Hearing Examiner Long Reach Village Center Redevelopment – March 13, 2026

The Howard County Hearing Examiner, Joyce Nichols, held a hybrid hearing on Friday, March 13, 2026, at 10:00 AM, to consider Petition ZB 1132M filed by Columbia Concepts, LLC for an Amended Preliminary Development Plan to permit Major Village Center Redevelopment at the Long Reach Village Center (8775 Cloudleap Court, Columbia, MD 21045). The hearing included preliminary motions, petitioner's witness testimony, public testimony in support, and was continued to March 18, 2026, at 10:00 AM.

Preliminary Matters

• Petitioner (Owen Jarvis) moved to schedule a second hearing date two weeks from March 13 to allow more time for public testimony, citing a letter from the Long Reach Community Association requesting the delay. Hearing Examiner Nichols declined to grant the request immediately, citing election-year time constraints but stated she would try to accommodate citizens.
• Mr. Hurrowitz (representing the Long Reach Community Association) raised concerns that the petition was incomplete due to missing corporate disclosures and financial contributions (e.g., an affidavit lacking contributions from Victor Co./Cookjoy, and insufficient explanation of HRD Development Management's connection to other entities). He noted similar issues were pending in another case (Howard Research Development). Hearing Examiner Nichols directed Mr. Hurrowitz to articulate specific irregularities to Mr. Jarvis, and Mr. Jarvis to either correct or justify them by the next hearing. Zoning Council (Nate Foreman) interjected that failure to fully comply with disclosure provisions does not affect the evidentiary purpose or application completeness but is handled separately.

Discussion Items – Petitioner's Case

Petitioner's Opening Statement (Owen Jarvis)

Mr. Jarvis outlined a timeline: County Council declared Long Reach Village Center blighted in 2014 and acquired 7.71 acres in 2014–2015. A prior redevelopment effort by Orchard Development was approved in 2018 (adding 315 dwelling units) but withdrawn in 2019. In 2023, the county issued a new RFP; Columbia Concepts was the sole respondent. County Council approved the urban renewal plan and sale of county property in February 2025. Community engagement sessions were held in April–June 2025. The Design Advisory Panel (DAP) recommended addressing James Rouse's vision and circulation plan. The Planning Board unanimously recommended approval in December 2025. The petition seeks to add 190 dwelling units (total 505) to the previously approved 315. Four exhibits were entered into evidence (timeline and three county resolutions).

Witness 1 – Eric McWilliams (Bowler Engineering – Civil/Site Design)

• Testified about existing site conditions: the village center is underutilized, lacks a sense of place, has no residential component, and the grocery store is undersized. The plan aims to create a mixed-use community hub with apartments, attached single-family, age-restricted housing, a multi-sports complex, parks, and a community arts center.
• The plan preserves open space, improves stormwater management (quality-based vs. quantity-based), and adds streetscaping. The DAP requested a comprehensive circulation plan and understanding of Rouse's vision.
• Cross-examination (Mr. Hurrowitz): Acknowledged the church is within the village center boundary but not included in the development plan; the plan provides parking for the church on CA property. Confirmed the 190-unit increase is in addition to the 315 previously approved. The PDP redline amendment shows a total of 505 dwelling units, which is below the maximum density of 2.5 FAR for New Town Zoning.

Witness 2 – Patrick McGowan (KGD Architecture – Architect)

• Designed the master plan: community engagement sessions (Q2–Q3 2025) informed the layout. The proposed use plan includes a community building (arts/community space) at the Tamar Drive frontage to draw visitors. The sports complex (volleyball, basketball, pickleball) would be phased later. Building heights are kept below maximums to fit with surrounding context.
• Phasing: Phase 1 – new street network (existing community building may remain); Phase 2 – center commercial pad and community pad; Phase 3 – senior building; Phase 4 – sports complex; Phase 5 – townhomes. Phasing is flexible.
• Open spaces include pocket plazas, a cross-functional park, and a ceremonial entry plaza for concerts/gatherings. The plan incorporates native plantings and sustainable design.
• Cross-examination (Mr. Hurrowitz): The community building is a focal point, not full profit, and would host arts/studio spaces. The 505-unit number balances economic viability with scale. Retail is intended to be local/small-scale to distinguish from nearby big-box stores. The sports complex is for-profit and would be privately operated, not by CA or county. A berm and trees would mitigate noise/emissions from the adjacent gas station. The townhomes would be owner-occupied; the remaining 450 units are rental (including age-restricted). No demographic studies were conducted beyond community meeting feedback. The BGE towers to the east were considered as backdrop.

