|
Post by lynn on May 18, 2007 11:51:32 GMT -4
Hi everyone. I'm home today and running errands. I saw at the end of Castle Marina Rd that there are many cars, police officers, and also the news station. I asked some people what was happening and was told that its people on both sides of the 4-seasons development protesting.
I don't have time to go. Does anyone know the details?
|
|
|
Post by baycitydan on May 18, 2007 11:57:13 GMT -4
I heard something on the radio this morning saying that O'Malley is there meeting with the K-Hov people. The protesters are probably local buisness owners who are for K-Hov, and residents who are against.
|
|
|
Post by lynn on May 18, 2007 11:58:03 GMT -4
I was just told that O'Malley and some other state reps and also the DNR are there.
|
|
|
Post by baycitydan on May 18, 2007 12:13:18 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by mikey on May 18, 2007 14:25:54 GMT -4
I went for a little while, but had to leave before O'Malley and his group arrived. There were about 50 people with signs against Four Seasons and "Save the Bay" type banners.
Their were about 20 people with stickers saying that they support Four Seasons. I was told that they were all from out of state and they work for K. Hovanian. They didnt look like activists or Kent Islanders. What a crock of crap that is.
Look forward to seeing how the public works trio responded.
|
|
|
Post by qacbuzzard on May 18, 2007 17:27:30 GMT -4
There will be a story tonight at 11:00 on WBAL-TV concerning this event. Many more to follow, I'm sure.
|
|
|
Post by kiwebadvertising on May 19, 2007 22:45:35 GMT -4
One of the reps from KHov spoke for a few moments at the Chamber meeting on Thursday and invited people out to take a tour of the property and to see first hand exactly how much of the wetlands will be used. Apparently this is the whole fight? That was supposed to happen about 11:00 am
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on May 20, 2007 7:48:49 GMT -4
... to see first hand exactly how much of the wetlands will be used. Apparently this is the whole fight? No, not the whole fight, just the latest skirmish. If you are pro 4 Seasons then this is yet another attempt by a small group of whiners to stop something that has been found to be legal by several courts. If you are con 4 Seasons then this is the main point of the effort to keep them out... protecting the Bay. On the one side you have a developer who has a Constitutional right to try to make money. You have land owners who were able to turn some idle land or a failing farm into money to live on. You have people who really don't care one way or another but who don't want to see more County money poured into court cases that can't be won. You have businesses who would love to think that the new people will keep their business full every day of the week. And you have retirees who would like to settle in a quiet, peaceful area like Kent Island. On the other side you have the people who don't much care if K-Hove makes any money and who didn't own the land that was sold to them. You have the people who voted the old commissioners out of office largely because of their pro-development, pro-K-Hov position, only to see them sign a binding agreement after they were booted but before the new group could come in. You have people who feel the lines are long enough at the Safeway, don't want to have to call ahead for reservations at La Fontana, and can picture what it will be like with a line of 20 cars at the traffic circle and every one of them coming to a stop to think about what "yield" might mean. And you have all of us who came to quiet and peaceful Kent Island wondering how that will be maintained with all the new people. 1300 here, 200 there and pretty soon you are talking about a real crowd. Protecting/Saving the Bay and the wetlands, especially now that it's become noticed at the State level, might be the one thing that stops the development. But, it isn't the whole thing.
|
|
|
Post by shadow1 on May 20, 2007 12:04:25 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on May 20, 2007 19:02:02 GMT -4
Since we have wetlands and we want to keep them, and we have rules to preserve them, then stick to the friggin rules already.
|
|
|
Post by Guest1 on May 21, 2007 0:08:16 GMT -4
K-Hov is not a bad thing. If not for them this land could be developed as low income section 8 property like Maryland likes to give away, and it could be mega-condos with a ton of kids to crowd our already overcrowded schools. Over 55 people will not be jamming the streets and bridge during rush hour, won't be adding to the schools, and will not be section 8 PG county sponges. These farms sold out to developers, and at least they didn't sell out to cookie-cutter mega mansion 2.5 kid having commuters and not to section 8 low lifes. If K-Hov gets somehow turned away, then expect the standard ghetto move-in that Maryland seems to promote. See Annapolis by College Creek, PG County, and any other poised for development area in MD for an example.
