Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Review Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers ask for county relief on review fees for Taneytown projects; commissioners defer for more study
Summary
Developers and county planning staff told Carroll County commissioners on April 17 that two Taneytown projects produce near-final plans before county review, prompting a request to reduce what developers called duplicative county review fees.
Developers and county planning staff told Carroll County commissioners on April 17 that two residential projects in Taneytown have already undergone extensive town review before the county’s review begins, creating what developers describe as duplicative county fees for concept and preliminary phases.
Linda Alexander, a project engineer with CLSI, said the town’s review and the town planning commission’s approval leave the documents approximately 85% complete by the time they reach county staff, so the county’s concept and preliminary reviews often examine nearly final material. She asked the board to consider fee relief for the two projects — Garnet Ridge and Mountain Brook — because the county’s review in those cases aligns with the town’s later-stage reviews.
County planning staff explained the three-phase model used countywide: concept (rough, ~35% plans), preliminary (~65% plans) and final (constructible plans). The county charges at each phase to offset review costs. Staff also noted that municipalities vary: Taneytown conducts some engineering reviews in-house and the county does not duplicate components already performed by the town (for example, engineering review that Taneytown pays for is not charged by the county).
After discussion, the board did not take immediate action but asked staff to return with more information and placed the matter on the next meeting agenda for further consideration.
Why it matters: County development-review fees contribute to the county’s cost recovery for staff time. Developers argue that where a municipality’s review advances beyond the town’s concept stage before county review, duplicative fees create a financial burden and inefficiency. Commissioners signaled interest in examining the mechanics and possible narrow relief for the two projects rather than a blanket policy change.
Clarification from staff: Planning staff confirmed they do not charge for reviews the municipality performs (for example, when Taneytown’s engineer handles stormwater and roads the county does not add that component). For the two projects in question, the county will review the situation further and report back.
Ending: Commissioners asked staff to bring back a recommendation and additional calculations at the next regular meeting; no fee reductions or exemptions were decided on April 17.
