Unable to open RSS Feed http://wordpress.centreville-md.net/wp-rss2.php?category_name=wharf_project with error HTTP ERROR: 301, exiting
Report from Work Session with Wharf
Developer
Most of the meeting revolved around trying to establish a Public Works
Agreement for the Wharf Project. The Planning Commission gave Final Approval
to the project in January 2006 with the stipulation of a number of things to
be done. The Town wants to have a Public Works Agreement but essentially no
progress has been made on this since May. There are four primary sticking
points, at least three of which were conditions specified by the Planning
Commission:
Upgrade of the sewage pumping station to handle the increased
load,
Upgrade of the Watson Road – Rt. 304 Intersection,
Public access to the boardwalk and
Town ownership of riparian rights (was not specified by the Planning
Commission)
The developer is willing to give public access to the boardwalk if the Town
will maintain it and the Town says they cannot maintain it unless they own it.
The developer does not feel they should have to upgrade the sewage pumping
station nor the road intersection. The developer would possibly sell the
riparian rights but they believe this opens a lot of issues regarding property
set backs and other issues that would significantly impact the site design.
While the developer did not feel that they should pay for the various upgrades
they did not rule out making a donation for the town to use as they see fit.
This is a very brief summary of about 1 ¼ hours of discussion.
While discussing buying riparian rights, Mr. Jonathan Hodgson, counsel for
the developer, Wharf Landing LLC, announced his willingness to sell the entire
property to either the town of Centreville or Queen Anne’s county.
Councilperson Mary Roby continued to reiterate her desire to own the riparian
rights and a boardwalk along the entire length of the property. She said that
the town should definitely own it, not just have access or an easement. After
a discussion on the potential difficulty in subdividing the waterfront from
the rest of the land, Mr. Hodgson then said “I’ve got an idea, why not buy
the whole thing”. “This property should be owned by the town, and if you
don’t buy it now, you’ll never own it”. He also then remarked “I’ll
sell it to you if you’re willing to pay it’s current value”. As a
businessman, Mr. Hodgson said that they would sell it if they can make their
money on it. Council President Mary McCarthy then said “I’ll be making a
motion, if one of these two will second it, to buy it today” referring to
fellow council members Norman Pinder and Mary Roby.
Here is a video clip of the above exchange:
The developer insisted that they planned to proceed with obtaining their
building permits whether or not there was a Public Works Agreement or further
discussion regarding a purchase.
There were three members of the public in attendance, Sveinn Storm, Tim
McCluskey and myself. Tim McCluskey made some very well stated comments
supporting the public use of the wharf area. He suggested that the Town hold a
referendum or at minimum a public meeting to discuss the pros and cons of
purchasing the property.
At this point, in the public comments, Hodgson made an impassioned plea for
the property to be bought and become public property. He compared Centreville
with Chestertown and the fact that Centreville owns more waterfront property
than Chestertown but unlike Chestertown, Centreville has ignored their
heritage and waterfront location for hundreds of years and is continuing to do
so. Chestertown is a destination and plays on its waterfront location but
actually owns only a very small section of waterfront at the end of one
street. He stated that the County boat ramp should be relocated and that
entire property should be made into a public access area.
The meeting ended with the Council voting to give Town Manager McGrory the
right to meet with the developer and work on the details regarding both the
Public Works Agreement and the possible purchase of any (such as riparian
rights) or all of the property.
Judge Ross's Opinion on
Wharf Appeal - "... the decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals
granting a variance from the town floodplain management ordinance, be, and is
hereby, AFFIRMED."
Appeal Hearing for the variance that
was granted by the Centreville Board of Zoning Appeals has been scheduled for
November 17th at 1:30 pm in the QAC circuit court.
Wetlands
Permit Application- "This project proposes the
reconstruction/replacement of an existing bulkhead along the northwest
shoreline of the property, as well as proposed stone riparian improvements
along the northeast shoreline of the property. In addition to the shoreline
stabilization, a 6-foot wide boardwalk with four (4) 10' x 30' "vista
viewing areas" is proposed that allows public access and use. Adjacent to
the proposed boardwalk and viewing areas, there are three (3) public boat
slips as well as fifteen (15) private boat slips with accompanying catwalks
for boat access."
Traffic
Study - "Daily traffic volumes along the study section of Watson
Read will rise from approximately 1,120 vehicles to 1,592 vehicles per
day. The subject site will be responsible for 224 daily trips of this
increase."
157-57C(f) - The Board of Appeals shall further make a finding that
the reason set forth in the application justify the granting of the variance,
and that the variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the
reasonable use of land, building, or structure.
157-57C(g) - The Board of Appeals shall further make a finding that
the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of this chapter, and will not be injurious to the neighborhood, or
otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.
