Frederick County Planning Commission recommends denial of rezoning for Houdershell property over unresolved buffer agreement

The Frederick County Planning Commission voted 7–5 on Nov. 6 to recommend denial of rezoning application 07/24, a request to change a 5‑acre property at 8183 Valley Pike from M1 (Light Industrial) to RA (Rural Areas) for William and Barbara Houdershell. Commissioners said they could not approve the rezoning without a finalized, recorded agreement that would waive adjacent buffer requirements.

The application covers a 5‑acre parcel in the Bat Creek Magisterial District, just south of the town limits of Middletown and between Routes 11 and I‑81. Staff told the commission they had facilitated negotiations between the applicant and an adjoining industrial property owner and that a draft multi‑party agreement — intended to memorialize a waiver of the ordinance buffer — had been prepared and submitted to the county attorney for review.

County staffer Mr. Pearson told commissioners the agreement ‘‘largely has identified the intended purpose’’ but that county legal review was still removing provisions the county could not accept. ‘‘County staff just needs to work with the adjoining property owner’s legal counsel to have some provisions removed,’’ Pearson said, adding the main objective was to ensure the agreement ‘‘effectuates’’ the buffer waiver and could be recorded against the land.

Commission debate centered on whether to recommend denial now or forward approval contingent on execution of the agreement. Supporters of a contingent recommendation argued the commission could help preserve a house on the property that staff said is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and was built in 1883. ‘‘We would be missing an opportunity to help preserve a historical facility,’’ one commissioner said during debate.

Opponents said the commission should not recommend approval without seeing a legally binding agreement and warned of setting a precedent. One commissioner argued a denial based solely on the absence of a completed agreement would leave open the board’s ability to act once the agreement was finalized: the issue would be considered by the Board of Supervisors when the rezoning arrives on its agenda.

The motion before the commission was to recommend denial because ‘‘there [is] not a written agreement in place that waives the buffers at this time.’’ The roll‑call vote produced seven votes in favor of recommending denial and five opposed. The commission’s recommendation will be forwarded to the Board of Supervisors, which has final authority on rezoning requests.

During public comment earlier in the meeting residents raised related planning concerns about other pending proposals in the county, including traffic and watershed impacts tied to the recently sold Riggleman Farm and broader preferences for concentrating development in compact centers. Staff also reminded the commission of upcoming work sessions on large projects, including a Winchester East/Opekham Creek filing and a proposed large Middletown rezoning.

The Board of Supervisors is next in line to consider rezoning 07/24; the Planning Commission’s recommendation and any finalized agreement will be part of the public record when the Board schedules the item.