Meeting Confusion

Here is a message from Alderman Arnett for the purpose of clarifying the dates for several meetings:

Ward 8 and Friends

I’ve heard that there may be some confusion about meetings that are coming up, two of which have to do with the redevelopment at Sarles and Petrini marinas, now known as the South Annapolis Yachting Center (SAYC). Here is the schedule:

o    November 28 at 7:30 at City Hall — a Public Hearing before the City Council on the proposed harborline correction at the old Petrini Marina,

o    December 1 at 7 PM at the Eastport Fire Station meeting hall — a presentation by Bret Anderson about the entire SAYC redevelopment, with Planning and Zoning staff in attendance

o    December 8 at 7 PM at the Eastport Fire Station meeting hall — my regular Town Hall meeting to discuss a whole range of topics important to Ward 8 and the City, including public safety, development in Eastport, and your issues.

Please pass this schedule on to your friends and neighbors.

Also note that Midnight Madness will be going held on December 1, 8 and 15. I hope that you will come to the meetings of your choice, then go downtown to do all of your holiday shopping.

Thanks.

Ross

Council

The Annapolis City Council will meet Monday 28 November at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers.

See full Agenda in Share:  Community Announcements

Tonight

Ward 8 Residents and Friends

 The Annapolis City Council will meet Monday 14 November at 7 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Public hearings will be followed by a legislative session. Although your attendance is preferred, all Council meetings are broadcast on Comcast channel 100 and on Verizon channel 34.

 Like you, I am watching with dismay young black males maiming and killing each other while putting others in the crossfire – where did “black lives matter” get lost. The Police Chief has asked for and received help from Maryland State Police, and we, the City, continue to meet biweekly with the Housing Authority to get more effective policies in place. Our next joint meeting is this Tuesday and I hope to hear a report about HACA’s meeting with HUD officials last week.

I will hold my next Town Hall meeting on 8 December at 7 PM in the Eastport Fire Station Hall when we can talk about the many matters affecting Eastport and the City.

Also, on 1 December I will be hosting at meeting where the developers of South Annapolis Yacht Center will present their most recent plans for the development of the Sarles and Petrini marina properties. The meeting will be at 7 PM at the Eastport Fire Station. Staff from Planning and Zoning will also be present. I understand that there are a lot of questions and concerns about this project and I hope you will attend to express your views and get answers to your questions.

Ross

Rocky Gorge Discussions Continue

The Planning Commission will meet today, 3 November, at 7 PM in Council Chambers.  They will continue to discuss the Rocky Gorge proposed project.  Some questions needing resolution include clear delineation of the lane issue on 665.  What are the realities of traffic there?  Will the City Planning office present another view of traffic, rather than using the applicant’s traffic report which can hardly be viewed as unbiased.  Also, DNEP needs to make clear that the Council action on Resolution O- 33-14 did not recommend approval of this access to (665).

You may be interested in the section on Rocky Gorge  in this video.  It starts at about 1:20 . http://annapolismd.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=356

Our previous post on Rocky Gorge:

A Clear Plan of Action

It was noted in the Capital Article on Rocky Gorge last year that opponents stated that the traffic will overwhelm Aris T. Allen Blvd; pouring more  traffic onto the Blvd would intensify gridlock between Rt. 50 and Annapolis. The response of the project proponent is to just move the traffic onto another road which will not change the problem.

This is an example of the depth of analysis or the lack of it and an expression of total disregard for the impact of the proposed project. Could this be the expectation of the planning and zoning requirements? It indicates that the minimum amount of work was done, “just to get this project before P&Z.” This type of failure represents the thread that runs through the projects currently under consideration in our Community. The developers’ and their representatives’ response is that they know that the Community wants this or that project. That is the heart of their justification. They must have a special divining rod or magical tool that gives them insights into what we are thinking. In their minds this justifies destroying a forest, creating negative land-use impacts, undermining the environment and perhaps competing with existing local businesses. To them, their work does not need to include community life-cycle impacts only a get in, get the project done and get out mentality. To them, the community impact concern is someone else’s problem.

To them, developers should have the right to initiate anything that they want. They have funding, they have lawyers, they have consultants, why should have to be concerned about collateral damage?

When we look into our community resources ruck-sack what do we have or need?

What do we have?

. We have planning and zoning regulations.

• Does the average citizen really understand the details and nuances of the regulations and the process of implementation?
• Even with regulations, do we understand the loopholes and workarounds that project proponents pay their teams to ferret out and use to their advantage and often to the disadvantage of the Community?
• Does P&Z staff have the resources to adequately and effectively use the regulation, protect the interests of the Community? Is that their job?

What do we need?

1.  A Community Comprehensive Master Plan (CCMP) that is current, detailed and enforceable
2.  All projects currently under review to be held static until and approved CCMP is completed. No new projects would be accepted during this period. All projects would have to comply with the Plan.
3.  As an alternative until the Plan is completed, all proposed projects currently being considered must be viewed in the aggregate for their impact on the total Community, both short and long-range .
4.  All projects must be evaluated using computer modeling and simulation tools and techniques to assess their cumulative short and long range impacts on the community. These costs will be borne by the project proponent. All projects over a pre-determined cost and scope threshold will be subject to a Community-wide referendum. These costs will be borne by the project proponent.
5.  An Office of Community Public Defender in association with P&Z  will be established to ensure that there is an entity that has the legal and planning process knowledge along with the responsibility and authority to protect the public interests in matters of project development. The costs of the Office will be borne by project proponents. This Office will be overseen by community representatives.
6.  No public portion of a project will be permitted until the project that is under review or appeal has fully completed the process. The punishment for anyone not adhering to that statute will be significant fines and possibly criminal proceeding and public ridicule.
7. The Planning and Zoning office will establish a project-specific website. The site will be updated at least monthly and/or each time there is a change in any project, such as requesting a permit or project scope or cost change.  All projects other than home owned or owner occupied changes over $100,000 for all or any part of the project will be included on the site.

If any of these proposals require changes to current legislation or administrative procedures then make it happen NOW.