LEONARDTOWN — Anyone hoping to open a new gas station, vape shop or dollar store in St. Mary’s County could eventually have to prove the public needs it. The Planning Commission took its first look at that idea Monday and decided it is not ready to put the question to a public hearing.
The proposal is a zoning text amendment that the county commissioners sent down to the planning board over the summer after splitting over how to limit fuel stations and vape shops. No vote was taken at the Nov. 9 work session, and none could have been. The commission must hold its own public hearing before it sends a recommendation back, and the commissioners make the final decision.
As drafted, the amendment would not ban any of the three kinds of business or change where they can locate. It would change how they are approved. Today, gas stations, vape shops and small-box discount stores are allowed by right in the zones that permit them, meaning an applicant who meets every written standard is entitled to approval. The draft would make each a conditional use, which adds a public hearing before the Board of Appeals.
Deputy County Attorney John Sterling Houser told the commission the draft also adds two tests an applicant would have to meet. One is a demonstrated public need for the business at that location. The other is a showing that it would not unduly disrupt the pattern of development or crowd out land for other commercial uses, language Houser said he borrowed from Prince George’s County.
Houser said the review began with a May motion by the commissioners asking staff to look into residents’ complaints that the county is oversaturated with these businesses. Speaking from memory, he gave approximate countywide totals that include the town of Leonardtown, which does its own zoning and would not be covered:
- Gas stations: about 45 to 47
- Vape shops: about 13 to 15
- Small-box discount stores: about eight to 10
The county’s 500-page zoning ordinance has no standard that lets a board ask whether a third gas station at one intersection is one too many, Houser said. That leaves the Planning Commission and Board of Appeals with little legal footing to turn down a project that checks every box, even when neighbors object. A conditional-use framework, he said, would give a denial a foundation that could hold up if a developer sued.
A split public and a vague standard
The commissioners’ own hearing on the draft drew a divided response. By Houser’s account, seven people spoke in person and were about evenly split, and roughly nine more sent individual written comments. Just under 60 additional written comments arrived through a text-message campaign that urged residents to weigh in. Those form comments opposed the ordinance.
Even supporters disagreed about the wording, with some asking for something firmer than “public need.” Houser acknowledged the term is subjective and laid out alternatives other Maryland counties use, including fixed separation distances between similar businesses and a Baltimore County rule tied to the number of abandoned gas stations within a mile. Objective rules are easier to apply, he said, but they can miss the case that prompted the complaint in the first place, such as a fourth station proposed where three are already operating.
One planning commissioner pressed staff on what criteria the Board of Appeals would actually use to decide. Members were also told the county needs no new state authority to adopt the change, and that the commission could recommend applying it to only one of the three uses as a trial.
The discussion comes as the county prepares to rewrite its zoning ordinance next year. Houser noted that the recently adopted comprehensive plan calls on the county to consider zoning tools that cut down on repeat uses in town centers and growth areas.
A hearing had been penciled in for Dec. 7. Commission members said they wanted more time with the material, and the board agreed to hold a second work session that night instead. Members will send questions to staff individually, and the answers will be compiled in a memo for the full commission. Later December meetings on the 14th and 28th were mentioned as possible hearing dates, but none was set.
