▼

Comprehensive Plan Update

Show All Answers

1. What is a Comprehensive Plan?

A comprehensive plan, sometimes referred to as a general plan or master plan, is the foundational policy document for local governments. It functions like a community's framework or vision for future growth to be implemented through local laws, such as zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations, and public investments over the next 20 to 25 years.

2. What is a Zoning Ordinance?

A zoning ordinance sets forth regulations and standards regarding the use and development of land and structures. A zoning ordinance describes zones, the types of uses allowed in each zone, and the conditions by which those uses are allowed. A zoning ordinance includes a map of zoning districts and may include regulations regarding the subdivision of land.

3. Who is involved in updating the Calvert County Comprehensive Plan?

The Calvert County Planning Commission is responsible for the development of the comprehensive plan. Consultants from WSP/Parsons Brinckerhoff of Baltimore will assist in the development, identification of issues and preparation of the final product. Staff at the Department of Community Planning & Building will provide coordination, input, outreach and direction. The Calvert County Board of County Commissioners is granted the authority by the State of Maryland to adopt the final plan.

4. What does a Comprehensive Plan do?

A comprehensive plan is a locally adopted long-range plan that includes analysis and establishes goals, policies and actions to guide a community’s land use, economy, housing, community facilities, housing and transportation. It provides the basis for development regulations and local capital improvement plans over a multiyear period.

5. Why is a Comprehensive Plan needed?

Maryland requires local governments to prepare comprehensive plans and many states require local development regulations to be in conformance with an adopted comprehensive plan. Common elements include land use, transportation, housing, economic development and community facilities. An increasing number of jurisdictions have added elements addressing sustainability, natural resources or energy to their comprehensive plans.

6. Why are we updating ours now?

• To ensure Calvert County’s current visions are still relevant.
• To account for changes in demographics, economic development, job creation and retail needs.
• To address emerging issues like housing cost and affordability, traffic congestion and education.
• To incorporate new state laws and requirements.

7. How does the Zoning Ordinance relate to the Comprehensive Plan?

A comprehensive plan sets forth the vision and policies, a zoning ordinance provides the rules for using or developing land. Per Maryland State law, zoning regulations must be consistent with a local government’s comprehensive plan.

8. What is the timeline?

This will be an intensive, long-term project which is expected to take at least two years to complete. An internal organizational meeting occurred in late 2015, outreach to the public begins in fall 2016 and draft planning documents are expected to be ready for presentation to the public in early 2017. Extensive public input will be sought to develop the plan, and it is expected the final product will be adopted by late spring 2018.

9. How will the public be involved?

We will use a variety of methods to engage the public and get feedback including social/online networks, town halls and face-to-face meetings, open houses, press releases, surveys, website postings and slide presentations, among others.

10. What is Calvert County's history with Comprehensive Plans?

Calvert County’s first comprehensive plan was developed in 1967. There have been five updates since then, focusing on various visions of the time:
1967 Master Plan: “Lay the Groundwork”

1974 Pleasant Peninsula Plan: “Control Our Own Destiny”
1983 Comprehensive Plan: “Maintain the Rural Character” and “Promote a Strong Economy”
1997 Comprehensive Plan: “Establish 10 Visions”
2004 Comprehensive Plan: “Stay the Course”
2010 Plan Amendments: “Address State Laws”

11. Whom should I contact for more information?

For Comprehensive Plan questions: Tay Harris, Long-Range Planner, Calvert County Department of Planning & Zoning. 205 Main Street, Floor 2, Prince Frederick, MD 20678. Phone: 410-535-1600, ext. 2333. Email: tay.harris@calvertcountymd.gov. 

For Zoning Ordinance questions: Judy Mackall,  Deputy Director, Calvert County Department of Planning & Zoning. 205 Main Street, Floor 2, Prince Frederick, MD 20678. Phone: 410-535-1600, ext. 2643. Email: judy.mackall@calvertcountymd.gov

12. Does the Comprehensive Plan draft call for expanded town centers? Why?

Yes. The two overarching visions of the Comprehensive Plan are to preserve the county’s rural character and direct growth to designated areas. The town centers are the designated growth areas as called for in the 1983 Calvert County Comprehensive Plan. To meet the Comprehensive Plan visions, one objective is ensuring our town centers are attractive, convenient and interesting places to live, work and shop.

