Charles Town planning commissioners approve Hunt Field rec center amendment with conditions, subject to zoning variance

Charles Town planning commissioners on March 24 approved an amended final plan for the Hunt Field Recreation Center, attaching four conditions intended to address safety and usability concerns raised during the review.

Staff summarized changes the applicant had made in response to prior comments, including added fencing on three sides of the basketball court, a 20-foot grass seating strip around parts of the pool, reconfigured pedestrian access from the top lot to the pool center, and a gated barrier around the children’s pool. Applicant Matt Monahan of DRV Group said the revisions reflected the commission’s February comments and that the team could add striping across the lot for a pedestrian crossing.

The motion approved by the commission (moved by Commissioner speaker 5, seconded by Commissioner speaker 1) included four conditions: provide an 8-foot chain-link fence on the three sides of the basketball court facing the road and parking; convert the grass seating area on the pool’s south side to concrete/decking; replace the pool’s maintenance/mechanical building as shown in the earlier (2007) plan; and provide a striped crosswalk through the parking lot. Chair speaker 2 and staff clarified the fence condition is subject to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) because the city’s front-yard fence rules limit front-yard fences to 48 inches and prohibit chain-link in front yards without a variance. As staff stated during discussion, “Fences in a front yard cannot exceed 4 feet in height. Furthermore, fences in a front yard cannot be made out of chain link.”

Commissioners pressed the applicant on several technical points before the vote. Members raised concerns that the revised plan reduces pool decking from the original plan (commissioners cited roughly a 2,000-square-foot decrease from about 9,500 to 7,400 square feet) and noted the earlier plan included a pool mechanical/maintenance building that is not on the revised single-story footprint. The applicant explained that grade changes and the elimination of a second floor required the pool and associated grading to be raised; the pool elevation was described in the discussion as on the order of 10–12 feet above the nearby roadway grade, limiting opportunities to expand surrounding decking without creating steep dropoffs or new utility conflicts.

On safety, commissioners sought assurances the kiddie pool and deep end would be separated adequately and that walkways would meet city pedestrian-width standards (commissioners referenced a 5-foot walkway standard). The applicant agreed to consider shifting fence lines and to add crosswalk striping and additional decking in the southern seating area to reduce the muddy/erosion risk raised by several commissioners.

After deliberation the commission approved the motion by voice vote. Staff and commissioners emphasized the fence condition will require BZA review for an 8-foot chain-link variant; if the BZA does not grant the variance the commission’s fence-height/material requirement would be adjusted to comply with the city code. The commission’s action attaches the conditions to the approval and directs the applicant to work with staff to finalize the plan set before the next approval steps.

The commission moved on to new business following the vote.