[PAGE 1]
1. Agenda - 08.20.24
Documents:
ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT AGENDA 8-20-2024.PDF
2. Call To Order
Statement of Authority - Pursuant to Maryland Code Annotated, Land Use Article,
Division 1, Single Jurisdiction Planning and Zoning, Title 4, Zoning, Subtitle 2,
Designation and Adoption, Section 4-205 and the City of Westminster Zoning
Ordinance Section 164-158.1A.(1), “…the Planning Director [Director] is authorized to
grant administrative adjustments from the following requirements contained in this
chapter:
(a) Local height requirements;
(b) Local setback requirements;
(c) Local bulk requirements;
(d) Local parking requirements;
(e) Local loading, dimensional, or area requirements; or
(f) Similar local requirements.
The Director may grant an administrative adjustment in cases where the strict
compliance with the requirements of this chapter would result in practical difficulty or
unreasonable hardship which has not been caused by the applicant.
3. Public Hearings
3.I. CASE: AA 24-04
An application by Dean Camlin on behalf of Westminster Firehouse LLC., the property
owner, requesting approval of an Administrative Adjustment for 66 E Main Street
Westminster, Maryland 21157 (SDAT# 07-006667) to Zoning Ordinance Sections 164-
111 B. and 164-111 C. to allow a reduction in the number of required parking spaces
for new retail/office use in the existing building on-site.
Documents:
AA-24-04 APPLICATION (UPDATED).PDF
AA 24-04 STAFF MEMO.PDF
3.II. CASE: AA 24-05
An application by Marta Coursey, property owner, requesting approval of an
Administrative Adjustment for Lot 4 Meadow Branch Industrial Park (SDAT# 07-
151039) to Zoning Ordinance Section 164-115. (D)(3) to allow for a relief of one foot
from the required 25 feet of drive aisle width in the parking lot. The administrative
adjustment is associated with a site development plan S-18-0037 to construct an
indoor dog training and event facility.
Documents:
AA-24-05- ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION.PDF
AA 24-05 STAFF MEMO.PDF
4. Adjournment

[PAGE 2]
1. Agenda - 08.20.24
Documents:
ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT AGENDA 8-20-2024.PDF
2. Call To Order
Statement of Authority - Pursuant to Maryland Code Annotated, Land Use Article,
Division 1, Single Jurisdiction Planning and Zoning, Title 4, Zoning, Subtitle 2,
Designation and Adoption, Section 4-205 and the City of Westminster Zoning
Ordinance Section 164-158.1A.(1), “…the Planning Director [Director] is authorized to
grant administrative adjustments from the following requirements contained in this
chapter:
(a) Local height requirements;
(b) Local setback requirements;
(c) Local bulk requirements;
(d) Local parking requirements;
(e) Local loading, dimensional, or area requirements; or
(f) Similar local requirements.
The Director may grant an administrative adjustment in cases where the strict
compliance with the requirements of this chapter would result in practical difficulty or
unreasonable hardship which has not been caused by the applicant.
3. Public Hearings
3.I. CASE: AA 24-04
An application by Dean Camlin on behalf of Westminster Firehouse LLC., the property
owner, requesting approval of an Administrative Adjustment for 66 E Main Street
Westminster, Maryland 21157 (SDAT# 07-006667) to Zoning Ordinance Sections 164-
111 B. and 164-111 C. to allow a reduction in the number of required parking spaces
for new retail/office use in the existing building on-site.
Documents:
AA-24-04 APPLICATION (UPDATED).PDF
AA 24-04 STAFF MEMO.PDF
3.II. CASE: AA 24-05
An application by Marta Coursey, property owner, requesting approval of an
Administrative Adjustment for Lot 4 Meadow Branch Industrial Park (SDAT# 07-
151039) to Zoning Ordinance Section 164-115. (D)(3) to allow for a relief of one foot
from the required 25 feet of drive aisle width in the parking lot. The administrative
adjustment is associated with a site development plan S-18-0037 to construct an
indoor dog training and event facility.
Documents:
AA-24-05- ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION.PDF
AA 24-05 STAFF MEMO.PDF
4. Adjournment

[PAGE 3]
ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT
HEARING AGENDA
Tuesday, August 20 2024, at 3 PM
Virtual Meeting:
https://www.youtube.com/@CityofWestminsterMD/streams
www.WestminsterMD.gov
I. Call to Order
Statement of Authority ‐ Pursuant to Maryland Code Annotated, Land Use Article, Division
1, Single Jurisdiction Planning and Zoning, Title 4, Zoning, Subtitle 2, Designation and
Adoption, Section 4‐205 and the City of Westminster Zoning Ordinance Section 164‐
158.1A.(1), “…the Planning Director [Director] is authorized to grant administrative
adjustments from the following requirements contained in this chapter:
(a) Local height requirements;
(b) Local setback requirements;
(c) Local bulk requirements;
(d) Local parking requirements;
(e) Local loading, dimensional, or area requirements; or
(f) Similar local requirements.
The Director may grant an administrative adjustment in cases where the strict compliance with
the requirements of this chapter would result in practical difficulty or unreasonable hardship
which has not been caused by the applicant.
II. Public Hearings
CASE: AA 24-04
An application by Dean Camlin on behalf of Westminster Firehouse LLC., the property
owner, requesting approval of an Administrative Adjustment for 66 E Main Street
Westminster, Maryland 21157 (SDAT# 07-006667) to Zoning Ordinance Sections 164-111
B. and 164-111 C. to allow a reduction in the number of required parking spaces for new
retail/office use in the existing building on-site.
CASE: AA 24-05
An application by Marta Coursey, property owner, requesting approval of an Administrative
Adjustment for Lot 4 Meadow Branch Industrial Park (SDAT# 07-151039) to Zoning
Ordinance Section 164-115. (D)(3) to allow for a relief of one foot from the required 25 feet
of drive aisle width in the parking lot. The administrative adjustment is associated with a site
development plan S-18-0037 to construct an indoor dog training and event facility.
III. Adjournment

