for a public hearing. On June 9th, 2025, the applicant provided what is now proposed fourth amendment of DPO4 with a revised development plan addressing the commission's May 15th, 2025 work session comments while again maintaining the 35 new density rights to partial W to construct single family detached dwelling units and again to dedicate the open space of partial X. The revisions included three new lots in addition to the two lots previously depicted along Bell Road. The additional bellroad lots reduce the number of lots from 33 to 30,

fronting the internal roadway of the development, allowing for larger lots and further separating the driveways to access these 30 lots. The plan proposes an 18.84 acre area of open space adjacent to the Wakefield Valley Park and the event center in Durban House. In addition, the plan located the majority of the storm water management facilities on parcel W, reducing the need to use an existing storm water management easement area of 3.1589 acres located on the city's Wakefield Valley Park, which can then be recaptured as usable open space. In September 18th, 2025, the commission held a public hearing on DP 2401. The commission continued the public hearing to its October 21st, 2025 meeting. Following the public hearing, the commission shall submit a report and recommendation to the zoning administrator as to whether the commission favorably or unfavorably forwards the plan development application to the mayor and common council. On October 21st, 2025, the commission closed the public hearing and recommended that they forward the fourth amended development plan and rendering for Wakefield Valley development plan amendment DP 2401, parcel W and parcel X to the mayor and common council with a favorable recommendation subject to nine conditions. On December 17th, the commission reviewed and forwarded the commission's report and recommendation of a conditional approval to the mayor and common council specifically again to add 35 density rights to partial W to construct single family detach dwelling units, dedicate approximately 18.84 acres of partial W for open space and to dedicate partial X to Carol Village or other entity for open space as depicted in the fourth amendment CP 2401. The notice for tonight's mayor and county council public hearing on DP2401 was advertised for March 3rd, 2026 and March 10th, 2026 in the Carol County

Times stating the application number, date, time, and place of hearing and the summary of the amendment and the location of the property, its area, and name of the owner. Written notice of the public hearing was mailed to the property owner and adjacent property owners, and the property was posted providing again notice of the public hearing. Uh staff has received approximately seven calls from the public regarding DP2401. The calls range from inquiring when and where the public hearing was to take place to concerns of traffic, schools, wildlife, increase in property taxes for adjacent properties, and the price of the new houses within the development of partial W. Staff also talked to prop the property owner of 187 Bell Road regarding their well and water waterline parcel. that's actually located on parcel W that extends along Bell Road. If you look at page 12, the staff report, this parcel is noted on image 8. It's a very thin parcel that houses that water line and wealth. Staff has provided the most recent version of the traffic impact study dated July 8th, 2025 for 35 lots that was provided to the planning and zoning commission during their public hearing. Both the 25 lot traffic impact analysis and the 35 lot traffic impact analysis studied the same eight intersections. All eight intersections operate at acceptable levels of service which is a level of service of D or better. The following highlights the differences between the 25 and 35 traffic impact analysis. The Maryland 140 and Warrior Road Meadow Branch Road intersection goes from a level of service B at 25 lots to a level of service D at 35 lots during morning peak hours. The Uniontown Road and Warrior Road intersection goes from a level of service C at 25 lots to a level of service D at 35 lots during

evening peak hours. All remaining intersections operate at a level of service C or better during both morning and evening peak hours and with no change in level of service from 25 lots of 35 lots. Traffic again will further be reviewed at the preliminary subdivision stage if this project moves forward which is reviewed and approved by both the county and the city. Carol County Public Schools manages school enrollment and this will be reviewed again during the preliminary subdivision stage. uh staff cannot speak to wildlife at this time. However, again, at the preliminary subdivision stage, um the preliminary subdivision plan itself shall comply with all requirements of the appropriate state agencies, including but not limited to the Department of the Environment, and the planning commission may also require additional information in evaluing the preliminary subdivision plan. Staff cannot speak about the increase in property taxes for adjacent properties and the price of the new houses. Staff recommends that the mayor and common council review development plan DP2401 and the planning and zoning commission's favorable report and recommendations to Mayor and common council to approve DP2401. If the mayor and county council approves DP2401, staff recommends that such approval be to add 35 new density rights to partial W to construct 35 single family detached dwelling units to dedicate approximately 18.84 84 acres of parcel W to the city for open space to dedicate parcel X to fail with the village or to the city open space as depicted on the applicant's fourth amendment to DP2401 as recommended by the planning zoning commission and as provided for and discussed in the March 23rd 2026 public hearing report subject to the 11 conditions listed in the public hearing report. And that completes my report. I'm available for any question. Thank

you, Mr. Dbo. Before we get started, do either one of my colleagues have any questions for Mr. Debo? U Mr. Debo, uh just to get a little bit of clarity to make sure we're all on the same page. Um when the mayor and common council, should we vote in the affirmative tonight? This still this plan still has to be processed, still goes back to planning and zoning commission. all the some of the issues that you brought up tonight, all the planning and zoning commission will have the ability to, you know, better vet and and address at that point in time. Is that correct?

That's correct. Again, it goes to the preliminary subdivision plan stage, which is submitted both to the county and the city for review. So, the county will review forest storm water management, forest conservation. Bell Road is a county roadway. So, they're going to look at the traffic study as well, and they have to approve the traffic study. It'll also go to the board of or the Carol County public school system as well for review. Uh so all that is done and until we get favorable approvals or concept approvals from the county, we would then bring it to the planning and zoning commission for review.

So the big thing that we potentially will be doing here tonight is basically affirming the density count of the number of density and then with all these different conditions that are listed in in the report or the resolution. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hoff. Mr. Dehoff, you have anything? No, sir.

