Letter to Editor: Vote Down Zoning Variance for Vacant Wawa Property
At a zoning hearing scheduled for 7 p.m. Wednesday (Jan. 18), owners will seek a use variance to subdivide two parcels into six residential lots at the corner of Fourth Street and West Avenue.
Here we go again with the Wawa property.
One would think there isn’t a commercial parcel of land anywhere in Ocean City that wouldn’t be better suited to high density residential development. The vacant Wawa parcel along the business corridor of West Avenue is just crying out for development, isn’t it? If not for the Planning Board’s attempts to ensure planned and balanced growth, some builder could make a tidy profit off of the unutilized commercial land here in Ocean City. What a waste huh? What better use for vacant lot than to build duplexes you can make money from, right?
Some of you might be convinced that no commercial application will be found for the Wawa parcel … that there just isn’t demand for commercial here ... that if we’re going to utilize those vacant lots we need to rezone them for residential development. You know, you may be right, but until some effort is made to promote and attract commercial investment in Ocean City, I like so many other citizens of this town remain unconvinced.
Don’t tell me it can’t be done until you try. The bigger question is: Will an attempt be made? What has been driving Ocean City for as long as most of us can remember is profit pure and simple. People make a lot of money here by building duplexes. Why would they be interested in doing anything else?
The story of the Wawa is a long and sordid affair. I’ve been told that an attempt was made before to obtain a use variance for the Wawa property from the Zoning Board. Then in February of 2011, City Council advanced ordinance 11-04 with the intent to rezone the west side of West Avenue between 3rd and 4th streets from NB to R2-30, including (of course) the Wawa parcel. In March of 2011, planner Michelle Taylor issued her finding to the Planning Board that the ordinance advanced in council was inconsistent with the Master Plan, at which time the Planning Board unanimously voted inconsistency. The ordinance to rezone the West side of that block was defeated on second reading. Failing in those attempts ,it’s now back to the Zoning Board. This isn’t going to stop is it?
What does need to stop is land use by variance. Recently a developer was successful at getting a commercial property along 13th and Haven rezoned. The argument for doing so (in effect) was that so many use variances had been issued on that block in the past that rezoning the one remaining commercial property would “complete the block” … that that block had already been “de facto rezoned”. Please! Far from issuing a use variance for a property here and there we’re now rezoning entire blocks by variance!
The one agency in this town responsible for planned (and not purely demand-driven) growth has consistently tried to preserve and protect commercial uses in Ocean City from residential development. It has conceded much already to residential development, allowing for residential use in commercial zones through the NB zone. But some is never enough, is it? As long as there is a single vacant commercial lot, you can bet that some developer will make an attempt to rezone it for high density residential development.
In that fight, this Planning Board has been consistent. In the past decade through two master plans and a third consistency review, it has sought to maintain some kind of balance here in Ocean City and to preserve some commercial use. In the most recent master plan review in 2006 (prior to the current one) it suggested incentives for encouraging restaurants and commercial use.
Throughout this period, it has consistently found that the best use for that block (and for the Wawa lot in particular) is commercial use. Failing to sway the Zoning Board (initially), then City Council and the Planning Board (through its vote of inconsistency), an application is being made once again to the Zoning Board. It would appear that some developer is looking for the weakest link, and folks, they must think it’s you.
Unplanned and demand driven growth has got to stop. These use variances have got to stop. We’ve already lost so much of what made Ocean City a livable town and a year-round community. As a community, we need commercial for the goods and services it provides. We need the jobs it provides. With jobs there will likely be an increase in residency. With an increase in residency will come an increased demand for goods and services. We’re at a tipping point here. One of two things is going to happen. This town is going to shut down over winter, or someone, somewhere, is going to do something about it.
As a citizen, I’m calling for leadership in our city government. I ‘m calling for a vision for the future of Ocean City that goes beyond profit margins and some peculiar notion of manifest destiny run amok. This Zoning Board, too, needs to think in terms of the future. It needs to stick to the plan, Stan.
Vote this use variance DOWN!
