Design Review Panel approves Taco Bell rebuild on Eastern Boulevard with conditions

Baltimore County’s Design Review Panel on June 11 approved a proposal to remove an aging Taco Bell and an adjacent single‑family house at 700 Eastern Boulevard and replace them with a new 2,700‑square‑foot Taco Bell restaurant, subject to conditions in the Department of Planning staff report and pending zoning variances.

Why it matters: The project covers roughly two parcels that together make up much of the 700 block of Eastern Boulevard and sits on a commercial corridor directly abutting residential zoning behind the site. Panel members and staff focused on circulation, buffering for nearby homes, dumpster and lighting details, and the applicant’s request for a parking variance.

The developer, represented by Dino Lafiandra of Essex Investors LLC, said the new building would have indoor seating for about 40 people and an outdoor seating area. Civil engineer Brian Cleary described the existing site layout and how the redesign would change circulation: "The double row parking out front of the building has 20 spaces, and then there's an additional 13 on the west side of the property. I consider those 30 spaces to be essentially useless since you have to pass through the drive through lane to get to the building." Cleary said the proposal keeps access from Eastern Boulevard and North Stewart Street and adds a dual‑lane drive‑through to improve queuing.

Planning staff recommended approval of the site and form but listed conditions in the staff report for landscape, lighting and signage: label all proposed tree removals and specimen trees; provide details of the outdoor seating area; indicate whether the existing fence will remain and provide enhanced landscaping and a fence along the unnamed alley to screen adjacent residences; provide dumpster enclosure details and reduce lights adjacent to residences to 18 feet, among other items.

Nearby resident David Sigolem, owner of 4 Hartman Avenue, told the panel he worried about nighttime noise from the drive‑through and early‑morning trash pickup and asked whether the fence and dumpster would be sited and built to mitigate noise and pests. Brian Cleary and the applicant team said the plan calls for a continuous 6‑foot privacy fence along the rear property line, plus an evergreen planting buffer of roughly 30 trees, and that the new masonry dumpster enclosure will be larger and set farther from the rear property line. Cleary said the proposed dumpster would be about 20 feet from the property line, compared with about 8 feet for the existing dumpster.

Panel discussion emphasized compliance with the staff report and practicality of existing access locations. Panel members and staff discussed whether to move the Stewart Street access north to reduce conflict; the applicant said they preferred to retain the existing accesses but could consider adjustments.

Motion and disposition: Panel member Om Kerjekar moved to approve the project conditioned on the Planning Department staff comments; the motion was seconded by Raj Sharma (recorded on the transcript as "Sharma"). The motion passed by a 4‑1 vote, with Donald Khan recorded as opposed. The approval is subject to the conditions enumerated in the staff report and to the outcome of required zoning variances.

What’s next: The applicant will pursue required permits and variances (including parking and signage relief) and must return to county review if changes are required by those proceedings.