Bel Air Planning Commission approves Phase 3 site plan for Bel Air Marketplace, with conditions on traffic, landscaping and architecture

The Bel Air Planning Commission unanimously approved a conditioned preliminary site plan and related approvals July 17 for Phase 3 of the Bel Air Marketplace, the mixed-use redevelopment of the former Hartford Mall property at 600 Baltimore Pike.

The vote covers approval of a Phase 3 site plan, a landscape plan and the special-development determination required by town code; the commission’s action allows construction of an 82,924-square-foot commercial phase that is part of a multi-phase redevelopment that also includes previously approved residential work.

The approval follows detailed staff review and a multi-hour hearing in which planning staff and the applicant’s team discussed pedestrian connections, truck routing, crosswalk design, dumpster screening, landscaping islands and building materials. Kevin Small, planning staff, told the commission, “I won't go through this whole staff report because you've seen it before,” but highlighted outstanding technical items, including coordination with the Maryland State Highway Administration and final traffic comments from town and county consultants. Christopher Mudd, attorney for the applicant, said the team was prepared “to implement the red lines as shown on the plan,” and Matt Robinson, representing the property owner SJC, said the owner hires local professional management to maintain the site.

Why it matters: The Phase 3 approval permits demolition of part of the existing mall and construction that will reshape a high‑visibility commercial corridor. The commission attached conditions intended to protect pedestrian safety, coordinate utilities and public‑safety monitoring, and preserve landscape screening as the project phases into later development.

Most important facts

- What was approved: Preliminary site plan for Phase 3 of the Bel Air Marketplace (commercial buildings including a grocer), a landscape plan, and the special‑development determination required by town code. The planning commission approved the applicant’s option without adding red brick to the grocer building’s façade.

- What the site will include: The applicant requested site and landscape approval for 82,924 square feet of new commercial space as part of the mixed‑use center. Planning staff said the redevelopment will demolish about 172,228 square feet (mostly the Macy’s building) and that the total proposed building area after work will be about 407,033 square feet. The existing Hartford Mall building area was cited as 496,337 square feet and approved residential units for the site total 249 units (previously approved).

- Conditions: The commission’s approval includes multiple standard and project‑specific conditions: final site drawings incorporating staff, DPW and architectural consultant comments; coordination of utilities and Maryland American Water comments prior to utility construction approvals; submittal of the required public amenity contribution (minimum $30,000) and performance security; coordination with the Bel Air Police Department on security and surveillance measures across the wider mall development; and installation of concrete pedestrian crosswalk panels, signed paddle signs and lighted/flashing stop signs at the two middle intersections of the north‑south connector drive aisle to DPW specifications. The approval also requires the applicant to secure conditional traffic impact analysis sign‑off from the town, Harford County and the Maryland SHA for off‑site improvements.

Discussion highlights and unresolved items

- Pedestrian safety and traffic calming: Commissioners pressed the applicant and staff on how to improve pedestrian safety at internal crossings and at the eastern entrance from Baltimore Pike. The applicant proposed a combination of narrower drive aisles (28 feet reduced to 24 feet through the pedestrian realm), stamped/colored paving at crosswalks, stop control, and the possibility of rumble strips or paddle signs. Several commissioners expressed skepticism about elevated crosswalks because the grocery tenant (referred to repeatedly as the “grocer that shall not be named”) and its truck routing requirements oppose raised crosswalks for loading/damage reasons. The commission required concrete crosswalk panels and lighted stop signs; commissioners declined to mandate raised crosswalks.

- Truck route and deliveries: The applicant presented a truck‑turning analysis showing a required truck route from the south/Route 1 side (a WB‑67 tractor‑trailer). Deliveries for the grocery tenant were described as occurring mainly between 7 and 10 a.m.; commissioners and staff noted potential queuing/stacking concerns at the northern left‑turn on Bolton Street and discussed signage to prohibit truck access at the problematic entrance.

