Tent Compromise Sought
Editor:
I’m weighing in on the canopy/tent debate. My husband has had a few Mohs surgeries. Another friend has a medical condition that limits the time spent in the sun. There’s a new baby in the family. When we found the Quipi (a large umbrella that has fabric pockets on four corners to add sand to as anchors, and an optional side panel) we were thrilled because it allowed us to shade more people under one umbrella-canopy. It has one removeable side which comes in handy as the sun changes its position. Where we once had to set up two, sometimes three umbrellas that we’ve had to continually adjust, we now only have to erect one.
We know that not all visitors to our beaches think about where they set up and how it impacts others. They’re on vacation and having fun. What I’ve observed and photographed is, in addition to the canopies, large family groups with multiple umbrellas that affect the ocean view. They have multiple beach carts, vertical and horizonal, high-back chairs and items hanging on the umbrellas that block the view of the surf. I don’t begrudge them because they got to the beach first. How is this different from canopies? I don’t think that we want to ban high-back chairs and beach carts, and not allow towels and clothes to hang on umbrellas.
I urge the Mayor and Council to not view this as a yes/no issue. I hope they look for a compromise. We visited Assateague Island National Seashore, where cones are set up near the lifeguard stands that mark where canopies, tents and umbrellas are permitted to set up back from the surf to give the lifeguards a clear view of the water. Why couldn’t we use cones to demarcate where canopies and tents could set up so many feet back from the surf? That way individuals, couples and small families who use no or just umbrellas can enjoy a clearer view of the ocean while larger groups of friends and family who have spent good money on their sun barriers can also enjoy a pleasant time at the beach just a few more steps to the water.
Ocean City has the luxury of wide beaches, unlike Bethany Beach and Rehoboth. We have room to compromise.
Natalia Leimkuhler
Ocean City
X
Response To Recent Letter
Editor:
Do you remember the line from “The Wizard of Oz” when Dorothy and her companions are on their way to Oz and are afraid of being attacked? The line was “Lions and tigers and bears – oh my! Lions and tigers and bears – oh my!” Well, I have revised that to “Murphy and Carney and Moore – oh my!” referring to the three Democrat governors of NJ, Delaware and MD who are absolutely determined to go full steam ahead on offshore wind, no matter what evidence of harm to wildlife and commercial fishing and the economy is presented.
I read Doug Miller’s letter to the editor of Aug. 11 with interest, also. I’m not entirely sure from whence his information comes, but I would like to dispute a couple of his points. First, I don’t understand equating people who oppose industrial size wind turbines a few miles offshore with “culture wars” in Florida.
Regarding Mr. Miller’s statement that concern about whale deaths is nonsense, I beg to differ. The concern is well-founded and what we are asking for is a moratorium on construction until the issue can be studied completely – including necropsies on the dead creatures that includes what damage there may be to their ears due to the impact of the loud sonar necessary to the building process. Over 60 whales have washed ashore along New England, New York and New Jersey since December, 2022, where surveying for the turbines has been underway for a while. Has that ever happened before? I don’t recall anywhere near this number of whale deaths at any time in the 45 years I have lived near the Atlantic coast.
Mr. Miller also contends that the Europeans are not having any “notable bird and whale die-offs” after years of offshore turbines. This is simply not true; many European countries are having significant difficulties, inclusive of marine traffic incidents, marine life deaths and population decimation.
Finally, don’t forget that just recently the IPCC warned that the green lobby needs to cool down on the alarmist global warming claims.
A good person to listen to on the whole global warming agenda is Bjorn Lomborg, an environmentalist who believes whole-heartedly in man-made climate change but has common sense ideas for how (and even whether) to deal with it that won’t destroy lives (both human and animal).
So, do I sound like a culture warrior?
Carol Frazier
Ocean Pines
X
Poor Project For Resort
Editor:
I attended the Ocean City Planning and Zoning meeting on Aug. 15 for the Kyma Luxury Resort Hotel project, a vacant lot located next to Sunset park on the inlet. I learned it has requested more than a 50% increase in height, and more than 50% of required offsite parking that is on a 40-year parking lease. It does not comply with the area’s comprehensive plan to provide public access to waterfront areas. This project wants all the benefits, none of the burdens. In the inlet area this would ruin the atmosphere and add to the traffic and parking problems
This property owner has the right to build up to 50 feet in height and have a calculated amount of onsite parking for all mixed use activities. They should be able to keep their private beach, if it is their property. A few set back variances are not unreasonable. It’s a valuable property, with already reasonable zoning requirements.
From 50 to 80 foot variance sets a very dangerous precedent. The inlet area has had 50 foot zoning for decades. If OC sets a precedent with this lot, then any new downtown construction can be 80 foot high. Now the door is opened for Windsor Resorts to convert that requested parking lease, across the street from this project, to an 80 foot high parking garage. That means more buildings can build up to 80 feet, if they also can lease offsite parking. Windsor Resorts doesn’t have to lease to Kyma after their term.