Legal Notice
Application has been made to the Town of Centreville Board of Zoning
Appeals under the Floodplain Management Ordinance of the Town of Centreville,
a municipal corporation of the State of Maryland, by Wharf Landing, LLC, Case
No. V-1-05, requesting a variance from the strict application of Section 66-20
C (1) of the Floodway Management Ordinance for the Town of Centreville to
allow the use of 891.6 cubic yards of fill above the 600 cubic yards of fill
which may be used without seeking a variance. The subject property is located
in the C-2 zoning district and is further described as parcel number 1303,
grid 2 on Centreville Tax Map 300, Third Election District, Queen Anne's
County, Maryland. Take notice that this application shall be considered at a
public hearing on Tuesday, May 24, 2005, at 4 pm in the Fire House in
Centreville. By order of the Zoning Appeals Board for the Town of Centreville.
CENTREVILLE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS - James E. Thompson, Jr. , Chairman
"Variance
for Centreville Wharf project considered", article in 5/4/2005
Star-Democrat - “'We want to go to the board of appeals and ask for a
variance and, if they grant it, we will be back for preliminary and final
(project) approval,' Hodgson told the commissioners."
Jon Hodgson, Wharf Condominium Project Mr. Hodgson reported that the
concept plan for the Wharf Condominium Project was filed in November, 2003 and
was approved. He came before the Commission to proceed relative to the U.R.S.
review in a letter received April 20, 2005. Mrs. Brice read the letter for the
record. Primary is the need for the applicant to request a variance from the
Town’s Floodplain Ordinance. Mr. Hodgson gave the members of the Planning
Commission his written response to the points in the U.R.S. letter signed by
Mr. Chris Rogers, consultant. The Planning Commission advised they would like
to confirm some of the responses from McCrone, Inc. Mr. Babbitt was not in
favor of sending the Board of Zoning Appeals a favorable recommendation as the
project “does not fulfill any public purpose.” Mr. Hodgson responded that
the additional fill needed will improve stormwater management control and
would accomplish what is desired for the site. The use is permitted by the
zone and it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Rogers advised that
a study is needed to see if there is a negative impact on adjacent properties.
Mrs. Brice read from the Comprehensive Plan relative to this site which notes
that this site can contribute many positive possibilities to the Town park
system, etc. Dave Powers of McCrone, Inc. explained how the fill would be
distributed on the site and how drainage would be improved.
After discussion, it was moved and seconded by Mr. Babbitt and Mrs. Lins,
respectively, to forward the request for a variance to the Board of Zoning
Appeals with a recommendation against approving the project as it serves no
public purpose to grant the variance. Upon call of the vote two voted in
favor, three opposed. The motion was defeated. It was then moved and seconded
by Mr. Starkey and Mr. Beskid, respectively, to send the request for a
variance to the Board of Zoning Appeals with no comment or recommendation. Mr.
Babbitt and Mrs. Lins were opposed. Mr. Beskid, Mr. Starkey and Mrs. Brice
were in favor. The majority being in favor, the motion carried.
March 17, 2004 Planning Meeting
David A. Powers, McCrone, Preliminary Review of The Wharf Condominiums,
Watson Road Mr. Chris Drummond, Esquire, on behalf of Lennie Weaver, the
owner/developer of the Wharf property, requested approval of the preliminary
plan submitted this evening. The principal concern about the elevation of the
first floor retail units will be addressed by the addition of 600 cubic feet
of fill, raising the ground floor by four feet. The proposed construction,
permitted “by right,” is under the 70% lot coverage allowed. The
landscaping and open space provided onsite were planned in consideration of
the public desire to have parkland. Mr. Drummond stated there will be a
cooperative effort between the developer and the Town to enhance the Town
properties on either side of 104 Front Street, Mrs. Barton’s property, and
to improve the road surface of Front Street.
Chris Rogers advised that procedurally, a preliminary site plan has
considerably more detail and is reviewed by the Planning Commission, after
which, comments are made by the consultant based on the information
illustrated on the plan.
In his presentation, Mr. Powers pointed out the three entrances into the
site and the parking area in front of the proposed business units. The two
water lines proposed will be looped which will improve the water quality for
the residents of Watson Road. Rainwater will be directed to the perimeter of
the property where a sand filter will slowly discharge it to the river. The
landscape buffer will be comprised of all native plantings that are saltwater
tolerant.
Mr. Lessard, architect for the project, presented illustrations of the
proposed condominiums which will have “stepped” rooflines, varied dormers,
window treatments and varied facade treatments. The open space in the center
of the project will appear as a little “green” or “commons” area. The
crawl space below the retail units will have break-away panels to handle
floodwaters.
There was discussion about the traffic generated by the complex as well as
the current tendency of citizens to speed on Watson Road. The possibility of
speed bumps to slow the traffic down was suggested. At the conclusion of all
discussion, Mr. Rogers advised that the presentation this evening gave him
sufficient information to review and comment on it as a Preliminary Site Plan.
Mr. Babbitt stated that the plan needs information relative to parking. It was
moved and seconded by Mr. Starkey and Mrs. Lins, respectively, to approve the
documents presented as the Preliminary Site Plan. All being in favor, the
motion passed.
