A motion to rescind an earlier decision to advance a controversial apartment project in Lusby was defeated during the July 17 meeting of the Calvert County Planning Commission. The split vote, with commission chairman and Lusby resident John Toohey voting opposed, likely means the Lusby Villas project will be on the panel’s August agenda as it continues to near fruition.
If it is built, Lusby Villas would add 276 dwelling units on a 26.23-acre parcel in an area of the town center that is zoned village residential district. The land is owned by John Gott Jr. and the project is being developed by Quality Built Homes.
During the July 12 meeting, V. Wilson Freeland, one of the three planning commission members who voted in May to not grant the project preliminary approval, said, “After the vote on this project, it was brought to our attention that the traffic impact analysis that was presented in the packet was in error.”
When Freeland was asked by JR Cosgrove, the county’s public works director, to explain what he meant by “in error,” the planning commission member explained, “We were advised the traffic impact analysis was using outdated information.”
Cosgrove said the traffic data related to the Lusby Villas plan was compiled in 2019 and presented in 2020. In March 2021, the project’s conceptual site plan was reviewed by the planning commission.
“At that point in time it [traffic study] was valid,” Cosgrove said. “At the time the subdivision plan came to you in May, the traffic study was three years old.”
Cosgrove said since the county does have the ability request a new study, a consultant is currently working on it.
For the planning commission’s next meeting on Aug. 21, “Hopefully, we’ll have a new study.”
Cosgrove pointed out that the study that is being replaced shows “pre-COVID” data and since that time the number of teleworkers in Calvert has increased. He also pointed out that Lusby Villas would be vested under the county’s previous adequate public facilities ordinance.
“Because of the issue with the traffic study we should rescind the approval,” Freeland said. “The data was too old for the study.”
Soon after Freeland’s motion failed, the meeting reached its public comment segment. Many of the same individuals who had spoken at a July 9 informational meeting on Lusby Villas at Southern Community Center reaffirmed their adamant opposition to the project.
Representing Friends of Mill Creek, Ted Haynie of Solomons called Lusby Villas “a project that is detrimental” to the local environment. “I have evidence that suggests this will have a negative impact.”
Former county commissioner candidate Myra Gowans of Huntingtown said the planning commission’s votes advancing the Lusby Villas project may have been illegal because commission member Lisa Williams should have recused herself. Gowans contended Williams is a real estate agent and a complaint has been submitted to the county ethics commission.
When contacted later by Southern Maryland News about the reported complaint, ethics commission chair Tim Cox stated in an email, “Generally speaking, with regards to complaints against elected officials, appointed officials and employees, I’d direct your attention to the confidentiality provisions of Calvert County Ethics Code Section 41-12H.”
The section deals with confidentiality, and states, “Any action taken by the [ethics] commission in connection with a complaint shall be conducted by the commission and its members in a confidential manner. Until a violation is determined, the commission and its staff may not disclose to the public any information about the complaint and any proceedings involving it, including the identities of the complainant and the respondent.”
Lisa Allen, a Chesapeake Ranch Estates resident, expressed concern about the potential for Lusby Villas to attract residents with low incomes.
“Lusby Villas is going to bring crime to this area,” Allen said.
In reacting to the quick timeline for presenting new traffic study data during the planning commission’s August meeting, Chesapeake Beach resident David Bury reminded the panel that the revisions would need to be reviewed by the Maryland State Highway Administration first.
Bury added, “It’s important the new study be given to the public to review.”
At their Aug. 21 meeting, the planning commission is tentatively scheduled to consider the Lusby Villas plan for a third and final vote.
Most Popular
Comments / 0