Howard County hearing on extension for Ellicott City gas station redevelopment draws neighbor objections over stormwater, notice and traffic

Hearing Examiner Catherine Taylor convened a hearing on a petition by A.K. Gorry LLC to modify conditions of a 2020 approval for redevelopment of the motor vehicle fueling facility at 4235 Montgomery Road in Ellicott City and to extend the time to commence work.

The petitioner, represented by attorney Adam Baker of Rosenberg Martin Greenberg, said the revised plan reduces the scope of the 2020 approval — removing a proposed service garage, shrinking the equipment storage and reducing the car-wash footprint — and asked for an additional four years to complete permitting, secure financing and begin construction. "We are here seeking to modify the conditions of an approval which is granted in 2020," Baker told the hearing.

In testimony, civil engineer Patrick C. Richardson Jr. of Richardson Engineering said technical approval of the site development plan had been obtained and that the remaining administrative steps were posting securities and finalizing developer agreements before applying for building permits. Richardson estimated, assuming steady progress, that obtaining building permits could take "another 3, 4 months or so." He explained the principal cause of delay: shallow existing storm drains forced the design team to enlarge above-ground stormwater facilities instead of going deeper underground, which required additional design iterations with county staff.

Khaled Azam, who identified himself as the property owner, confirmed he acquired the property in July 2010 and that the site has been continuously operated as a fueling facility. Azam said the on-site propane tanks will be removed and that he would install a six-foot fence and is willing to work with neighbors on additional landscaping or screening.

Neighbors from the adjacent Jefferson Place Condominium Association strongly opposed the extension. Pamela Kreis, representing the association's board, said residents did not receive written notice of the 2020 hearing and that the original record mischaracterized the adjacent building as office space rather than a community center. She also argued that recent state highway improvements on Montgomery Road — converting the corridor to three westbound travel lanes plus a bike lane — have changed traffic conditions and increased safety concerns for cars exiting the station.

Kreis added that large trees once serving as a buffer had been removed and that the condo association fears overflow from the station's stormwater facilities into its own drainage culvert. "We believe that an extension of 4 more years to obtain additional approvals is excessive," she said, citing potential increases in maintenance costs for the association's stormwater system.

Petitioners disputed those assertions in part. Richardson testified that the revised layout actually places fewer parking spaces along the property line and that the resulting setback is greater than the 2.6-foot encroachment reflected in the earlier plan, reducing the impact on the adjacent property. On rebuttal, Richardson confirmed that Howard County reviewed and granted technical approval of the stormwater plan and that car-wash water would generally be handled on-site (the witness estimated about 90% would be recycled on-site with excess diverted to the sanitary system, not to storm drains).

The parties left a factual disagreement over the local drainage flows unresolved in the hearing record: neighbors said they observed overflow entering their property during storms, while the petitioner said the contours and design indicate the station's stormwater ties into the existing roadside drain flowing toward Montgomery Road.

No decision was announced at the hearing. Hearing Examiner Catherine Taylor closed the record and said she would review the testimony and exhibits before issuing a written decision within the required time period. The examiner also encouraged the petitioner to continue community engagement to address remaining landscaping and stormwater concerns.

The hearing included admission of the petitioner's exhibits (including the 2020 decision and the updated site plan), sworn testimony from the engineer and owner, and public comment from two nearby residents and the condominium association board. The petitioner requested a four-year extension but acknowledged that the work may be completed sooner; neighbors asked that any extension be limited or that the process be restarted to allow full notification and review.