Commissioners direct staff to schedule public hearings on town‑center traffic mitigation and small nonresidential APF exemptions

The St. Mary's County Board of County Commissioners on Aug. 20 voted to send two proposed zoning text amendments to public hearing: one to allow projects in town centers to mitigate traffic impacts in a manner more like development districts, and a second to exempt nonresidential site plans under 5,000 square feet from Adequate Public Facilities (APF) findings.

Phil Shire of the Department of Land Use and Growth Management outlined the traffic item and said the county’s zoning code lists multiple mitigation options including dedication of property, impact fees, taxing districts, fees‑in‑lieu, public‑private partnerships and off‑site improvements. “I'm gonna ask that just for the sake of today's discussion whenever I say traffic mitigation, let's just think road improvements,” he said, and explained that town centers currently require projects to achieve a passing level‑of‑service (LOS) at affected intersections, while development districts permit projects to mitigate their own traffic impact even if the overall LOS remains under the county threshold.

Shire said the proposed amendment would allow a developer to mitigate its impact and leave an intersection slightly better than before even if it does not reach the county’s passing LOS — a measure he described as a temporary or “band‑aid” solution until the Charlotte Hall master plan and longer‑term fixes are completed. He identified Golden Beach Road and Route 5 intersections in Charlotte Hall as current examples of constrained LOS and said smaller projects cannot afford major intersection reconstruction.

Commissioners debated whether the text change should be restricted to nonresidential (commercial) development only. After discussion, Commissioner Jones moved to direct staff to schedule a public hearing on the proposed text amendment; Commissioner Morgan seconded. The motion passed on a voice vote; two commissioners registered opposition during the discussion and the board carried the motion.

On the second text amendment, Shire described an existing ordinance exemption for “minor” site plans with less than 5,000 square feet of nonresidential floor area and recommended deleting the word “minor” so any stand‑alone nonresidential site plan below 5,000 square feet would be exempt from APF findings. Shire said the change would remove a technical distinction that forced otherwise low‑impact pad‑site buildings into a major site plan review solely because they were freestanding.

Commissioner Morgan moved and Commissioner Jones seconded that staff schedule a public hearing on the APF exemption amendment. The motion passed; the board recorded one opposing vote. The board instructed staff to prepare materials and public notices for each proposed amendment so the hearings can present both sides of the policy choices before any ordinance changes are adopted.