The meeting convened at 9:00 a.m. on September 8, 2026, to address two primary agenda items: a request to hold a public hearing on extending the self-service storage facilities deferral for an additional six months, and a work session on proposed code amendments for age-restricted housing (retirement zoning codes). The public hearing request failed due to an abstention, while the age-restricted housing work session covered extensive technical and policy issues without a final vote, with adoption planned for September 17, 2026.
Item 1: Request for Public Hearing – Self-Service Storage Facilities Deferral Extension
Tim Burke (County Attorney) and Christopher Heyn (Director of Planning and Land Management) briefed the Board on the need for an additional six-month extension (to October 9, 2026) to allow completion of work with the Planning and Zoning Commission on code amendments recommended by consultant Michael Baker, as well as ongoing small area plan amendments for the Freedom District. Commissioner Krebs expressed strong support for the extension, arguing that the original code changes were made after the master plan adoption without transparency and are inconsistent with the plan. She noted that the deferral only affects one use and is not a moratorium. Commissioner Kiler opposed the extension, stating that the initial three-month promise has grown to 15 months, the consultant’s references to Carlisle, Pennsylvania are irrelevant, and the proposed changes could render many commercial properties unbuildable countywide. Commissioner Gordon requested clarification on the process but ultimately abstained. The vote was 2 in favor (Vigliotti, Krebs), 1 opposed (Kiler), and 1 abstention (Gordon). The motion failed as the Board requires a majority vote and the abstention prevented a quorum of approval (2–1–1).
Item 2: Work Session – Retirement Zoning Codes (Age-Restricted Housing Amendments)
Christopher Heyn and Daphne presented a detailed review of proposed amendments to Chapter 158 regarding age-restricted housing, developed with the Planning and Zoning Commission and consultant Michael Baker. Key topics included:
Commissioner Krebs repeatedly raised concerns that current code amendments are inconsistent with the Freedom Master Plan and state law, and suggested temporarily removing age-restricted housing as a permitted use until a comprehensive review could be conducted. Commissioner Vigliotti expressed doubt that the board would be ready to vote on September 17 given the evolving issues, while Commissioner Kiler supported proceeding with the code as proposed. The work session concluded with staff directed to prepare the final recommended code (incorporating minor staff-recommended changes) for consideration on September 17, with further board discussion expected.
Pledge of allegiance and a moment of silent reflection. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Yes, good morning. So as you're all aware, we've had uh a couple of deferrals that were put in place by the Board of County Commissioners related to a couple of different types of uses. One of those deferrals relates to self-surface storage facilities, which that current deferral uh expires on October 9th. Currently um we are working with the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding certain um recommended um code amendments from our consultant Michael Baker. Um that process is ongoing, but we anticipate that we still have two or three more sessions with the Planning and Zoning Commission to get to the point where we can return to the board uh with recommendations. So those recommendations uh will will certainly be after the October 9th deferral. So if the board is so inclined and wishes to extend the deferral to allow additional time either for those code amendments or the additional process that we're going through, the additional work that we're doing regarding the small area plan amendment for the freedom area. Um the deferral would need to be extended. Uh so in order to allow enough time for the public hearing and so on and so forth related to extending the deferral um with before October 9th. Um the decision would have to be, I believe would have to be made this week to then start that process for a public hearing and so on to officially extend the deferral beyond October 9th. So that's why we brought the topic to the board for discussion. Thank you very much for that, Chris. I'll open it up to the floor to my colleagues for any thoughts, discussion. Or action. I just want to make one really quick. Thank you, Jack. We have a public comment. It's uh Kelly Miller. Several copies of it. Good morning. I'm gonna time myself, I promise. Uh Kelly Schaefer Miller, 73 East Main Street, Westminster, Maryland, two one one five seven. I'm here this morning. Oh look, there it is. On behalf of uh Scott Cooper, who is the prospective developer of the self-service storage unit proposed on Liberty Road. I've handed to you a few pages of the elevations, the most recent elevations. These are um part of the county file, and I just picked a few um representative of his project. Um I think it's important for you to look at these and have these in front of you and deciding whether this topic goes to public hearing for a discussion on another extension. Um this deferral has been extended already to nine months, and now the request before you is for an additional a public hearing for an additional six months. But don't stop the two plans that are in process, one of which is Scott's project, and one of which is a much, much newer project that you're all well aware of. I think, and I'll defer to Mr. Burke, who gives you wise legal advice. But I would say to you that a additional extension of this deferral is unconstitutional under Maryland case law. There is case law that supports the length of allowed moratoriums, deferrals, and this would far exceed what uh case law suggests is appropriate. So I would ask uh that you consider that in your discussions today. Thank you. Thank you very much. Now I will open up to the floor of my uh for my colleagues for any discussion or thoughts or action. I just want to bring up one thing really quickly for the good of the group. Um Chris, could you touch a little more on what we've discussed of planning and zoning because just for everyone? I know obviously the deferral has been related to the freedom district, but what we're looking at in planning and zoning, which would be coming before the board, is not solely related to freedom, it would be countywide. That's correct. So the text amendments that are being discussed are specific to the use of self-service storage. The recommendations from the consultants and and um the recommended text that's being discussed. Um has I would say primarily are um our aesthetic type uh recommendations for the look and feel of buildings. Um they uh I think the the primary substantive type uh recommendations relate to um process as to whether self-storage should be a conditional use in the C2 district or principal permitted. It's currently principal permitted, and some one of the recommendation that's being discussed is to make that a conditional use, so that would require a BZA approval of the other item. Oh, is is separating out the difference between the different types of self-service storage?