Okay, we'll go ahead and get started then. In terms of the public hearing, I am going to just follow folks in the order that they signed up. I would ask that you be relatively brief. You do have a number of people that are asking to speak this evening, so we don't want anybody drawing there too long, please. Um, first we'll go with Mr. Mrs. Joe McKe, 103 St. Elport. Hi. Uh, John McKe. I'm a resident of Carol Lutheran Village and I see that we have a Baker's half dozen here bus residents here. I live at 103 St. Paul Court and I'm here um as a number of residents who use the Wakefield walking path some with our dogs and are like many others who enjoy the golf course and restaurant years ago and now celebrate the newly created event center. But where materials attached to the dates have sent us, it appears that CLB residents will have a walking path connecting us the trails in Lakeville Valley. And we hope to learn more about that and the proposed gate just outside CLB. We would also like to know whether that path is exclusively for CLB residents or open to the public since it is immediately adjacent to a CLB resident's home and appears to terminate on CLB property. and that would be um near the RV parking lot. We appreciate that the 16 acres in part parcel X will remain sea comp conservation regardless of whether it is the ATCL or to the city of Westminster. We hope that the 16 acres will remain a permanent natural area and that native trees and bushes are planted wherever possible. Thank you very much.

Thank you, ma'am. Okay. Next, we'll call on Mike Lenhard, if I'm pronouncing that correctly, at 231. Yeah, I'm here as part of the applicants team. Mr. Sachi, if it's okay, I think the next two people on that list are all for the applicants. So, all right, Kelly, without telling you what, you go ahead and drive the next three and we'll take back over after the three of you guys are done. Thank you. I appreciate it. Absolutely.

We're going to do our our best to be efficient here tonight. Uh, Kelly Schaefer, Miller, 73 East Main Street, Westminster, Maryland, 21157. If anybody has difficulty hearing me, please let me know. I'm happy to stand up and try to project louder. Um, we are here tonight uh on behalf of the applicant. I have with me Mr. Richard Crest who is the property owner, Marty Hackett of CLSI, who prepared the plans that accompanied the application, Mr. Joe Ruer, who's a planner uh by trade, and Mr. Mike Lenhard prepared the traffic impact analysis that you have before you tonight. Um the request tonight is to make an amendment to the 1978 Wakefield Valley general development plan to accommodate 35 single family detached homes. As set forth in staff report, this property is subject to that 1978 plan which supersedes or came before the city's adoption of zoning. Um, so in section 1641 133B, which Mr. O has cited in his staff report as well. We see that the ordinance recognizes development plans that were approved before that date and then provides for an amendment process that one may apply to go through for those plans. That amendment process, your task here tonight is to review all of our testimony under the subsection of 1641 188J. So, what we are going to do is we are just going to walk through each subsection and provide you specific information related to each one that supports um each of those subsections here tonight. We're going to do that um like I said as efficiently as possible. So, we are going to kind of go back and forth with people because we're going to provide content to you in the organization of those subsequent. I do want to point out, and you'll hear testimony of this, that the originally approved density in that 1978 plan was

1.6 dwelling units per acre. Uh, tonight you will hear testimony that the overall density with this plan would be 1.24 density units per acre. The originally approved open space was 40.5% of the acreage of the plan uh with the original plan. And with the proposal here tonight, the open space acreage would be 43.2%. 2%. So, both are staying as they should or increasing as they should under the confines of the code. Um, the planning and zoning commission issued a very thorough staff report which was part of your packet here tonight. So, I'm certain that you all uh reviewed that and as Mr. Huff asked Mr. DVO, what I was also going to say is that this is really the very first step in a process. um if approved here tonight, this would still need to go through sub a full subdivision plan submitt and review process as well as a building permit process. So that includes things such as a full review of the traffic impact analysis and any required mitigation, um school capacity, all of those things are reviewed through a sub process. So with that, to keep you, like I said, my goal here is as organized as possible. Um, what I have done is I created a little cheat sheet for you of just how we're going to run through the organization like all of the subsections.

That would be helpful. This is just for you guys to take a look at as we run through. So we are going to start with subsection one of 1641 188J which says that the zone applied for is in a substantial compliance with the use and density indicated by the master plan or sector plan and that it does not conflict with the general plan the city's capital improvement program or other applicable city plans and policies. So I'm first going to ask Mr. Marty Hackett who's sitting right here with me. Marty, can you please state your name and address for the record? Pardon Hackett 439 East Main Street, Westminster 2157.

Mr. Hackett has appeared in front of this council in the planning and zoning commission as an expert in many years of his history in the city, but I would ask that he be qualified here tonight as an expert in the area of land use design. I'm happy to ask any qualifying questions if the council. I think we're all in agreement. He's an expert. Thank you. Mr. packet. Did you prepare the plan that accompanied the application here tonight? Yes, we did. And approximately how long have you worked with Mr. Crest on uh relative to this property? I believe probably 13 to 15 years. And are you familiar with the general development plan that I referenced in my opening that was approved in 1978?

I am. And what I'm going to do is I'm just going to reference you to the pages in your packet because almost everything we're talking about here tonight is what is was available online and is part of your packet. So, uh, Mr. Hacket, it's labeled exhibit number four of the planning and zoning commission exhibit packet, which is council's PDF page number 32. That is a copy of that plan, correct? Yes. Okay. on that plan. How many dens density units were approved as part of the 1978 plan? Uh 768. And given that amount of density units, what was the average density units per acre allowed under that plan? 1.6 units per acre.

Are you aware of how many dwelling units have actually been constructed to date within the area of that plant? I I believe it's 569. And how many density units is the subject of maintenance replacing? 35. Given the acreage, would the resulting gross allowable density uh what would the resulting gross allowable density be if the subject plan is approved? 1.24 units per acre.

And I'm going to point council to PDF page 37 of your packet, which was um exhibit five in the planning and zoning commission exhibit packet. I did have a couple extra copies of that whole packet printed here. So in case anybody else floundering right now, I will be right there. That is exhibit five which is PDF page 37. That is the density chart that shows that calculation. Correct. Correct. Okay.

On the 1978 development plan, how many acres of open space were contemplated? 78 plan was 200.14 acres. Given an acreage of that plan, what was the percentage of open space indicated on 40 40.8 And with the subject amendment, how many acres of open space are proposed across the entire area of the 1978 plant? 222.02 acres.

