Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Petitioner seeks conditional‑use approval for semi‑detached homes on Race Road; hearing closed, decision pending
Summary
On Oct. 23 the Howard County hearing examiner heard two conditional‑use applications from Racetrack Road 2, LLC to permit semi‑detached (two‑family) dwellings on Race Road in Elkridge; the petitioner’s engineer testified the projects meet R12 zoning criteria and county plan policies, noted a planned easement for an existing driveway and disputed staff findings about visibility to nearby historic properties; the hearings were concluded and decisions are pending.
On the evening of Oct. 23, the Howard County hearing examiner took testimony in two conditional‑use requests from Racetrack Road 2, LLC seeking permission to build semi‑detached two‑family dwellings on parcels along Race Road in Elkridge.
Jamie Fraser, vice president of development for H and H Rock Companies, testified as the petitioner’s expert witness. Fraser said the subject properties are in the R12 zoning district, that one lot exceeds the 18,000‑square‑foot minimum needed to authorize two semi‑detached units on a single lot, and that the petitioner’s conditional‑use plans are consistent with county policies encouraging “missing middle” housing. "I do," Fraser said when asked whether the proposals align with policy DN1 and implementing action 3 of the county plan.
The petitioner introduced a conditional‑use site plan and a set of photographic exhibits (labeled 2a–2f) showing nearby duplexes on Railroad Avenue, Old Washington Road, Anderson Avenue and Main Street to demonstrate visual and use compatibility with the neighborhood. Counsel moved to admit the conditional‑use plan and photos into evidence; the examiner admitted them.
Fraser testified the proposed units will comply with zoning standards: the buildings will be no taller than 34 feet, each unit footprint was stated in testimony (as reported in the record), and parking meets or exceeds the code requirement (three spaces proposed where 2.5 spaces per unit is the standard). He said ingress and egress sight distances are adequate and that stormwater measures (likely dry wells) will be provided. "We have 3," Fraser said of parking provided per unit where 2.5 spaces is required.
During cross‑examination and examination by the presiding official, a previously existing driveway that crosses Lot 3 was discussed. A project representative explained the petitioner purchased both parcels and intends to preserve the existing driveway as an "existing condition," provide an easement to formalize access for the neighboring property, and design the new development to avoid impacting that driveway. "We'll give them an easement... We'll leave this driveway untouched," the presenter said.
The parties also addressed nearby historic properties, including the Davis and Hemphill shop (now occupied by Hamill Builders) and the Dixon Brick House. The staff report stated the subject parcels are not visible from those historic resources; Fraser said he was not sure whether the historic site would be visible in winter when leaves are down and acknowledged he had not recently inspected the line of sight in leaf‑off conditions. "I don't know if you can see it in the wintertime," Fraser said, adding that he does not believe the proposed buildings will diminish the historic properties' character even if partially visible.
Fraser confirmed an existing dwelling that partially overlaps Lot 2 and Lot 3 will be razed because it is in poor condition and said the petitioner intends to develop the new units at the same time, with shared driveway access serving the lots.
The petitioner closed both cases; the examiner said each hearing was concluded and that a written decision and order would be issued later.
The record contains the conditional‑use site plan and photographic exhibits admitted as evidence; no vote or final ruling was announced at the hearing.
