Council To Review Draft Comprehensive Plan Revision

OCEAN CITY — Resort planners this week put the finishing touches on Ocean City’s revised comprehensive plan and forwarded it the Mayor and Council for approval, but not before making some last minute revisions in some sections.

For the last year or so, the Planning and Zoning Commission has conducted a chapter-by-chapter revision of the town’s existing comprehensive plan. The weighty tome outlines Ocean City’s recent growth activities and lays out a plan for its future in a wide variety of areas from land use and economic development and from population trends to housing, transportation and infrastructure, for example.

The Maryland Department of Planning requires jurisdictions to submit revised comprehensive plans in 10-year cycles in conjunction with the U.S. Census and Ocean City’s plan was last updated in 2009. After conducting a chapter-by-chapter revision, forwarding a draft copy to the state and holding the requisite public hearings, the planning commission on Tuesday voted to forward the final version to the Mayor and Council, one of the last steps in the long process.

However, before signing off on the final version, commission members wanted to tidy up a few sections and make some last-minute revisions in some of the language. One of the more contentious elements was the inclusion of language related to the proposed R-1A zoning district, which would essentially ban short-term rentals in some of the town’s quiet single-family home neighborhoods.

After considerable and often contentious debate, some sections of the plan that referenced the proposed R-1A zoning district were amended or removed altogether. Planning and Community Development Director Bill Neville on Tuesday said the plan going forward included a clear definition of just what a short-term rental means.

“It’s pretty clear we need to come up with our own definitions,” he said. “What they’re doing in Montgomery County, for example, doesn’t apply here.”

Neville explained the final version included language related to some of the long-term capital projects in the resort such as the future of the midtown fire station and the expansion of the Ocean City Lifesaving Station Museum, for example. While the planning commission has been working on the comprehensive plan, the Mayor and Council have been proceeding on a parallel course with the town’s capital improvement plan (CIP) and some of the major projects proposed.

Neville said some adjustments were made in the final version of the comprehensive plan to reflect the Mayor and Council’s adjustments to the CIP. However, Planning Commissioner Lauren Taylor said the planning body had never weighed in on the proposal to move the midtown fire station and questioned its inclusion the final comprehensive plan.

“I don’t ever remember this board endorsing moving the mid-town fire station,” she said. “I’m not sure this belongs in here. I still believe renovation is a good option.”

Similarly, Taylor said another section related to the major expansion of the public works campus at 65th Street, including a large parking garage, had never been discussed by the planning commission and probably didn’t need to be included in the comprehensive plan.

“We couldn’t build a parking garage downtown because it wasn’t revenue neutral and we couldn’t build one at the convention center,” she said. “But now we can build a $5.9 million parking garage at 65th Street.”

Planning Commissioner Joel Brous asked if the section related to the resort’s recycling program could be cleaned up, so to speak, in order to make it clear Ocean City does recycle. Several years ago, the town switched from hauling its trash and other solid waste to the county landfill and opted instead to send it all to a waste-to-energy facility. At the time, the traditional curb-side recycling program was eliminated and Brous raised concern many in the resort do not understand the whole waste-to-energy program.

“I wish we could make that section sound better because we do recycle but not in the traditional way,” he said. “I think a lot of the tourists and some of the people who live here don’t get that. They just think Ocean City doesn’t care about recycling and that’s simply not true.”

Taylor questioned a section in the proposed comprehensive plan related to bicycling on the Boardwalk. In particular, she questioned a section that called for extending the hours of biking on the Boardwalk north of 17th Street.

“I’m opposed to the language that would extend the hours of biking on the Boardwalk north of 17th Street,” she said. “It would be a total zoo up there. I don’t think we recommended that or even discussed it.”

Neville said that section could be amended or removed and suggested the bicycling rules could be addressed through other means.

“We have other areas where a bicycle master plan should be considered,” he said. “Maybe there is a more appropriate place for that.”

After considerable debate, the commission voted to forward the final version of the comprehensive plan to the Mayor and Council for approval.

About The Author: Shawn Soper

Alternative Text

Shawn Soper has been with The Dispatch since 2000. He began as a staff writer covering various local government beats and general stories. His current positions include managing editor and sports editor. Growing up in Baltimore before moving to Ocean City full time three decades ago, Soper graduated from Loch Raven High School in 1981 and from Towson University in 1985 with degrees in mass communications with a journalism concentration and history.