Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Howard County Planning Board Approves Accessibility Variance and Timber Woods Subdivision – May 21, 2026

County Council & Boards — Thursday, May 21, 2026

BodyHoward County, Maryland

SessionCounty Council & Boards

DateThursday, May 21, 2026

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 48:55

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it

0:17

So with that, uh I do not have any chair items this evening.

0:20

Uh but do we have any uh executive secretary executive secretary items?

0:26

Uh Ms.

0:26

Kendall.

0:27

No, there are no items this evening.

0:29

And I'm Mary Kendall, Deputy Director, uh, filling in for Linda Eisenberg as executive secretary tonight.

0:34

All right, thank you so much.

0:35

Thank you.

0:37

All right, so with that, we'll move on to CSDP 26001 uh Village of Oakland Mills.

0:44

And we have Derek Jones with us for that.

0:55

Good evening.

0:55

I'm Derek Jones of the Department of Planning and Zoning.

0:59

Tonight's meeting subject is for CSDP 26001, Village of Oakland Mills.

1:06

For the property addressed at 5491 Sleeping Dog Lane, the applicant is Karen Mosell, who has been authorized to represent the property owner.

1:18

The purpose of this meeting is for planning board evaluation and approval of a concept site plan in accordance with section 1250 G of the zoning regulations and the final development plan FTP 58A for the Village of Oakland Mills, Section 1 Area 4.

1:36

The request is to reduce the required required side yard setback from five feet to three feet to accommodate a residential building addition for an elevator.

1:48

The property was legally posted with one official planning board poster, public meeting sign, excuse me, and the notice was certified by DPZ pursuant to legal requirements.

2:06

It is surrounded by single family residential lots zone NT, which is Newtown.

2:17

The addition of a 41 square foot elevator structure on the right side of a single family residential home.

2:32

The graphic site plan on the screen illustrates the proposed elevator addition as the red arrow points to the addition circled in red.

2:50

From a front view and a side view perspective.

3:08

So as part of this evaluation, the board must consider this this request in terms of the final development plan criteria and for conformance.

3:17

First, permitted land uses.

3:19

All lots within single family detached medium density land uses, land use areas shall be used only for single family detached medium density residential uses.

3:35

Next parking, two parking spaces required.

4:01

Five foot from any property line.

4:03

This is why we're here.

4:35

Okay, planning board criteria under section 125 OG4D of the zoning regulation states that the required adjustment to the bulk requirements shall be granted.

4:45

If the planning board finds that the adjustment will not alter the character of the neighborhood or area in which the property is located, will not impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent properties and will not be detrimental to the public welfare.

5:00

Secondly, the adjustment is needed due to practical difficulties or necessary hardships which arise and compliance strictly with the final development plan and or results in better design than would be allowed by straight compliance with the development criteria.

5:16

As stated, the petitioner is requesting an adjustment from the five-foot site yard setback requirement of three feet for the existing dwelling to accommodate a proposed elevator addition for accessibility improvements.

5:59

The addition is designed to be compatible with the existing character of the home and neighborhood, exterior materials, including the siding and concrete base will match the existing residents, and a new roof line will be slightly lower than the existing roof to reduce visual impact.

6:17

The addition should remain entirely within the subject property and does not encroach upon adjacent lots, utilities or right-a-ways.

6:25

The petitioner indicates that the proposed location of the elevator shaft is the only feasible placement for this addition.

6:32

And finally, the applicant did receive written approval from the Oakland Mills Community Association Residential Architectural Committee on March 19th.

6:44

And lastly, additional regulatory compliance, stormwater manager, stormwater management, excuse me.

6:51

This property is exempt from stonewater management.

6:53

Disturbance will not exceed 5,000 square feet.

7:01

It is exempt per section 161202B1i.

7:07

And also exempt from landscaping.

7:09

There is no increase in the number of residential units.

7:14

So in summary, um the planning board has the tasks to consider the it should say com uh concept site development plan and approve, approve with conditions or deny the plan according to section 125 OG of the zoning regulations and for conformance with the approved final development plan FDP 58A.