The current Comprehensive Plan update draft aims to better define town center boundaries by considering existing land use patterns, the size of the core community, the roadway network, utility extension policies, preservation priorities and environmental constraints.

New boundaries would simply include areas that naturally enhance the town centers; that is, the boundary now follows the natural parcel boundary lines. Redefining these boundaries will make future development in these locations more predictable and better identified with the associated town center. Using this method, the town centers of Solomons, Huntingtown, Lusby, Owings, Prince Frederick and St. Leonard would expand. Dunkirk Town Center is not expanding.

While the plan draft recommends expansions of some town centers, it does not automatically expand the boundaries. That can only be done through zoning amendments which involves a full public process.

13. Is the Prince Frederick Town Center to be significantly expanded? Why?

In the current Comprehensive Plan draft, Prince Frederick Town Center would grow to include existing residential subdivisions and institutional use such as the College of Southern Maryland and the Barstow Landfill that fit naturally within the town center concept. The expansion, however would not increase density or change current land use patterns.

The Prince Frederick Town Center is proposed to expand in two phases. The first phase, as outlined in the draft Comprehensive plan, would incorporate the areas currently zoned Employment Center, which has no assigned density and shares a border with the current town center and the area to the southeast zoned Residential. This would expand Prince Frederick Town Center by approximately 23 percent.

The proposed second phase would occur only after a future Comprehensive Plan update, Transportation Plan update, Zoning Ordinance update, and the Prince Frederick Town Center Master Plan update is completed. To include this phase would require formal action by the Board of County Commissioners following completion of the state-mandated Comprehensive Plan update process.

14. Is it true that traffic in Prince Frederick is projected to reach 83,500 trips per day by 2030?

No. The Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA) released new projections Aug. 1, 2018 showing Prince Frederick trips per day in 2040 ranging from 46,300 to 57,500. This compares to 43,531 trips per day counted by SHA in 2015. Given these numbers, traffic is projected to increase an average of less than 1 percent per year in Prince Frederick from 2015 to 2040.

15. Is it true the draft Comprehensive Plan ignores Maryland Department of Transportation studies predicting future transportation impacts in Prince Frederick even before its proposed expansion?

No. All relevant state studies, as well as local studies resulting from the normal plan review process, are taken into account. The growth visible today has been planned for many years and under the guidance of the 2010 Comprehensive Plan and associated zoning ordinance. However, the Maryland State Highway Administration (SHA) recently released new projections for future Prince Frederick traffic showing less of an impact than previously stated. SHA originally projected 83,500 average daily trips in Prince Frederick by 2030, up from 43,531 in 2015. New projections show a projected range of 46,300 to 57,500 average daily trips by 2040.

16. Shouldn’t studies be conducted on local traffic before any town centers are expanded?

It is important to remember the Comprehensive Plan is a visionary document. It points to the community’s goals for our collective future. Following the public process of updating the Comprehensive Plans and its visions, the work then begins on the regulatory framework that would put the visions into action. This includes the county transportation plan, the zoning ordinance and all town center master plans.

Traffic studies completed by the state of Maryland are used in the comprehensive plan process, including a Prince Frederick area study conducted in 2011 and updated in 2013. The Board of County Commissioners also directed staff to update the county’s existing transportation plan that dates to 1997. An updated transportation plan will be done before the updated zoning regulations, which will dictate future density, are adopted. The transportation plan will cover near and long-term transportation statistics and goals countywide. By contrast, traffic studies are generally limited to smaller scales – a single intersection or a town center. The updated transportation plan will be used to determine if individual traffic studies are necessary during the future updating of all seven town center master plans.

Updating the county transportation plan prior to conducting new traffic studies follows the same logic of updating the comprehensive plan (countywide goals and vision) prior to developing zoning ordinances (specific implementation actions).

17. Why does the draft Comprehensive Plan designate Dunkirk as a “major town center?”

Given the nature of county development, the Comprehensive Plan draws distinctions between the size and character of our town centers. The plan states “major town centers are to serve as regional centers, providing goods and services that attract visitors from the entire county and/or from outside the county (as in tourism).” (Draft Plan, Page 3-16) Dunkirk serves as a regional center and has three grocery stores along with retail stores like Wal-mart and Marshalls that provide more than local convenience goods. Lusby, Prince Frederick and Solomons are also major town centers.