And specific to the area shown on our amendment, how much of open space is proposed? Uh that will be 30 36.36 acres and that's made up of the Carol Lutheran village parcel. the parcel that is to be dedicated to Terithan Village, the open space shown within our proposed development and the open space that will be controlled by the HOA of our development. Is that correct? That's correct.

Now, given that acreage that is shown on that proposed amendment, um I'm going to refer you to uh what was exhibit number six of the planning and zoning commission packet, which is council's PDF page 38. That is a an open space chart that goes through the breakdown of acreage. Correct. That's correct. And given the acreage shown on the proposed amendment, what would the resulting percentage of open space need relative to our plan? 42.9.

And in your opinion, having reviewed the 1978 Wakefield Valley plan, is the proposed amendment in substantial compliance with that Wakefield Valley plan? Yes, it is. Are you aware of whether the proposed subdivision will require an additional water allocation?

It will will not require any additional that the water allocations uh are based on a memorandum of understanding. Uh and I don't know the exact date of that. Well, I will point um council here to what was included as exhibit number seven in the planning and zoning commission packet and is your council PDF pages 39 through 44. Um that includes the memorandum of understanding that Mr. Hackett just referenced and that also includes does it not Marty a chart breaking down the remaining water allocations available for this development?

Yes, it does. I'm gonna jump gears with you because we're going to go to Mr. Joe Ruer for a second. Joe, can you please state your name and address for the record? Joseph Ruer, 3435 Jennings Chapel Road, 1797.

Now, I don't know if any of you have have spoken of Mr. Rudder, so I'm happy to ask him the qualifying questions. His resume is included in the packet. Um, he was accepted as an expert by the planning and zoning commission and I'm going to ask that he qualified as an expert in the area of planning and land use. But I am happy to run through his resume with you which is um in that packet as exhibit number two of the planning and zoning commission exhibits if you would like me to. Good. Good to go. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Rudder, in preparing for this case, did you have the opportunity to review and visit the subject property? Yes, I did. And is the subject property within the priority funding area?

Yes, it is. Can you please explain succinctly the significance of that? That's when the state adopted the smart growth uh legislation a number of years ago, they created four tiers. Uh tier one was the areas that were targeted for growth and municipalities were always tier one of tier one. Uh then it goes down tier two suburban and then three and four are the rural high defensive type areas.

Thank you. In preparing for this case, did you have the opportunity to thoroughly review the city's master plan um to evaluate whether the proposed plan conflicts at all with that plan? I believe it the plan was very consistent with the master plan. Can you please explain some of your reasoning for saying

there's there's several points u in the 2009 master plan in chapter 4 it addresses the m municipal growth and it notes that the current capacity and projected growth would result in buildout by 2024 two years ago. So it was pretty aggressive with the road. Uh it provides that and I'll quote this even with an axible acres Westminster needs to look within the city boundaries first plan for implementing the goals outlined in the municipal growth element to accommodate future population growth in an efficient and orderly manner. Then in chapter five, it provides um part four uh some areas of concern. In order to accommodate the projected population growth for the next 20 years, Westminster will need to increase the housing unit capacity of the city by at least 648 acre uh units. Uh this will require the city of Westminster to look inside its boundaries uh for opportunities to develop housing units, making vacant land a precious resource. As the amount of vacant land continues to decrease, the need for housing units increases, promoting faded mixed use infill or redevelopment of existing u unconventional parcels a priority. Is the Wakefield Valley site specifically called out on its own in section six of the comprehensive plan?

Yes. On page 81, uh it it's noted and it's also noted in the staff report that the plan acknowledges that the land use designation amendment at this time uh does not change the approved development plan for Wakefield Valley. Chapter 6, page 92 addresses protection of environmental resources. The strategic lot layout presented by Mr. Hackett addresses the master plan design objectives by concentrating the development to maximize open space or protect the environmental features.

Now, Mr. rudder. Is it accurate to say that there are a bunch more references throughout the comprehensive plan that support the finding that this amendment is in conformance with the plan? Yes, there are numerous sections and I think the staff report did a great job of summarizing the key points. In an effort to be succinct, have we prepared those in an exhibit?

Oh, yes. I have handed you all a copy of what I have marked as applicants exhibit one, which is the only new exhibit, if you will, that we are entering tonight. Um, that is just a summation of quotes and relevant sections from the town's master plan um that Mr. Ruer just sort of summarized, but this hasn't the detailed list in that for you. Do you have an extra copy? Yes. Give it to our turn, please. Yes, he Sorry. I would like to ask that applicants exhibit one please be entered.

Objection. Okay. Thank you. We are next going to move to section 1641 188J2 which requires that the proposed development would comply with the purposes, standards and regulations of the zone as set forth in articles 2 through 15 would provide for the maximum safety, convenience and amenity of the residents of the development and would be compatible with adjacent development. And I hope that through part of this we can also answer some of Mr. Key's questions about that terrorist as well. of Mr. Packet, you're up again. Can you just say your name for the record, please? Martin Packet. Are you still an expert?

Can you please Can you please explain the zoning and land use of the surrounding area?

Yeah, the the zoning and land use. It's predominantly residential zoning. Um it's residential land use. The zoning uh varies in and throughout, but it's majority of R20,000 zoning. There's there are some conservation zones. Um and obviously under the Wakefield Valley plan, the underlying zoning um is uh the the Wakefield development plan is sort of an overlay zone to those zones. I don't know if how it's worded in the ordinance is uh it's uh I shouldn't say uh not irrelevant, but my opinion is is the underlying zoning um doesn't apply, if you will. It takes the development plan takes precedence over the the actual um underlying zone

and the proposed development adjoins immediately what is a large acreage of city park. Correct. That's correct. And that was in fact dedicated to the city under thatou that you referenced from the same owner of the property. Correct. That's correct. And then to the left of the subject parcel, it's adjoined by what's known as parcel X, which is reserved as open space for the benefit of Carolan Village. Correct. That's correct. And in fact, the um ownership of Carolan Village joined in this application by a letter submitted with the initial filing. Is that accurate?