|
|
|
Post by mikey on May 21, 2007 8:23:03 GMT -4
C'mon Guest1. Dont kid yourself. Look at the site plan: www.khov.com/Home/MD/KI001/SitePlan.htm1350 homes brings over 2000 cars to Castle Marina Road. This isnt a nursing home. Its an active adult community. Over 500 acres of perfectly landscaped terrain, and all that that does to the Bay. I dont see Section 8 housing coming to this land. I forsee something more reasonable. Like 250 units.
|
|
|
Post by matt on May 21, 2007 11:00:18 GMT -4
Fook that, I see something more reasonable like the XX acre estates it was supposed to be built as. This is a perfect example of the developer's using their very deep pockets to buy their way out of standard regulations and laws. I've lost all sympathy and empathy for Khovnavian.
|
|
|
Post by another guest on May 21, 2007 12:26:29 GMT -4
K-Hov is not a bad thing. Over 55 people will not be jamming the streets and bridge during rush hour I can't buy that argument at all. How many 55 year olds do you know who are retired? Most of the ones I'm acquainted with still work. If half the homes have just one worker, that's 1000 new cars on the bridge every day. Heck, even if everyone is retired, that's still 2000+ more cars filled with "active" adults driving all over Kent Island. The developers have a right to build, but environmental laws must be observed.
|
|
|
Post by mikey on May 21, 2007 14:45:38 GMT -4
Our roads are designed for light traffic patterns. The island is bi-sected by Cox creek and Rt 50, with limited passages across both. We have a short span of road (Rt 8) that has traffic lights and turn lanes. Other than the light at Right-aid ... thats it.
If you add 2500 cars, you also have to look at adding more lanes, installing more traffic lights, paving more intersections and managing heavier traffic volumes.
The commish had to spend a wad of $$ to improve the road at South Piney Creek Rd after they OK'd the development there. They want to OK the development of the Cracker Barrell and Ruby Tuesdays, but are aware that both would require road improvements.
Its a viscious cycle, that ultimatly causes nothing but more conjestion. Much of the rest of the county has the roads to handle development. (Symphony Village didnt cause any issues)
Why are they intent on cramming everything onto an island.
|
|
|
Post by matt on May 21, 2007 15:07:23 GMT -4
The old boy network mindset. KI is the sacrificial lamb of the good old boys. Their short-sighted stupidity on that issue will cause them more problems than they seem able to comprehend. After KI is full... the Narrows is a very NARROW channel and the crap spreads. Allowing KI to become another Glen Bernie (sorry, folks, it's still the most apropo analogy) is just ushering in continued irresponsible development that PG, AA, MC, and Baltimore/County are seeing. We elect our officials to keep things straight and honest, but instead we let the fox guard the henhouse and we end up with developers collecting dishonest politicians in thier pockets and we get crap like KHov, Breeding, and so, so many other developments on Kent Island. (can I squeeze just one more cliche into a post? )
|
|
|
Post by outlaw on May 21, 2007 22:39:51 GMT -4
Below is from the Kent Island section of "The Capital." Hopefully KHOV's bullying tactics will backfire.
"What has been described by Mr. Franchot as a "gag order" against public officials has gone into even more troubling territory, the comptroller said.
Following the board's May 9 meeting on Four Seasons, where a decision was delayed to gather more information, an attorney representing the developer mailed a letter requesting the commissioners to show they are not in opposition to the permit.
"I didn't think it could get any worse," Mr. Franchot said before the tour, "but it did."
|
|
thomas
Full Member
Welcome to the Land of Pleasant Living!
Posts: 169
|
Post by thomas on May 22, 2007 8:07:51 GMT -4
Outlaw - so not only are they not allowed to speak against the development - now they are being asked to support KHov in writing? Does KHov have some blackmail pictures of these guys or something? This may be a stupid question, but who, specifically, are the commissioners who arranged this deal? I'm assuming they've all been kicked out by now - But I'm curious who is responsible for this agreement? Anyway - I hope O'Malley comes through on this one. With the publicity it's getting, it sure would make him look good to the environmental groups.
|
|
|
Post by outlaw on May 22, 2007 10:08:09 GMT -4
My memory isn't great, but I believe it was the last five commissioners who were asked to sign the agreement, and Ransom and Koval refused to sign it. I'm not sure about that though. A gag order on elected representatives is ridiculous, but it's calling attention to the good old boy nonsense that goes on over here.
