Planning commission backs rezoning for Route 7 self‑storage despite neighborhood objections

The Frederick County Planning Commission voted Feb. 19 to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve rezoning 2.38 acres along Route 7 from B‑1 (Neighborhood Business) to B‑2 (General Business) to allow a self‑storage facility, with proffers limiting the site to indoor self‑storage and restricting generator/testing hours and operation hours.

The proposal includes a generalized development plan showing a two‑to‑three‑story self‑storage building of roughly 40,000 square feet, a new entrance from eastbound Route 7 with an eastbound right‑turn lane and deceleration taper, and an exit lane with acceleration taper. The applicant proffered that the development will generally conform to the GDP and that outdoor trailer storage would be prohibited.

“This rezoning is not in conformance with the comprehensive plan,” planning staff said in presenting the item, noting the site’s long‑range land use designation as residential; staff nevertheless highlighted the applicant’s proffers intended to reduce traffic and operational impacts. Several neighbors urged the commission to reject the rezoning, calling the area residential and saying the facility would harm property values, create security concerns, and increase noise and traffic. Resident Steven Carter said, “We do oppose this rezoning. It is a residential community.” Resident Marcy Smith told the commission that Route 7’s noise is already audible inside homes and said removal of tree buffers and construction of a 30‑foot retaining wall would bring traffic and light closer to adjacent yards.

Speakers also raised stormwater and flooding concerns along Ash Hollow Run, with one resident submitting photographs of past flooding and warning that additional impervious surface could worsen runoff. The applicant and the applicant’s representative said stormwater would be designed to meet county standards and that engineering and geotechnical work would be required at site plan review. The applicant also said the proposed rear wall of the building would act as a retaining wall and that the finished design would be structurally engineered; the developer said the front entrance would be at a lower level so much of the building would be partially built into the slope.

Commissioners pressed for operational limits; the applicant indicated willingness to accept restricted customer hours and later agreed to a 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. hours‑of‑operation proffer. Commissioners also discussed buffering and screening requirements, a required 50‑foot buffer between the building and adjoining residential property, and landscaping to provide visual and noise mitigation. Staff noted that plan conformity questions remain and that final engineering details — water connection, stormwater design, retaining wall engineering, and exact finished floor elevations — will be resolved at site plan stage.

After discussion, Commissioner Markert moved to recommend approval with hours of operation limited to 6 a.m. to 10 p.m.; the motion carried on a roll call vote. The commission’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors, which will consider the rezoning at its March meeting.

Because this item generated public comment, staff noted that the public hearing before the Board of Supervisors will be another opportunity for neighbors to present concerns and for the applicant to supply detailed site engineering documents.

Ending: The planning commission’s recommendation does not approve construction; it forwards the rezoning to the Board of Supervisors with the proffers and the condition on operating hours. Final engineering, water connection, stormwater controls and retaining‑wall design will be reviewed during site plan review if the Board approves the rezoning.