— Eric Sauder
Ocean City
Eric Sauder
10:26 pm on Wednesday, January 18, 2012
An update for anyone who read this article (I can see it generated a lot of interest :) is that the zoning application was pulled. It was pointed out at the meeting that some of what I stated may not be common knowledge so a few clarifications. The 13th and Haven parcel was rezoned through ordinance (by City Council). No use variance was issued by the Zoning Board. The Zoning variances I mentioned that led to the "defacto rezoning" of that block were issued some time ago and not by the current Zoning Board. Most members of the Zoning Board understand the context of those statements but the public may not. Apparently the weak link wasn't the Zoning Board afterall :) It will be interesting to see what will be tried next.
Jim Houck
10:41 pm on Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Eric - Thanks for the clarifications.
steve
8:36 am on Thursday, January 19, 2012
Maybe we have enough duplexes in town.. how about giving a variance for several single family homes with small yards?? Maybe we could convince the developers that this area could be the New Gardens. I can hear the realtors pitch now;-)
Eric Sauder
9:53 am on Thursday, January 19, 2012
Good idea Steve. But we can't be using use variances to "fix" everything that seems to be wrong with Ocean City. Redefining land useage through zoning (what can be built) is the purview of the Planning Board and not the Zoning Board. And we can't over react to short term trends (like a downturn in the economy).
There are many of us who would like to see more single family homes in Ocean CIty. The problem is that's not what the builders want to build. When you build multi-family the cost of the land is spread out among many units. Because of that return is consequently greater for the builder, realtor, etc. That in a nutshell is why we need zoning. It protects this city from over development according to short term market driven demand.
Eric Sauder
9:54 am on Thursday, January 19, 2012
You know the advocates for the zoning variance raised many valid points as did the residents of that block and it's not like I'm not empathetic. They're saying that their neighnorhood is mostly made up of year around residents, which is something we need. But if, on a city wide basis, we cave into these requests, we're soon going to be left with nothing BUT duplexes on this island. I do not think that is in the best interests of Ocean City. Are we then going to issue use variances for every other commercial property that isn't currently being utilized? Developers will appeal to precedence as they did last night ... "hey you did it there, why not do it here?"
We'll never know what action the Zoning Board would have taken but i believe they would have denied the variance and it seems the applicant concluded the same. I think that would have been the right call.
Eric Sauder
10:00 am on Thursday, January 19, 2012
I'm not sure what the solution is but issuing use variances as a work around ain't it. Let's appeal to the Planning Board for more single family zoning.
steve
12:51 pm on Thursday, January 19, 2012
I agree and I should be more obvious with my sarcasm in the future.. let's hope in 20 yrs Ocean City resembles Avalon more than Wildwood...
Eric Sauder
10:12 am on Friday, January 20, 2012
Gotcha Steve. I didn't pick up on the sarcasm.
BLDShamrock
8:26 am on Saturday, January 21, 2012
Having had a few days to truly think about a comment on this subject and read others thoughts and ideas here goes. Having lived in close proximity to the Wawa both while it was open and now that it has closed I can honestly say that the quality of life in the neighborhood has greatly improved. Last year when this rezoning idea first was opened to public opinion many people spoke both in favor and against building combined commercial and housing units. Being one of those people who spoke out against the idea I would again like to revisit the points made by many in the area. There are over 40 vacant store front/commercial properties between West Avenue and Asbury Avenue as we discuss this issue. There are at least six just in a two block radius of the property in question - all of which have been empty for several years or more. The ethnic grocery store in the 200 block of West Avenue is gone as well. This only further indicates that the area is not suited to support a corner store or restaurant type of business. As the representative from Wawa pointed out in his comments a business would have hundreds of thousands of dollars in work to do with the property before it would be ready for use - there is no equipment in the building, it is in need of updating and there are various other start -up costs involved here. What was most troubling with the discussion by members of the zoning board was their comments about the decision needing to be for the greater good .....