|
|
|
Post by outlaw on May 22, 2007 10:17:00 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by Mr Practical on May 22, 2007 10:27:01 GMT -4
Has anyone thought of compromise with K-Hov? Why don't we put an end to this mess and agree to say, just 700 homes on the island instead of the 1350 that's proposed. This, I think, should satisfy everyone. Let's face it, K-Hov has deep pockets and by the time they roll out there "big gun" lawyers they will win in the end. I don't particularly want to live in an area that could become a swamp of low income housing if K-Hov pulls out. A K-Hov development could add a lot of beauty to this island. Let's face it the stuff thats built around here now doesn't exactly make it look like Beverly Hills. Forget the "good old boys" who want to preserve the land for their own selfish interest. Think about the future, and "what if". The land is not going to stay vacant forever.
COMPROMISE!!!
|
|
|
Post by kl on May 22, 2007 10:33:44 GMT -4
But it's also the good old boys, who are pushing to have this project go forward as planned. And if you think it will end with just 700 houses? Don't kid yourself.
|
|
|
Post by matt on May 22, 2007 10:53:38 GMT -4
Mr. Impractical, would you be so good as to tell us where you pulled "700" out of? nearest hundred to half the 1350? Simple math? based on something more actual than a random number?
Why not base it on meeting ALL zoning regulations, environmental regulations, setbacks, and restrictions that were in place on the property before our commissioners were paid off!? Keep the appropriate distances from the water, the wetlands, the roads, the floodplain, and reduce density to tolerable levels. Anything above the original density (1DU/10 or 15 acres I believe originally) should be paid for in buying equivalent development rights elsewhere on the island and handing them over the CBF, CBT, NC, or another preservation/ Chesapeake group; lock those development units/rights up in perpetuity. Cover the VFD's remaining costs, and help AAMC build a proper emergency room.
Your "compromise" sounds like it was from KH themselves.
|
|
|
Post by outlaw on May 22, 2007 11:08:15 GMT -4
I've thought about a lot of things, including compromise, during the times I've been stuck in traffic, unable to pick my kids up from practice, etc., or while I'm at home worrying because their buses can't get to school. Seeing a large buck in Big Bats parking lot and waiting 25 minutes for an ambulance this summer also made me think. When is enough enough? Sure, 700 houses might be better than 1350 or a garbage dump or a jail. Many Europeans compromised with the Nazis, and things didn't work out so well. Wrong is wrong.
Anyway, I'm nobody important. This is in the hands of O'Malley, Franchot and Kopp - it only takes a minute to e-mail them with your opinion.
|
|
|
Post by falgar25 on May 22, 2007 14:20:29 GMT -4
Outlaw - so not only are they not allowed to speak against the development - now they are being asked to support KHov in writing? Does KHov have some blackmail pictures of these guys or something? This may be a stupid question, but who, specifically, are the commissioners who arranged this deal? I'm assuming they've all been kicked out by now - But I'm curious who is responsible for this agreement? I think you'll find it happened something like this. The commissioners of a couple of elections back were pro K-Hov and were working with the developers to make this thing happen. The people didn't like it and voted them out. Unfortunately for the people, the ousted commissioners signed an agreement with K-Hov in the last days of their term. The new commissioners tried to rescind the agreement and took other measures to stop the development. K-Hov took them to court. The court apparently decided the the new commissioners were bound by the agreement signed by the old commissioners. Therefore, since the old commissioners supported K-Hov and nothing had changed with their proposal, the new commissioners were bound by the signed document and the court decisions to support K-Hov as well. It isn't exactly a gag order. It's more that these commissioners are legally required to support K-Hov. If they were to testify against K-Hov, then they would be violating the court's decision and opening themselves and the County up to a lawsuit by K-Hov. Since there has already been a lot of County money spent unsuccessfully trying to stop this development, they are understandably reluctant to take a chance at sending even more good money after bad. Asking them to sign a letter of support is really just rubbing salt in the wound; it won't help K-Hov at the State level but K-Hov can probably make them do it. I don't know the names of the ousted commissioners who signed the agreement at the last minute but I'm sure someone on here does.
|
|