That's correct. And if it's your understanding that that Carol Lutheran village for parcel s is amendable to allowing that to be used by visitors of the public park and connect to the trail system. That's correct. As part of that proposal is the developer here tonight, Richard Crest, proposing an offering to rehab that trail system through parcel X and provide some park passive park amenities such as benches and gazeos on that parcel. That's correct.

And I know that you can't speak for the ownership of Carol Ludan, Marty, but can you explain to council um the reference to the gate, the gated access? Yeah, as we're working with Carol Lutheran on this, they knowing that the uh pathway and the park ties into Carol Lutheran that they would uh they were looking at doing some sort of gate and fencing along that upper area where it would tie in um to where the uh people of Carol Lutheran uh can can access the accessibility if you will um and uh accessibility to enter the trail network from the car in. Correct. Yes.

But that would it would be it wouldn't include people from public from then entering on Carol. That's correct. Um Yeah. And they've been the parallel itself on how it they're very flexible on how that works, whether the city takes ownership of it, maintains it, or they take ownership of it, but the city maintains it, that kind of thing. Uh, and we'll be working through that through the preliminary planning subdivision process. Marty, can you aside from what's being proposed on parcel X, can you explain on the plan how the sidewalk network works and and connects to the greater

park road system that we're putting in, it's going to have public sidewalks on it, and the roads going to be owned and maintained by the city of Westminster like pretty much all the roads are within the city. Um, we plan on taking the sidewalks and tying the pathway system into the sidewalks uh to sort of tie the um the open space area which is going to have the 18 acres which we're creating. Uh we'll have trail systems in that. It'll tie over to the new uh building uh your your facility over there now and sort of just tie everything together. So people will be able to have continuous movement all the way around the the park.

The 1978 plan already mentions that the majority of the site the time the golf course um it open with substantial portion the remaining area is covered with mixed hardwoods. Can you please explain how the proposed plan preserves some of those mature hardwoods?

Well, yeah. We have basically uh you know the acreage that we're preserving just on the parcel W is is approximately 26 acres of of area where it's preserved. Um we're keeping the grading and all basically through the area of the lots for the most part. Um we do have some stormware management or bio facilities that are going to have to go outside that area. We were able to, as stated before by Mr. Depot, we were the facility where we thought it was going to go years ago and we reserved an easement for that. We don't believe there's a need for that anymore. So, that's going to open up that space to be usable open space as well.

So, by concentrating the development, we've preserved the maximum amount of open space. Is that accurate? That's correct. And you understand, I think it was a comment in staff report, but you understand that through any subdivision plan process, we would need to um comply with the landscape manual, correct? Oh, yes. And I think you just basically talked us through, but is there any additional details on the road network that's being proposed here that you'd like to offer?

No, it's going be a typical section city like you see in most subdivisions. So moving on to 1641 188J3 which is uh related to the proposed vehicular and pedestrian circulation systems uh adequacy and efficiency some of most of which Mr. Hackett just covered in this discussion on the pedestrian connectivity but I'm going to ask Mr. Mike Lenhard to please introduce himself by stating his name and address. Good evening. Michael Lenhardt with Lenhard Traffic Consulting, 231 Nolles Road, Sweet 2550, Millersville, Maryland 218.

Mr. Lenhart's uh a copy of his resume is included in your packet as PDF page 31. It was number three in the planning and zoning commission exhibit packet. He was accepted as an expert in the areas of traffic engineering by the planning and zoning commission and he has done several projects in the city of Westminster and Carol County in his history. I'm happy to walk through any questions um related to his educational background and professional background. Mr. Lenhard, was your firm hired to prepare traffic impact analysis related to this proposal?

Yes, we were. And is that traffic impact analysis part of the submitt and packet that the council has reviewed here today? Yes, it is. As part of any subdivision proposal, do you understand that staff uh would require a traffic impact analysis submittal and full review? Yes, it be required as part of this preliminary plan of subdivision. Okay. Can you explain to members of council just generally how a traffic impact analysis is prepared and how it is scoped?

Uh so the the town does not have its own uh specific requirements for traffic impact study. So we use the uh Carol County um traffic impact study requirements and their APF ordinance. Uh we scoped the study with the town and with the county and state highway administration input. Um the study that we've done for this amendment had eight study intersections. We conducted traffic counts at each of those during the morning and evening peak hour. We had growth in um regional traffic to 3% growth. We had um approved background developments that are not yet built. We did we did include the Bridgewald subdivision in this traffic impact study. Uh and then we add the site traffic in and u Carol County has requirements on u level of service analysis methodologies and uh acceptable levels of service. And um this uh as Mr. Deepo testified all of the study intersections in this report did operate at acceptable level of service D or better. Um we understand that we will have to do an updated study for the preliminary plan and uh we'll have to go through this process again.

So today is it your opinion that the proposed vehicular systems are adequate to handle the proposed amendment? That's correct. And this to be clear, a traffic to impact analysis would be submitted with any subdivision plan and if something changed at that point in time, that would all need to be addressed. Either way, whether it changed or not, that would be reviewed and any changes would need to be addressed. Correct. That is correct.

Okay. Thank you. We're almost there. We're at 1641 1888 J4 which requires that by its design by minimizing grading by and by other means the proposed development would tend to prevent erosion of the soil and to preserve natural vegetation and other natural features of the site. So I am back with Mr. Hackit. Mr. Hackett previously mentioned and and a lot of this you kind of already covered so we'll just remind very briefly. You previously mentioned that the strategic lot layout maximizes the open space. Does that in turn also mean that it minimizes the disturbance? Yes, it does.

And you previously spoke to the layout preserving significant amount of the mature trees on site. Is that correct?

That's correct. The uh the area of open space, the 18 acres, there's uh since the beginning, we've always tried to maintain. There's a scoop slope area out there that has very heavily vegetated and heavily wooded. Um, we're going to maintain preserving that and all the other trees that are along there. The entrance way going into your new facility, all those trees stay and they're they're quite mature. Um, I've always thought they were a great buffer from the property anyway um throughout the process. Um, the the grading uh we have to do grading requirements. So by the time you meet um you meet road design criteria and the grading criteria, uh we try to keep everything to a minimum, but we also want to ask nice lots for for future homeowners.

