Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Bradley Brook Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board continues Bradley Brook appeal after Navy warns of noise and safety risks
Summary
The St. Mary's County Board of Appeals continued hearings on the Bradley Brook concept site plan after staff found the 76.26-acre proposal met county zoning standards but the Navy said parts of the site lie in higher noise contours and abut APZ-2, raising safety and complaint risks. The board reconvened April 23.
Get email alerts on the Bradley Brook Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The St. Mary's County Board of Appeals on March 26 continued hearings on the Bradley Brook concept site plan, a proposal for 223 homes on 76.26 acres in the Lexington Park Development District.
Brandy Glenn, deputy director of Land Use & Growth Management, told the board the concept submission proposes 150 attached townhomes and 73 single-family detached homes, provides 11.49 acres of common open space (exceeding the 10.24-acre requirement) and otherwise meets the county’s concept-site-plan criteria except for a required variance related to street frontage. Glenn also summarized the staff traffic and adequate-public-facilities review and provided the project’s student-generation estimates that appear in the staff packet.
The applicant team argued the project complies with the county’s adopted Air Installation Compatible Use Zone (AQ) maps and the comprehensive zoning ordinance. Chris Longmore, legal counsel for the applicant, said the project was designed to keep residences outside the county’s adopted APZ-2 boundary and that the developer was prepared to accept conditions, including noise-attenuating construction methods and buyer disclosures, for units in higher noise contours. “We’re offering that if you want to put that as a condition on the houses that are within that area,” Longmore said.
The Navy’s representatives disputed the applicant’s reliance on county-adopted maps alone. Captain Mark Zematis, commanding officer at NAS Patuxent River, said Navy analyses show a larger high-noise footprint and that roughly 20–30 homes in the proposed plan fall within the 65–70 dB contour of the Navy’s more recent study. “This development … presents an encroachment risk to our installation, due to the resident exposure of aviation noise and the public safety risk due to the proposed development’s proximity to APZ-2,” Zematis told the board.
Navy staff and the installation’s noise program manager, Alexis Gray, described the Navy’s complaint-and-investigation process — which uses flight-track/radar data to validate individual complaints — and said the Navy plans to release a new AQ study to the public in late spring or early summer 2026 with an open house planned for July–August. Captain Zematis said the Navy averages roughly 60–80 noise complaints annually and warned that new residential development near approach corridors can increase complaints and pressure to change flying operations.
Traffic analysis presented by Lenhart Traffic showed the required study intersections operating at level of service A under the county’s evaluation criteria; the consultant noted one low-volume side-street movement (Hilton Drive) reached LOS E during the evening peak, a condition driven by background traffic rather than the site itself.
School district staff clarified how the development’s students would be allocated and what capacity tools the district uses. Kimberly Howe, director of capital planning for St. Mary’s County Public Schools, said the board of land-use staff makes APF (adequate public facilities) determinations using the school system’s capacity data; for this project she reported estimates of 23.86 elementary, 47.95 middle and 34.34 high‑school students tied to the proposed build-out and explained the district’s remedies if capacity becomes constrained (relocatables or redistricting).
Given the competing maps and the technical testimony still to come (the applicant’s acoustical engineer is scheduled to appear), the board voted to continue all three Bradley Brook hearings to April 23 at 6:30 p.m. in the Commissioners Meeting Room. The board also completed ministerial business, approving the March 12 minutes, signing an order on a separate variance and adjourning the meeting.
What’s next: the appeal will resume April 23, when the applicant’s acoustical witness and additional county or Navy exhibits may be entered and the board will take additional public comment before deliberating. Until the board issues a formal decision, the hearing record will be open on the appeals docket.
Votes at a glance: the board voted unanimously to continue the Bradley Brook hearings to April 23, approved the March 12 minutes as written, and signed a separate variance order on a different docket item.

