EZStorage Company found out last Thursday (October 8) that is will remain unaffected by a proposed zoning amendment following a full year of battling county officials, according to an October 14 posting on gazette.net (Maryland’s community newspaper online.)
Varying interpretations of the Fairland Master Plan made it unclear how the land ezStorage had already purchased near the intersection of routes 29 and 198 in Burtonsville (MD), was meant to be used. The facility would be located on an industrial overlay zone, where a single piece of land has conflicting zoning restrictions. Representatives for ezStorage said they were first told they could use any of the zoning uses their site falls upon, only to be told later that they could only use the site for its most restricted zoning uses.
When ezStorage bought the land three years ago, it was told it would be allowed to build a storage facility on the site, however, when they proceeded with filing preliminary plans, county officials decided the storage facility no longer fit with the community's master plan. The small number of jobs created by the facility was one reason officials thought ezStorage should not be allowed to build, officials said.
Stating that the board's decision was "arbitrary and capricious," the circuit court overturned the rejection of the preliminary plan, according to Vice President of parent company Siena Corporation Craig Pittinger. Questions regarding the site’s "place" in the master plan remain, though.
The zoning distinction between two plots of land on the same overlay zone, which allows one plot owner to build a storage facility but preclude a nearby land owner from doing the same, is unreasonable and absurd, committee officials said.
Councilwoman Nancy Navarro proposed Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) 09-05 to restrict allowed zoning uses in the overlay zone last June. If passed as originally worded, ZTA 09-05 would prevent ezStorage officials from building on the land they already owned. County officials stated that the amendment was not created to specifically block ezStorage, although it would have that effect.
The council committee voted to add a grandfather clause, enabling ezStorage to move forward with plans, but restrict similar zoning conflicts going forward. Yet, the council must still vote on the revised zoning amendment at a future meeting. Committee members also acknowledged the need to revisit the Fairland Master Plan to clarify ambiguous language.
The $10 million ezStorage facility was proposed after market analysis suggested there was a need for climate-controlled, single-building storage facilities in the immediate area, Pittinger said.