Speaker numbers apply only to this recording. Names come from transcript evidence. “Possibly” marks uncertain attribution.
The Charles County Planning Commission held a regular meeting on Monday, June 15, 2026, beginning at 4:00 PM. The meeting included significant discussion of prior public hearings, action on a development agreement amendment, public meetings on two large subdivision plans, and recommendations on several zoning text amendments (ZTAs) and a comprehensive plan amendment.
Chair Kevin Wettding opened the meeting with extensive remarks regarding the June 1st data center public hearing. He emphasized that the planning commission cannot answer questions during public hearings, only listen. He thanked the public for their participation but strongly condemned uncivil behavior and profanity from some attendees. Chair Wettding clarified that claims the commission was 'not listening' are contrary to the board's work. He noted the commission voted unanimously to recommend denial of the data center ZTA because their prior recommendations regarding siting, self-powering, and water usage were not incorporated. He stated he does not oppose data centers in principle but opposes them in inappropriate locations. He suggested the county form a work group and wait for state/federal guidelines. Vice Chair Bossert echoed the call for respect and objectivity from all parties.
The planning commission approved the agenda for the June 15, 2026 meeting. There were no minutes to approve.
Staff presented a request from the applicant to increase the stage one residential cap from 545 to 615 units, with the increase contingent on the 70 additional units being constructed as stacked townhouses. The overall project cap of 798 units would not change. Staff found the amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan.
Public Testimony: Christina Clink (3011 Hickory Valley Drive) requested denial, citing severe existing traffic congestion, inadequate infrastructure, and the single entrance on Mattawoman Bean Town Road being shared with the Pinefield community. Aaron Levine asked if the VanGo county bus service would serve the project.
Applicant Response: Eric DeVito (Greenberg Gibbons) addressed concerns, stating a second entrance via Substation Road would be built as part of the next phase of townhomes, well in advance of the units discussed in the amendment. He detailed that required off-site road improvements for full build-out were already completed or in progress.
The public hearing was closed. A motion to recommend approving the amendment was made and carried unanimously.
Staff presented a preliminary subdivision plan for 270 single-family detached lots on Piney Church Road. The adequate public facilities (APF) analysis found no adverse impacts. A major issue was a required habitat protection plan for a state-listed species. Staff recommended approval with 11 conditions, as the applicant had not fully met DNR's recommendation for a 100-foot buffer in the northeast portion of the property.
Applicant Response: Sue Greer and Ed Carroll (Soltez) detailed the project's evolution from close to 350 units down to 270, with 47 acres of open space provided. They argued they were exceeding regulatory requirements. To address the buffer issue, the applicant offered to eliminate two lots to achieve a 100-foot buffer, reducing the total from 270 to 268 lots.
Public Testimony: Andrea Stark (virtual, Waldorf) spoke in opposition, stating the applicant has not met DNR requirements for the 100-foot wetland and riparian buffers, failed to address impacts to rare and endangered species, and did not mention the high potential for archaeological resources on the site.
A motion was made and seconded to approve the plan with the 11 conditions in the staff report, with an additional requirement that the applicant return to the planning commission to demonstrate all conditions have been met before proceeding. The motion carried unanimously.
Staff presented a preliminary subdivision plan for a mixed-use development off Billingsley Road and US 301, including 216 townhomes, 9 commercial lots, and future multifamily uses. The APF analysis included a detailed traffic mitigation program addressing six intersections, including signal warrant analyses and turn lane extensions. A habitat protection plan was also pending DNR concurrence regarding a rare plant species.
Public Testimony: Numerous residents spoke, predominantly in opposition or with significant concerns.
Applicant Response: Sue Greer argued the plan is consistent with the comprehensive plan and meets subdivision regulations requiring interparcel connections for emergency access. She provided traffic data suggesting minimal peak-hour impact on the connecting streets. The applicant offered a 25-foot setback with a solid fence for the rare plant to satisfy DNR recommendations.
Planning commission members expressed significant sympathy for the community's concerns. A motion was made to keep the record open for 30 days to allow for further community discussions. Despite a caution from staff that this may impact the project's ability to secure school allocations in the current cycle, the motion was seconded and carried. The record will remain open until July 16, 2026.
Staff presented the zoning text amendment regarding regulatory enforcement of encroachments on county-owned land. The commission discussed the balance between the ZTA and the internal Standard Operating Procedure (SOP). The commission voted to recommend approval of the ZTA to the county commissioners. Chair Wettding stated he was not supportive of giving the government more power over private landowners.
Staff presented a corrective amendment to revert the land use designation of 351 acres near the Maryland Airport from Employment and Industrial Park District back to Watershed Conservation District to align with current zoning. The commission discussed the need for a future briefing on the airport's environmental assessment. A motion to recommend approval to the county commissioners was made and carried unanimously.
Staff presented a zoning text amendment to allow retail sales over 100,000 square feet in additional zoning districts and to reduce retail parking requirements by 20%. Vice Chair Bossert expressed concern about rushing the amendment, preferring to fully vet the impacts through the upcoming comprehensive plan process. A motion to recommend denial of ZTA 26-190 to the county commissioners was made, seconded, and carried.
The Director's Report was tabled due to time constraints. Under new business, Vice Chair Bossert requested a quarterly tracking report of approved residential units to monitor progress against the county's one-percent annual growth goal. The meeting was then adjourned.
Okay, welcome to the June 15th, 2026 Charles County Planning Commission meeting, and I will open it up and uh ask you what is the first item. The first item on the agenda is called to order, roll call. Chair Kevin Wettding. Present. Vice Chair Jeffrey Bossert. Present. Secretary Dawood Abdur Rahman. Absent Samaya Hackett. Present. Denard Earl. Absent. Ryan Sekretarski. President. Britt Toku present. And we have a quorum. Okay. Thank you very much, Ashley. What is next? Approval of the agenda. Okay, hopefully everyone has had an opportunity. Any discussion? All in favors. There we go. This was not working. All in favor signify saying aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed. Motion carries. Okay. So agenda is accepted. All right. Next. Next item. Here, I'll switch. Next, we have approval of the minutes. There are no minutes for next we have chairperson's comments. Well, I do have comments. Um, so let me start from the top. Um I I have several things to say about the June 1st data center uh public hearing we had. During public hearing, the planning commission hears from the public. We take the three-minute testimony from each person about the subject that night, and at no time can members of the planning commission answer or ask questions of the public. Only the public can speak. Now is our time to say a few things.