BLDShamrock
8:35 am on Saturday, January 21, 2012
if the interest was truly in the greater good then bringing up the "hardship" of having to travel from the Gardens to 12th street for a cup of coffee would not have been brought up but yet several board members flat out stated that they "want another convenience store there" Who's greater good are we looking at here, truly. There are more and more full time families moving into the neighborhood and these folks are sending their children to our schools, spending their money at our businesses, and more importantly paying taxes here. These folks moved to our neighborhood because it was affordable and they want to LIVE here. Concerns about more duplexes are valid and I can see the point some make that perhaps single family homes would be a better choice but here again is a concern for the greater good. The more single family homes you put in an area largely populated by duplexes the more you hurt the property value of the duplexes....yes, makes no sense to me either but several realtors and mortgage brokers have stated the same that this move would make it more difficult for the owners of duplexes to obtain equitly loans etc when updates or improvements need to be made.
Many call the former Wawa a blight to the neighborhood.....look around the neighborhood and tell me if that is the greatest area of "blight"? How much more should Wawa do to maintain their vacant property? They have had someone there monthly since they closed cleaning up the graffitti, etc. and securing the lot.
Eric Sauder
1:45 pm on Saturday, January 21, 2012
A master plan review is underway in the Planning Board. I suggest you petition that board.
Eric Sauder
1:46 pm on Saturday, January 21, 2012
I think Wawa was acting out of self interest. I think there's a far greater chance that property could have been sold for commercial if they hadn't placed those deed restrictions on it. But it's worth considerably more (to Wawa too) converted to residential. So I'm not real sympathetic with the fact that they've had to maintain it all this time.
In regard to the other sources you site, are you sure that they're not acting out of self interest too? I thoroughly expect that the builders and realtors will make a case that the best of all uses for that lot is to subdivide it and build duplexes there. That IS the best use for them.
You are a resident of that neighborhood and I do not think you're making a case out of self interest, but for what you feel is in the best interest of your neighborhood. So I accept your motives as being pure. To be honest with you, if you succeeded in what you hope to do I would be happy for you. You see it as being in the best interest of your neighborhood. But I do not think it is in the best interests of Ocean City to define land use by variance. If we do it's not going to stop with your neighborhood.
You might see that as being unfair to your neighborhood but what was done to mine (for much the same reasons) was detrimental. Are you sure that having a restaurant or store you could walk to in your neighborhood would be such a bad thing? I personally would like to have a couple of ours back.
BLDShamrock
6:58 pm on Saturday, January 21, 2012
Eric, a restaurant or store in our neighborhood would be convenient to those in the surrounding area but I assure you that none of the folks in the immediate area are without the ability to either go to a grocery store or Wawa or ask someone to do it for them. The unfortuante thing with having a convenience store in that location is that it becomes a hangout, particularly in the summer when many teens and young adults would come to the store looking for trouble and the teens and young adults of the neighborhood would often be blamed for the fights, etc that ensued. Are there problems like this in other areas of Ocean City, in areas where there is a convenience store or restaurant, I don't know but I do know that the response to these problems was not usually prompt nor adequate on many levels. It is only through experience that I voice any opinion and believe me, I would much rather invest in a coffee pot and walk or drive to the grocery store than have the headaches of the Wawa back. To say that Wawa was acting out of self interest might be true but it does benefit the surrounding neighborhood that they keep the place up as well. The same cannot be said for some of the other empty, and even occupied, properties in the surrounding area. It's funny that a paritally constructed home sits across the street for several years yet no one mentions it. The City tore a similar one down near the boardwalk but it's ok in our neighborhood,Other vacant properties are maintained spotlessly
Eric Sauder
12:51 am on Sunday, January 22, 2012
Sham I have a car but I find it nice to be able to walk to a destination, especillay in the summer. I don't know how long you've been lving in Ocean City but it once had neighborhood stores and deli's and restaurants and it was a better place then. You had a feel of neighborhood. I've heard some people say that we don't need grorcery stores in OC either... that people don't think twice about driving to Shoprite. I hate to think what will happen when we only have one grocery store. Competition is good.
I live close to 34th street and we have a Wawa, Sunoco, and Blitz market. We don't have a problem with juveniles hanging out at those locations but then very few people live on my end of the island. I work with a number of young adults and they all tell me there's nothing for them to do. I don't suppose the kids in your section of town have any other place to go. It would be nice if someone would do something about that, but stuff like that isn't what this town is about. Where's the money in it?
