Community Issues

Zoning Issues

The following are some of the major issues for which I believe significant revisions to the Baltimore County Zoning Regulations are needed to better protect citizens and our property values. I would appreciate any comment or thoughts on these or other subjects.

Service Garages

While no Service Garage is a nice-looking place, many have gone way over-board with junked cars all around, parking on nearby residential streets, etc. The problem is many-fold, but, probably the worst thing is that the definition of "Garage, Service" in the BCZR, left over from 1955, is "A garage, other than a residential garage, where motor-driven vehicles are stored, equipped for operation, repaired or kept for remuneration, hire or sale". This is being used to allow unlimited storage and sales of used vehicles, even though Service Garages are allowed in zones where used-vehicle sales are not and junk yards have been banned since 1955. Since "Service Garage" applies to many different things, even a "detailing" shop, this is used to sneak a use into an un-aware community, which then has no recourse when the property turns into a used car lot, even with many junk cars.

The BCZR contains multiple conditions under which a Service Garage is allowed. These are scattered around the BCZR and are very confusing.

More info ---->


All residential zones include some limit on density. There is a lot of confusion concerning the use of terms "dwelling unit", "density unit", "lot", "parcel", "tract", and the like. There needs to be a complete cleanup of the BCZR to clarify these terms and then to ensure that all uses of the terms are consistent (as well as limits on the authority of the ALJ to grant variances).

More info ---->

Road Classifications

Numerous places in the regulations refer to Road Classifications, which may affect what is allowed or prohibited. In some places, the BCZR correctly references "the Federal Highway Functional Classification Map" as the source for designation of road classifications. In other places, it does not, thus relying on the definition of "arterial street", "collector street", etc in Section 101.1 (which might not be consistent with the Federal definitions and are open to interpretation.

It should be noted that the current classifications are indicated both on the County's MyNeighborhood web application and on an SHA application (but not the same).

This needs to be fixed.

More info ---->

Gas stations

The BCZR contains a confusing set of regulations, exceptions, and exceptions to exceptions regarding where gas stations may be located. This has been complicated by a number of "Special Bills" to allow them in specific locations where not otherwise allowed (more exceptions).

To further confuse the issue - the term "Automotive Service Station" (not to be confused with (Service Garage") was changed to "Fuel Service Station" (see 405.1.C), but the term "Automotive Service Station" remains in numerous places. The BCZR needs a lot of clean-up and a simple editorial fix.

More info ---->

Agricutural Uses

There has been lots of discussion going back years concerning what uses should be allowed on Agricultural-zoning land. While some want to restrict such land to traditional growing of crops and raising animals, other want to expand the uses to whatever is needed to allow the farmer to continue to own the land, even if it means detroying its agricultural use. This has included cell towers, solar fields, breweries with large entertainment facilities, etc. In a notable example, Councilman Huff, in his final weeks in office, tried to advance what he called a "Right-to-Farm Bill" (as Bill 65-14 (which was tabled)). It mostly defined a bunch of non-agricultural activities to be allowed under the term "agricultural tourism", with the argument that they were agriculture-related to "generate economic growth", such as selling clothing, seasonal haunted houses, straw mountains (?), petting zoo, tours, playgrounds, picnis areas with rest rooms, gift shops, etc. While these all sound good, they are very hard to control, as we have found with other things. I called it the "Right-to-not-Farm Bill".

In fact, back in 2009, a group of citizens, farmers, county employees, experts, etc. met for months, beginning with an effort to better restrict Special Exceptions that were destroying farm land. A set of recommendations were forwarded to the County Council, but no action was ever taken. We also looked at the "Right-to-Farm Laws" in other Counties and Bill 19-14 went directly against one of our recommendations.

More info ---->

Return to Main Page

Updated 14 June 2022 by MAP