OCEAN CITY – A first reading of an ordinance to grant air rights above Washington Lane will move forward following a public hearing this week.
In a Mayor and Council meeting Monday, officials voted 5-0, with Councilman Peter Buas absent and Councilman Will Savage recusing himself, to proceed with the first reading of an ordinance granting air rights over a portion of Washington Lane at 613 Atlantic Avenue.
In a public hearing preceding the vote, Planning and Community Development Director Bill Neville said the request would allow the owner to redevelop the existing Majestic Hotel and construct a single building connecting properties to the east and west of the 16-foot-wide public alley.
“This is a public hearing to consider allowing the developer to acquire air rights from above the existing 16-foot-wide alley known as Washington Lane, in between 6th and 7th streets,” he told the council. “The air rights would be from 14 feet above ground level up to 60 feet in the air, providing that the developer would improve the alley to Ocean City specifications.”
As proposed, the Majestic Hotel property will be redeveloped to include two buildings connected by a fitness center, arcade, hospitality rooms and the like. Joe Moore, attorney for the developer, said his client was seeking air rights to make the project a reality.
“Our obligation this evening is to show you that it’s in the public interest to determine the property and the rights involved are no longer needed for public use, and to permit the developer – my client, 11th Street MD LLC – the acquisition,” he said. “So our responsibility is to show you the public benefit of granting the air rights outweighs any public benefit of maintaining the air rights.”
Moore said the town had granted air rights ordinances over the years for various projects, including the most recent Margaritaville development. He said his client was seeking air rights to build a structure that would not only provide amenities, but safe passage between buildings.
“I think it’s important we start out by telling you what we are not requesting. That is an increase in density …,” he said. “We are not asking, nor would we have, any additional dwelling units in our build-over area.”
In exchange for granting the air rights request, Moore said the developer would widen the 16-foot alley below to 20 feet and include a five-foot bike lane.
Officials noted the improvements would allow for better access and pedestrian safety.
“It’s a much more efficient alley then what’s currently there,” said architect Rick Schoellkopf.
City Manager Terry McGean questioned the developer’s plans for the dedicated bike lane.
“You’re proposing to give us a four-foot easement to make it 20 feet … Now you are proposing an additional five-foot bike lane,” he said. “Is that going to be an easement to the city? What’s that going to be?”
Moore said his client would grant public easements.
“We will make that an easement over our private property to the benefit of the public,” he replied.
During the public hearing, neighboring property owner Angelo Telo spoke in favor of the proposed project.
He said the developer’s plans would not only improve safety in the area, but his property as well.
“It fits pretty good,” he said, “and it’s a good project.”
Later in the meeting, however, resident Robert Hemp came before the Mayor and Council to oppose the abandonment of the city’s air rights.
“I’d like to say that I am opposed to abandoning any air rights, which to me is just euphemism for giving it away for free,” he said. “I think the air rights have a definite dollar value attached to it.”
Following Monday’s hearing, Council President Matt James sought the council’s direction.
He noted the council could either defer the request to a future work session or direct City Solicitor Heather Stansbury to draft an ordinance for first reading.
“It doesn’t seem very controversial,” he said.
A rendering of the alley from 7th Street is shown. Submitted Image
Councilman John Gehrig added that advancing the request to a first reading would provide community members with additional opportunities to comment.
“That’s two more opportunities for the public to come here and discuss,” he said.
For her part, Stansbury questioned if the conveyance of the air rights should be tied to the proposed project.
“Most recently, when we’ve done an ordinance for air rights, we’ve tied that conveyance to the specific project as presented,” she explained. “Do you wish to do that and have that as part of the motion? Or do you wish to remain silent on that topic?”
James said it should be part of the motion. Others on the council agreed.
“My opinion is that we should be consistent,” he added.
Stansbury noted that it could be included in the ordinance.
“If for some reason, in a couple days’ time, this developer and attorney were no longer in the picture and it was sold to an entirely different entity, you may not wish to have that conveyance be made,” she said.
After further discussion, the council voted 5-0 to direct Stansbury to prepare an ordinance for first reading.
