Planning commission approves Patuxent Cove Phase 1 concept plan with conditions

The St. Mary's County Planning Commission on [date of meeting] approved a concept site plan for Patuxent Cove Phase 1, a proposed 60‑unit multifamily apartment project by Conifer Realty, after hearing presentations from the applicant and staff and taking public comment.

The approved plan covers Phase 1 of a two‑phase development on Peg Road and includes 60 apartments in five residential buildings, a community building with a clubhouse and fitness space, a neighborhood green and a tot lot. The commission approved a request to reduce the county’s minimum open‑space requirement for the site from 50 percent to 30 percent and also accepted the applicant’s reduced parking program for Phase 1. The approval carries conditions the commission listed at the vote: a recorded affordable‑housing restriction of at least 15 years, no on‑street parking along the main entry drive, and explicit acceptance of the proposed parking count for Phase 1.

Why it matters

Planning staff and the applicant framed the project as a mixed‑income development that would add workforce and affordable rental housing near the Lexington Park development district and the naval base. The applicant said the project would reserve a portion of units for low‑income households and veterans and would be eligible for state low‑income housing tax credits and project‑based rental assistance.

What the commission heard

County staff summarized the concept submittal and the regulatory items the commission must consider under the comprehensive zoning ordinance, including buffer yards, parking, public‑facilities adequacy, forest conservation and open‑space requirements. Staff noted the plan as submitted shows approximately 83,360 square feet of building area and 60 dwelling units for Phase 1, that public hearing notices were posted in December 2017, and that agency review comments (METCOM, Department of Public Works, Health Department and others) had been or would be required as the project moves to final engineering.

Applicant representatives described the proposal and fielded detailed questions. Vonette Harris, identified as development director for Conifer Realty, said the development would be mixed‑income: 42 units were designated for households at or below 60 percent of area median income under the low‑income housing tax credit program and the remainder would be market‑rate. She said 15 percent of the units would be reserved for veterans and that project‑based vouchers had been secured to subsidize those units; the tax‑credit subsidy will include a recorded restrictive covenant lasting 40 years under the state program. Harris said, “We believe in being long term partners in the community.”

Project engineer Jim Gotch and architect Jim Haley gave technical testimony on site layout, grading, stormwater management, parking and building types. Gotch said the site drops roughly 20 feet from the Peg Road edge to the downstream storm drain and described a system of bioretention facilities intended to meet the county’s stormwater requirements and to avoid wetlands or stream permitting. He said the developers were pursuing a gravity sewer connection through an easement across adjacent property rather than a private pump station and that Phase 2 will require a separate concept submission.

Open space, forest conservation and parking were the principal technical topics debated. The applicant asked the commission for a reduction from 50 percent to 30 percent usable open space under the county rules because the site’s high‑density residential standards, forest conservation requirements and stormwater facilities limit fully developable area. Staff and the applicant discussed a draft exhibit that showed developed and undeveloped open space and how the Phase 2 area factors into the Phase 1 calculations; staff said an accurate and legible exhibit will be required before final engineering approval.

On forest conservation, the applicant submitted a forest conservation plan that was under review. Gotch testified the concept plan shows about 3.46 acres of forest conservation on the concept map while a later forest conservation calculation showed 4.99 acres required; he said the applicant is considering a fee‑in‑lieu or purchasing easements to meet any shortfall and discussed possible boundary‑adjustment discussions with a neighboring property owner to increase on‑site wooded acreage.

On parking, the plan submitted for Phase 1 shows 96 parking spaces on site. County staff asked the commission to discuss the number; staff noted the director may decide a reduction under subsection 64.3.1 but had requested the commission consider the proposed figure. Applicant witnesses said Conifer’s portfolio averages about 1.3 parking spaces per unit in Maryland and the company chose to provide a 1.6 ratio on this site (the applicant’s ratio and sample matrix were shown to the commission). The planning commission expressed concerns that local public transit frequency is limited and that on‑street spillover into neighboring streets could be a problem; applicant witnesses said lease rules and parking registration, site monitoring and enforcement would be used to manage parking and guest behavior.

Public testimony and accessibility

Three residents spoke during public comment. Two speakers representing persons with disabilities praised the project for including a comparatively high number of accessible or adaptable units on the first floor and asked the applicant to ensure accessible details in the final plans. Applicant and architect testimony stated that all first‑floor units would be adaptable or designed for accessibility and that a portion of units — described in testimony as about 11 percent of units — would be fully accessible (mix of one, two and three‑bedroom units with accessible fixtures and design). Speakers also asked about handicap parking counts, playground accessibility, and clubhouse access; the applicant said management and unit mix decisions would address visitor and accessible parking and that the community building, clubhouse and tot lot would be designed to meet accessibility standards.

The commission’s decision and conditions

After discussion the commission voted to approve the concept site plan for Patuxent Cove Phase 1, with conditions the board read into the record at the time of the vote. Those conditions (as entered on the record) are: a recorded affordable‑housing covenant for a minimum of 15 years (the applicant indicated the state tax‑credit covenant will be 40 years at closing), a reduction in the county open‑space minimum from 50 percent to 30 percent for this project, acceptance of the applicant’s reduced parking plan for Phase 1 (96 spaces as shown on the concept submission), and no on‑street parking along the primary internal entry drive (signing and enforcement as part of final approvals). The motion passed and the commission closed the public hearing.

Next steps

The Planning Commission’s approval was a concept determination. Final engineering, the forest conservation plan approval, any required easements for sewer and any remaining TEC agency approvals must be completed before final site plan and building permits. The applicant indicated Phase 2 will be submitted as a separate concept plan and that final design adjustments could be made in the engineering phase to resolve open‑space or stormwater details requested by staff.

For now, the project has concept approval with the conditions the commission recorded at the vote. The applicant and staff both said they would provide clarified, legible exhibits and calculations for staff review during the final plan phase.