7:35

Thank you.

7:39

Thanks so much.

7:42

Any questions for staff at this point?

7:53

Anybody here.

7:56

All right.

7:56

So that if we can move on to the petitioners presentation, yeah, my loud is your own.

8:39

Make sure the microphone is agreeing level.

8:45

Sure.

8:45

My name is Sarah Conover, and the address is 13464 Clarksville Pike Highland.

8:53

If you can turn that up, this mic on you hear me now.

9:03

Thank you.

9:08

Is that better?

9:11

Thank you.

9:14

Okay.

9:19

All right.

9:21

All right.

9:22

Hello, everyone.

9:23

Thank you for your time this evening.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Zoning And Land Use█████████████████████████████████████████████66%

Procedural██████████████21%

Engineering And Infrastructure████6%

Community Engagement██3%

Disability Rights█2%

Historic Preservation█2%

Summary of Proceedings

Howard County Planning Board Meeting – May 21, 2026

The Howard County Planning Board met on May 21, 2026, in the Banneker Room of the George Howard Building, Ellicott City, Maryland. The board considered two items: a concept site plan for an accessibility elevator addition requiring a setback variance, and a preliminary equivalent sketch plan subject to scenic road review. Both items were approved.

Chair Items and Executive Secretary Items

No chair items were reported.
Mary Kendall, Deputy Director, serving as executive secretary in place of Linda Eisenberg, reported no executive secretary items.

CSDP-26-001 – Karen Mosel (Village of Oakland Mills)

Staff presented the request for a concept site development plan for the property at 5491 Sleeping Dog Lane. The applicant sought to reduce the required side yard setback from five feet to three feet (a two-foot encroachment) to accommodate a 41-square-foot elevator addition for accessibility improvements.
Planning staff reviewed the criteria under Section 125.0.G.4.d, including whether the adjustment would alter neighborhood character, impair adjacent properties, or be detrimental to public welfare, and whether practical difficulties or better design justified the request.
The petitioner's representative, Sarah Conover, stated the two-foot encroachment is the minimum relief necessary to support aging in place and documented safety concerns. She explained that the left side of the home contains a 20-foot drainage and utility easement and would require removal of bedroom space; the back would require modifications to windows, HVAC equipment, and a deck, and would limit elevator access to the primary suite. The proposed right-side location connects directly to living spaces on both levels with minimal disturbance.
The elevator is sized 36 inches by 54 inches to meet safety requirements. The applicant received written approval from the Oakland Mills Community Association Residential Architectural Committee on March 19, 2026.
The board approved the concept site plan. The motion passed with three votes in favor; one board member experienced audio issues and was not part of the initial vote.

SP-24-003 – Timber Woods (Scenic Road Review)

Staff presented the preliminary equivalent sketch plan for Timber Woods, a subdivision creating five new single-family lots, incorporating one existing lot, and creating two open space lots (lots 7 and 8). The property fronts on two scenic roads: College Avenue and Newcut Road.
The review was conducted under Section 16.125(c)(1) of the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations, focusing on access and buffers. No new access points are proposed; the subdivision will use an existing private right-of-way and driveway. The forested buffer along Newcut Road will be preserved through a forest conservation easement dedicated to Howard County.
Applicant's attorney Brian Shepter argued that the proposal preserves the scenic character of both roads by using existing access, making no changes to Newcut Road frontage, and minimizing visual and physical impacts along College Avenue. Engineer Rob Bogle presented a visual assessment, including photos and an animation, showing that the proposed homes would not be visible from College Avenue due to topography and retained vegetation. A stormwater management facility is required under Ellicott City flood-related criteria and would be tucked into the slope.
A board member questioned sight lines and planned improvements to the existing driveway. The applicant noted that the access location was chosen for safety and a flatter grade, and that site distance was evaluated. The applicant also mentioned community outreach, including walking the neighborhood and preserving a neighbor's important tree.
One board member initially raised a potential recusal because of past employment with Timmins Group, the former engineer, but it was confirmed that the project had moved to Xite Engineering more than six months prior, so no conflict existed.
The board approved the scenic road review for SP-24-003 as presented, with a unanimous vote.

