Planning Commission unanimously recommends rooftop T‑Mobile antennas at 177 Kentlands Boulevard to Board of Appeals

The Gaithersburg Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the Board of Appeals approve a special‑exception application (BOA‑10045‑2025) allowing T‑Mobile to install a rooftop telecommunications facility at 177 Kentlands Boulevard.

Caroline Seiden, Planning Department staff, told the commission the proposal is for a property in the MXD (Mixed Use Development) zone and that telecommunications facilities are permitted there by special exception and must comply with the city’s telecommunications rules. "Staff recommends that the planning commission, based on the exhibits submitted, the applicant's testimony, and the staff report findings and recommendation, recommend approval of BOA 10045‑2025 to the Board of Appeals," Seiden said.

Corinne Smallwood, a consultant with Network Building and Consulting representing T‑Mobile, said the company seeks the special exception to "enhance the wireless coverage and capacity for T‑Mobile customers in the surrounding area addressing the increased demand." She described a rooftop installation of nine antennas and ancillary equipment concealed within two proposed rooftop structures — one housing six antennas and a smaller structure housing three — and said the design is intended to visually integrate with the building.

Commissioners focused questions on appearance and materials. One commissioner said the proposed solid red finish would "stick out" against the building’s brick façade and asked whether a finish that more closely mimics brick could be used; another suggested a mid‑tone gray roof screen as an alternative. Smallwood said she would work with the property owner on materials and confirmed the concealment structures would use RF‑compatible materials that can be painted or finished to match the building.

Seiden told the commission that staff initially proposed five conditions in the draft report but planned to remove two (conditions 2 and 5) before the meeting because one was a holdover from an older ordinance and because post‑installation coverage maps are less applicable when the applicant is addressing capacity rather than coverage. After discussion, staff and commissioners agreed to keep a condition requiring further review of materials so the recommendation forwarded to the Board of Appeals includes four conditions.

The commission moved and seconded a recommendation to the Board of Appeals finding the project in compliance with section 24‑12.7(c) of the city code and voted unanimously to approve the recommendation. The Board of Appeals will hold the final decision on BOA‑10045‑2025.

The applicant and staff said the installation is intended to benefit residents, businesses and emergency services in the area; no construction timetable or final material selection was specified at the meeting.