I am not opposed to a 50 foot parking garage, or more 50 foot development projects. But allowing projects in this vulnerable and unique area, to be over 50% higher and meet their parking requirements using leases with a finite term, sets another very dangerous precedent. After 40 years no one is going to tear this Luxury Resort down if there is no available leased parking. “Harry Homeowner” never get to build his home over 50% higher and lease parking off site, shouldn’t this owner have the same rules?
Thank you Palmer Gillis, for stating the importance of keeping with the comprehensive plan and warning of the precedent of all these special exceptions and variances. Thank you Janet Hough and Maryellen Rosen bl it for expressing concern about the long-term viability of leased parking and over where workers can park. “Bus them in, from West Ocean City” the developer says. We already have a worker shortage in this town with housing and parking issues making this situation even worse. The Town of Ocean City needs to address the need for worker housing and parking. The downtown area is particularly vulnerable. Now more events downtown are requiring more public parking, which is already stressed.
Who hasn’t been blinded by the light, or heard of the parking wars, at the 80 foot high Cambria, even with all onsite parking. The parking protections promised by Emerson towers were never honored. Two mistakes should not entitle developers the right to continue making the same mistakes going forward.
A man asked to speak at this meeting but was denied, he was told public comment was not allowed. Public comments were on the published agenda, in fine print at the bottom. Why didn’t it apply to him?
Farewell old Town Ocean City, our local government and its appointees are giving it away. To see the Inlet area look like this proposed 80 foot building project, is devastating. Will the Board of Zoning Appeals help with this situation? I’ll be at that meeting too. Citizens, pay attention and let your opinions be heard.
Deborah Stanley
Ocean City
X
Disappointing Ruling
Editor:
Charges dropped. A battle won, on a technicality. There’s more to come, we’ll just have to wait and see. Probably more technicalities. Must keep up the fight. Looks like the legal team is giving you your monies worth.
Wouldn’t it just have been a whole lot cheaper to plead it out, like the rest of us? Accept responsibility for your actions. Stand tall before the mast. Help with closure. So, others may have a respite, some peace. I don’t think any of this crosses your mind.
This game of using lawyers to work the law, continually searching for a way out, to mitigate charges, find a loophole, creates a constant divide. You know, poor vs. rich. It’s been going on forever this system of unequal justice.
The poor cannot access technicalities. Can’t afford a private investigation, that might challenge other versions. Prepare a sure defense that will argue stridently on your behalf. Nah. Poor folk just accept the plea and show up to court with their beleaguered public defender. It is intimidating to say the least.
All that is left for the poor and powerless is the dignity to plead to what they did and do the time. It’s called character. Some people don’t have it.
James R. Hughlett
Ocean City
X
Weaponizing Government
Editor:
In response to a letter entitled, “No One Is Above The Law”, it’s also fair to say that it is not an assault on democracy to question an election. The four indictments against President Trump are an attempt to prevent him from running in the 2024 presidential election. It appears that every time the House Oversight Committee reveals more corruption on the part of the Biden family, there is another indictment against Trump. These indictments have been brought in heavily Democrat jurisdictions that vote Democrat and will vote to convict, as these charges are political in nature. It’s curious that the indictment in Fulton County, Ga. was leaked to the media prior to a grand jury vote.
The former President did not lie about voter fraud or pressure local officials to illegally overturn election results. As Trump has stated many times, no incumbent has ever improved his vote total from the previous election by over ten million votes and lost. He also improved his numbers among minorities, including black males and Hispanics. With that in mind, he firmly believes that he won the election as do millions of Americans. He was leading late into the evening. However, he found himself behind after vote counting in swing states was inexplicably halted, poll watchers sent home and then ballot counting resumed. It would be reasonable for any candidate to question local officials as to what happened.
Regarding the false allegation that President Trump “incited an attack on our Capitol,” it was quite the opposite when he directed the crowd to “peacefully and patriotically” make your voices heard. Despite denials from Democrats and their corporate media assistants, retired U.S. Army Lt. General Keith Kellogg stated that Trump offered to request National Guard troops on January 3, 2021 to protect the Capitol. Democrats do not have clean hands when it comes to inciting violence. Numerous Democrats made inciteful comments leading up to and during the summer riots of 2020. I don’t recall any being indicted.
In the matter of possessing classified documents, Trump had documents in the course of serving as President and is covered by the Presidential Records Act. Many of the classified documents possessed by Biden were from his time as Vice-President and as far back as Senator. He had no right to have them, but no swat teams raided any of his homes.
Democrats have a long history of questioning election results. Can there be any greater threat to our democracy than masterminding a criminal plot to overturn an election or weaken an administration with a now debunked “Russian Collusion” story as Hillary Clinton did? It’s true that in a democracy, “no one is above the law”, but it doesn’t seem to apply to the political party that has weaponized our federal government.
Joe Kelly
Ocean City