[PAGE 4]
DULANY LEAHY CURTIS & BROPHY LLP
J. BROOKS LEAHY ATTORNEYS AT LAW WILLIAM B. DULANY
AMBER DAHLGREEN CURTIS 182 EAST MAIN STREET (1927 – 2017)
STEPHANIE R. BROPHY WESTMINSTER, MARYLAND 21157-5012 WESTMINSTER 410-848-3333
-------- BALTO LINE 410-876-2117
FAX LINE 410-876-0747
EMAIL: BROPHY@DULANY.COM
August 9, 2024
Via email and hand delivery
Mark A. Depo, Director
Department of Community Planning and Development
City of Westminster, Administrative Offices
45 West Main Street
Westminster, Maryland 21157
Re: Application for Administrative Adjustment
66 E. Main Street, Westminster, Maryland 21157
Dear Mark,
I represent Westminster Firehouse, LLC in connection with the attached
Application for Administrative Adjustment to the local parking requirements for its
proposed co-working space at 66 East Main Street, Westminster, Maryland 21157.
Attached hereto are the following documents:
1. Application for Administrative Adjustment
2. Continuation Sheet to Application
3. Design Drawing by Dean Robert Camlin, Architect showing gross floor area of
the entire building. The co-working space would be on the second and third
floors.
You will see an asterisk and a note on page 2 of the Application. Per our call earlier this
week, I did not fill in the contiguous property information as it is my understanding that
the City already had identified them and did not need me to include it. If my understanding
is incorrect or if you would like me to send, please let me know. If you need any additional
information, please contact me. Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
DULANY LEAHY CURTIS & BROPHY LLP
/s/ Stephanie R. Brophy
Stephanie R. Brophy
cc: Westminster Firehouse, LLC (via email)

[PAGE 5]
Zoning Application Number: ____________
AApppplliiccaattiioonn ffoorr AAddmmiinniissttrraattiivvee AAddjjuussttmmeenntt
PAGE 1 CITY OF WESTMINSTER, MARYLAND
AApppplliiccaattiioonn ffoorr HHeeaarriinngg
In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 164-Zoning of the Westminster
City Code, application is made for administrative adjustment to the Director
of Planning and Public Works as follows:
Westminster Firehouse, LLC
AAPPPPLLIICCAANNTT:: PPHHOONNEE:: ((4
4 3
))
2 8 5
--
3802
AAPPPPLLIICCAANNTT AADDDDRREESSSS:: 5192 Talbots Landing, Ellicott City, MD 21043
OOWWNNEERR ((iiff ootthheerr tthhaann aapppplliiccaanntt))::
OOWWNNEERR AADDDDRREESSSS::
SSUUBBJJEECCTT PPRROOPPEERRTTYY AADDDDRREESSSS:: 66 E. Main Street, Westminster, MD 21157
PPRROOPPEERRTTYY IIDDEENNTTIIFFIICCAATTIIOONN:: MMAAPP __1__0__4______ PPAARRCCEELL __1__7__5____4__ LLIIBBEERR __ 8__ 9__ 7__ 2__ FFOOLLIIOO __4__4__7____
NNaattuurree ooff RReeqquueesstt
CCuurrrreenntt ZZoonniinngg
OOff PPrrooppeerrttyy:: __C____-B______________________ ZZoonniinngg OOrrddiinnaannccee BBaassiiss ooff RReeqquueesstt:: §§__1__6__4__-1__5__8__.__1_ _A__._ _(_2_)____
Misc. Commercial
CCuurrrreenntt UUssee ooff PPrrooppeerrttyy:: __________________________________________________________________ AAccrreeaaggee ooff PPrrooppeerrttyy:: ________________
The applicant requests the following adjustment(s) as marked:
(cid:133) Local Height Requirements (cid:133) Local Setback Requirements (cid:133) Local Bulk Requirements
(cid:133)x Local Parking Requirements (cid:133) Local Loading Requirements (cid:133) Local Area Requirements
(cid:133) Local Dimensional Requirements
DDeessccrriippttiioonn ooff RReeqquueesstt iinn DDeettaaiill:: ______S__e___e___ a____tt__a__c__h__e____d__ C____o__n__t__i_n___u__a__t__io___n___ S____h__e__e__t__.________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Westminster Firehouse, LLC
By:__________________________________________ _0_8_.0_9_._2_02_4____________
Chetan Mehta, Managing Member Date
Continued on Page Two →

