The Carroll County Board of Zoning Appeals unanimously ruled that a revised proposal for Nell’s Acres LLC does not amount to a “substantial change” from the site plan the board approved about a decade earlier.

Clark R. Schaeffer, representing Nell’s Acres LLC, presented a redesigned layout that reduces the previously approved higher‑density condominium product to approximately 130 single‑family attached (townhouse) units intended as an age‑restricted community. Schaeffer told the board the new layout uses approximately the same road access and similar ground coverage and likely has less impervious surface than the previously approved plan.

Board members deliberated on whether their original approval was of the general land use or of detailed site plans. Several members said the board’s role is to approve broad land‑use characteristics and that detailed technical review occurs later through the Planning Commission and site‑plan processes. One member summarized, noting the new plan reduced unit counts and did not increase density or the scope of impacts.

The board also heard that any subsequent development would be subject to current site‑plan review standards. Schaeffer acknowledged that, even if the board found no substantial change, the developer must proceed through site‑plan review, which would require bringing the project to current standards for traffic, stormwater management, State Highway Administration access, architectural review, and forest conservation.

After discussion, a board member moved that the proposed layout does not constitute a substantial change requiring new Board of Zoning Appeals approval. Another member seconded; the motion passed 4-0. The board chair said this determination does not exempt the project from future regulatory review or from meeting modern standards.

During the presentation, Schaeffer described earlier approvals as showing roughly 312 units (he also referenced documents that reduced the count to 296 in some prior site plans) and said the revised proposal would be about 130 units. The transcript records the community as intended to remain age‑restricted (55 and older). The board recorded that the reduction in units would likely lower traffic, water and sewer demand compared with the original plan, but staff and the Planning Commission will examine those impacts during the formal site‑plan review.