Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Updates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Board member flags maintenance funding, equine legacy area study, and solar law changes
Summary
Board member Stephen (Steve) Lafferty updated the Planning Board about capital budget attention to long-term maintenance, an ongoing study and a Council resolution on an equine legacy area, a Board of Appeals hearing on a CZMP parcel mapping dispute, and recent state-level changes affecting local solar siting authority.
Board member Stephen Lafferty used the May 15 meeting to summarize several substantive planning issues affecting Baltimore County.
On capital budgeting, Lafferty said recent county budget discussions showed “an increased focus of funding and actually be clear line items in the budget for long term maintenance,” and credited work the Planning Board had done earlier in the year for helping to raise the issue. He described building systems failures as an example, saying, “For instance, our… chiller went out. People had to go home… these long term maintenance issues are real.”
Lafferty also discussed an item from the county master plan that called for a study of a potential equine legacy area. He said the concept had been advanced by a Valley planning council study and that Councilman Katz had introduced a resolution to establish such an area. Lafferty advised continuing study to assess viability and implications for future development requests.
On a separate zoning map matter, Lafferty described a four-hour hearing before the Board of Appeals concerning a comprehensive zoning map process (CZMP) dispute in the Lock Raven/Joppa Road area. He said three parcels owned by the same owner were at issue after the council and board considered only two parcels; the Planning Board had rejected the council’s request to add the third parcel as a technical drafting error. He thanked Chris Weaver for explanatory materials on the CZMP process and said the Board of Appeals would act later.
On solar policy, Lafferty summarized recent state legislation and its effect on local authority: he said the state “essentially further preempted local government decisions on the placement of solar facilities,” restricting counties’ ability to deny facilities except on certain tier 1 and tier 2 properties and allowing limited solar on priority preservation agricultural areas (up to 5 percent of those areas). He noted that “in Baltimore County, that’s still 7,000 acres.” He said these changes will alter how the county approaches solar development and that staff planned to present briefings and updates at future board meetings.
Lafferty concluded by noting planned briefings on the master plan and other topics and invited board members to request additional clarifications from staff in future meetings.