[PAGE 6]
AApppplliiccaattiioonn ffoorr AAddmmiinniissttrraattiivvee AAddjjuussttmmeenntt
PAGE 2 CITY OF WESTMINSTER, MARYLAND
AAPPPPLLIICCAANNTT:: Westminster Firehouse, LLC
AADDJJOOIINNIINNGG ((CCOONNTTIIGGUUOOUUSS)) PPRROOPPEERRTTYY OOWWNNEERRSS::
(Including adjacent property owners on opposite side of streets or roads)
* City has mailed notice to the applicable contiguous property owners. Per cousel conversation with City, Applicant is not
filling out the below information as the contiguous property owners have been identified and notified.
NNaammee:: ______________________________________ NNaammee:: ______________________________________
AAddddrreessss:: ________________________________ AAddddrreessss:: ________________________________
________________________________ ________________________________
NNaammee:: ______________________________________ NNaammee:: ______________________________________
AAddddrreessss:: ________________________________ AAddddrreessss:: ________________________________
________________________________ ________________________________
NNaammee:: ______________________________________ NNaammee:: ______________________________________
AAddddrreessss:: ________________________________ AAddddrreessss:: ________________________________
________________________________ ________________________________
NNaammee:: ______________________________________ NNaammee:: ______________________________________
AAddddrreessss:: ________________________________ AAddddrreessss:: ________________________________
________________________________ ________________________________
NNaammee:: ______________________________________ NNaammee:: ______________________________________
AAddddrreessss:: ________________________________ AAddddrreessss:: ________________________________
________________________________ ________________________________
I understand that the above information is required for the processing of my
case and I hereby certify the list of contiguous property owners and their
addresses:
Westminster Firehouse, LLC
08.09.2024
B y : _____________________________________ ____________________
Chetan Mehta, Managing Member Date
OOffffiiccee UUssee OOnnllyy
Date Filed: ____/____/_______
Case Number Assigned: #________________ Application Fee Received: _________________
Decision: _______________________________
Date of Hearing: ____/_____/_______
Newspaper Advertisement: _________________ Date Decision Rendered: _____/_____/_____
Property Posted: _________________
Zoning Certificate Number: #_______________

[PAGE 7]
CONTINUATION SHEET
APPLICATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT TO LOCAL PARKING
REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY OF WESTMINSTER, MARYLAND
APPLICANT: WESTMINSTER FIREHOUSE, LLC
ADDRESS: 66 EAST MAIN STREET, WESTMINSTER, MARYLAND 21157
OWNER: SAME AS APPLICANT
ATTORNEY FOR APPLICANT: Stephanie R. Brophy, Dulany Leahy Curtis & Brophy LLP
DETAILS SUPPORTING REQUEST:
Background:
The subject property 66 East Main Street, Westminster, Maryland 21157 (the “Property”)
is zoned C-B, Central Business. The applicant/owner of the property seeks to operate a co-working
space business at the Property on the second and third floors. The first floor of the property is
occupied by commercial tenants. The Code of the City of Westminster (the “Code” or as
applicable, the “Zoning Ordinance”) lacks a provision addressing a use such as a co-working space.
A co-working space is a business in which people who do not work for the same company share
office space to do their respective work. The Code also lacks corresponding provisions addressing
parking requirements for a co-working space. Arguably, the closest use the City has in its Zoning
Ordinance is “Offices: business professional or financial” (Chapter XVI, Section 164-111) which
use is distinct from a co-working space. The City of Westminster’s (the “City”) lack of provision
for co-working spaces may be due to the fact that co-working spaces as a use were not as ubiquitous
once as they are now, and the City has not had an opportunity to update the Zoning Ordinance.
Nevertheless, even though the City’s Code has not caught up yet, other jurisdictions have
addressed co-working spaces as a distinct use and in doing so have consistently found that local
parking requirements for co-working spaces should be either zero or greatly reduced.
Local Applicable Law:
Section 4-205 of the Land Use Article of the Maryland Code provides that “[a]
legislative body may authorize the planning director or another designee to grant an administrative
adjustment from the parking requirements in a zoning law enacted by the legislative body.”
Section 164-111 C. of the Zoning Ordinance provides, in pertinent part, that the parking
requirements for “Offices: business, professional or financial” is “1 for each 250 square feet of
floor area or 2 per office, whichever is greater.” Since the Code lacks a provision for co-working
spaces, Offices is arguably the closest use for the purpose of establishing what the local parking
space requirements would be if the Applicant is not granted an Administrative Adjustment to the
same (see attached drawing for a detailed tabulation including Offices, Commercial Establishment
and Storage, but note, however, that the co-working space being proposed is only going to operate
on the second and third floors.).
Section 164-111 D. of the Zoning Ordinance provides:

[PAGE 8]
Parking facilities in Downtown Parking Area; benefit assessment charge and
annual maintenance fee. As to all construction or uses, including residential uses,
commenced in the Downtown Parking Area after the effective date of this section,
to the extent that the Planning Director determines that the size, configuration or
other physical characteristic of the site of the planned use makes it impossible for
the user to meet the standards in this section, thereby creating a hardship, the
Director may, in the Director's discretion, upon application from the user, allow a
reduction in the number of spaces; provided, however, that the user shall pay the
City a one-time benefit assessment charge of and an annual maintenance fee for
each space the user is not able to provide under the standards in this section as
provided in the General Fee Ordinance. Additionally, there is hereby granted a
reduction in the number of required parking spaces of 25% for all construction or
uses, commenced in the Downtown Parking Area after July 1, 2004. The Downtown
Parking Area shall be designated on a map adopted by resolution of the Mayor and
Common Council.
The Property is in the Downtown Parking Area; therefore, a reduction in the number of spaces
of 25% is applied to the number of parking spaces required to be provided by the Applicant. This
reduction is shown on the attached design drawing showing the Property’s gross square footage
and parking calculations based on the existing Code provisions.
Section 164-158.1 A.(2) of the Zoning Ordinance provides:
The Director may grant such adjustments in cases where the strict compliance with
the requirements of this chapter would result in practical difficulty or unreasonable
hardship which has not been caused by the applicant. Nothing in this section is
intended to permit the Director to permit an adjustment to state or City requirements
that are intended to protect environmentally sensitive areas, such as streams, slopes.
wetlands, natural heritage areas or critical areas. This section does not authorize the
Director, under the guise of an adjustment, to change the use of land.
Argument:
Applicant’s research shows that while Maryland jurisdictions may be catching up as
regards updating local ordinances to address co-working space as a use and to correspondingly
address what are appropriate parking requirements, there are other jurisdictions the City can look
to as a guide in the interim for analyzing the appropriate metric to be applied in the instance case.
At least two (2) jurisdictions in Massachusetts have set parking requirements at zero for co-
working spaces. And other jurisdictions who still impose minimum parking requirements on co-
working spaces recognize the difference between a co-working space and an office space. Below
are Applicant’s key findings that support Applicant’s request that the parking requirement for the
Property be set to zero.
Massachusetts
The Newton, Massachusetts City Council’s Zoning and Planning Committee recently
approved an amendment to the city’s zoning ordinance to allow more variety in maker-space
businesses. The amendment establishes a definition for “business incubators,” explicitly allowing
for maker-spaces, start-ups, and co-working spaces. The final amendment does not include any
2

[PAGE 9]
parking requirements for these businesses, citing Brookline, Massachusetts as a city with a parallel
zero parking minimum for co-working spaces and similar businesses. Council members reasoned
that in order to be successful with these changes, the Council ought not to place too high of a
parking standard on the co-working businesses. They also sought to minimize traffic and avoid
placing an undue burden on the businesses. Bryan McGonigle, Making room for maker-spaces:
City Hall seeks to change ‘business incubator’ zoning, The Newton Beacon, (2024),
https://www.newtonbeacon.org/making-room-for-maker-spaces-city-hall-seeks-to-change-
business-incubator-zoning/. (Emphasis added). All of the factors that drove the decision in
Massachusetts exist in Westminster and for this Applicant specifically.
The Brookline, Massachusetts November 14, 2023 Zoning Amendment adopted a
definition for “shared workspace” as “The transfer of knowledge or skills related to the creative
enterprises through teaching, training, or research; organizations providing collaborative
workplace facilities and business planning, finance, mentoring, and other business or
administrative support services to creative enterprises; and multipurpose facilities dedicated to
providing space for multiple creative enterprises. The shared workspace & arts education category
includes arts centers, creative incubators, culinary incubators, design & fabrication centers,
fabrication laboratories, and their substantial equivalents.” 11-7.03 Definitions and Standards
Specific to Uses. This use has a parking minimum of 0 spots and a maximum of 1 spot per 600
square feet of gross floor area.
Colorado
The city of Fruita, Colorado recognizes that co-working spaces warrant less parking than
regular offices, which is reflected in the difference between the required parking spaces for offices
and that required for co-working spaces. Fruita, Colorado has a rate of required parking which
differentiates offices from co-working spaces. See Fruita, CO Land Use Code 17.39.30 A. which
provides, in pertinent part, that the parking requirement for co-working spaces are1.5 spaces per
1,000 square feet of gross floor area whereas it is 2.5 spaces for offices. The difference in the rate
is that co-working spaces have one spot less per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area than what is
required for offices.
New Jersey
The B-4 Zone in Millburn, New Jersey allows co-working spaces and the Zone does not
have a parking minimum. The amended ordinance removed parking requirements in this Zone
unless on-site parking already exists. The City of Millburn website indicated eliminating this
barrier will allow more permitted uses to avoid going to the planning board for parking variances.
The ordinance also provides for additional uses in the B-4 district, such as theaters and museums.
It also allows co-working/shared work spaces in the B-2 and above ground floor in the B-4. See
§DRZ-607.4 Waiver of Parking Requirements in the B-4 District. “In the B-4 District, where the
number of off-street parking spaces does not satisfy the requirements established under Section
607.2 herein and there is a change of occupancy or use but no physical expansion of the building,
there shall be no requirement to provide additional off-street parking spaces above what already
exists on the lot.” This is exactly what we have here with the Applicant Westminster Firehouse,
LLC– there is no expansion of the building and the building has not historically been subject to
parking requirements. See also, §DRZ-606.7 “Central Business B-4. B. Permitted Principal Uses.
Offices, including co-working or shared work space, but not on the street-floor level. For the
purposes of this restriction, travel agencies, opticians, local newspaper offices substantially
3

