Developers seeking to build a nine-story condominium at Hunt Valley Towne Center avoided scrutiny of the county?s top planning advisory group earlier this month, choosing to leave their plans? fate to the county?s appelate board.
Their story illustrates what the county?s development approval process can often be: a maze.
Months ago, the county?s development review committee approved Virginia-based Wood Partner?s 198-unit condominium proposal as a minor refinement to the site?s original 1979 plans as the now-demolished Hunt Valley Mall. That allowed them to skirt most of the county?s usual and lengthy review process.
But when the county?s planning board asked them to furnish more detailed drawings, firm officials withdrew their application, said Jeff Long, deputy director of the county planning office.
“If the planning board had considered it, that would indicate acceptance that this proposal is something beyond a refinement,” Long said. “We agreed mutually it would not be placed on the planning board?s agenda.”
Residents concerned with traffic congestion and the building?s proposed height ? six stories of condominiums atop a three-story parking garage ? agree the proposal is more than just a minor modification. They?ve filed a complaint with the county board of appeals, arguing the proposal should have to go through the county?s entire review process.
Developers have been working to alleviate residents? fears, however, and the strategy appears to be working, they said.
“The level of our concern is abated somewhat, but we?re still waiting for more information,” said Richard Compton, president of the neighboring Broadmead Retirement Community. “We?re concerned about traffic, size scope and the impacts on our campus.”
Arnold Jablon, an attorney representing Wood Partners, said it?s his understanding county planning executives agreed with his clients that the proposal is indeed only a slight change to original plans. He said they are subject to regulations existing in 1978, and he believes planners agreed they have satisfied them.
The process, he conceeded, is complex. “The bottom line is, it?s all going to be argued out before the board of appeals,” Jablon said.
WHAT?S NEXT
» The Baltimore County Board of Appeals is scheduled to hear the case at 10 a.m. July 11.
