The State Exceeded Its Bounds, Firm Says

Md. Planners Advise Against Rezoning

Officials from one of the region's largest construction-materials firms are crying foul after state planners intervened in a Charles County zoning dispute.

In a letter to the Charles commissioners late last month, Stephanie Martins, director of the Maryland Planning Department's land-use planning and analysis office, said that a proposal to rezone 150 acres in Hughesville for heavy-industrial uses is inconsistent with the county's comprehensive plan.

The unsolicited letter advised the county commissioners that changing the parcel's zoning from agricultural to heavy industrial to accommodate a Chaney Enterprises facility "will have a negative impact on the County's ability to preserve Hughesville as provided for in the Hughesville Village Revitalization Plan."

Chaney spokesman Steve Tripp said company officials were blindsided when they found out about the letter on a blog produced by opponents of the proposed rezoning. He said Chaney executives are upset that the state Planning Department involved itself in a county zoning issue over which state planners have no jurisdiction.

"The Maryland Department of Planning has no zoning authority," Tripp said. "They did not have any right to comment on this."

Martins's letter arrived at the commissioners' office during heightened tensions over the rezoning proposal, which has pitted dozens of Hughesville residents against Chaney Enterprises. It was sent the day of a widely attended public hearing on the subject, about two weeks after the county Planning Commission recommended approval of the Chaney plan.

A spokesman for the state Planning Department said the intent of the letter was not to assert authority over county zoning matters but to express an informed opinion on a topic of general interest. To prepare the three-page letter, department staff members reviewed the county's comprehensive plan and its water and sewer plan, as well as the Hughesville Village Revitalization Plan, which was created by a board appointed by the county commissioners when the Hughesville Bypass was under construction.

"Zoning is a local decision, but we can make our determination by reading the county's plans and reading the company's proposal," said the department's spokesman, John Coleman. "According to our analysis, the proposal is inconsistent with the county's goals."

The zoning change would allow Chaney to move a gravel-washing facility and truck hub to Hughesville. Chaney is considering such a move because the county might build an extension of Post Office Road through Chaney's current site in Waldorf, between Acton Lane and Mattawoman-Beantown Road. Chaney officials have said that the chances of building the facility on the Hughesville land are slim, but that they need the zoning change in place as they explore options.

Publicly, the county commissioners have remained neutral on the dispute as public comments -- skewed heavily against the Chaney request -- have streamed into their office. The comment period ends Wednesday, and the commissioners will schedule a vote on the proposal relatively soon after.

Tripp said he considers the state letter the latest effort to pressure the elected commissioners into voting against the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the rezoning. Because the county commissioners did not request a state analysis, he said, the state Planning Department should not have volunteered an opinion.

"This is just one more threat against the commissioners, and I don't think that's fair ball," Tripp said.

The dispute is the latest of many debates over the future of tiny Hughesville. In 2004 and 2005, residents led a successful effort to prevent a minor-league baseball stadium from moving in. Last year, the Hughesville Bypass, a four-lane, 3.2-mile highway, began diverting traffic on routes 5 and 231 from the town's main commercial strip. That led to the creation of the revitalization report, which aimed to find ways to create a bustling village offering antique stores and cafes.

Martins's letter addresses a variety of potential problems presented by the proposed change to industrial zoning, including excess traffic and noise and a contradiction of the county's desire to create a pedestrian-friendly village in Hughesville. Generally, she wrote, the Chaney facility would damage efforts to preserve the rural character of the area.

"It is clear that the truck traffic that will in many cases cut through the Village Center Core will . . . make it more difficult to create a village center that is a destination place for those living in Southern Maryland," Martins wrote.