[PAGE 10]
servicing Township residents, and real estate sales and insurance offices shall not be considered
offices and are permitted to locate on the street-level floor.”
Here the Property, which has been historically used without the imposition of parking
requirements by the City, is improved by a building that almost entirely covers the site to the point
that meeting onsite parking requirements would not be possible. The building existed as such on
the Property when the Applicant acquired the Property. And finally, if the City were to deem the
co-working space the equivalent of Office: business, professional and financial and impose the
corresponding parking requirements, the only way for the Applicant to meet those parking
requirements would be to pay the fee in lieu (Section 164-111 D. of the Zoning Ordinance) of
actually providing the parking spaces and this fee in lieu would be so costly that the Applicant
would be unable to proceed with the co-working space, leaving yet another commercially viable
building in downtown Westminster used to less than capacity. The Property is located downtown
and many users could walk or bike to the co-working space. Fortunately, the drafters of the Code
provided for instances such as this by designating the Director of Community Planning and
Development with authority in Section 164-158.1 A.(2) of the Zoning Ordinance to “grant such
adjustments in cases where the strict compliance with the requirements of this chapter would result
in practical difficulty or unreasonable hardship which has not been caused by the applicant.” Here,
the Applicant has not caused any of the reasons why strict compliance with the requirements of
the Zoning Ordinance results in practical difficulty and unreasonable hardship for the Applicant.
Under the current Zoning Ordinance, if the Property is deemed a traditional office, and parking
is calculated per the attached drawing with commercial, office and storage, then the Property would
need to provide 56 parking spaces (if we include the first floor) based on gross square footage and
the applicable parking requirements. The co-working space would only operate on the second and
third floors so arguably the first floor square footage should be excluded from the calculation, but
for purposes of providing a baseline for the City to review this Application, the entire building
square footage has been inlcuded. See attached design drawing by Dean Robert Camlin, Architect,
showing the parking space tabulation, including the first floor which is occupied by commercial
tenants. Mr. Camlin has prepared a simplified site plan on behalf of the Applicant and during his
communications with the City has expressed the Applicant’s position that parking space
calculations would be more fairly calculated if based on the net floor area, meaning the area
actually used for office space and not including other areas, such as hallways, utility rooms and
such. Nevertheless, it remains the City’s position that the baseline parking tabulation must be
based on gross square footage and thus, we are faced with the Applicant being responsible to
provide 56 parking spaces or the fee in lieu thereof – the former results in practical difficulty for
the Applicant and the latter results in unreasonable hardship.
The parking space requirements for a co-working space should not be analogized to
traditional office space due to the fundamental differences in their use and occupancy rates.
Traditional office spaces typically have a higher and more consistent rate of occupancy, which
justifies the stringent parking space requirements. In a traditional office space, workers for a
business come to work in the office every day. In contrast, co-working spaces operate on a more
flexible model, often with a significantly reduced rate of occupancy at any given time. Users of a
co-working space may only use a space once a week, once a month or even less frequently. Their
use of the co-working space may only be periodically for meeting clients or meeting colleagues
face to face. The City of Westminster encourages businesses to operate in the City. This Applicant
has worked hard to bring this Property back up to par and by including this co-working space at
this Property will not only support the business of this Applicant, but also business in Westminster
4

[PAGE 11]
in general. Empty buildings can often be attributed to increases in crime, so encouraging business
use of properties furthers the general public welfare.
The reduced occupancy rate should be a critical factor in determining the appropriate
parking space requirements. The parking requirements for a co-working space should be set to zero
due to the fundamental differences in their use and occupancy rates compared to traditional office
spaces. The reduced rate of occupancy and the encouragement of the co-working business model
justify a waiver of parking requirements. This approach would be in harmony with the spirit and
intent of the zoning regulations and would not cause substantial injury to public health, safety, and
general welfare.
The Zoning Ordinance grants authority to the Director to make adjustments from the
parking requirements and this is just the type of factual circumstance when exercising this
authority is warranted. Applying the same parking space requirements as those for traditional
office spaces would result in an unreasonable hardship for the co-working space.
Conclusion
For the reasons set forth herein, the Applicant Westminster Firehouse, LLC respectfully
requests that an Administrative Adjustment be made reducing the required parking spaces to be
provided to zero, or, in the alternative, to materially reduce the number of required parking spaces.
Respectfully submitted,
DULANY LEAHY CURTIS & BROPHY LLP
/s/ Stephanie R. Brophy
Stephanie R. Brophy
S:\WPDOCS\- GENERAL FILES\W\Westminster Firehouse, LLC\10812-0004 - re Coworking Space\Application for Administrative
Adjustment\Westminster Firehouse. App for Admin Adjust.Continuation Sheet.docx
5