And how would you compare the size of the lots proposed to the surrounding area? I think and and when we say the surrounding area, the Wakefield area itself, we uh were probably slightly larger with third to halfacre lots that all the properties in the city um some of the some of them have town homes around some of them have multif family uh like the the Carol Luther village that some of those structures are obviously much larger than a single family home. Um but but it's all it's all relative and and very compatible.

Uh Mr. Hackett, I'm switching you to section 164 188 J5 which requires that any proposals including restrictions, agreements or other documents which show that ownership and method of assuring perpetual maintenance of those areas if any that are intended to be used for recreation or other common or quasi public purposes are adequate and sufficient. Mr. Hacket, you previously mentioned the pocket of open space that is in the midst of the community. Is it correct that that would be governed by a homeowners association that would be established for this community? Yes, it would. And that would be done through the subdivision process. Correct. That's correct.

And you also previously mentioned uh the open space buffer between the park and the development which is about 18 acres I believe. Is it accurate that the developer would be willing to dedicate that to the city as has been enumerated as a condition of approval tonight? Yes, that's correct. And that would also be done through the subdivision process. Correct. Okay. And you've you've already spoken about the Carol Lutheran Village piece, but it's your understanding that the intent is that no matter who owns it, whether it be the city or Carol Lutheran Village, that that will remain passive park land. Correct.

That's correct. Absolutely. I will briefly submit to you that section 1641 188J6 which requires just uh conformance with the pertinent statutory requirements has been met through the application through the planning and zoning commission's uh recommendation and through the staff report. You'll see that the application is complete and accurate under your code requirements. And that concludes all of our testimony here tonight. I do want to make it very clear that all of these people are more than willing to answer specific questions. We were intentionally efficient as it related to the trafficked impact study study and such, but those are very detailed documents. So, should you have any questions specific to any of that, we are here happy to answer that.

Mr. President, I have a question.

I or point of clarification, I just want to make sure everybody's on the same stage here. um the open space parcel X and the part that is going to be going to the city which is part of W which is basically close to half of parcel W that's all going to be incorporated basically as part of the park the question of the ownership of one parcel might but it's going to be used as public park area and we already talked about the gate as it goes into Carol Luther Village I just want to be clear uh that I'm understanding this correctly. There are trails within the development itself as well as the HOA uh open space parcel that's kind of in the center of the roadway. All of that, correct me if I'm wrong, is public. Is it the intent is it to be public as well because I don't see how you're going to be able to stop somebody from walking through there when you have a park all around. Is that correct?

That is correct. The intent is that that will all connect to the trail system. Yeah. So all the trails that we're seeing on these two parcels are going to be able to be used as part of the public trail system. But the only place that we're talking about which is already the case is once you enter on the private property which is Carol Lutheran village that of course not become part of a public trail system. That is correct. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you.

No questions. So, M. Miller, um, my question is on parcel X. When we originally negotiated this deal back 15 years ago or whatever it was with Mr. Crest, the intention was to give that piece to Carol Village, but it's my understanding that that it really it's going to come to us instead is the way this is selling. Is that the intention here? I think that that is what Carol Lutheran villages desire is. That's my understanding, but I want to make sure that is in fact there is there there's no one here from

Carol. We did invite Mr. Powell to attend. I don't know whether he was able to attend tonight. I know that he has been having some discussions with ownership. Um so he's very aware and I also made him aware of the condition in the staff report which he did not have any problem with. He communicated to me that their desires remain the same that if it stayed passive parkland and that um whether it be owned by Carol Luther or the city it would be passive but I would suspect it's advantageous for them to give it to us because then we have to maintain it versus they have to maintain it tax that okay I just wanted to make sure that was clear with LSND yes um it is

that that's the intention which is my understanding of his case but I just wanted make that very clear in public. And I believe you're what you're probably referencing is their letter of support which was filed with the initial application. It's been some years since the initial application for this was filed. Um but I believe that that is still pretty much fully their position. Okay, great. All right. Thank you. Uh hearing no other questions, we'll continue on with the hearing. We do have one last person that signed up and uh that is Lewis, but I can't make this writing out on the first name. First one's Gen Lewis. Gayen. Okay.

Yeah, that's me. I'm Gen Level Road. Yes. I was just trying to figure out with you guys and everything about the water situation. I' I've already had to redo a well and everything. So, is it going to be public water? Are they all going to be wells? And then is it gonna have street lamps and the Adams Mill Road and Bell Road intersection that side goes to a single lane which is tight to drive already and I wanted to know about the traffic if there was like you've done any research on that. Sorry I don't

that's okay. It's okay. So the way the way hearing works you're you talking that's okay. um we may ask them to answer a question during this hearing but you can't question you can't talk that but that's okay. So, um I can answer one of your questions, which is absolutely it's all going to be public water. So, okay. There will be no wells being used as far as street lights. That was your second question.

I I that's probably not completely vetted out yet, is it? That's going to come later in the process, I would suspect. So, we're not that would be part of what we're we're talking about this evening. But certainly, you know, I'm sure you can get their information. Okay. Get your desire there if that's something you'd like to see. There's still more process to be had. This is just very early as Bill said. What was the last part you were asking about? The traffic study side. Yeah, the traffic study at the other side of Bell Road at Adamsville. Was that part of the study?

We did study that intersection, the results of that. Uh and it it is, you know, the roads are narrow all rural roads, but the intersection operates at the level of service A. Um, anything else, sir? No. Okay. I would I would recommend that at the conclusion we grab some contact information. So, if you think it's any discussion you might want to have as this continues through the process.

Now, that is it for those that signed up this evening to speak. Although I will go ahead and allow anyone else if they would like to speak, if you want to say your name and your address. I'll give you a couple minutes. Hearing none, we'll go ahead and conclude. Yes, sir. Excuse me. My name is David Barry. I live on Fendi Farm Road.

