Centreville council approves public-works agreement for Hillside Liquors, selects middle trail alignment

The Centreville Town Council approved Resolution 01-2025, a public‑works agreement for the Hillside Liquors and Deli project, and directed the agreement use the option B trail alignment shown in the project exhibits.

The vote followed a presentation by Ryan Showalter of DMS and Associates, who said the applicant is willing to grant any of three public‑trail easement alignments the town prefers and that the State Highway Administration district office reviewed the proposed access and told the applicant the access could be constructed as designed. “We really don't care which easement alignment the town prefers, and our proposal would be that the public works agreement is executed,” Showalter said.

Council members and several commenters expressed concern about the project's location, traffic and proximity to parkland and floodplain. One council member said, “I don't like this project,” and several others described reservations about siting a liquor store near the park and in an area subject to flooding. Another council member warned about vehicle speeds coming down the hill toward the site and the effect on trucks turning into the property, saying larger vehicles slowing or stopping could create traffic conflicts.

Planning and permit context: the project has been reviewed by the planning commission and the packet included a planning commission record and a public‑works agreement draft. The applicant told council that the State Highway Administration had reviewed the proposed access and was willing to coordinate on a sidewalk/connection from MD 213 into the proposed trail. The packet also includes an application for the water and sewer allocation, which staff said would be acted on after final site approval is granted.

The council debated three alternative trail alignments submitted by the applicant. The council president and others favored the more straightforward alignment that terminates at the southeast corner; others preferred an alignment that preserves the option to connect adjacent properties in the middle of the parcel. The council ultimately approved the agreement using the “option B” (middle) alignment as part of the resolution.

Vote and procedural notes: council approved Resolution 01-2025 in a roll‑call process. The roll call, as recorded in the meeting transcript, included a mix of affirmative and negative remarks and at least one council member indicating they would “pass and vote later” during the initial roll call. The transcript does not provide a signed, itemized final numerical tally attached to the public minutes; the resolution outcome on the meeting record was approval and the public‑works agreement will be executed with the selected alignment.

Next steps: with the public‑works agreement approved, the applicant will continue final site plan work and water/sewer allocation will be processed after final approval. Council members said they expect the applicant and town staff to coordinate with the State Highway Administration on the sidewalk/trail connection.

Background: the project has been before the planning commission previously and generated discussion around trail connectivity and architecture. The planning commission recommended conditions including additional odor‑control and tree/landscape measures for other projects considered at the same meeting; council members referenced that broader planning work when discussing the Hillside project.

Provenance: the council discussion and approval appear in the meeting transcript beginning with the applicant presentation and trail/alignment exhibits and concluding with the motion and roll call on Resolution 01-2025.