The longest Board of Appeals hearing in Anne Arundel County history ended last night with a victory for a developer who won unanimous approval to build a rubble landfill on 150 acres near Crofton.
But the six-member board attached 11 conditions that the Halle Cos. must meet before work begins, including widening Conway Road to 40 feet, including wide shoulders and limiting the hours of operation to weekdays between 7 a.m. and 5 p.m.
"We are pleased with the approval," said Susan Henley, the lawyer representing the Halle Cos. of Silver Spring. "I think the conditions are acceptable. I think the board has been fair."
Jack Meyer, who lives near the 489-acre site, was among the opponents. He said he already is surrounded by rubble fills and sees no reason for another, and that he might appeal the decision to Circuit Court.
Residents especially are concerned with the intersection of Routes 3 and 424 -- already dangerous, according to the state -- where there could be an additional 300 trucks a day going to and from the rubble landfill.
An administrative hearing officer rejected the project in March 1991, agreeing with residents that clogged roads would be further burdened by the additional traffic. The developer appealed a month later, and the Appeals Board had heard evidence and discussed the issue since.
The 17 hearings, many more than three hours long, topped the 30 hours of hearings in 1982 for what is now Marley Station Mall.
Last night, after 90 minutes in closed session and two hours of public discussion, the board approved allowing the rubble landfill on 150 acres and a sand and gravel operation on 35 acres.
Still being discussed late last night was the fate of a variance the developer is requesting, which would allow excavation within 240 feet of a residence and 40 feet of a property line. The current standard is that such work be 1,000 feet from the nearest home.
The biggest point of contention last night was the widening of Conway Road to 24 feet and adding shoulders on both sides.
Board member Anthony Lamartina said that if that condition cannot be met, the entire project should be rejected.
At the close of the hearing, Mr. Lamartina said he would change his vote to "no" if that condition was not spelled out to his satisfaction in the written draft of the decision.
Mr. Lamartina was one of three board members who in February expressed strong reservations about the project. Members John W. Boring and David M. Schafer made motions at that hearing to deny the application, but both withdrew those motions last night.
Other conditions included limiting the rubble operation to 10 years, after which the developer would have to reapply for another special exception if it wanted to continue.