St. Mary’s planning panel approves Religious Freedom scenic-byway corridor plan with technical edits

The St. Mary’s County Planning Commission on July 14, 2008 approved a corridor management plan for the Religious Freedom Scenic Byway and recommended that the Board of County Commissioners incorporate the plan by reference into the county comprehensive plan.

The commission voted to approve the corridor plan after staff recapped a June 23 public hearing and an open-record comment period that closed July 7; “No comments were received during the open record period,” staff representative Theresa Wilson said. The commission adopted several specific modifications before forwarding the plan.

Commissioners said the changes address practical concerns about future road work, business signage and historical accuracy. The commission added language to (1) acknowledge that existing minor arterials could be widened from two to four lanes if growth requires it and to direct the county to work with the Maryland State Highway Administration to find “context sensitive solutions” that preserve character while meeting safety and capacity needs; (2) require any business sign to conform with St. Mary’s County sign provisions; (3) note that tourism-area corridor signing or permitted off-premise signs could assist motorists in finding businesses; (4) require a post-construction evaluation of the signing program including highway users and southern Maryland residents; and (5) amend the Chaptico history text to note the parish was established in 1692 and the church structure was erected in 1736 and to state that Chaptico was an important port of entry on Chaptico Bay.

Commissioner McNeil made the motion to approve the plan as amended; Commissioner Thompson seconded. The motion passed on a voice vote and the chair authorized the commission chair to sign a resolution conveying the recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners. The transcript records that one commissioner expressed opposition before the vote: Commissioner Guzzo said she would not support the plan because she did not consider Route 234 and Route 5 “a byway” and feared “unintended consequences” and restrictions on needed road improvements. The transcript does not record a roll-call tally by name.

Staff and members emphasized that the byway designation is a state-recognized program intended to highlight historic sites and to encourage context-sensitive approaches to roadway improvements rather than to prohibit changes. Theresa Wilson noted the corridor management plan was prepared by Lardner Klein and Associates (March 2008) and that the record complied with the requirements of Article 66B of the Maryland Annotated Code for comprehensive-plan amendments.

The Planning Commission’s approval sends the amended corridor management plan to the Board of County Commissioners, which will hold its own public hearing before any formal adoption into the county comprehensive plan.

The commission also noted that Charles County planners were expected to review adjacent segments and that state highways within the byway remain under Maryland State Highway Administration jurisdiction.