Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bypass Deferral topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council introduces bypass development deferral; Mountain Brook representative asks for exemption
Summary
Council introduced a draft deferral that would pause development along the proposed southern bypass until right‑of‑way easements are secured. A representative for the Mountain Brook project asked council to exempt that proposal, saying its plans already accommodate the bypass.
The Taneytown City Council introduced a draft development deferral on Feb. 4 targeting projects on the proposed southern bypass corridor, part of an administration strategy to pressure landowners and accelerate easement acquisition.
The draft deferral would pause processing of certain projects along the corridor unless a developer signs a Development Agreement Restricting (DAR) construction until the city secures easements. Staff said legal has reviewed the draft’s form and that Exhibit A — the corridor map — is currently a placeholder to be refined before adoption.
At the public‑comment period, Kelly Schaefer Miller representing Ward Communities — the contract purchaser of the Mountain Brook property — urged council to exempt Mountain Brook from the deferral because, she said, the project’s plans already provide for the bypass across the entirety of the site.
"Their plans show a design for the bypass and they would construct the bypass over the entirety of their property," Miller said, asking that the council consider an exemption so the Mountain Brook proposal can continue to advance while still accommodating the bypass alignment.
City staff responded that the deferral is an introduction to start a larger conversation: draft language includes an exemption pathway through DARs for projects that commit to delay certain construction until easements are secured. The mayor and staff said the goal is to apply pressure along the corridor to obtain easements and reassure residents that the administration is serious about moving the project forward.
Staff noted the draft’s Exhibit A will be updated and that additional meetings, legal review and at least one public hearing will follow before any adoption vote. Developers and affected property owners can expect further outreach as staff refines the deferral’s boundaries and exemption rules.
Council took no final vote on the deferral at the workshop; staff was directed to revise the map and return with refined legal language.