- Landscaping and service areas: Staff requested additional interior landscaping and clarified several refuse/recycling enclosure details. The applicant removed a previously shown dumpster adjacent to Building 600 and consolidated service into the central enclosure behind Building 300; the applicant said tenants typically transport trash to that shared service yard and that the grocer’s lease limits certain food uses. Commissioners debated whether to require small “diamond” planting islands in parking aisles (used to add trees without losing parking) and whether those islands are practical where stormwater filter systems are installed. The final landscape approval required the refuse/recycling enclosure details on sheet LPO‑2 and otherwise left some island and tree sizing items to final landscape plan submittal; commissioners removed a mandatory requirement for five interior diamond islands and declined to require elevated crosswalks.

- Architecture and materials: The applicant submitted two façade options: one without red brick and one showing red‑brick accents on end caps. The retailer occupying Building 100 (the grocer) has approved a non‑brick façade; the applicant asked the commission to allow the no‑brick option for that building because tenant approval is part of the grocer’s national design specification. Commissioners by vote accepted the no‑brick option for Building 100 and approved an architectural condition requiring final elevations to include elements shown on the perspective renderings and to incorporate the architectural consultant’s comments; they also requested that the view from Route 24 closely resemble the artist’s renderings.

Votes at a glance

- Consistency determination under Town Code §165‑19 (comprehensive plan consistency): motion made and seconded; APPROVED. Recorded votes: Jim — aye; Peter — aye; Bill — aye; Don — aye; Lois Kissinger Kelly (chair) — aye.

- Preliminary Site Plan for Phase 3 (conditioned approval, option without brick on Building 100): motion made and seconded; APPROVED. Recorded votes (planning commission): Jim — aye; Peter — aye; Bill — aye; Don — aye; Lois Kissinger Kelly (chair) — aye.

- Landscape plan (conditioned approval; final details to be provided prior to building permit): motion made and seconded; APPROVED. The record reflects debate and at least one amendment attempt concerning diamond islands and elevated crosswalks; the final approval required refuse/recycling enclosure details and left some internal tree/island locations to the final landscape plan and staff review. Recorded votes on the final landscape plan: Jim — aye; Peter — aye; Bill — aye; Don — aye; Lois Kissinger Kelly (chair) — aye.

Next steps and outstanding approvals

The town and applicant must complete several items before building permits and final use and occupancy permits are issued: obtain conditional sign‑off on the traffic impact analysis from the town (and coordinate comments from Harford County and the Maryland SHA), resolve Maryland American Water Company comments for utilities, record required development agreements and reciprocal easements across the mixed‑use center, submit final landscape and architectural drawings that reflect the conditions, provide the cultural‑arts public amenity documentation and performance bond, and coordinate security/surveillance plans with the Bel Air Police Department.

What the commission emphasized: Much of the commission’s conditions are technical and intended to ensure safe pedestrian crossings, workable truck access for the grocer, consistent architectural presentation from Route 24, and coordinated utilities and public‑safety surveillance across the larger mall redevelopment. Several commissioners said they expect additional detailed review of phase‑4 materials and connections when that phase is submitted.

Quotes (selected)

Lois Kissinger Kelly, chair, Bel Air Planning Commission: “I would like to call the meeting of the Bel Air Planning Commission to order… the agenda for this evening is a review of a project continued from June 5 for a special development site plan and landscape plan applicable for an 82,924 square foot shopping center … to be located at 600 Baltimore Pike.”

Kevin Small, Planning staff: “I won't go through this whole staff report because you've seen it before,” and he highlighted the need for SHA review and traffic‑related comments.

Christopher Mudd, counsel for the applicant (Venable): “We're fully prepared to put in everything and to respond and address the comments that [staff] provided.”

Matt Robinson, SJC (owner representative): “We hire professional management for all of our properties… they're ultimately the ones that are maintaining the areas.”

Ending

The commission’s approval allows the applicant to move to final engineering and permitting work for Phase 3 subject to the conditions the commission placed on traffic, utilities, landscaping, architecture and public‑safety coordination. Several technical items remain under review by outside agencies (Maryland SHA, Harford County and Maryland American Water), and the planning commission signaled it expects to revisit later‑phase connectivity and architecture when Phase 4 plans are submitted.