OCEAN CITY — Ocean City officials last week agreed to begin exploring what to do with a no man’s land of sorts along Baltimore Avenue with 30 feet or so belonging in the city’s historic right-of-way currently being used by private property owners.
The issue came to light earlier this month during a debate about extending a sunset provision on non-conforming signs along Baltimore Avenue for another six years. Dozens of signs along Baltimore Avenue currently don’t comply with the city’s code for the upper downtown overlay district. Some are too tall or too wide, but more than a few are placed in the city’s right-of-way for Baltimore Avenue.
The right-of-way issue on Baltimore Avenue is complicated. The right-of-way on the state-owned roadway is not clearly established and the property lines are blurred. As a result, many of the properties extend well into the originally-platted right-of-way, but those lines have long been forgotten or ignored.
City Solicitor Guy Ayres explained years ago there was a conceptual plan of widening Baltimore Avenue and the State Highway Administration (SHA) voiced concern some properties or parts of properties might have to be condemned if the plan came to fruition. The original Sinepuxent Beach Company plats for the roadway from 33rd Street to the Inlet are much wider than the roadway is now. When Ocean City conveyed Baltimore Avenue to the state, the rights were conveyed from the existing curb to curb.
While the Mayor and Council last week approved the extension of the non-conforming sign sunset provision, the issue of the 30 feet or so of private property in the historic right-of-way for Baltimore Avenue was left largely open-ended. Councilman Wayne Hartman said last week the issue needs further scrutiny and some decisions have to be made.
“I really think in the near future we need to bring that back on the agenda,” he said. “We have to get on paper what our intentions are for Baltimore Avenue as far as the right-of-way.”
Eventually, the issue will be resolved when the city comes up with a long-range plan for Baltimore Avenue, but in the meantime, Hartman said the 30 feet or so of right-of-way used by many property owners creates a no man’s land of sorts filled with uncertainties.
“Right now, we’re holding up development and we’re impacting property values because of that 30 feet and the unknowns with what’s going to happen,” he said. “We need to figure out what we want to do with Baltimore Avenue and maybe turn that over to the property owners.”
Hartman said the issue needs to be resolved, not only for the city’s long-range plan, but for the property owners along the corridor as well.
“I feel like we’re holding property owners hostage with that 30 feet of property that we probably don’t need or maybe need half of it,” he said. “I think we owe it to those people. It would improve property values and get that property back on the tax rolls.”
Council President Lloyd Martin agreed the right-of-way issue needed to be revisited and suggested it be included in the long-range plan for the corridor.
“We do need a plan for Baltimore Avenue,” he said. “At the same time, it’s a long-range plan and not something we can do tomorrow.”
Martin said the six-year extension for the non-conforming signs created a window to explore the issue, but suggested it not take that long to resolve.
“It’s something we need to work on sooner rather than later,” he said. “We have six years on the signs and we need to do something before those six years are up. I don’t feel like were holding them hostage. It’s our right-of-way. I do agree it’s a good idea to get that property back on the tax rolls as well.”
