Planning commission backs rezoning of 22.86 acres near Route 589 to R‑3, limits access to Ocean Pines

The Worcester County Planning Commission recommended approval June 5 of a rezoning that would change two parcels totaling 22.86 acres from C‑2 (commercial) to R‑3 (higher‑density residential) and added a condition barring vehicle access to Ocean Pines/Bridal Crown Estates.

The vote followed a presentation by the applicant’s team and technical testimony from a traffic engineer and a land planner. The commission’s recommendation will go to the County Commissioners for final action. One commissioner opposed the recommendation, saying additional traffic information is needed before the county makes a final decision.

The applicant, represented by attorney Hugh Cropper, asked the commission to find a substantial change in the character of the neighborhood since the last comprehensive rezoning and to conclude that R‑3 zoning is more consistent with the county’s comprehensive plan. Cropper told the commission, “we are alleging substantial change in the character of the neighborhood,” citing development including the casino overlay district, construction related to Atlantic General Hospital, new subdivisions and sewer expansions.

Land planner Steve Engle testified the applicant’s neighborhood boundary follows prior rezoning cases and that recent development around Maryland Route 589 supports higher‑density residential in that location. The application covers two revised parcels described in the hearing as Lot 1 (7.62 acres) and Revised Parcel B (15.24 acres), for a rezoning area of 22.86 acres; the original tract was 30.9 acres but had been divided.

Traffic engineer Carl Wilson of The Traffic Group presented the traffic analysis used by the applicant. He said the draft analysis used the standard ITE trip generation methodology and, for the project as proposed, the multifamily scenario yields substantially fewer trips than the commercial option the site could otherwise support. "We're looking at 65 trips during the morning and 79 during the afternoon" for the proposed 37‑unit multifamily scheme, Wilson said, and contrasted that with a hypothetical 100,000‑square‑foot shopping center that he said could generate about "73 trips in the morning and 519 in the afternoon." Wilson also reported a modeled daily trip total of about 953 trips for the 37 units versus roughly 6,700 daily trips for the 100,000‑square‑foot shopping center in his comparison table.

Wilson said the firm used existing turning‑movement counts collected in January, applied State Highway Administration conversion factors and a conservative 3% growth rate, and also reviewed older July counts available from SHA (which his team used to scale up winter counts). Under his analyses — both a Critical Lane Volume check and an HCM (Highway Capacity Manual) signalized‑intersection analysis — the intersection serving the site performed at acceptable levels of service (A–C overall) under the residential scenarios tested, though some minor‑street approaches showed higher delays, a result Wilson attributed to signal timing that prioritizes the 589 through movement.

Wilson and the applicant’s team emphasized the project would use the existing signalized access on Maryland Route 589 and proposed no additional direct access to 589. The team also noted potential internal synergies if a limited amount of neighborhood commercial were later included as part of a master planned Residential Planned Community (RPC), and said the ITE methodology includes an allowance (about 20%) for internal capture when on‑site complementary uses reduce external trips.

Commissioners asked about summer (peak seasonal) counts and coordination with adjacent intersections. The applicant’s team said their detailed RPC and site plans would return to the planning commission for public review and that some commissioners could request updated summer traffic counts at that time. One commissioner said the recommendation felt premature without additional traffic information; that commissioner voted against the recommendation.

Planning staff and witnesses discussed the site’s history: it was zoned A‑1 prior to the 2009 comprehensive rezoning, later rezoned to C‑2 in 2012 after a multi‑layer appellate process tied to an Atlantic General Hospital project, and has since seen changes including the county’s Casino Overlay/Casino Entertainment District and sewer and service‑area amendments that the applicant argues altered the character of the neighborhood. The applicant said the earlier medical campus concept was scaled back after market changes and COVID‑era shifts in healthcare financing and demand, and Signa Companies (presenting as the property owner group) has explored several potential uses.

Environmental and utilities issues were raised in testimony: Steve Engle said non‑tidal wetlands and an established conservation area lie toward the rear of the property and would be addressed through forest conservation and required buffers. The applicant said sewer service discussions and a prior service‑area expansion for nearby parcels make on‑site sewer feasible; the team noted the casino project had been connected to Ocean Pines sewer lines as part of prior work.

After deliberation the planning commission voted to forward a favorable recommendation to the County Commissioners to rezone the parcels from C‑2 to R‑3, with a condition prohibiting access to Ocean Pines/Bridal Crown Estates (verbiage discussed at the hearing). The motion passed with a majority; one commissioner opposed on the record because they wanted additional traffic study information before a county decision.

The applicant noted that if the rezoning proceeds the project would still require subsequent approvals — including RPC/master‑plan review for developments over 20 units — and that those steps will involve additional advertised hearings and technical review. The rezoning record and technical exhibits referenced the county comprehensive plan, previous rezoning cases (3‑90‑2 and 3‑90‑6 cited by the applicant), Resolution 19‑2, the Casino Overlay District adopted in 2020, and prior court proceedings tied to the 2012 commercial rezoning.