Carroll County extends deferral on Freedom District self‑storage approvals for six months after contested hearing

The Board of Carroll County Commissioners voted to extend, by six months, a temporary deferral that halts final approvals for self‑storage facilities in the Freedom District.

The public hearing and subsequent vote followed months of neighborhood concern about large, multi‑story storage buildings being allowed in C‑2 commercial corridors after a master‑plan wording change removed the word “mini,” which previously implied one‑story buildings. The extension passed by a 3–1–1 vote after the board debated how to balance a developer’s investments with community protections.

Tim Burke, the county attorney, told commissioners the extension is intended to give staff and the Planning Commission time to study whether zoning language and the Freedom District plan should be amended. "The purpose of today is to solicit public comment on a proposed amendment to our zoning code, which would extend the deferral ... to allow staff and the Planning Commission to study the issue further and recommend legislation if appropriate," Burke said.

Several residents urged the extension. Sarah Penn said the recently hired consultants need adequate time to complete a full review and that large storage buildings are “giant” and “hard to repurpose.” "I really would appreciate the extension of the deferral to give the county time and all of you time to just make sure we're doing the right things for our community," Penn said.

Audrey Novak, a 36‑year Freedom District resident, told the board that placing a large storage facility adjacent to homes would change neighborhood character and cited repeated requests to restrict such uses to industrial zones. "Large level storage facilities are not appropriate adjacent to residential communities," Novak said.

Representing the prospective developer, attorney Kelly Miller asked the board to reject the extension, saying the developer had made multiple concessions — including revised elevations that reduced building height — and that self‑storage is typically a low‑intensity use with limited traffic and low utility demand.

Planning staff clarified that projects subject to the deferral may continue to submit plans and receive technical reviews, but the deferral would prevent final approval by the Planning & Zoning Commission until any code changes are addressed. Staff also said the board would be notified if a project reached the point where the deferral would prevent a final approval.

Commissioners debated the fairness of pausing a project that had already incurred design and engineering costs against the need to protect neighborhoods and review whether the C‑2 commercial definitions introduced in prior zoning work were appropriate. One commissioner said the removal of the word "mini" from the zoning language was a consequential change that many residents did not realize had occurred during prior revisions.

Ultimately, the board extended the deferral to allow consultants and staff to finish their review and to give commissioners time to consider potential code amendments. The order carries for six months unless the board acts earlier to modify or end the deferral.

Next steps: staff will complete consultant reports, notify the board when any project reaches the point where final approval would be blocked by the deferral, and bring any recommended ordinance changes back to the board and Planning & Zoning Commission.