Key Outcomes

CSDP-26-001 was approved, allowing a 2-foot encroachment into the side yard setback for the elevator addition.
SP-24-003 was approved with respect to scenic road access and buffer criteria.
No public testimony was offered for either item.

Meeting Transcript

So with that, uh I do not have any chair items this evening. Uh but do we have any uh executive secretary executive secretary items? Uh Ms. Kendall. No, there are no items this evening. And I'm Mary Kendall, Deputy Director, uh, filling in for Linda Eisenberg as executive secretary tonight. All right, thank you so much. Thank you. All right, so with that, we'll move on to CSDP 26001 uh Village of Oakland Mills. And we have Derek Jones with us for that. Good evening. I'm Derek Jones of the Department of Planning and Zoning. Tonight's meeting subject is for CSDP 26001, Village of Oakland Mills. For the property addressed at 5491 Sleeping Dog Lane, the applicant is Karen Mosell, who has been authorized to represent the property owner. The purpose of this meeting is for planning board evaluation and approval of a concept site plan in accordance with section 1250 G of the zoning regulations and the final development plan FTP 58A for the Village of Oakland Mills, Section 1 Area 4. The request is to reduce the required required side yard setback from five feet to three feet to accommodate a residential building addition for an elevator. The property was legally posted with one official planning board poster, public meeting sign, excuse me, and the notice was certified by DPZ pursuant to legal requirements. It is surrounded by single family residential lots zone NT, which is Newtown. The addition of a 41 square foot elevator structure on the right side of a single family residential home. The graphic site plan on the screen illustrates the proposed elevator addition as the red arrow points to the addition circled in red. From a front view and a side view perspective. So as part of this evaluation, the board must consider this this request in terms of the final development plan criteria and for conformance. First, permitted land uses. All lots within single family detached medium density land uses, land use areas shall be used only for single family detached medium density residential uses. Next parking, two parking spaces required. Five foot from any property line. This is why we're here. Okay, planning board criteria under section 125 OG4D of the zoning regulation states that the required adjustment to the bulk requirements shall be granted. If the planning board finds that the adjustment will not alter the character of the neighborhood or area in which the property is located, will not impair the appropriate use or development of adjacent properties and will not be detrimental to the public welfare. Secondly, the adjustment is needed due to practical difficulties or necessary hardships which arise and compliance strictly with the final development plan and or results in better design than would be allowed by straight compliance with the development criteria. As stated, the petitioner is requesting an adjustment from the five-foot site yard setback requirement of three feet for the existing dwelling to accommodate a proposed elevator addition for accessibility improvements. The addition is designed to be compatible with the existing character of the home and neighborhood, exterior materials, including the siding and concrete base will match the existing residents, and a new roof line will be slightly lower than the existing roof to reduce visual impact. The addition should remain entirely within the subject property and does not encroach upon adjacent lots, utilities or right-a-ways. The petitioner indicates that the proposed location of the elevator shaft is the only feasible placement for this addition. And finally, the applicant did receive written approval from the Oakland Mills Community Association Residential Architectural Committee on March 19th. And lastly, additional regulatory compliance, stormwater manager, stormwater management, excuse me. This property is exempt from stonewater management. Disturbance will not exceed 5,000 square feet. It is exempt per section 161202B1i. And also exempt from landscaping. There is no increase in the number of residential units. So in summary, um the planning board has the tasks to consider the it should say com uh concept site development plan and approve, approve with conditions or deny the plan according to section 125 OG of the zoning regulations and for conformance with the approved final development plan FDP 58A. Thank you. Thanks so much. Any questions for staff at this point? Anybody here. All right. So that if we can move on to the petitioners presentation, yeah, my loud is your own. Make sure the microphone is agreeing level. Sure.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com