[PAGE 12]
ATTACHMENT TO APPLICATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT - WESTMINSTER FIREHOUSE, LLC - 66 EAST MAIN STREET, WESTMINSTER, MARYLAND 21157
Area
8224 SF
UP
Area Area
4850 SF 4850 SF
Area
6495 SF
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
1 2 3
1/16" = 1'-0" 1/16" = 1'-0" 1/16" = 1'-0"
16' 8' 0' 16' 32'
PARKING TABULATION: ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENT REQUEST:(pending)
PARKING LOADS BY BUILDING USE (§ 164-111): The parking calculations for this property (retail, storage & office) are based on gross floor area. SCALE : 1/16" = 1'-0"
This simplified method inludes floor area occupied by circulation, restrooms, utility rooms, and
A. Offices, Professional and Business: wall thicknesses--none of which are devoted to the specific space use. A more fair method
NOTE: THE OFFICE OF DEAN ROBERT CAMLIN & ASSOC., INC. ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE
• 1 space / 250 sf of floor area or 2 per office, whichever is greater. would omit these extraneous areas.
ACCURACY NOR FOR THE COMPLETENESS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS AS SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS.
B. Commercial Establishments: This urban site is almost completely covered by the building; there is no practical on-site area ALL FEATURES AND DIMENSIONS SHOULD BE VERIFIED BY CONTRACTOR PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK.
• 1 space / 250 sf of floor area used for retail sales, trade or merchandising, and 1 / 300 sf used for office, for parking. Similarly, there is very little space available for landscaping.
storage or other purposes.
REV. DESCRIPTION DATE
PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION:
C. Storage:
I certify that these documents were
• 1 per 1-1/2 employees on a major shift, plus 1 per company vehicle and piece of mobile equipment, plus
prepared or approved by me, and that
1 for visitors use per 25 employees on the maximum shift, or 1 space per 1,000 sf of floor area I am a duly licensed architect under
the laws of the State of Maryland,
License No. 7243-A.
PARKING COMPUTATION: Expiration date: 8-21-2026.
A. 1st Floor Commercial Uses:
• 6,495 sf commercial space / 250 sf = 25.98 →26 Parking Spaces. DATE/TIME ISSUED: 7/31/2024 3:48:45 PM
DRAWING TITLE SCALE:
B. 1st Floor Storage Use: Floor Area Calculations 1/16" = 1'-0"
• 8,224 sf storage / 1,000 sf = 8.2 →9 Parking Spaces. DATE:
FOR DESIGN 07/31/2024
C. 2nd & 3rd Floor Offices: REVIEW ONLY PROJECT NAME PROJ. NO.
• 4,850 sf office space / 250 = 19.4 →20 Parking Spaces Old Firehouse Offices 23053
• 4,850 sf office space / 250 = 19.4 →20 Parking Spaces DRAWN BY:
NOT FOR DRC
Initial parking spaces required = 75 parking spaces CONSTRUCTION CHECKED BY:
25% reduction for Downtown = -19 spaces Dean Robert DRC
Total Spaces Required = 56 Parking spaces CamlinARCHITECT DRAWING NO.
& Assoc., Inc.
C-002
8 N. Court St. Suite 2 Westminster, Maryland 21157
410-876-6900 FAX: 410-876-9268
dcamlin@drcamlin.com www.drcamlin.com
C:\Users\DeanCamlin\OneDrive - Dean Robert Camlin & Associates\Company Documents\CAD Files\2353 - Old
Firehouse\Old Firehouse-rev1(2025).rvt

[PAGE 13]
CaITseE M# AAA –-2 W4-e0s4t minster Mission BBQ
To: Mark A. Depo, Director of Community Planning and Development
From: Andrea Gerhard, Comprehensive Planner
Hearing Date: August 20, 2024
Subject: Administrative Adjustment Case AA 24-04 Staff Memo
Re: An application by Dean Camlin on behalf of Westminster Firehouse LLC., the
property owner, requesting approval of an Administrative Adjustment for 66 E
Main Street Westminster, Maryland 21157 (SDAT# 07-006667) to Zoning
Ordinance Sections 164-111.B. and 164-111.C. to allow a reduction in the number
of required parking spaces. In addition, the applicant is requesting that the
required parking calculation based on usable space not gross area. Lastly, the
applicant is asking for relief from the required landscaping required on-site. The
applicant is requesting the administrative adjustments for a retail office use in the
existing building on-site. The Administrative Adjustment application is requesting
a reduction of 52 parking spaces.
I. Background
On June 5, 2024, an application was submitted to the Department of Community Planning
and Development for an administrative adjustment at 66 E Main Street, Westminster,
Maryland 21157 (the “Property”). The Property is zoned C-C Central Commerce Zone and
governed under the City of Westminster Zoning Ordinance (Zoning Ordinance). The
Maryland State Department of Assessments and Taxation (SDAT) online records indicate
the property is owned by C & C Westminster, LLC.
The Property contains a three-story 18,813 square feet building. The Applicant is
proposing to renovate the second and third floors of 66 E Main Street for offices. This
application is only taking into account 10,972 square feet for the commercial/offices uses
on the first, second and third floors. This Administrative Adjustment does not address the
7,841 square foot social hall that is located at the rear of the property. This Property was
previously the location of the City of Westminster Firehall. Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance
Article VIIIA, Section 164-45.2.A.(20), “offices, professional and business” is a permitted
uses in the C-C zoning district.

[PAGE 14]
II. Notice
The property was posted with notice of the pendency of the application and the adjoining
property owners were notified of the application by first class mail as to the date, time,
and place of the Administrative Adjustment Case AA 23-04 hearing. These notices were
provided to meet the notification requirements set forth in the Section IV of the
Administrative Adjustment Procedures, as contained in Resolution No. R-03-9. On August
16, 2024, a copy of the agenda was posted on the City’s website.
III. Authorization
Pursuant to Maryland Code Annotated, Land Use Article, Division 1, Single Jurisdiction
Planning and Zoning, Title 4, Zoning, Subtitle 2, Designation and Adoption, § 4-205 and
Section 164-158.1 A. (1), of the City Zoning Ordinance,“…the Planning Director is
authorized to grant administrative adjustments from the following requirements
contained in this chapter:”
(a) Local height requirements;
(b) Local setback requirements;
(c) Local bulk requirements;
(d) Local parking requirements;
(e) Local loading, dimensional, or area requirements; or
(f) Similar local requirements.
IV. Process
On July 14, 2003, the Mayor and Common Council adopted Resolution R-03-9 that
contains Administrative Adjustment Procedures (Section 164-158.1 B.). Under section
three D. of the procedures, “an applicant should understand that an administrative
adjustment is an exception to the general requirements imposed under Chapter 164 and
that its obtention is not a matter of right. An applicant bears the burden of persuasion
and proof to justify the granting of an administrative adjustment”. Under section five of
the procedures, the Director may consider the factors set forth in Section 164-161.A.(3),
originally related to the BZA variance requests. The Director shall not grant an
administrative adjustment if to do so would violate the spirit and intent of the
requirements or cause or would be likely to cause substantial injury to the public health,
safety and general welfare.
V. Proposal
Simplified Site Plan SS-24-11 was submitted also on June 5, 2024 to establish the uses that
are happening within the three floors located at 66 E Main Street. The applicant has
submitted Water and Sewer Allocation Application WSA-24-19 for this project.