On the other hand, minor town centers contain a mix of uses, with concentrations of commercial, retail and civic and/or community uses. Minor town centers have more local-serving commercial uses when compared to major town centers. The county’s minor town centers are Huntingtown, Owings and St. Leonard.

18. If land preservation is a goal of the Comprehensive Plan, why has there been a moratorium on Agricultural Preservation Districts since 2013?

At the time, the county was experiencing the continuation of the economic downturn with very little movement of the Transferrable Development Rights (TDRs) designed to preserve farmland and move development to town centers. Continuing to add additional Agricultural Preservation Districts would simply flood the existing surplus of TDRs currently on the market. Changes to allow for the movement of TDRs were designed to encourage the use of TDRs in Prince Frederick, Solomons and Lusby. The moratorium was a joint decision in which the Agricultural Preservation Advisory Board played a major role and considered input from farmers, builders, developers, foresters and various planning staff.

Before lifting the moratorium, a detailed audit of the TDRs already existing had to occur. This type of audit had not been conducted in the 40-year history of the program. An electronic auditing program is nearing completion, which will be used when developing recommendations to reopen the Agricultural Preservation District program for future preservation. Meanwhile, other land preservation practices have been added over the years and remain in place.

19. Why has land preservation slowed in Calvert County?

The Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) is financially responsible to all citizens of Calvert County. During the economic downturn that started around 2007, less funding was available across the board and the BOCC redirected funding in order to provide necessary services to citizens. Vital services such as law enforcement, emergency services, social services and public education took precedence. When appropriate funding is available, the BOCC has supported land preservation.

Last year, over $1 million dollars in the county Purchase and Retirement (PAR) Fund went unused by property owners for the sale of associated Transferrable Development Rights (TDRs). This year, there is approximately $3.2 million set aside in the PAR fund. These funds directly impact preservation.

The BOCC also removed some restrictions to make it easier for the holders of TDRs to sell their holdings. Property owners holding TDRs are no longer restricted to 10 TDRs per annual transaction.

20. Is it true the draft Comprehensive Plan has no recommendations to improve the county’s effort to preserve 40,000 acres of farm and forest land?

No. Several strategies in the draft plan address land preservation. They include:
- Continuing to fund the Purchase and Retirement (PAR) and Leveraging and Retirement (LAR) Programs.
- Allowing the use of TDRs to increase the density and range of housing types provided in town centers.
- Exploring the use of TDRs to increase commercial intensity in town centers.

21. Is it true the Board of County Commissioners members seized the Comprehensive Plan process from the Calvert County Planning Commission by hiring a consultant of their choice?

No. The Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) was not involved in the consultant selection process, other than the final step of signing the contract hiring the consultant. An evaluation and selection committee reviewed the proposals. Two members of the Planning Commission served on the evaluation and selection committee.

22. Is it true the Board of County Commissioners rushed through the Comprehensive Plan process two years prior to the 10-year review deadline?

No. In 2013, state law changed the review cycle for Comprehensive Plans from six years to 10 years. The 2013 law also required that a planning commission complete an implementation status report at least once within five years after the adoption or review of the local jurisdiction’s Comprehensive Plan. Calvert County’s current plan was adopted on January 11, 2005 (the 2004 Comprehensive Plan) and amended on October 26, 2010. At its Dec. 10, 2014 meeting, the Planning Commission voted to do a full review and update of the plan rather than a five-year status report.

23. Did the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) stop the 1989 Prince Frederick Master Plan Update Prior to the Election of 2014?

No. The Prince Frederick Master Plan update was delayed prior to the current Board of County Commissioners term which started in 2014. The Prince Frederick charrette was held in June 2013 and subsequent charrette report was presented to the prior Board of County Commissioners later in 2013. Work on the Prince Frederick Master Plan was put on hold to allow for the update of the Calvert County Comprehensive Plan per the Calvert County Planning Commission. In lieu of executing a mid-term update to the current Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Commission directed staff to fully update the Comprehensive Plan and, as a result, caused the delay in updating the already 25-year-old Prince Frederick Master Plan.

