Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dunkirk Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission keeps Dunkirk Town Center record open, asks staff for follow-up research
Summary
After hearing public comment and staff presentations on draft chapters of the Dunkirk Town Center master plan, the commission voted to keep the record open and directed staff to provide additional information requested during testimony ahead of the next meeting.
The Planning Commission heard a staff presentation on revised draft Chapter 1 and Chapter 3 of the Dunkirk Town Center Master Plan and voted to keep the public record open and direct staff to provide additional research and answers requested during testimony.
Planning staff summarized revisions including updated housing-affordability assessments, affirmatively furthering fair housing language, updated broadband and EV-charging guidance, revised impervious-surface and riparian-buffer mapping, and a recommendation to coordinate with the Maryland Transit Administration on potential commuter routes to Annapolis, New Carrollton, College Park and Greenbelt. "Staff has revised the draft plan since then to respond to comments received..." the long-range planner said.
Commissioners raised questions about whether proposed town-center boundary adjustments (including Dunkirk District Park and the Dunkirk Park & Ride) are contiguous, whether added parcels are developed or developable, and whether inclusion would change ownership. Planning staff said the Park & Ride is state-owned and that boundary inclusion does not transfer ownership. Staff emphasized that the boundary change alone "does not by itself result in a net increase in impermeable soils," but acknowledged some areas within expanded boundaries are developable in Prince Frederick and Owings.
Public commenters raised access and traffic concerns. John Kaiser asked what benefit would come from expanding the town center to include the park and whether doing so would increase impervious surface; a resident, Sarah Rothis of Applegreen, opposed a proposal to turn Appleway into a right-turn-only movement because she said it would increase congestion and urged construction of a Shops Way connector. Staff said the Shops Way recommendation reflects a SHA study addressing a median crossover and sight-distance issues and that the recommendation would require coordination with the state and potential funding decisions.
The commissions motion directed staff to prepare the additional research requested during testimony and to keep the record open until the next Planning Commission meeting; the motion passed by voice vote.