So, my interest is is from the perspective of living on Deb Farm Road, looking at the back of these homes that we developed. So, the homes that are being developed, are they going to be twotory homes? 2,000 square foot are the size of the homes? Just curious about that. The way I've heard so far sound like the partials will be anywhere from a half acre to 3/4 acre lots. And the last question on that part is the road that's being proposed coming off of Bell Road. Is that a 50 foot wide city standard street or will it be different?

So as far as the homes go, I do believe they are twotory homes that are going to go in there. Most of them will be. Um I don't know the answer to your other question in terms of this exact size of all the pots but I think that's in the ballpark of what we heard um today what you just said. Lastly on the road you said I I don't understand that part of it. I'm sorry. The road width is 30 ft of paving or a 50 foot right away. Okay. The rightway is 50. Good. Sir, what was your address? 1051050 Fenby Farm 2158. Mr. President, I do have a question.

Yep. Um, could you speak a little bit? I know that this is still a process to go through. Uh but could you address a a little bit about what the developer's vision is as far as the type of housing that's going to go in there like you know two stories square footage and I know this is all very preliminary but I'm sure you all have already thought some about that. Um so could you speak to a little bit about what the current thinking is and with the understanding of course during the development process that may change. Yes, I will speak and then I will ask that Marty correct me if I'm misspoke. Um the anticipation is is these will be high-end um single family detach residential homes obviously. Um I think the square footage and I even saw it referenced in the packet somewhere is anywhere between 2500 to 3500 square feet plus.

Correct.

Um definitely two stories. That that is correct. Um I believe that the lots are designed such that they can accommodate that obviously we can't commit specifically but the theory is that some of these could be opportune for you know sort of custom home builder situation and we want to have very aesthetically appealing homes. Um and obviously we will also be subject to your design manual through the subdivision plan process as well. So, these have been designed with some flexibility to accommodate some of the desires of the residents that would be buying these. In terms of garages and those sorts of features of the homes, Marty, I don't know if you can get into any more specifics.

I I think sizewise, uh, the lots can can accommodate pretty large homes. Uh, we had the w that we our goal was to try to do as many sideload garages as possible. Um, but if there is a house that's very wide and stuff like that, it might have a combination of of both to a degree. Um, but this being the location, uh, the 35 lots that we're looking at proposing, um, you're looking at one of the most attractive places around.

Um, it's, you know, right across the street of Bel Road. There's some there's some homes all along Belro. It's just it's it's a nice area and uh obviously hope you know the market is where right now it's they're not going to be cheap. They're they're going to be on the expensive side question. Yes. Thank you. Mr. Dehoff, you good sir?

Yes. Okay. I am going to go ahead and uh call the public hearing to a close at 7:56. Perfect. Go ahead and continue on. Uh, anyone want to go ahead and exit now? Now would be a quick time. I'll just pause for a minute. All right. Folks, we do need to continue our meeting. So, everybody keep it up.

Thank you. Okay. Now we'll consider approval of previous meeting minutes. We have minutes from one meeting held on March 9th, 2026. I have a motion to approve the minutes. Motion to approve. Thank you, Mr. Dehoff. Is there a second? I will second. Thank you, Mr. There any discussion regarding the motion on the table? Hearing? None. All those in f and let me pause for a minute. Doug, I will be voting on everything this evening obviously. Um hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying I. I.

Any oppose? The eyes have it. And the minutes are approved. You have two items on the consent calendar this evening. Is there a motion to approve the consent calendar? Mr. President, I'll make a motion to approve the consent calendar. Thank you, Mr. Huff. And I'll second it. Thank you very much, Mr. Dh. You guys are hard working tonight. All those in favor of approving the consent calendar, please signify by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? The eyes have it and the consent calendar is approved. We have no report from the mayor this evening. We will not have an art council report. Economic and community development, Mr. Puff, nothing uh to report tonight, sir.

Thank you very much, sir. Finance committee, Mr. Peekerero is not here this evening and we have no personnel committee report either. We do have a public safety report of which I chair on uh our committee met on March 18th. We reviewed recruitment efforts which continue to be very successful. The department remains well staffed. We were also updated on ongoing traffic stud on the ongoing traffic study taking place in several areas of town. Data collected is now fully underway and with conduct with conducting devices being deployed throughout the study zones to gather the information needed uh uh for a thorough analysis. um

open.

There was also uh some retail thefts uh that were occurring. And on March 15, 2026, officers from the Westminster Police Department in coordination with the Maryland State Police conducted a traffic stop that led to the arrest of two individuals responsible for stealing over $2,600 of merchandise from Dick Sporting Good. Further investigation revealed evidence linking the suspects to multiple thefts throughout the region. This case highlights the effectiveness of of inter agency collaboration and proactive enforcement in addressing organized theft rings. So a job well done chief. Um we'll move on to public works. Mr. Pero is not here. Reckon Parks. Mr. Day,

no report, sir. Thank you very much. Intergovernmental Mr. Huff. The only thing I will mention is that the general assembly will be wrapping up things on April the 13th. I will share that so far. Everything is going well that u the um IR committee is paying attention to as it relates to Westminster. Um and I will have a more thorough report after we get through. Senator, thank you very much, sir. Uh now we'll move on to council comments and discussion. Mr. Dehoff, do you have anything? Um no, sir. Okay, Mr. Huff, you have anything? I do not.

Nor do I. We will keep moving right along. We have two ordinance this evening before us. Uh, and Mr. Witworth, uh, if you want to take us away on the first one. Yes. Good evening, Mr. President. The first is the adoption of resolution 26-10, a resolution of the mayor and common council of the city of Westminster approving Wakefield Valley Development Plan Amendment DP24-01. Thank you, sir. Mr. Deepo, I have nothing more to add. Um, the resolution does point out the conditions, the 11 conditions of approval as recommended by staff and the planning and zoning commission. Thank you very much, sir. Mr. President.

Yes, sir. I do want to just clarify one thing that that um for the record uh the Westminster Planning and Zoning Commission report and recommendation there was actually a typo. It says December 17, 2024. It was actually 2025. I just wanted that to be clarified for the public record. Okay. Thank you, sir. Well, let's go ahead and then uh get a motion and a second get it on the floor and then we can have some discussion about it. So, if I can have a motion, please. Uh, Mr. President, I'll make a motion for the adoption of resolution 2610. Thank you very much, Mr. Huff. Do we have a second? Second. Thank you very much, Mr. Dehoff. Let's have some discussion uh regarding this, Mr. President.

