Meeting Time: February 19, 2025 at 7:00pm EST
The online Comment window has expired

Agenda Item

7.A) Rezoning #11-24 of Route 7 Self Storage (Edward P. Browning IV) - (Mrs. Peloquin)

  • Default_avatar
    Kristen Snyder 4 months ago

    Please do not approve this rezoning. It is well known how many traffic incidents have affected this area of Rt. 7. This is a highly congested area and the addition of storage units would bring more slow moving traffic to that portion of Rt.7...vehicles and trailers of all sizes needing to slow to pull in/pull out of the facility. This area was zoned as-is for a reason...let's not overlook that the property was purchased under the current zoning so why change it now? Because the owners now want to make it into something other than it's initial zoning would allow? This is unfair to neighboring properties, homes, and the environment (specifically the creek that runs right down through there).

  • Default_avatar
    Tim Siler 4 months ago

    RE: Rezoning #11-24 of Route 7 Self Storage
    Strongly oppose

    A storage facility in this location would fail to have any positive impact on the surrounding community:

    There are already 6 storage facilities within 2 miles of this location. Adding more is just a land grab and is taking away opportunity for more impactful small businesses.

    A two-story industrial-style facility this close to a residential area will likely decrease the home value of the surrounding homes

    The large volume of tree-clearing will significantly increase traffic noise from route 7 within the surrounding neighborhoods

    These facilities are land consumptive and do not generate any jobs. They also do not offer significant tax revenue for the county for various reasons.

    There is no specific mention of a slope stability analysis to evaluate the structural impact the grading/clearing of land would have on the heavily sloped adjoining area, and the potential instability it may cause overtime

  • Default_avatar
    Stephanie Jahnigen 4 months ago

    I oppose this rezoning of this parcel of land to allow, yet ANOTHER, storage unit facility to be built here. This will butt up to our homes. Our back yards. We invested in our properties with the expectation of increased property values and peaceful living, not increased noise from further traffic (already NOT policed and motorcycle racing happens nightly), light pollution and safety concerns. I certainly don't want to look outside and see unsightly industrial buildings with people coming and going. I am sure potential buyers of our homes would not either. We don't need another storage facility...this is not being placed here to "serve local residents" in the area. We don't want it. Force them in an empty building with the storage units. Plenty of empty grocery stores.

  • Default_avatar
    Lori Douglas 4 months ago

    As a resident and home owner on Monroes Circle I am opposed to the rezoning for the following reasons.

    Safety Risks for Children and Families: Many young children play in the backyards of homes bordering the proposed development site. The presence of a storage facility, often frequented by a steady flow of vehicles, including large moving trucks and unfamiliar visitors, creates serious safety hazards. Unlike businesses with regular customer hours, storage units can attract activity at all hours, increasing the risk of trespassing, loitering, and unwanted interactions near residential properties. This is especially concerning for parents who want to ensure their children can play safely in their own yards.

    Traffic and Infrastructure Strain: The development of storage units will bring increased traffic on local roads, which were not designed to accommodate frequent commercial and large-vehicle traffic. This congestion raises concerns not only for the safety of residents but also for the longevity of our roads and infrastructure.

    Waterway / Flood Zone Concerns: The proposed property is near [Creek Name], which is already prone to flooding during heavy rain events. The construction of storage units, which typically involves large impervious surfaces such as paved lots and buildings, could worsen stormwater runoff, increase erosion, and further stress the local drainage system. This poses a direct risk to nearby homes and properties, exacerbating existing flood concerns.

    For the well-being of our community, the safety of our children, and the preservation of property values, I urge the Planning Commission to deny this rezoning request. I appreciate your time and consideration of this matter and trust.

  • Default_avatar
    Leland Duer 4 months ago

    I am opposed to the rezoning for the following reasons/issues.

    Disruption to Residential Properties and Families: The property in question directly adjoins residential homes, where families with children live and play in their backyards. A storage facility would significantly disrupt their quality of life by introducing excessive noise, increased vehicle traffic, and potential security concerns. Residents purchased their homes with the expectation of a safe and peaceful environment, and this rezoning would drastically alter that.

    Negative Impact on Property Values: The construction of a storage facility so close to homes will likely reduce property values in the area. The sight of industrial-style buildings, security fences, and increased lighting does not align with a family-friendly residential setting, making nearby homes less desirable for current and future homeowners.

    Missed Opportunity for a More Suitable Development: Instead of a storage facility, which provides minimal economic and social benefit to the community, this property could be better utilized for developments that enhance the neighborhood—such as parks, retail, or community spaces that serve the needs of local residents.

    Increased Erosion and Environmental Harm: The removal of natural vegetation and the addition of paved surfaces will likely accelerate soil erosion in the area. This erosion could weaken the stability of nearby land, affecting both the environment and the structural integrity of neighboring properties. The loss of green space will also impact local wildlife and contribute to worsening water quality in nearby creeks and drainage systems.

    Leland Duer, resident of Monroes Circle 2/18/25

  • Default_avatar
    Andrea Wolter 4 months ago

    RE: Rezoning #11-24 of Route 7 Self Storage
    I oppose.
    The said proposal will negatively impact surrounding property value.
    The increase of noise poses a violation of Chapter 118-1 Frederick County Codebook.
    The infrastructure of this zone proposal fails to address Nuisance SS165-35 (light pollution).
    The removal of forested area will add to an already heavily taxed storm and rainwater runoff system, thereby causing and/or contributing to potential flooding. Proposal does not provide an adequate solution to this problem.
    Impact Statement fails to address community concerns with explicit details and/or impact study reports.

  • Default_avatar
    David Wolter 4 months ago

    Re-zoning #11-24 of route 7 for self-storage
    I am opposed.
    Please note the following concerns:
    Traffic: It's already dangerous to enter/exit my property. This will exasperate the existing problem.
    Noise: It's already above acceptable noise levels for a residential neighborhood.
    Deforestation: proposed storage facility would destroy needed trees and vegetation. Various animals such as deer, squirrels, birds, etc. will suffer.
    Devaluation of property: currently have a forest view from property. This building will negatively impact my home's value and destroy its curb appeal.
    Increased Erosion: no clear resolution for addressing stormwater drainage.

    Note: Community Impact Statement from said company is extremely vague regarding these concerns.

  • Default_avatar
    Annie Gaston 4 months ago

    I strongly oppose this rezoning. It will depreciate home values and could be unsafe for the children who live/play in the neighborhood adjacent to the projected build site.

  • 10163280329458357
    Dee Shaffer 4 months ago

    I oppose

  • Default_avatar
    Nelson Clark 4 months ago

    100% OPPOSE RE-ZONING # 11-24 OF ROUTE 7 FOR SELF STORAGE!!! WE DO NOT WANT ANY SELF STORAGE UNITS NEXT TO OR NEAR OUR RESIDENTIAL BACKYARDS!!! THESE WILL DE-VALUE OUR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, INVESTMENTS AND THE OVERALL HOMEOWNER/FAMILY-ORIENTED COMMUNITY!!! ETC.

  • Default_avatar
    Maria Clark 4 months ago

    DO NOT WANT THIS IN MY BACKYARD!!!!! I am 100% opposed to this!

  • Default_avatar
    Stephen Carter 4 months ago

    Oppose for all the same reasons as before. This is a redindential community and a self storage facilityvis mot wanted here. Do you want a storage facaility next door butting up to your back yard where your kids play? This is crazy its being considered.