[PAGE 15]
In evaluating the requested Administrative Adjustment, the Director may consider the
factors set forth in Section 164-161A.(3), as follows:
1. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the
Property in question or to the intended use of the Property that do not apply
generally to other properties or classes of uses in the same zone;
Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section 164-111, the total number of required off-
street (on-site) parking spaces is 75, (1st Floor 6,495 sf commercial uses / 250 sf = 26
(rounded); 1st Floor Storage 8,224 sf / 1,000 sf = 9 (rounded) 2nd Floor 4,850 sf office
space / 250 sf = 20 (rounded); 3rd Floor 4,850 sf office space / 250 sf = 20 (rounded);
75 @ 25% reduction of 19 spaces = 56). There are 4 existing on-site parking spaces.
The Applicant is requesting a reduction of 52 required parking spaces (56 required
spaces – 4 provided spaces = requested 52 space reduction) as the property is
located in the Westminster Historic District, the primary structure at the property
was built in 1895, the property has operated as a public or commercial use in the
past without providing additional on-site parking spaces, there are City owned
parking lots in proximity to the property, and due to the size of the lot and the
existing development on-site, there is very limited open space available making it
impossible to provide the required number of parking spaces on-site.
2. Such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial
Property rights possessed by other properties in the same zone and in the same
vicinity; and
Many properties in downtown Westminster experience the same limitations
(developed property, older existing structures, operated uses in the past without
providing required on-site parking, limited to no addition open space to provide on-
site parking) when it comes to provide required on-site parking facilities.
Furthermore, downtown Westminster has several public parking facilities, with a
few in close proximity to the property, and on-street parking along Main Street.
3. The authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent
properties and will not materially impair the purpose of this chapter or the public
interest.
There will be no detriment to adjacent properties due to these Administrative
Adjustment. This is an already existing building in downtown Westminster that has
been operating commercially for decades.
VI. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law
Staff recommends that the Director consider the following as findings of fact and
conclusions of law:

[PAGE 16]
▪ The administrative adjustments are being requested to allow the reasonable and
allowed uses in the C-C Central Commerce Zone to operate at the property.
▪ The property is located in the Westminster Historic District and the primary structure
at the property was built in 1895.
▪ The property has operated as both public and commercial uses in the past without
providing additional on-site parking spaces.
▪ There are City owned parking lots in proximity to the property.
▪ There are four existing on-site parking spaces being provided.
▪ It is not unusual for properties in the Historic Downtown to provide required on-site
parking spaces, requiring a request to reduce the number of parking spaces.
▪ The authorizing of the administrative adjustments will not be of substantial detriment
to adjacent properties and will not materially impair the purpose of this chapter or the
public interest.
VII. Decision
Under section five of the procedures, “subsequent to the conduct of a hearing, the
Director shall decide the issue(s) raised by the application. The decision shall be in writing
and provide a brief explanation of the law and facts which support it. In evaluating the
application, the Director may consider the factors set forth in Section 164-161 A(3 ). In
making a decision, the Director may grant the administrative adjustment in cases where
the strict compliance with Chapter 164 would result in practical difficulty or unreasonable
hardship which has not been caused by the applicant. The Director shall not grant an
administrative adjustment if to do so would violate the spirit and intent of the
requirements or cause or would be likely to cause substantial injury to the public health,
safety and general welfare.
VIII. Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Administrative Adjustment, per § 164-158.1
of the City Code.
IX. Attachments
1. Property Location Aerial Map
2. Administrative Adjustment AA 23-04 Application

[PAGE 17]
Property Location

[PAGE 20]
CaITseE M# A AA -–2 4W-0e5stminster Mission BBQ
To: Mark A. Depo, Director of Community Planning and Development
From: Andrea Gerhard, Comprehensive Planner
Hearing Date: August 20, 2024
Subject: Administrative Adjustment Case AA 24-05 Staff Memo
Re: An application by Marta Coursey, property owner, requesting approval of
an Administrative Adjustment for Lot 4 Meadow Branch Industrial Park
(SDAT#07-151039)toZoningOrdinanceSection164-115.(D)(3)toallowfor
a relief of one foot from the required 25 feet of drive aisle width in the
parking lot. The administrative adjustment is associated with a site
development plan S-18-0037 to construct an indoor dog training and event
facility.
I. Background
OnJuly26,2024,anapplicationwassubmittedtotheDepartmentofCommunityPlanning
and Development for an administrative adjustment for Lot 4 Meadow Branch Industrial
Park (SDAT# 07-151039) (the “Property”). The Property is zoned I-R Restricted Industrial
ZoneandgovernedundertheCityofWestminsterZoningOrdinance(ZoningOrdinance).
The Maryland State Department of Assessments and Taxation (SDAT) online records
indicate the property is owned by C & C Westminster, LLC.
The Property is currently vacant. The Applicant is proposing a 40,000 sf Dog Training
facility. Pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Article X, Section 164-54.(L), “Indoor dog training
and event facilities” is a special exception use in the I-R zoning district. The property
received Special Exception approval from the Board of Zoning Appeals on April 6, 2018.
II. Notice
Thepropertywaspostedwithnoticeofthependencyoftheapplicationandtheadjoining
property owners were notified of the application by first class mail as to the date, time,
and place of the Administrative Adjustment Case AA 23-04 hearing. These noticeswere
provided to meet the notification requirements set forth in the Section IV of the
AdministrativeAdjustmentProcedures,ascontainedinResolutionNo.R-03-9.OnJuly12
2024, a copy of the agenda was posted on the City’s website.