Eric Sauder
12:55 am on Sunday, January 22, 2012
You'll get your multi-family cluster () soon enough. No one here has the slightest intention of doing anything with that lot other than building multi-family and it's likely to remain vacant until people are so sick of it they'll take anything in its place. The builders and realtors are counting on it. That;s ow they make money. You seem to think in terms of only a convenience store at that site. There are so many other possibilities. We once had an ice cream parlor (Torries) a seafood kitchen (Campbells) and Casas Del Dolce was in our neighborhood. I understand you had a bad experience with the Wawa but don't let that experiencet color your thinking over all the other possibilties.
Beachy Keen
1:54 pm on Saturday, January 21, 2012
Hmmmm....just wondering how would building single family homes hurt the value of the surrounding duplexes??? @BLD where are you getting your data that more families have moved to that area. Seems the year round population goes down year after year not up. The best USE for the site will be determined by whatever brings in the MOST money for all involved not what might be best for residents. How would a business or restaurant survive there? Asbury Ave. is a ghost town most of the year. @Eric, I admire your energy in staying on top of these things but I think we all know what the outcome will be. WaWa wants to sell the property and there is enough greasing of palms to find the "weakest link" who will make it happen.
Disappointing all around.
Eric Sauder
2:06 pm on Saturday, January 21, 2012
Beachy I have a hunch it's going back to City Council for rezoning. The solution is to get more people living here (year around). There is no shortage of housing here, but if we continue with this trend there WILL be a shortage of commercial and retail. If Ocean City is going to be (at least in part) a year around community we're going to need both. Unfortunately (and as you know) that's not what "greases the palms" here.
I never said we'd win (in the end). But I'm not going to stop fighting.. I don't want OC turning into a ghost town in the winter. It is not a profit making center for me but the place where I LIVE.
BLDShamrock
6:48 pm on Saturday, January 21, 2012
The 300 block of West Avenue is comprised of at least 10 families that live there year round, there are at least 10 in the 400 block as well. The 300 and 400 blocks of Haven as well as Simpson are also largely year round residents not to mention Asbury and Bay Avenue.
Eric Sauder
1:07 am on Sunday, January 22, 2012
I think we should take the nature of the neighborhood into account. You're raising a good point. We have one heck of a mess on our hands with all the non-conforming structures and we're going to have to find a way to deal with it. I'm all for residency. I do know people on the citizen boards that follow these threads. You never know when an idea will catch fire. As for the property across the street I can only say that I got hauled into court when the contractor (who was retained to build a deck on my property) was in a car accident. I was close to being fined (and shut down) before I was able to find someone else to do the work. There must be something about that property. A place to start is finding out who owns it.
Beachy Keen
2:30 pm on Saturday, January 21, 2012
Eric--I hear what you are saying and of course it makes perfect sense to have a growing year round population with a diversity of sustainable businesses and balanced growth. Perhaps a study is needed as to what drives permanent residents away--my guess would be unaffordable housing and high taxes. Families can't afford to move here and the economy is in the tank and probably will be for awhile. For you it is your home and you want different things than those "in charge" yet those in charge want only the bottom line or things would not be as there are. As I have said many times, things are tough all over but there still seems to be "big money" here that drives these decisions and unfortunately the housing is what sells and generates income. If you had hundreds of residents swarming these meetings (year rounders and 2nd home owners) instead of a few concerned citizens, things might be different but unfortunately for most it is difficult to sustain that level of involvement for a variety or reasons. I do admire your energy and perhaps I will run into you one of these days at a council meeting.
Eric Sauder
2:42 pm on Saturday, January 21, 2012
Hey we can only hope. Say hello at one of those meetings. I've been calling for the formation of some kind of committee to investigate just those sort of things, but wouldn't you know it fell on deaf ears.
BLDShamrock
6:59 pm on Saturday, January 21, 2012
I am glad that if nothing else came of this it has people talking.