Residents urge caution as commission sends quadplex concept to council for legal review

The Leonardtown Planning & Zoning Commission considered concept site development for a two‑story quad duplex (case 43‑25) on Miss Bessie Drive and moved to send the recommendation to town council with a request that the town attorney review covenant and plat issues.

Planning staff said the proposed building would be a 3,600 sq ft structure (1,800 sq ft per floor) with a building height of about 25 feet. Under chapter 155 of the municipal code, multifamily dwellings in the PUDM district require two parking spaces per unit; staff said the plan reflects the required eight parking spaces, including one ADA‑accessible stall. The plan received concept approval from St. Mary’s County Department of Public Works and Transportation on Feb. 4, 2026, according to staff.

Residents at the meeting objected to the scale and character of the building and raised legal arguments about private covenants. “In the state of Maryland, there is a rule that's called the most restrictive rule,” said resident Chris White during public comment, arguing that private covenants might restrict the proposed development. Another resident and parent, Katherine True Blood, warned the commission that Miss Bessie Drive has three school‑bus stops and said she was concerned about increased traffic and safety for children.

“I see this building put in there between all these single‑story bungalows is going to be towering down on us looking in our backyards,” said Roger Mattingley, a nearby homeowner. Fred Calbert, another resident, objected to architectural features he called out in the drawings and described an open third‑level deck as a potential party space.

Staff responded that the parcel has been PUD‑zoned for more than 25 years and that the town attorney reviewed the plat and told staff the plat does not override zoning. “We took the plat to him ... he said it would not as far as the plat goes,” a planning staff member said. The staff member also advised that the planning commission’s role was to make a recommendation to town council and that a public hearing would be scheduled at the town council meeting (staff noted the council hearing schedule for May).

A commissioner moved to recommend approval of the concept plan to town council with the condition that staff check covenants and clarify legal issues with the town attorney. The transcript records the motion and a voice response, but the meeting record in this transcript does not include a complete roll‑call tally of the commission recommendation.

Next steps: the planning commission’s recommendation and staff legal review will be considered at the scheduled town council public hearing. If council approves, the applicant will return for final design review and permitting.