At a public hearing on June 19, various county agencies and representatives of developer Paragon Outlet Partners spoke to an administrative law judge about the Paragon at Nottingham Ridge outlet mall proposed in White Marsh along MD-7/Philadelphia Road near I-95.
The hearing room was packed with over 100 people, a mix of supporters and opponents of the project, as Administrative Law Judge John E. Beverungen heard the case.
Both sides were legally represented as well, with Paragon’s lawyer facing off against lawyers hired by White Marsh Mall and by two private citizens whose suit will allegedly be joined by unspecified community associations, attorney G. Macy Nelson claimed. The first day of the hearing featured testimony from county agencies who reviewed various aspects of the proposal and by Paragon witnesses. The project’s opponents will call their own witnesses when the hearing resumes on July 23.
The county departments of zoning and environmental protection and sustainability did not have any objections to the plan as submitted. The representative from the Office of Real Estate Compliance said that his department had initial concerns about the project regarding the width of the sidewalks, but that they had been addressed in the most recent filing. Jane Tansey from the Department of Recreation and Parks noted that the proposed 250 apartment units would require the plan to meet county open space requirements. But Paragon has opted to instead pay a $30,000 fee to waive this requirement, as allowed by county law.
Only the Department of Planning raised substantial objections to the plan. Representative Lloyd Moxley revealed that the school impact studies suggested that the plan would put Vincent Farms Elementary School at approximately 117 percent capacity, higher than the 115 percent capacity the county allows. But other schools in the area are not as full and could ameliorate this situation by accepting overflow students, he said.
Moxley explained that the bigger issue was the 75-foot sign tower proposed on the site’s west side. “We could not recommend conceptual signage that matched what’s being proposed here,” he declared. “The height of the tower is a factor, but the intensity of the sign is more of an issue. This would be a commercial enterprise with a joint identification component that doesn’t exist anywhere in the county.”
The sign in question is a tower that would feature the names of the retail tenants in the outlet mall along with Paragon’s own logo. Exact details of how the sign would be laid out would vary depending on the lease terms agreed to, but Moxley said the combination of height and function lead to the decision. His office recommended a reduction to 50 feet and no joint identification component, similar to the other signs already in White Marsh.
“We feel this tower is a very important part of the plan,” said Salam LaHood, the architect who designed the proposed center. He noted that the tower is an architectural component built into the outlets’ design rather than the standard piling sign that many retailers use and that it would sit next to a parking garage, so it would not appear as high in comparison to its surroundings. Judge Beverungen will make the ultimate decision on whether to allow the sign as proposed.
Issues related to the outlets’ potential impact on traffic in the area were also discussed. Wes Guckert, president and CEO of Traffic Group, Inc., presented a report his company made modeling the traffic effects the project may have. Baltimore County divides roads into Level of Services which are impacted by specific intersections. It grades these levels of service and marks grades D, E and F on its yearly Basic Service Map. Guckert said that the Paragon property is located in a Level of Service C or better (since it is not marked in the map), although surrounding intersections are Grade D. Paragon plans to improve one intersection by widening the lanes and installing a right turn lane.
Guckert also said that his firm recommends that a ramp from northbound MD-7 to eastbound MD-43 be constructed if the plan was approved, but did not specify whether Paragon or Baltimore County should be expected to build this ramp. “We think it will enhance traffic operations to the area,” he said. If the ramp is not built, the Level of Service will drop to an F, which the county deems unacceptable, he said. Guckert also pointed out that the outlet mall will generate the greatest amount of traffic on Saturday, when the impacts would be the least severe because of the reduction in commuters on the road. However, even with this ramp the intersection of Ebenezer Road and MD-7 could fall to grade F.
Judge Beverungen will hear testimony from the rest of Paragon’s witnesses and from community members when the hearings resume. “This is an amendment to a plan that was approved years ago, so that makes things exceptionally difficult,” he stated.
This PUD plan under review is an amendment to a PUD approved by the County Council in 2008. The revision calls for a 560,000-square-foot outlet mall paired with 60,000 square feet of additional retail space, including restaurants and a hotel, and 250 apartment units. There are also currently two office buildings on the property, which are owned by Corporate Office Properties Trust (COPT). They would be upgraded to coincide with the new development even though COPT would retain ownership of them. The original plan featured 1,250 apartment units and 1.2 million square feet of office space. Paragon’s lawyers noted that that plan could still go forward if the amended version is not approved.
Some community leaders believe that those 1,250 apartments would have a greater traffic impact than the 250 in the current plan. Proponents also claim that the outlet mall will bring 1,600 jobs to the area and bring in $180 million in sales each year on top of the initial $100 million investment to build it.
Opponents question the impact on other local retailers like White Marsh Mall and The Avenue, the effect of new traffic congestion and patterns on the community and the lack of community input on the project.
No comments:
Post a Comment