Yes, sir.

Um, I I would like to comment in reference to I made some notes here, but I cannot find them right at the moment, but I wanted to make some comments related to being the exopicio member on the planning and zoning commission. This has come, as you saw from the staff report, to the planning and zoning commission numerous times. Um, and I just really want to commend the work of staff as well as our planning and zoning commission. Um, as well as the applicant. I think you can really tell on a mayor and common council level when you look at the staff report and you see all the variations of the different development plans as they were working through the process to get here today. I think you can tell that a lot of work and thought went into that. And I think the product that we see here tonight um is a very attractive subdivision and will be a real benefit to the community uh especially when you consider all the additional open space uh that quite frankly is being included by the developer uh before it's turned over to the city. Um, so I just kind of want to shout out to my members that are on the planning and zoning commission, uh, to kind of point out their hard work related to this as well with staff and the applicant was very willing to work. Uh, sometimes as a planning and zoning, when you're on planning and zoning, uh, you can get a little bit frustrated because you will give feedback to a applicant and then they'll come back to you and you're like, did you not listen to the feedback last time? I will say I did not feel a lot of that with this particular case. Uh and sometimes we do. Um so I really appreciate the applicants efforts in that regard as well.

Thank you, Mr. H. First, you have um as Mr. Hackett will testify, I've been to a lot of these hearings over the years. A lot. This was really well done and I really appreciate it. I'm looking forward to the additional open space. I'm looking forward to the addition of the high quality housing staff community. Very much appreciative of that. And I I just really appreciate the diligence, the perseverance, how well this was prepared. I think this is a real quality addition to our community. Can't thank you.

Thank you, Mr. De. I'd like to take a moment and thank Mr. Crest specifically. Um you know uh when we negotiated the deal for Wakefield initially um it it was very clear there was no contract agreement contract zoning agreement it was done without any promise of anything. It's taken quite a few years to get you and it's gone through a very arduous process and through it you've stuck with it. You've proven to the city of Westminster it's your good friend. Um, Wakefield Valley sits there in in its glory in great part due to you. Um, we've got a wonderful community just south of of downtown in Stonegate that uh has some beautiful homes in it that I think went well above what probably you even anticipated when you started that project, which is good for the city and good for the citizens here. Um, so you have been a good friend to Westminster and I'm excited about this project. Um, I think it's going to be a great asset um to the community and I'm looking forward to voting in favor of this and getting this thing moved through the process so you can get started building some more beautiful homes in our community.

Well, thank you. Absolutely. Mr. President. Yes, sir. I asked one other question of staff. Mr. Deepo, I just want to clarify something. So when we're voting on this today as mayor of Khana council, what eventually comes back to the planning and zoning commission has to look very similar to what we're voting on tonight. Is that correct? That's correct. Part of the resolution you are accepting the amendment, the fourth amendment for the 35 lots, the 18 acres, the dedication, the parcel X. So when it comes back with preliminary subdivision plan, it has to be consistent with that plan that you are you've seen tonight. What you're

So it's kind of similar to like when we dealt with the East Green Street condo where not that changes can't happen a lot of technical changes, but it's not like when it goes to the planning and zoning commission and goes through that process, the mayor and common council are going to be surprised to see a totally different plan. The plan that we have before us today is the plan is going to be very materially similar to what eventually goes through the planning and zoning process and gets approved. That's correct. Yes. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

Okay. Well, I think we are ready for a vote. Uh unless there's any further discussion hearing no more discussion uh I'll ask all those in favor of adoption of resolution 20 glasses here sorry adoption of resolution 26-10 please signify by saying I I any opposed the eyes have it and the resolution is is approved adopted sorry we'll now move on to our next item of business. Whitworth.

Uh, thank you, Mr. President. The next is the adoption of resolution 26-11, a resolution of the mayor and common council of the city of Westminster in support of House Bill 1142 establishing the task force to modernize county and municipal revenue sources.

Thank you very much. Uh, Mayor Becker wasn't able to be here this this evening, so Mr. Hoff is going to speak on this resolution. Mr. So, um, the the Maryland Municipal League is looking for different municipalities to pass a resolution in support of House Bill 1142. Um, what 1142 does is just simply form a task force um, which has to give a report back to the general assembly by the end of this year. As we've had many discussions over the years related to tax differentials, tax set offs, May and Chelle counties, part of this task force will look at some of those issues. Uh because quite frankly, not to to upset my friends on the county commissioner level, but arguably we do not get our fair share back from the county taxes that we should.

Not sure that's arguable.

Well, it's true. It is. it is very clear. Um, so but there's a multitude of issues where where it comes when it comes to this kind of issue because the county has the issues as well. Uh, long story short, the House has already passed the bill. It just happened today. It was by a vote of 100 to 30 through 33 days. So, it is now working its way through the Senate and hopefully will pass before the end of session. With that in mind, I would like to make a motion to amend the resolution first. Uh, and let me explain what my motion is. I would like to amend the the resolution 2611. In the very last paragraph that begins now, therefore, be it resolved, I would delight I would like to delete and urges the House Ways and Means Committee to issue a favorable report. Um, I would like to instead just read now therefore be it resolved. The mayor and common council of the city of Westminster formally supports the passage of House Bill 1142. It has already passed um the House Ways and Means Committee. It's already been voted down by the House, but this did not this bill did not have a companion Senate bill. So, this version of the bill is the one that's moving over to the Senate. So by modifying the resolution this way um it still serves its purpose and we can still forward it along to our friends in the Senate.

We have a second that's amended. Yes. If I could insert something. I don't think you have a motion on the floor as is. So maybe you would want um a motion to adopt resolution 26-11 as amended by Mr. Huff. That would be fine with me. We don't have to do it. I guess it's too separate. So, is that in the record? Yeah. Yep. Do you want to go ahead and make your motion to adopt it as amended? Yes. I would like to make a motion to adopt as amended um with what we just discussed. Sure. And you're seconding that? We're as amended. Is that good?