24. Did the BOCC adopt piecemeal changes, disregarding the Prince Frederick Master Plan?

Piecemeal, no. However, the Board of County Commissioners did make four changes to the Prince Frederick Master Plan, as has been done by previous boards. Historically, it is important to note that the Prince Frederick Master Plan has been changed 22 times since 1994:

-- 9 changes between 1990-2000 (2/15/94; 6/13/95; 3/12/96; 3/19/96; 4/2/96; 12/23/97; 1/20/98; 12/8/98; 4/20/99)
-- 8 changes between 2000-2010 (7/3/01; 5/29/01; 10/28/03; 12/2/03; 5/18/04; 8/10/04; 5/1/06; 3/25/08)
-- 5 changes between 2011-present (5/4/12; 8/5/15; 11/30/15; 4/15/16; 7/29/16)

25. Did the BOCC change requirements for developers when building apartments/townhomes in town centers?

Yes, but with input from the agriculture and development communities. In 2013, prior to the current board taking office, the Agricultural Preservation Advisory Board prepared a draft list of suggested program changes for Transferrable Development Rights (TDRs), which included:

-- “…scale TDRs to match the type of development and require perhaps one TDR for an apartment, two for a condo, three for a duplex and five for single family residences.”
-- The Prince Frederick Town Center charrette report made several key recommendations, one of which was to reform the TDR program

Based on growing concerns about the TDR program, in 2015 the Department of Planning & Zoning held several joint meetings with the agricultural and development community to discuss TDRs. To make certain that all there was even representation from both the development and agricultural community, four representatives were chose from each of the communities that included: Susie Hance-Wells, Wilson Freeland, Hagner Mister and Steve Oberg (agriculture); and Randy Barrett, Rick Bailey, Rodney Gertz and Anthony Williams (development). The group’s recommendations were presented to the Board of County Commissioners in May 2015; the new regulations were adopted and became effective in November of 2015. The group’s recommendations followed the process for zoning ordinance text amendments, including agency review, public hearing, recommendation by the Planning Commission and adoption by the BOCC.

26. In Prince Frederick, did the BOCC reduce setbacks, increase the number of dwellings allowed per acre (14 to 24), increase big box store size and increase building height to 6 stories?

Yes. It is important to remember that these amendments applied only to the New Town District and were adopted in order to achieve the vision for the Armory property proposed during the public charrette process. The amendments were proposed, and enacted, to provide more flexibility in support of economic development in Prince Frederick, respond to market demand and attract quality development for county citizens.

The changes were also made in order to jumpstart the sale of TDRs within the Prince Frederick Town Center, text amendments were enacted. The County’s TDR program is designed to protect and preserve the rural character of the county by directing growth in the county’s Town Centers. Text amendments were necessary for Prince Frederick to reverse the trend of residential development occurring outside of the Town Center and to encourage residential growth in the Town Center, where previously it had been minimal.

27. Did the BOCC adopt regulations allowing big box and restaurants to have signs taller than local businesses?

No, in fact sign regulations were adopted to consider all businesses; singling out any type of business category would be inappropriate. Corporate businesses are allowed to attempt to retain nationally standardized signs by way of variance through the county. Local businesses are afforded these same variances where applicable.

28. Did the BOCC attempt to eliminate Architectural Review Committees (ARCs) and weaken regulations to favor chains and weaken ARC authority?

Yes. The regulations governing the County’s ARCs were brought before the Board of County Commissioners for review due to inefficiencies in the execution of their responsibilities where, at times, it was difficult to obtain a quorum for meetings thus causing significant delays in the process. The commissioners reviewed the current structure and recommendations for changes to the ARCs. However, to date, no changes have been made to those regulations.

29. Did the BOCC gut sign regulations and weaken regulations to allow sign proliferation?

No. The U.S. Supreme Court case Reed v. Town of Gilbert in June 2015 impacted the county’s update to the sign regulations. The eventual update of the sign regulations occurred only after a six-year public review period, reflected input from the public from a variety of backgrounds, and incorporated the findings of the U.S. Supreme Court. Signs located along Route 2-4 are in Maryland State Highway Administration easements and are not regulated by Calvert County Government.

30. Did the BOCC remove architectural standards for signs?

Yes, however, the design standards now fall under the direct guidance of the Department of Planning & Zoning for review and remain part of the review performed by the Architectural Review Committees within each Town Center.

31. Did the Board of County Commissioners adopt term limits for the Planning Commission and other boards?

Yes, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) considered term limits for all BOCC-appointed boards and commissions under their legal oversight and made term limits consistent throughout the government.

32. Did Board of County Commissioners members exempt themselves from term limits?

No, Board members do not possess the authority to assign term limits to themselves. They are governed by legislative rules set by the Maryland General Assembly. The notion of applying for terms limits was posed but did not make it through legislative review.