[PAGE 21]
III. Authorization
Pursuant to Maryland Code Annotated, Land Use Article, Division 1, Single Jurisdiction
Planning and Zoning, Title 4, Zoning, Subtitle 2, Designation and Adoption, § 4-205 and
Section 164-158.1 A. (1), of the City Zoning Ordinance,“…the Planning Director is
authorized to grant administrative adjustments from the following requirements
contained in this chapter:”
(a) Local height requirements;
(b) Local setback requirements;
(c) Local bulk requirements;
(d) Local parking requirements;
(e) Local loading, dimensional, or area requirements; or
(f) Similar local requirements.
IV. Process
On July 14, 2003, the Mayor and Common Council adopted Resolution R-03-9 that
contains Administrative Adjustment Procedures (Section 164-158.1 B.). Under section
three D. of the procedures, “an applicant should understand that an administrative
adjustmentisanexceptiontothegeneralrequirementsimposedunderChapter164and
that its obtention is not a matter of right. An applicant bears the burden of persuasion
and proof to justify the granting of an administrative adjustment”. Under section five of
theprocedures,theDirectormayconsiderthefactorssetforthinSection164-161.A.(3),
originally related to the BZA variance requests. The Director shall not grant an
administrative adjustment if to do so would violate the spirit and intent of the
requirementsorcauseorwouldbelikelytocausesubstantialinjurytothepublichealth,
safety and general welfare.
V. Proposal
Site Development Plan S-18-0037 was resubmitted on February 26, 2024. The applicant
has submitted Water and Sewer Allocation Application WSA-20-12 for this project.
In evaluating the requested Administrative Adjustment, the Director may consider the
factors set forth in Section 164-161A.(3), as follows:
1. Thereareexceptionalorextraordinarycircumstancesorconditionsapplyingtothe
Property in question or to the intended use of the Property that do not apply
generally to other properties or classes of uses in the same zone;
PursuanttoZoningOrdinanceSection164-115D.(3),thewidthofthedriveaislesin
throughout the proposed parking lot for S-18-0037 are less than the required 25’
width. The dimensions of the parking space, 9’ x 18’, meet the dimension

[PAGE 22]
requirementsoftheZoningOrdinance.The25’driveaislewidthrequirementalittle
more of a requirement than what is typically used as the industry standard. It is
commonpracticefortheparkinglotanddriveaislestoequal60feet.Thissiteplan
offers parking spaces that are 9’ x 18’ with a 24’ drive aisle (18’ + 18’ + 24’ =60”).
The plan meets the 60’ industry standard requirement.
2. Such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial
Property rights possessed by other properties in the same zone and in the same
vicinity; and
This is a property located in the Industrial Restricted Zone. There are other
properties in the I-R that operate in this way. In order to reach all of the required
stormwater requirements, setbacks and to reach the desired number of parking
spaces the adjustment of the drive aisles 1 foot would be necessary.
3. The authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent
properties and will not materially impair the purpose of this chapter or the public
interest.
There will be no detriment to adjacent properties due to these Administrative
Adjustment. This property is currently surrounded by vacant land and Shelter
Systems which is an already established industrial user.
VI. Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law
Staff recommends that the Director consider the following as findings of fact and
conclusions of law:
 The administrative adjustment that is being requested reflects an industry standard
and common practice.
 The property is located in an Industrial Zone
 The property is surrounded by both vacant land and Shelter Systems, an established
industrial user.
 Theauthorizingoftheadministrativeadjustmentswillnotbeofsubstantialdetriment
toadjacentpropertiesandwillnotmateriallyimpairthepurposeofthischapterorthe
public interest.
VII. Decision
Under section five of the procedures, “subsequent to the conduct of a hearing, the
Directorshalldecidetheissue(s)raisedbytheapplication.Thedecisionshallbeinwriting
and provide a brief explanation of the law and facts which support it. In evaluating the
application, the Director may consider the factors set forth in Section 164-161 A(3 ). In
making a decision, the Director may grant the administrative adjustment in cases where
thestrictcompliancewithChapter164wouldresultinpracticaldifficultyorunreasonable
hardship which has not been caused by the applicant. The Director shall not grant an

[PAGE 23]
administrative adjustment if to do so would violate the spirit and intent of
therequirements or cause or would be likely to cause substantial injury to the public
health, safety and general welfare.
VIII. Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the proposed Administrative Adjustment, per § 164-
158.1 of the City Code.
Attachments
 Site Location Aerial Map

[PAGE 24]
Property Location