top of page

County IW2 Advisory Group Aims at

"Comprehensive Rezoning"

Composed largely of developers, Advisory Group considers 10K acres of new commercial zoning

 

The Frederick County Planning Office and the county’s Division of Economic Opportunity teamed up to create the “Investing in Workers and Workplaces” (IW2) advisory group, populated primarily by folks in the business of property development. The county website says: “This plan…will increase land designated for targeted economic opportunity uses through the review of select growth areas and current land use designations…. A comprehensive rezoning will follow Plan adoption to implement the Plan’s recommendations.”

​

Starting in May 2024, the IW2 held six meetings when only members of the group could speak; no public comments were allowed. This month, at last, meetings that will allow public input are scheduled Sept. 19, Sept. 25, and Oct. 2 – click here for times and location. The county’s intention is to fast-track the IW2, with completion expected by July 2025.

​

The Sugarloaf Alliance encourages residents to learn about the issues, plan to attend at least one of the public sessions and offer informed comments in person or in writing. We offer the following points to spur your thinking.

​

***

The Sugarloaf Alliance believes that, in pursuing the IW2 initiative at this time and in this way, Frederick County compromises its process, its values and its identity.

​

Frederick County is compromising its land use planning process.

 

  • The Livable Frederick Master Plan (LFMP), completed in 2019, requires land use plans and actions to be viewed through the lens of climate change and calls for the Green Infrastructure Plan to be launched and completed prior to IWW. Why change that? Why opt to designate commercial zoning changes before choosing where to preserve green infrastructure?

​

  • Doesn’t it seem more consistent with the LFMP process to:

    • Fully develop existing commercial/industrial zoned properties before undeveloped land is proposed and enabled by rezoning actions and incentives?

    • Redevelop existing commercial/industrial properties to update uses?

    • Assess new business prospects for their full range of impacts on the community, from environmental impacts on forest, farmland, and water resources, to power lines, air/water/noise/light pollution, costs to county and county residents for long term infrastructure (water, sewer, roads, electricity)?

 

Frederick County is compromising its values.

 

The Livable Frederick Master Plan begins with a statement of the county’s values: “Livability is the sum of the factors that add up to our quality of life in Frederick County. It is the ability to easily get where you’re going, to enjoy great parks, to benefit from great schools, to find support when you need it, to form bonds with your neighbors, to have access to excellent stores, restaurants, and entertainment, to have good jobs close to home, to enjoy the revitalizing qualities of our forests, rivers, mountains, and countryside, and to be in harmony with the systems that surround, support, and underlie our ability to live happy, healthy, long, and prosperous lives.

 

“To preserve, sustain, and create livability, we must define and advance our shared values as they impact our built and natural environments, our community health, our economic prosperity, our social stability and equity, our education, and our cultural, entertainment and recreational opportunities. This is the central ambition of Livable Frederick. It is a bold and visionary purpose, but one that is at the heart of every technical and practical effort to plan our communities.”

 

  • Sugarloaf Alliance agrees that these are values that attract residents and businesses to our county. However, it seems that county residents, tax payers and many others are not getting the full picture of what quality of life factors are at stake. What short- and long-term costs to the public to prioritize and expedite the IW2 rezonings? Who will pay the price of postponing Green Infrastructure planning and other elements of the Livable Frederick Master Plan?

 

  • The IW2 advisory group, which met for presentations and discussions over three months, represented land use views dominated by a majority of developers with profit and return-on-investment objectives. Implications for workers were hardly included in their discussions.

 

  • Among IW2 assertions: Agricultural and resource conservation lands were labeled as “underperforming,” ignoring their value in food production, water and air quality, carbon storage and sustainability, recreation, health and habitat.

 

  • IW2 asserted that the commercial portion of the county tax base should be increased to 28% (from the current 21%) and that some jurisdictions that are more successful at promoting business development get 32% or more of their tax revenues from that sector. They estimated 10,000 acres of new commercially zoned land would be required (they ignored redevelopment opportunities). Sugarloaf Alliance notes that the proposed data center map created in 2021 calls for 9,400 acres. Coincidence?

 

  • IW2 discussions did not mention state laws regarding forest preservation, agriculture industry protection (largest in MD), water supplies and waterway protection, or air quality.

 

  • Doesn’t it seem more consistent with the county’s values to:

    • Prioritize economic development business attraction efforts and prospects based on redevelopment options and policies, actual revenue and job projections, synergies with other county businesses, and environmental compliance? Where is the current independent research to support the IW2's assumptions?

    • Recognize and promote agricultural enterprises among target industries?

    • Acknowledge that county residents will pay for the quality-of-life consequences of IW2 development - higher electricity bills, incompatible land uses, reduced water supplies and water and air quality, school overcrowding, traffic congestion, and reduced green space – all in contradiction to the values described in LFMP?

 

If these and other economic development issues are not fully addressed in the IW2 Plan before it reaches the Planning Commission and County Council, then the Plan will be a developer-driven exercise with those developers nominating parcels now zoned AG or RC that they own, control or are affiliated with. Is that consistent with the county’s values?

 

Frederick County is compromising its identity.

 

The Frederick County seal shows a farmer, a river and mountains. The photographs displayed on the monitors in Winchester Hall invariably show Sugarloaf Mountain or agricultural fields or other scenic views of Frederick County. The recent email from the County Executive announcing a meeting about the proposed powerlines - the so-called "Maryland Piedmont Reliability Project" (MPRP) - shows a covered bridge. This is our identity.

 

  • The county sought a sweet spot, a synergy where residents and visitors have “access to excellent stores, restaurants, and entertainment, to have good jobs close to home, to enjoy the revitalizing qualities of our forests, rivers, mountains, and countryside, and to be in harmony with the systems that surround, support, and underlie our ability to live happy, healthy, long, and prosperous lives” (LFMP).

 

  • The county is suffering the results of over-commitment to housing development. Will IW2 pile on with over-commitment to commercial development?

 

  • Doesn’t it seem more consistent with the county’s identity to:

    • Delay IW2 consideration until the Greenfield Infrastructure Plan is launched and complete, as outlined in LFMP?

    • Reconsider the IW2 advisory process so that county land use advice is not focused on the wishes of special interest groups like land and data center developers?

    • Make economic choices rooted in the county’s identity and based on comprehensive, unbiased cost/benefit analysis?

 

CONSEQUENCES

The Livable Frederick Master Plan (LFMP) aims to preserve, sustain, and create livability. The Sugarloaf Alliance believes that in pursuing the IW2 initiative at this time and in this way, Frederick County compromises LFMP, with negative consequences for residents’ quality of life.

​

  • County residents pay in quality-of-life consequences for misguided development: higher electricity bills, incompatible land uses, lower property values, reduced water supplies and water and air quality, school overcrowding, traffic congestion, and reduced green space.

 

 

Who will bear responsibility for the consequences and costs to the public – community, environmental, lost opportunities – of current land use decisions?

​

​

bottom of page