Witness 3 – Katie Wagner (Grove Slade – Transportation/Traffic Engineer)

• Prepared Traffic Impact Study (Exhibit 7), Circulation Study (Exhibit 8), and Parking Study (Exhibit 9).
• Traffic: The study analyzed intersections within 1.5 miles; all intersections are projected to operate at Level of Service C or better (county standard D). The project will generate 364 net new AM peak trips, 475 PM peak, and 459 Saturday peak. A new traffic signal is warranted at Foreland Garth and Tamar Drive; a right-in/right-out access is proposed at the main entrance (no left turns). The Tamar Complete Streets project (road diet with bike lanes) is assumed.
• Circulation: Pedestrian/bike connections include sidewalks, shared-use paths, and crosswalks. Direct connection to Elkhorn Branch Trail is proposed. Pickup/drop-off zones are located near building entrances.
• Parking: The project provides 1,007 total spaces (833 garage, 102 surface, 72 on-street). Parking demand was calculated using ITE, ULI shared parking methodology, and Howard County ratios, with reductions for multimodal access (10% non-auto mode shift) and captive market (5% internal capture). The parking supply is deemed adequate.
• Cross-examination (Zoning Council Foreman): The traffic study credits existing approved uses (315 units), not current underutilized uses. The parking study assumes shared parking; the church's parking needs were not analyzed as it is not part of the application. The bus stops on Tamar will remain. The parking reduction is justified by mixed-use and multimodal context.

Witness 4 – Brian Kim (Columbia Concepts – Managing Director)

• Testified as a Howard County resident and developer. The team was attracted by the opportunity to revitalize a key asset. Community engagement was central; changes were made based on feedback (e.g., non-slip walkways, lighting). The plan modernizes Rouse's vision with higher density and mixed-use to create a walkable, gathering place.
• The current decline resulted from Safeway's departure and inability to attract a new anchor. The mixed-use approach (residential, retail, sports) diversifies foot traffic. The sports complex targets unmet demand for youth travel sports (basketball, volleyball, pickleball) with a for-profit model.
• Cross-examination (Mr. Hurrowitz): No formal market study was done for the sports complex; the decision was based on personal experience and community feedback. No partnerships with county or CA were considered. The church's existing easements and parking agreements will be honored. The development's boundaries do not include the church or BGE right-of-way; no changes to village center boundaries are requested.

Public Comments & Testimony

Supporters

1. Erica Chavaria (Founder/Executive Director, Columbia Community Care) – Spoke in strong support, stating the redevelopment would provide a resource-rich community hub, benefiting families she serves (hunger relief, youth programs). She emphasized the importance of investment in neighborhoods and praised Columbia Concepts' inclusive approach.
2. Phil Sherer (Baltimoreans for People-Oriented Places) – Supported the project, highlighting the reduction of parking minimums and walkable design. He suggested additional bicycle connectivity between the Elkhorn Branch Trail and the site via a lower-grade path (per the Bikeable Baltimore Region Plan).
3. Brian Shepter (Administration of County Executive Ball) – Testified in support on behalf of the Ball administration. He summarized the decade-long effort to redevelop Long Reach, crediting Columbia Concepts' vision (townhomes, multifamily, senior housing, grocery, sports complex). He noted the urban renewal plan was approved by County Council in February 2025, and the plan delivers needed community amenities.

Undeclared Person of Record

• An individual (name not provided) requested not to testify on March 13, stating they were not prepared, and asked to speak at the continued hearing. Hearing Examiner Nichols continued the hearing to March 18, 2026, at 10:00 AM, and granted that request.

Key Outcomes

• Petitioner's exhibits 1–10 were accepted into evidence.
• Corporate disclosure issues were deferred: Mr. Hurrowitz must specify perceived irregularities; Mr. Jarvis may correct or justify by the next hearing.
• Hearing continued to Wednesday, March 18, 2026, at 10:00 AM to accommodate further public testimony and continuation of the case. Zoning Council's presentation and any opposition will be heard at that time.
• All parties were reminded to register online for testimony; the next hearing will follow the same order of presentation.