Design Review Panel endorses Pikesville Armory redevelopment concept, approves parking garage design with conditions

Baltimore County’s Design Review Panel voted to support the architectural and site concept for the Pikesville Armory redevelopment’s arrival boulevard and a structured parking garage at 112–116 Slade Avenue, while asking the design team to refine several key details before administrative sign-off.

The developer’s team — led in the presentation by Peter DiPrinzio of Seawall and land-use attorney Chris Mudd of Venable — described the larger Armory redevelopment as an intergenerational destination for recreation, arts and culture. The portion before the panel focused on the new arrival boulevard, pedestrian and bicycle connections and a proposed two-bay, roughly 400-space parking garage located on the west side of the Armory campus.

“The whole idea for this project came out of actually a public input session,” Peter DiPrinzio told the panel, noting a 2016 governor’s commission process and more than 1,500 community inputs that shaped the overall vision. Chris Mudd told the panel that county legislation facilitating the redevelopment “actually requires the placement of structured parking here to accommodate the use.”

Design highlights presented to the panel included: a new curb cut and arrival boulevard off Milford Mill Road that provides a vehicular approach and pedestrian boulevard to the Armory’s historic facade; a 400-car, two-bay structured garage with a park-on ramp and stair-tower feature intended to signal the garage entry; a perforated-metal/finned screen on primary facades that the team said will balance natural ventilation and daylighting with visual screening; a solar-panel canopy on the western bay of the roof; and landscape proposals that use urban-hardy street trees and native plantings.

The Department of Planning read a staff report referencing the Comprehensive Manual of Development Policies, the Pikesville Revitalization Action Plan, the Pikesville Commercial Revitalization Guidelines, the Baltimore County Landscape Manual and Bill 98-23. Staff recommended approval of site and architectural form subject to conditions including: showing proposed solar panels on the upper level, labeling light fixtures on elevations, providing a circulation diagram for pedestrian and vehicle flows (including bike lanes), labeling bike racks and seating, and submitting a detailed landscape plan with a plant legend.

Public comments at the meeting were broadly supportive but urged refinements. Denise Watkins, speaking as a Sudbrook Park resident, praised the project but asked for stronger pedestrian priority along the arrival boulevard and better wayfinding to transit. Susan Williams of the Pine Hill community and Tom Faketa of the Pikesville Revitalization Committee both endorsed the project and urged the team to take advantage of the garage facade as a public-art opportunity rather than a typical precast face. Williams requested larger planting areas to allow combined stormwater features and tree canopy.

Panel discussion focused on five recurring topics: alignment between the garage and the event lawn to the north, the design density and orientation of the perforated fins on the garage facades, stronger pedestrian and bicycle connections to the south/Slade Avenue, the opportunity to use permeable paving and other stormwater best practices, and reconsidering portions of the surface parking layout so the on-grade stalls do not fragment the pedestrian experience. Several panelists also asked the team to consider refined facade treatments so the garage reads well from both Slade Avenue and from nearby residential streets.

Scott Walters moved that the panel recommend approval with conditions; Mr. Kerjekar seconded. The motion listed the considerations above and also asked that the design team implement the recommendations of the Department of Planning staff. The motion carried with no recorded opposition. The panel’s approval was a design-level endorsement subject to further refinement; the team will pursue the required front-yard setback variance and subsequent development approvals.

Clarifying details recorded during the meeting: the garage was presented as a roughly 400-space, two-bay structure with a park-on ramp; the solar panel array was described as being located on the western bay of the garage roof; the proposal requires a variance for front-yard setback to align the garage face with existing buildings along Slade Avenue; two existing buildings at 116 and 122 Slade and the Mersen building were noted for demolition in the site plans shown to the panel. The Department of Planning’s staff report included multiple required submittals (lighting and signage details, circulation diagrams, bike parking labeling and a detailed landscape legend).

Next steps: the panel’s approval is a design recommendation; the applicant will incorporate the panel and staff conditions into revised drawings for administrative review and will pursue a public hearing for the zoning variance required for the garage setback and then file for development approvals.