Howard County hearing on Troy Farms variance requests focuses on setbacks, drainage and neighbor concerns
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
SubscribeSummary
The Howard County administrative hearing on April 10, 2025, considered a request by Michael Singh, doing business as Troy Farms Liquors LLC, for three variances from the county’s 30-foot structure-and-use setback requirements to accommodate parking and retaining walls at a rebuilt liquor store property on Meadow Ridge Road in Ellicott City.
The Howard County administrative hearing on April 10, 2025, considered a request by Michael Singh, doing business as Troy Farms Liquors LLC, for three variances from the county’s 30-foot structure-and-use setback requirements to accommodate parking and retaining walls at a rebuilt liquor store property on Meadow Ridge Road in Ellicott City.
The variances sought would reduce the 30-foot setback to 17.66 feet along the northern property line for parking, to 19.68 feet along the northern line for a retaining wall, and to 16 feet along the eastern property line for a retaining wall. The hearing examiner closed the record and said a decision and order would be rendered later; no final decision was announced at the hearing.
Why it matters: the property sits on roughly 1 acre and is bordered on three sides by residences. Neighbors raised concerns about stormwater runoff, driveway access for emergency vehicles and loss of preexisting yard area. The applicant’s witnesses said the variances are needed to provide code-compliant parking and required stormwater controls for a building that was rebuilt after a fire.
Testimony and technical findings Jeffrey Scenario, a civil engineer with CMS Associates who prepared the plans, testified that he had reviewed and concurred with the Department of Planning and Zoning staff report. Scenario described the three variance requests and said the paving, retaining walls and building footprint have largely been constructed and that final inspections are on hold pending resolution of the variances. "There will not" be additional paving to the south side of the property, Scenario said, and he described a stormwater control (a rain-garden type facility) that is proposed to receive the discharge now going into a pipe that empties onto an adjacent lawn.
Scenario told the hearing the project needed minor adjustments to the site layout to allow for required sprinkler systems and for sufficient parking; he said the site configuration is "very unique" and that formalizing existing parking (26 spaces shown on the plan) is necessary for the use to function and meet accessibility and code requirements.
Neighbors’ concerns and requests Bob Palmer, speaking for his mother who lives at 6189 Meadow Ridge Road (property directly south of the liquor-store parcel), said runoff from the site has pooled at the end of his mother’s driveway and that a visible discharge pipe currently empties into their lawn. "I don't think we should take the brunt of it," Palmer said, asking that no additional paving be done on the south side of the store unless stormwater containment is provided and that the driveway width not be reduced further. He provided photographs, which the examiner marked as exhibits.
Barry Hoover, owner of 6159 Meadow Ridge Road and a neighboring resident, testified in favor of the project and said he supports the proposed site fence and buffer. Hoover said he and other nearby residents have worked with the applicant’s contractor and expect the fence alignment and proposed plantings to provide improved screening.
County review and conditions discussed The record shows at least one agency comment from the Development Engineering Division "taking no exception" to the reduction from 30 to 16 feet (the record did not establish whether the division formally reviewed all three variance lines). Planning and Zoning staff had discussed the retaining-wall and parking encroachments with the applicant, and the engineer said the project will include the required stormwater management measures before the business can reopen.
The hearing examiner noted that Maryland stormwater management regulations "are pretty strict these days and certainly wouldn't allow what that picture shows," referencing the neighbor’s photos of current runoff and discharge.
Next steps and outcome The applicant’s counsel rested the case and the examiner closed the record. The examiner stated a decision and order will be issued after review of the hearing record; no vote or final ruling was made at the hearing.
Details and context - Applicant: Michael Singh (doing business as Troy Farms Liquors LLC). - Witness: Jeffrey Scenario, civil engineer, CMS Associates (testified he prepared the plans and concurred with the Planning and Zoning report). - Property context: approximately 1 acre in a B-1 commercial setting bordered by residences on three sides; building reconstructed after a fire; site contains new retaining walls and pavement and shows 26 parking spaces on the submitted plan. - Neighbor requests: confirm stormwater controls (rain-garden facility) be installed and function as designed; do not further reduce driveway width that provides access to neighboring house; signage to prevent blocking of private driveway was suggested.
The hearing examiner’s written decision and order will indicate whether Howard County will grant the setback variances and any conditions (for example, installation of the stormwater facility, a six-foot site fence along the southern property line, or required easement clarifications).
