BERLIN — Revisions to a planned residential community in West Ocean City were given the green light by the Worcester County Planning Commission this month. Some of the commissioners weren’t happy with aesthetic choices made by the developers, however, and made that clear even if there were no technical reasons to deny the application.
Located on the north side of US Route 50, east of Golf Course Road, the Seaside Village Residential Planned Community will feature 63 individual lots, which are already being sold through Evergreene Homes. On behalf of the developers, attorney Mark Cropper met with the commission last week to ask for revisions to the existing plan and a preliminary and final plat review.
The commission immediately expressed dissatisfaction with the decision to use stone as an exterior building material in the village. However, Jennifer Burke, zoning administrator, told the commission that the standard design guidelines that prohibit stone siding aren’t valid for Seaside.
“The design guidelines, just so you know, don’t apply for this project,” she said. “But I wanted you to review it as just guidance since the project is in the general seaside area even though it’s not on the water.”
Guidelines or no, Commissioner Brooks Clayville wasn’t shy about how unhappy he was with the stone.
“Even though they don’t apply, I can’t really support stone when we’ve asked everyone else not to do stone. I think stone looks nice in a lot of places … just stone isn’t something we use around here,” he said, “and I think there should be something else there. I mean any kind of siding would be fine, but not stone. I know this is my personal taste but this is the direction we’ve gone in the guidelines.”
Cropper promised to take Clayville’s complaints to the developer and the architect but reminded the commission that the usual guidelines don’t apply and it wouldn’t be correct to deny the application based on “personal judgment.”
“We will certainly ask the architect, the developer if this is a big deal to them and whether they would consider something else but, in all candor, you don’t have guidelines for residential structures. You only have them for commercial,” Cropper said. “And I would submit the whole reason we have them for commercial structures is to avoid this discussion.”
In a technical sense and by the letter of the code that is likely true, Clayville acknowledged. But he still couldn’t vote in favor of the application due to the use of stone.
“I know there’s stone on Route 50 on commercial properties and it’s like nails on a chalkboard every time I go by it,” he said.
Commission Chair Marlene Ott also had issues with the exteriors.
“My only comment is that, as a professional real estate agent, I don’t think that’s an appealing elevation,” she said.
Clayville’s was the lone vote against the application, which passed 4 to 1.