Okay. Any discussion? All those in favor of adoption resolution 2611 as amended, please signify by saying I. I. I. Any opposed? The eyes have it and the resolution is adopted. We have no unfinished business that I'm aware of this evening. Is there any unfinished business that I'm not aware of? Hearing none, we'll move on to new business. I have no new business this evening. Is there any new business that I'm not aware of? Moving on, uh we will go ahead and have departmental reports. Miss,

thank you, Mr. President. You have a shortened staff here tonight. Some of whom are off on vacation, some of whom are out sick, some of whom are working on the budget. Well, that ex that that reflects the day nicely. Yes.

So, I'll give you an abbreviated uh report. I want to start tonight by thanking planning department and specifically uh Mr. Debo for his leadership and efforts getting through the project that you've heard tonight. Um there's always a lot more that goes on behind the scenes than than many realize. Um you've had been partners with the applicants tonight. Thank you for being here. Um I've heard about this project since I actually interviewed with this job. So I'm really excited. Today's a big win for everyone here. Um especially the applicants. So we're very excited to have you. We look forward to moving through the process as quickly as you're ready to. Um and again, thank you Mr. D for your for your leadership there. Thank you.

We will move on to your report tonight.

Okay. Sorry. On March 19th, the planning zoning commission forwarded a recommend forwarded a recommendation to approve zonal zoning map amendment ZMA 2401 to Willows, an application for zonal classification to the PD9 zone to develop 420 over2 residential dwelling units, including plan development plan option three and architectural elevations option A as amended and option B to the mayor and common council. On there are no applications scheduled for the board of zoning appeals April 7th meeting. On April 8th, the historic district commission is scheduled to re review facade improvement program applications. We received 11 this year. Uh only six are moving forward that have uh that meet the standards for the application. Uh on April 23rd, the mayor the mayor will be hosting a community meeting which is open to the public to learn more about the Westminster Historic District National Register Update. This is gives the public the ability to ask questions and speak with the consultant which is EAC Archae Archaeology Inc. performing the update. This update is funded through a matching grant from the Maryland Historic Trust. The mayor's community meeting will be held from 6 pm to 7:30 p.m. at Exploration Common Commons in downtown Westminster at 50 East Main Street. We're also sending out letters to all the owners of properties in the historic district regarding update in the mayor's community meeting. That completes my

When did you say that meeting, Mr. It is April 23rd, a month from today? April 23rd from 6 pm to 7:30 p.m. Mr. Dbo, I do have one other uh question related to the Willows. I know that there were some elevations that are continuing to be kind of refined a little bit. When is the expectation that that'll come up to the mayor and common council level? Um, think we're looking in a June time frame for the Maritime County uh hearing. And that's assuming that you get the elevations fine tuned elevations average requirements. Exactly. Okay. Okay. Thank you.

Are there any other questions for the planning department? Hearing not, we'll move on to the public works department. Just have a quick update on paving at Albian and Sherwood lots. So, the Alvon and the outer portion of Sherwood bus have been completed, but they're not open yet because they need to be striped. Tomorrow, we will complete the rest of the topping of the Sherwood lot. The base has been finished already, but that has to be completely dry. We can stick the top on and it rained for Monday morning. Um, once that all dries, then we'll finish the striping. We're hoping to have both of those lots open by Wednesday at the end of the day if the weather can uh works with us. questions on the public works report. Hearing none, we'll move on to police department. Chief Price,

thank you, ma'am. Good evening, everyone. Uh, I just have two things I'd like to highlight for the last reporting period. Um, first is, uh, on March 10th, 2026, WPD partnered with the Carol County Sheriff's Office to participate in the Leadership Carol Law Day program. Uh, this initiative provides current and emerging community leaders a hand-on hands-on uh, understanding of law enforcement operations. uh participants engaged in practical scenarios observed demonstrations from several of our specialized units helping to strengthen the community awareness and partnerships across town. A great program and uh everybody did well and I think all the emerging leaders really enjoyed it. Uh second thing is we conducted traffic enforcement initiative on route 140 on March 13, 2026. Uh we partnered with Maryland State Police and the sheriff's office and conducted a high visibility traffic enforcement initiative uh targeting aggressive driving behavior. The operation resulted in 262 traffic stops, 69 citations issued, 254 warnings, 38 safety equipment repair orders in addition to one criminal arrest and three DUI arrests. Um, this collaborative effort underscores the department's ongoing commitment to work with the other agencies and uh to make sure we're keeping the roadway safe county. So that's my report.

Very impressive. Thank you, chief. Are there any questions for the chief? I have a question. That was just a snapshot. You want to do that more in the future? Yeah, there are plans to do more initiatives, especially as we come into the warmer summertime. That would be good. Thank you. Hearing now, Mr. President, that concludes the departmental reports.

Wonderful. Uh we'll now move on to citizen comments, the final item on our agenda, during which we invite the public to address the mayor and council on any issues related to tonight's agenda or other city matters. For those not attending this public meeting, we offer your comments via email at comments westminster md.gov. All email comments will be shared with the mayor and council. Please include your address and phone number with your comments. We will now invite comments from those present this evening. This is an opportunity for the public to share their thoughts with the mayor council. Our role at this point is to listen to your comments and respond appropriately after consulting with staff and each other. Is there anyone here this evening who wishes to be heard? Hearing none, that concludes our Mr. President.

Oh, I'm sorry, Lindy. I apologize. I didn't look far enough over. The floor is yours, Lindy. Lindi West Main Street. I just like to thank the city for their efficient removal of the snow on Main Street. Well, she's sitting right there. Let her know. That's great. Thank you, Lindy. Okay. Anybody else? Make sure I've missed anybody. That concludes our agenda and the meeting. Our next regularly scheduled meeting is a special council meeting on Monday, April 6, 2026 at 5:30 to appoint a new council member to the currently vacant seat. And with that and without objection, we are adjourned.