Developer advised to move 12 of 66 planned units Balto. Co. officials' report may force project cuts

August 10, 1996|By Jay Apperson | Jay Apperson,SUN STAFF

Plans for a 66-unit development of back-to-back duplexes off Reisterstown's historic Main Street likely would have to be scaled back under recommendations issued yesterday by Baltimore County officials.

In a study on the proposed Goldsborough Manor's compatibility with neighboring homes and businesses, the county planning office called for 12 units to be moved farther from the development's borders -- a change that planner Carol McEvoy said probably would mean the elimination of some of the proposed units.

Howard Brown, project developer, said he was particularly unhappy about the recommendation to double the setbacks required for eight proposed units bordering homes on Glyndon Drive.

"That's the most difficult one to deal with, because that would cost us units and would take away from the whole character of the neighborhood," Brown said. He said he did not know immediately how many units would have to be eliminated under the recommendations.

The report was prepared at the direction of county hearing officer Lawrence E. Schmidt, who in June delayed approval of the project. Schmidt said the project of "neo-traditional" houses met zoning requirements, but described the proposal as unprecedented in Baltimore County in ordering the compatibility study.

The Northwest Reisterstown Community Association and a neighboring businessman, who oppose the plan's density on the 9-acre tract, had argued the proposal violated zoning regulations.

Brown said yesterday the planning office went beyond the hearing officer's request in conducting a compatibility study of the entire parcel. He said he had expected it to address only the small part zoned for fewer than four units per acre because such studies are required for that zoning class.

The developer also complained that the planning office seemed to be hedging on its previous support for the project.

No date was set yesterday for resumption of Schmidt's hearing on the proposal. A zoning office docket clerk said the hearing might not resume until October -- when the County Council is scheduled to consider the community association's request for more restrictive zoning for the property.

Brown acknowledged he was concerned about the timing and said, "We'll see if we can get a hearing set earlier."

Pub Date: 8/10/96

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.