Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bypass Corridor Deferral topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer urges Taneytown council not to introduce bypass deferral as council moves forward
Summary
Kelly Schafer Miller, representing Ward Communities, asked Taneytown council not to introduce a development-deferral ordinance for the proposed bypass corridor, saying the Mountain Brook plan already reserves right-of-way and that the town lacks a timeline or funding for the bypass. Council members debated easements and introduced the ordinance for further review.
Kelly Schafer Miller, speaking on behalf of Ward Communities, told the Taneytown City Council on Feb. 10 that the developer’s Mountain Brook subdivision plan already reserves the right-of-way needed for the town’s long-discussed bypass and urged council members not to introduce a development-deferral ordinance.
"Everything that was spoken about at last meeting matches our plan," Miller said, identifying herself and giving a Westminster address, and warning that "this deferral...seems on its face like a targeted attempt to stop the Ward project." She added that the town has no timeline or identified funding to complete the bypass shown on the ordinance’s attached map.
The presiding officer and several council members said the introduction is the start of a public process. The presiding officer said the measure is intended to give the town time to secure easements needed to build the bypass and to avoid exacerbating congestion and safety problems in town. "The introduction is the start of a discussion," the presiding officer said, noting that introduction does not mean immediate adoption or an emergency action.
Council members split on the question of timing. One council member who supported introduction said the planning commission had concluded there was a "very slim chance" the necessary flow-serve easements would come through without action, and that introducing the measure could help the town secure easements and coordinate construction. Another council member said without easements or funding the deferral could unfairly halt projects that include construction of the bypass segment.
After debate, Council voted to introduce the bypass corridor development deferral ordinance so staff and the town attorney can continue legal review and the public can comment at later hearings. The council’s vote was by voice as part of the meeting’s formal agenda procedure.
What happens next: staff and legal counsel will continue to refine the ordinance language and the council will consider public hearings and additional information (including easement status and any funding plans) before any adoption vote.
Why it matters: The bypass has been discussed for decades as a way to relieve congestion; the ordinance could delay or condition development in the corridor while the town seeks easements and plans, with potential impacts on developers, nearby property owners and town traffic patterns.
